RE: £75k for new Mercedes-AMG GLC 63

RE: £75k for new Mercedes-AMG GLC 63

Friday 7th June

£75k for new Mercedes-AMG GLC 63

Latest V8 AMG thug undercuts X3 M but is more than a Stelvio - let the super SUV scrap commence!



Sometimes it can be difficult to keep up with the sprawling Mercedes range, certainly now the EQ models have joined - but those with the awesome AMG 4.0-litre twin-turbo aboard will always attract attention. Because that engine could go in an Actros truck and still be of interest.

The latest recipients of the mighty V8 are the updated GLC and GLC Coupe with specs and prices now released for UK cars due in the autumn. The range kicks off at £74,599 for the 476hp GLC 63 4Matic+; the Premium Plus package costs £2,500 on top of that, while the GLC Coupe equivalent is £2,490 more. So that's £77,099 for a Premium Plus SUV, then £77,089 for a base 63 Coupe and £79,589 for the Premium Plus Coupe.

Really though, when it comes to these latest turbocharged AMGs, the S is the one to have: it boosts power to 510hp, adds AMG performance seats, a top speed limit raise to 173mph and 20-inch wheels. All models get the AMG electronic diff lock, air suspension and AMG performance exhaust.


The GLC 63 S range starts at £85,855 for the SUV, or £88,345 for the Coupe; again the Premium Plus - adding a Burmester stereo and Keyless-Go comfort package - are available for another £2,500. Notable options on top of those include the Driving Assistance Package Plus for £1,695 and the £4,285 ceramic brake option (for S models only).

Big money, but also big performance: AMG claims 3.8 seconds to 62mph and 173mph for the 63 S models. In terms of rivals, it says much of the current market that the GLC will have a few to fend off. The Alfa Romeo Stelvio Quadrifoglio has impressed all who've driven it so far - though the Mercedes' interior will surely surpass it - and looks conspicuous value here with 510hp and a £69,510 RRP.

Drives of the BMW X3 M are imminent, which will surely be classed as the GLC's closest rival, and that car starts at £77,070 - again with 510hp. Don't forget about the F-Pace SVR either, which wades into this with the most power - 550hp - and a list price of £75,535. For four-wheel drive and fast without the SUV-ness, buyers could consider an Audi RS4 as well - that's from £63k. Decisions, decisions...





Author
Discussion

cib24

Original Poster:

741 posts

95 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
Quite frankly, I see no reason to choose anything but the Stelvio Q4 if you are looking for a performance SUV. It may not have the interior toys but as an overall package it's simply in a different league to every other SUV, and it evokes emotional attachment to it as well. Plus, they are a nice buy with few miles on them and they are proving very reliable.

Burnham

3,487 posts

201 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
As much as I love the idea of the 63 S, I think I've be happy enough with the GLC43 and change.

simonbamg

257 posts

65 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
cib24 said:
Quite frankly, I see no reason to choose anything but the Stelvio Q4 if you are looking for a performance SUV. It may not have the interior toys but as an overall package it's simply in a different league to every other SUV, and it evokes emotional attachment to it as well. Plus, they are a nice buy with few miles on them and they are proving very reliable.
V8

Dave Hedgehog

10,246 posts

146 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
This is my number one choice for my next car (not in white thou yuck)

no interest in the alfa, i want a V8 thug car before they are banned or i expire or the speed limiter is introduced


the price thou ... jebus especially with the old none twin screen interior


Zetec-S

2,678 posts

35 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
cib24 said:
Quite frankly, I see no reason to choose anything but the Stelvio Q4 if you are looking for a performance SUV. It may not have the interior toys but as an overall package it's simply in a different league to every other SUV, and it evokes emotional attachment to it as well. Plus, they are a nice buy with few miles on them and they are proving very reliable.
Plus you won't have to see a GLC on the drive every time you look out the window... smile
Advertisement

Dave Hedgehog

10,246 posts

146 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
there not going to depreciate much either

with demo's under 60k and one with 150 miles for 56k lol

S coupe demo for 60k, 28k discount not bad



Edited by Dave Hedgehog on Friday 7th June 11:00

Helicopter123

5,824 posts

98 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
cib24 said:
Quite frankly, I see no reason to choose anything but the Stelvio Q4 if you are looking for a performance SUV. It may not have the interior toys but as an overall package it's simply in a different league to every other SUV, and it evokes emotional attachment to it as well. Plus, they are a nice buy with few miles on them and they are proving very reliable.
Stelvio is sensational, but the interior quality isn't up to much and the engine is missing a couple of cylinders.

Heart says Alfa, head says Merc.

GhellopeSir

30 posts

22 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
Why even mention the X3 M....it's not a contender, just a throwaway. Both the Stelvio and GLC walk all over it, regardless of price or options.

louiebaby

8,813 posts

133 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
GhellopeSir said:
Why even mention the X3 M....it's not a contender, just a throwaway. Both the Stelvio and GLC walk all over it, regardless of price or options.
For me, in that sized segment, I'd be considering the Alpina XD3 too. (The Alpina version of the BMW X3.)

It's an odd segment, but undoubtedly hilarious fun.

h0b0

3,920 posts

138 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
I am completely biased but I would still rather have a V8 Cayenne. There appears to be no GTS right now so it would have to be the Turbo which is more expensive. I have a 2013 GTS and I would not swap it for a Merc or BMW.

aeropilot

17,996 posts

169 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
GhellopeSir said:
Why even mention the X3 M....it's not a contender, just a throwaway. Both the Stelvio and GLC walk all over it, regardless of price or options.
I'd take the X3M (or more probably a Macan Turbo) over the Merc or the Alfa because of the interior in the BMW & Porsche, as the Merc is horrible, and the Alfa is not great.


moffat

961 posts

167 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
Cayenne is much more comparable to the GLE 63 and X5M right?

Not sure why you would compare it to a GLC when the Macan Turbo S is the competitor?

h0b0

3,920 posts

138 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all

moffat said:
Cayenne is much more comparable to the GLE 63 and X5M right?

Not sure why you would compare it to a GLC when the Macan Turbo S is the competitor?
I have a Cayenne GTS hence the comparison. Also, there is no V8 Macan and another poster mentioned that being important.

Itsallicanafford

1,964 posts

101 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
So an optioned car is pushing £90K for the S...

you have really, really got to love your dog to spend this amount on one of these..

At what point exactly did the whole world go mad?


Dave Hedgehog

10,246 posts

146 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
h0b0 said:
I have a Cayenne GTS hence the comparison. Also, there is no V8 Macan and another poster mentioned that being important.
it would be interesting to know how much more porsche main dealers charge over mercs

One of the things that put me of the macan was the fear of insane part and servicing costs


had ham

3,539 posts

125 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
GhellopeSir said:
Why even mention the X3 M....it's not a contender, just a throwaway. Both the Stelvio and GLC walk all over it, regardless of price or options.
How so, it's not yet released, no drives either so far, so unsure how you could make that conclusion?

I quite like the Merc, the Alfa does nothing for me, but it would be a Macan for me - the drive is superb.

Roy m

69 posts

155 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
l'm going to bleat on again - HAVE THEY FIXED THE FRONT SUSPENSION/ STEERING DESIGN FLAW ON THE RHD MODELS YET?

Can't get an answer anywhere

I 8 a 4RE

58 posts

183 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
"let the super SUV scrap commence!"

Don't call these cars super SUVs. As a matter of fact don't even call them SUV; Compact Sports Vehicles may be better.

They are just hot hatches on stilts. Anyone who received healthy nutrition in their childhood would not fit comfortably in the backseat.

aeropilot

17,996 posts

169 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
Dave Hedgehog said:
One of the things that put me of the macan was the fear of insane part and servicing costs
Not hugely worse than Merc or even BMW really.........and more than offset anyway by the excellent residuals on the Macan.

Macan isn't without its faults, but as mentioned above, drives so much better than the others.


h0b0

3,920 posts

138 months

Friday 7th June
quotequote all
Dave Hedgehog said:
it would be interesting to know how much more porsche main dealers charge over mercs

One of the things that put me of the macan was the fear of insane part and servicing costs
I’m in the US so can’t really give you a relevant insight. Over here Porsche are much more lax on things like warranty repairs. In the U.K. they void your warranty for having none N labeled (Porsche certified) tyres. Here they wouldn’t even try that because a class action would be filed.

But, they are a little pricey for service. My wife’s Tiguan needed brakes. The quote for disks and pads, front and rear was $1000. That felt a little expensive. My Porsche needed the same and the estimate was around $5k. I did it with better quality parts for around $600. It’s not the parts they sting you with, it’s the labour. The 40k service is $1400 which was a tough pill to swallow. The service center I use is immaculate. They always give me a macan and it used to be a GTS. But, I found a top rated independent in walking distance from my house and he has halved costs. Even then he makes a great living on one or two cars a day.

In comparison, I used to run a fleet of Fords. We would have them serviced every 7k miles for about $100. That kept the warranty in check.