German Car Forum

That's what i said bro,the diff in lap times is smaller than with the coupe.Was wondering about why the C63 is almost 200kg heavier is it coz MB builds it's cars with high strength steel while BMW incorporates more aluminium?

I think the main reason the laptimes are closer than other tests is because this is the first head to head comparison where the C63 had the Performance package with stiffer suspension and a locking differential. I personally feel it has little to do with the fact the M3 is a sedan this time.

But still, the C63 with PP is over a second slower than the M3 sedan in this particular test. Some people would consider that a "small" margin, while others consider that a relatively "large" margin. When I first joined this forum, I was reminded by JustMe many times that a 1 second difference is not insignfiicant on a short track.

Now that I've tracked my car, I realize that 1 whole second on a short track is not that small of a difference. In one lap, that could mean at least 3-5 car lengths when travelling at speed down a straight. With repeated laps, the gap will be huge. And without the performance package, head to head tests show that the C63 is anywhere between 3-5 seconds slower than the M3 on a short track, which is a HUGE difference no matter how you look at it.

So far, the C63's laptime peformance (relative to the E92/90 M3) appears to be WORSE than the C55's laptime performance (relative to the E46 M3)....ie the gap has increased.

What I'm waiting for now is whether the C63 will shine on the Nurburgring when Sport Auto takes it out as part of their Supertest. This will be the best chance for the high powered C63 to match or even outshine the new M3.

Exactly, I still have the same opinion and I share it with many "trackers". Those who think this isnt a big difference, lack knowledge. No offense to them but its the truth.

CLK63 Black Series will be in the next issue of Sportauto.

With that much power going to the rear wheels, it's a sin not to have LSD standard. Even Infiniti G35's have them.

A one second gap to me is not that big of a deal. Burn me if you will for this, but most really serious enthusiast will not go for a C63 as a track car. There are many other options.... the C63 is still a great fast cruiser although the comfort has suffered a bit (which I guess totally contradicts my point).

Were the gaps between the C55 and M3 1 seconds? If not, then it's an improvement

Hard to tell if there is an improvement since the E46 M3 never came as a 4-door.. well, on a much more important matter, the C63 seems to have improved a lot compared to the C55 when it comes to driver involvement and enjoyment.

The E46 M3 and C55 were tested head to head (same day, same drivers) on a track only twice, as far as I know, so these are the best data that I know of.

1) Evo magazine 1.8 mile Bedford Autodrome: 1.29,8 minutes vs 1.30,1 minutes (0.3 second differece)

2) Cars in Action magazine (in S. Africa): 2.0 km Zwartkops Raceway (very short and very tight): 1.17,8 minutes vs 1.18,0 minutes (0.2 second difference)

If you look at the Sport Auto Supertests where the same pro driver (Mr. HVS) drove the cars, but on different days:
Nurburgring: 8.22 minutes vs 8.22 minutes (0 difference)
Hockenheim: 1.17,6 minutes vs 1.18,6 minutes (1 second difference)

Note that the fastest E46 M3 time on Hockeheim (1.16,3 minutes) achieved by Sport Auto was not conducted as part of a Supertest, so it was a different driver, so I don't really consider that as much of a good comparsion to the time achieved by the Supertest's Mr. HVS.

Not many people appreciate the fact that the C55 could hang with a E46 M3 on a twisty track despite no LSD, thinner tires, and with better ride comfort on everyday roads. The problem was the C55's strength as a good road car was its undoing when compared to the involving and rewarding driving experience the raw M3 delivered. The C55 was MB/AMG's best handling car with their "old forumla". Now they're trying a more sport oriented forumula with better steering feel, much tighter suspension, more involving drive with the C63. The problem is it hasn't translated yet into a good match for the E92/90 M3's pace around a track, despite its new found "rawness".

Regardless, track times matter to those who track their cars and those who want some objective measurement of how fast the car can go when pushed on a twisty course. They mean little on the streets, which is why the C63 still will likely be the better performer on everyday streets.

But for the sake of comparison the times for the E92 should be used. That way we can tell if there has been any change. I agree that 4-door vs 4-door is the best comparison to judge todays cars but to compare changes from different generations we need to use the E92.

One thing that very few forum posters take into consideration is that in a real race (not against the clock) the cars start together. The C63 will be in front at the first corner making it a lot harder for the M3 win a real race even with it's marginal (empty track) superiority.

I still prefer the M3 though!

The C55 was very vary fast, but felt slower than it was and was not involving enough. understated bodykit too.
The C63 is very very fast, but feels even faster than it is, and it very very involving... and the bodykit is more aggressive.

It's another way of seeing things. AMG tries to be more like M, but with even more rawness.

In fact they are back to the glory of older AMGs, with aggressive kit, insane motor...raw, brutish and bad boy. I love it.

No, the 5th gear did exactly that, a real race. C63 got the jump at the start and M3 overtook C63 in the first turn and it was . Video should be around somewhere.

Generally MB's are overweight. I think the C63 AMG might have more luxury features onboard, hence the weight difference.

I was just about to say the same thing.

Here's the video:

All that torque in C63 needs stronger (and heavier) components to handle it. Also M3 uses Aluminum for most of the suspension components, not sure about what C63 uses.

Funny thing is that the C63's engine is acutally lighter than the M3's engine. (199kg vs 202kg)

If we were to compare weight of the whole car, say a E90 M3 with MDCT to a C63 it's only a difference of 30kg (1700 kg to 1730 kg) according to EU specs. Add a moonroof to the E90 and it's safe to say it's about the same weight as a C63. So the C63 is not as heavy compared to the competition as some might think.

However, the M3 has better weight distribution & suspension set up thus giving it a slight edge in the handling department. I look forward to see some more apples to apples comparisons in the future.

do you really think they were racing hard against each other?
It's just a TV show,they were doing that just for entertainment.

Those guys from that show are usually a bit more serious than let's say top gear. Even though this is somewhat useful info, I'd wait for the official nurburgring lap times to see whats what

Yeah, I would imagine the difference would be even bigger if it was a real multi-lap race.

The EU weight for the C63 seems off. Most car mags don't include the driver or luggage (as is EU norm), yet the C63 averages about 1820kg in tests, which is about 200 more than the average M3. This also raises questions about how they weigh the engines.
I find it difficult to believe the weight difference comes down to options. The single heaviest item would be a sunroof (standard on the C63, right?), and that's only about 30kg at most. The heaviest M3 yet was AutoBild's as tested against the S5: 19" wheels, electronically controlled dampers, sat-nav, leather. At 1635kg, that is nearly 170kg lighter than the lightest C63 tested (on 18" wheels, no EDC).
If we compare like for like and figure +20kg estimated for MDCT on the M3 sedan as tested here, then it would weigh 1675kg, or 145kg less than this C63.
From what I've seen, the W203 C55 was around 88kg less than a non-sunroof E46 M3. That car also had somewhat similar torque advantage over its BMW competitor.

5th Gear usually is serious about their test. I think the race was pretty fair and real.

I don't see what it brings all these discussions about laptime, it seems clear the M3 is faster. And lighter. No need to say it's because it's a sedan and e92 is a Coupe, then because it has no LSD, then because it has a sunroof, then...
The M3 is faster around a track, period. That's fact now. C63 accelerates a bit faster, and the M3 corners a bit faster.

Both are extremely fast, and both are fabulous to drive, very entertaining.

The C63 drifts more, the M3 is a little bit more precise and neutral.

They just are different, none is better, you just have to drive them to decide which one suits you better, it's not possible to tell it from the paper any more.

In a long track like the Ring where there are very long straights, the C63 might be able to crawl back that time so I think it is useful info. I was just showing both sides of the coin...

Yeah, the Nurb is a faster track, but I think it won't be enough. I think the M3 still will be faster on the Nurb.

Let's see the result... but it does not have such an importance for me. The fun factor has much more meaning to my eyes.

So far there is only one review of the E90 M3 being tested against the C63; we don't know really what options either car has. I wish there was a bit more info on this review unless somebody cares to elaborate on it some more. I still suspect a similarly equipped E90 M3 compared to a C63 won't be far off in weight. I hope the next stage for car manufacturers is to focus their attention on making their cars lighter in weight and more rigid. They both are heavy animals in my opinion...

Like I stated before, I think M3's handling characteristics is mainly due to its weight distribution and suspension set up. Lastly, that LSD helps too...

I seriously doubt it will be the 30kg difference that you are projecting. If we believe the factory figures, then a stripper M3 coupe should weigh only 75kg less than a stripper C63. But we have seen that even a very heavily optioned-up M3 is still 170kg lighter than even the lightest C63 tested.
You can pick "only one review" of E92 M3 coupe vs C63 and the result is largely the same as if you picked four reviews: the C63 is heavier by about 200 kg. The point is, the options aren't likely to account for those differences. Most of the M3's tested aren't strippers anyway: they come with EDC, leather, sat-nav & iDrive, parking sensors, etc.

Well these types of argument can go on forever, I'm just reiterating what the manufacturers have stated. I'll reserve my judgement until I see the cars on the streets. Both cars, in my opinion, have their strengths and weaknesses so I really wouldn't say that one car is better than the other.

I think you are right. The only independent source I have seen that have measured the weigth of the E92 is Sport Auto and accoding to them the M3 weigths in at 1,608 kg as tested with a full fuel tank. Note that no driver or luggage is included and with a full fuel tank instead of just half full.

It should not be that hard to figure out what options the tested car had installed since we have the test and a lot of pictures.