German Car Forum

Heaps of road like that in NZ, I go to those so called Scenic Drives from time to time with a friend or two, absolutely thrilling, especially at night =D

But all that about AMG built to drift more and purposely let it drift or something, well if you build a hardout sports car like this, if you're not looking into lap times, what are you looking at? The fact they put a 6.2L V8 in there is trying to go fast, and a quick lap time mean you have a fast car (with a good driver). I still consider AMGs are, of course, very hardcore sports cars, but not that they 'intend' to produce cars with slower lap times, but they can't produce cars with faster laptimes with a good compromise. Looking at that youtube video with the red M3 and white C63, that C63 is nearly a disaster in corners.

I don't get the above video though, why the hell is a M3 even faster in acceleration? That is something i refuse to believe.. with so much more torque/power, even putting it into some crap chassis it will be faster.

^M3 is faster in straight line because it's got a third party exhaust system.....

and DCT.

Is it really possible that there is no straight line race between the C63 and the M3 using only standard cars?

Oh, I guess that picture of a dragstrip rally hit a sore spot Best bad karma I ever had

Lol, someone gave you bad karma for that? What a whiner! haha.

^ Hahaha, I can think of a few who might have done that
For the record, I've never given bad karma

I very much doubt that the exhaust will unleash that much horsepower. It might make your car sound better, but the hp figures don't bump up by that much. Not enough to compensate for MB's higher power anyway.

Since the C63's engines are supposed to be one off, maybe Hanz forgot to put 1 cylinder and it's running on 7

A jap car race at Suzuka it looks like.. pretty good fun to watch =D
YouTube - BMW M3 vs C63 AMG vs Lexus IS-F vs Skyline 350GT Track Race

Yet another entertaining video from them. As usual, expected result. A few things to note:

1. MB is a monster in straightline, very impressive
2. MB looked sloppy in some corners. Especially the last one, the long sweeping right hander.
3. M3 is a lot louder than I thought. You could clearly hear it during the start.
4. M3 pulled away when it passed the MB. Anything wrong with the MB's brakes, they seemed to mention it a lot.

Last but not least. That was a very cool drift to finish off the race

you understand japanese?
I don't know, that C63 just looks so nervous in every corner, it makes me think of F1 but worn tyres.

Best Motoring? In that case; Lexus win, followed by the Skyline. third and fourth (with a good gap) would be the M3 and the C63.

I can't watch the movie here at work.

Have some faith in the ///King

1. M3 (started 3rd)
2. C63 (started 4th)
3. IS-F (started 2nd)
4. Skyline (started 1st)

M3 built a lead in the 5th (final) lap and drifted it's way to the finish line

Thanks!

Oh, I know that nine times out of ten, the M3 is the fastest of the four around a track. But given that this is Best Motoring (or is it?), I thaught it would be a Best Motoring result.

Haha, give them an NSX type R and they will even beat an F1 with it and scream all the way doing it.

Yes, sure did look like a handful. And that was with Tsuchiya driving; he's probably their best driver.
I wouldn't be surprised if the MB's brakes faded. C&D noticed this in their testing, as did edmunds who noted other braking issues with the C63 (lack of consistency, vague feel, etc).

Speaking of edmunds, we can add this to Sunny's list of lap times.
http://www.germancarforum.com/interna...-w204-c63.html
E90 M3 - 1:24.0
C63 (PP) - 1:25.8
Diff: 1.8s

The best kind of formula is a simple one. Take history’s most famous equation, E=MC2. We all owe a debt of thanks to Albert for that insight into the relationship between energy, mass and velocity: entertainment equals a muscle-car times itself. Without it, American teenagers in the Fifties wouldn’t have had anything to do on a Saturday night. And this twin test wouldn’t be happening.

Truth is, the best ideas don’t fade away. The modern compact high-performance V8 saloon is a fine example of cutting-edge automotive engineering, but its roots run all the way back to any convenient set of traffic lights at midnight in smalltown USA. The psychology of those hallowed rituals lives on, too. Mercedes C63 AMG and BMW M3 saloon customers are unlikely to admit detecting even the faintest whiff of teen spirit but there are issues to resolve here: which car has the harder punch, which will gain the admiration of its owners’ peers. Essentially, which one gets the girl. And, tempting as it is to call it here and now, all bets based on previous form are off.

In its earlier guises, both four- and six-cylinder, the M3 has stood its ground heroically, but in its current V8 form it faces sterner new challenges, some of its own making. Its higher power output is, to some extent, offset by its extra bulk, and while as a four-door saloon it’s a little shorter than the carbonfibre-roofed coupe, it’s also wider and taller and, at 1680kg, another 25kg heavier. The resulting power-to-weight ratio of 250bhp per ton, while undeniably impressive, no longer qualifies as any kind of natural advantage in a sector where all of the opposition is V8-powered. Especially when the old enemy, AMG, is back with a bigger gun.

It badly wants to be the new face of sharply dressed violence, too. Hard as it is to imagine the staid, slightly portly proportions of the latest C-class acquiring a bring-it-on stance, the C63 AMG has achieved just that. Should BMW be worried? If it believes that size matters, let’s just say there are grounds for paranoia. The gleaming, hand-built, personally signed centrepiece of any AMG is its engine, and the C63’s is… big. At 6208cc it has a swept volume some 2.2 litres larger than the BMW’s, and with 451bhp and 442lb ft of torque, the C63’s outputs eclipse the M3’s by 37bhp and 147lb ft. Fortunately for the BMW, the Merc also weighs 50kg more and, therefore, nets only a slightly better power-to-weight ratio of 264bhp per ton. Torque-to-weight is a different story, though, with the C63’s 260lb ft per ton crushing the M3’s 178. And while the M3’s six-speed manual gearbox should, in theory, claw back some of the initiative from the auto-only C63, bear in mind that the 7G-Tronic transmission is no slouch when it comes to swapping cogs itself, and here it comes with a pair of steering-wheel paddles if you fancy doing the job yourself.

The performance figures are desperately close. In the benchmark sprints to 60 and 100mph it’s the Merc that predictably nicks the edge, recording 4.7 and 10.3sec to the M3’s 4.9 and 10.7. Whatever the conspiracy theorists might say, there is no substitute for capacity, and 6.2 litres never buckles against the clock, auto ’box or not. In particular, that 442lb ft of torque has a deep-welled, inexhaustible quality and mid-range presence that places the concept of ‘effortlessness’ in an entirely different context. When overtaking, the acceleration that chuffs air from your lungs and the nonchalant murmur of exertion from under the bonnet simply don’t seem to belong to the same physical event. The AMG motor’s linear delivery feels monumentally weighty from what seems like just a handful of revs too, the savage push ebbing only slightly over the final 1000 revs to the 7500rpm red line. Even though the M3 has another 800 revs in hand – and this is where its engine, in contrast, is hauling its hardest – the damage has already been done.


Full Story: Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG v BMW M3 saloon | Car Group Tests | Car Reviews | evo


M

Now I want to see the facelifted E90 sedan with DCT tranmission!

Those pics are lovely btw! Germany's finest