AutoZeitung - BMW M6 Cabrio vs. Mercedes SL63 AMG & Porsche 911 Turbo Cabrio

[DeDe]

Nothing new.
But, very interesting that the Turbo Cabrio is as fast as the coupe (?) and the SL63 AMG is slower than the previous SL55 AMG...(pretty weak acceleration IMO)



BMW M6 Cabrio
-507 hp, 520 Nm
-7-speed-SMG
-2007 kg
-0-100 km/h: 4,6 s
-0-200 km/h: 14,0 s
-100-0 km/h: 34,3 m
-Handling: 1:43,3 min
-18 m slalom: 65,0 km/h
-Fuel c.: 15,6 l/100 km

Mercedes-Benz SL63 AMG
-525 hp, 630 Nm
-7-speed-automatic
-1967 kg
-0-100 km/h: 4,5 s
-0-200 km/h: 14,4 s
-100-0 km/h: 34,0 m
-Handling: 1:43,5 min
-18 m slalom: 63,5 km/h
-Fuel c.: 17,5 l/100 km

Porsche 911 Turbo Cabriolet
-480 hp, 620 (680) Nm
-6-speed-manual
-1670 kg
-0-100 km/h: 3,7 s
-0-200 km/h: 12,2 s
-100-0 km/h: 32,6 m
-Handling: 1:41,2 min
-18 m slalom: 67,5 km/h
-Fuel c.: 14,1 l/100 km

Winner: M6 Cabrio
2nd: SL63 AMG
3rd: Turbo Cabrio

http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/4/5/7/f_1m_1a2d2d3.jpg&srv=img26

 

[Centurion]

Porsche does very hard work with their convertibles. The top speed is the same as the coupe variants and the acceleration figures are very close as well. I love these figures, the 911 is the under powered one but yet the fastest and most fuel efficient one.

 

[VroomVroom]

M6 cab please, I love it

 

[Tarek]

SL63 please,there's no more complete convertible

 

[Cashmere]

I would have them in the following order:

1) 911 Turbo Cab
2) SL 63
3) M6

 

[Bruce]

I would have them in the following order:

1) 911 Turbo Cab
2) SL 63
3) M6

Ditto.

 

[ree]

I would have them in the following order:

1) 911 Turbo Cab
2) SL 63
3) M6

Yep!! Same for me!!

 

[Sunny]

I thought the the SL63 would have something on the M6 in acceleration with the new transmission and the bigger engine but guess not. The TT is still the king of performance by a big margin but not a big fan of the TT cab. If it was the coupe that would definitely be my choice.

 

[Cashmere]

Winner: M6 Cabrio
2nd: SL63 AMG
3rd: Turbo Cabrio

http://www.picoodle.com/view.php?img=/4/5/7/f_1m_1a2d2d3.jpg&srv=img26

Wow, I only noticed this now, how on earth did the M6 vert outclass the face lifted SL and the Turbo?

 

[Zafiro]

Wow, I only noticed this now, how on earth did the M6 vert outclass the face lifted SL and the Turbo?

becuase its a good car?

 

[LaArtist]

no brainer for me..SL63 all the way

 

[Centurion]

I like the SL63 and 997TT equally as much but they are a little different and I would buy on depending on what I'm in the market for. The SL is a luxury glider which works wonders as a daily driver while the Porsche is the car you can shine with on a boulevard but is in an essence a pure sports car perfect for anyone who have dream of ever owning engineering excellence.

becuase its a good car?

No. Because it is cheaper to buy and to own than the other two. If you ignore the cost factors then the Porsche is the car which won the test.

 

[Guibo]

No. Because it is cheaper to buy and to own than the other two. If you ignore the cost factors then the Porsche is the car which won the test.

If it's cheaper to buy and to own, while being just as good as (or better than) the Porsche in the other parts overall, doesn't that make it a good car? It's not like we are comparing the Turbo against a Korean- or Japanese- or South American-built car.
Not so sure we can ignore the cost factors; if BMW were charging, say, 300K euros for the M6 and a 5K euro service every 10K km, then most people in their right mind would see that as an incredibly poor value in the category, and something of a joke of a car.
Removing the environment/costs category points, the BMW is still ahead by 7 points.

Anyway, Porsche for me.

 

[Centurion]

If it's cheaper to buy and to own, while being just as good as (or better than) the Porsche in the other parts overall, doesn't that make it a good car? It's not like we are comparing the Turbo against a Korean- or Japanese- or South American-built car.
Not so sure we can ignore the cost factors; if BMW were charging, say, 300K euros for the M6 and a 5K euro service every 10K km, then most people in their right mind would see that as an incredibly poor value in the category, and something of a joke of a car.
Removing the environment/costs category points, the BMW is still ahead by 7 points.

Anyway, Porsche for me.

Ignore the cost factor and the finishing score would be:

997TT: 822
SL63: 715
M6: 700

In the performance and driving dynamic category the Porsche was better than the M6 in all possible ways. That is also emphasized by the performance figures for acceleration, slalom and lap time. The M6 might be a better GT but the 997TT is the better sports car.

 

[Guibo]

Ignore the cost factor and the finishing score would be:

997TT: 822
SL63: 715
M6: 700

That is only the driving dynamics score. This test was a test of the better overall car, and that encompasses 4 other major categories.
Excluding cost/environment, the finishing score would be:
SL63: 2704
M6: 2662
997TT: 2655

 

[Merc1]

I would have them in the following order:

1) 911 Turbo Cab
2) SL 63
3) M6

That is pretty much what I expected when I saw the title of the thread. The SL and 911 trade places so easily depending on what one is looking for sport/luxury or luxury/sport.

M

 

[Zafiro]

No. Because it is cheaper to buy and to own than the other two. If you ignore the cost factors then the Porsche is the car which won the test.

so what you are saying here is that M6 is bad car?

 

[bum-man]

No, just not as good as the other two.

 

[Tarek]

No, just not as good as the other two.

Not to mention it's fugly next to the others IMO of course

 

[DeDe]

Not to mention it's fugly next to the others IMO of course

It is.