Video: BMW M3 vs C63 S AMG comparison review | evo DEADLY RIVALS

[Irishace]

Its too bad the Benz looks so awful. The rear end looks like a complete afterthought. Great motor as always from AMG but I just can't get past the style. No doubt it can rip though.

[Crescendo]

Originally Posted by Irishace

Its too bad the Benz looks so awful. The rear end looks like a complete afterthought. Great motor as always from AMG but I just can't get past the style. No doubt it can rip though.

That's subjective, for some the F8x looks just as bad(or as good).

[CARMASTERRACE]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

Had swapped mine to top of the line Bridgestone summer S-04 Pole Positions.

Helped the rears, but the engine was simply too powerful for the chassis.

I disagree with this statement. Did yours have LSD? The C63's chassis was pretty damn good, just not as good as the E9x. It had good ridigity (came fairly close to the M3, don't recall the numbers though), had a fine tuned suspension (lacked EDC, so sometimes too soft, sometimes too stiff, KW DDC though solves this), excellent brakes (just a tad worse than the M3's), good LSD (once again gets killed by the Bimmer's), better hydraulic steering than the BMW, and excellent feel overall.

I used mine in tons of the Brazilian equivalent of canyon roads, and I will tell, it was not as balanced or poised as the E90 M, but it could definitely keep up, just that it would require more skill, better throttle control and more bravery (LOL).

Here in Brazil there was a pilot that had both E9x M and W204 AMG and took both on 3 different circuits trackday to get an overall outcome, both cars with PZero slicks, and that was the only mod. The laptimes in one (full of straights, and mainly quick corners)- C63 1.5s ahead, (full of mid speed, low speed corners, some high, and 2 large straights), C63 and M3 had same lap time just a 0.05 difference in favour of the BMW, and on a smaller track with just low speed tight corners, and one straight - BMW ahead by 0.3s. Overall both cars have very similar chassis performance, the trouble is that the C63 had too much low end torque, and required massive throttle management, or a ton of balls to drive neatly and at the limit.

Personally I think it is 2 different schools, the scalpel and the filet knife. Both are downright brilliant, and I wish I had money to have both. As I only had money for one, I chose the C63 as it was a more fun car yet comfortable car at normal traffic conditions (that kick in the back with the throttle, and that exhaust never got old), but it was equally good at the limit, just not as brilliant as the M3.

[adc]

There is one essential point at which AMG has failed perennially - no manual transmission. If nothing else, this would kill it for me.

But as far as I am concerned, it goes beyond the transmission issue. When you are dawdling around in town or on the highway, the AMG can easily seduce with a more powerful engine or great sound. But when you really ask it to step up the game and become something special or sublime, like at the limit pounding away on track, it simply doesn't deliver that special thrill.

Somehow despite Mercedes having an incredible racing program (far better than BMW currently IMO), it just doesn't translate to their cars. Perhaps the new GT is different, not sure as I'm not in that spending bracket.

So if you want that special extra thing, the tangible and not so tangible in the most demanding conditions, IMO the M is still the car to have.


I have absolutely no problem with people disagreeing with me. I just returned from a 6,000+ km European Delivery, and fell head over heels for my M3. I guess the most ringing endorsements are offered with the wallet...

[F85FTW]

Originally Posted by adc

There is one essential point at which AMG has failed perennially - no manual transmission. If nothing else, this would kill it for me.

But as far as I am concerned, it goes beyond the transmission issue. When you are dawdling around in town or on the highway, the AMG can easily seduce with a more powerful engine or great sound. But when you really ask it to step up the game and become something special or sublime, like at the limit pounding away on track, it simply doesn't deliver that special thrill.

Somehow despite Mercedes having an incredible racing program (far better than BMW currently IMO), it just doesn't translate to their cars. Perhaps the new GT is different, not sure as I'm not in that spending bracket.

So if you want that special extra thing, the tangible and not so tangible in the most demanding conditions, IMO the M is still the car to have.


I have absolutely no problem with people disagreeing with me. I just returned from a 6,000+ km European Delivery, and fell head over heels for my M3. I guess the most ringing endorsements are offered with the wallet...

I agree with the statement of the c63 at the cornering limit not delivering the thrill or connection you get with the m3/4. I believe it comes down to brand philosophy and it can be summarized by the choice of the roofs on each car. The M4 has a rigid very lightweight CF roof to lower weight and more importantly center of gravity while the C63 has the panoramic glass roof that is extremely heavy and adds weight up top.

What I can also say is after driving a buddies GTS this car can not be compared to any other Mercedes on sale or sold besides maybe the SLS Black Series its a serious weapon beyond anything bmw currently offers. As expected though its a 140+K car and is a ground up 2 seat sports car. I was just not expecting it to be so sharp and capable wearing a 3 pointed star on the grill they really went to town on this car and it shares no familiar AMG traits besides a loud V8.

[KevinM]

Originally Posted by adc

There is one essential point at which AMG has failed perennially - no manual transmission. If nothing else, this would kill it for me.

+1 And that, in terms of Mercedes and now increasingly Audi, seals it for me currently. I bough my first BMW in 1999, a 528i, because it was the only medium-szied sports sedan that was offered with a manual. As BMW winds its manual program down (even the M brand), perhaps I'll be forced to buy Cadillacs, ha ha. Of course manuals will soon be dead in all sedans and then eventually all cars...glad I'll have some in my garage to drive.

[CARMASTERRACE]

Posted this in the other thread posting it here as well.
Every C63 S thread is becoming absurd, full of fanboys for both car, my advice is cut it out. I find ridiculous BMW guys saying the C63 (old or new) is a pathetic car, and making bold claims about it, as I also find it ridiculous Mercedes guys coming here bashing on the M3/M4 saying it is a bad car and blah blah blah. Let's put it this way both are excellent, fun and exciting to drive, and deserve equal respect. To end discussion:

Winning points:
C63 S - exhaust, straightline speed, ride, and interior
M3 F80 - exterior, transmission, cornering ability

[adc]

Guys, you should take all magazine reviews with lots of grains of salt. For one thing, the reviewer's national bias often comes through: Brits extol the perfection of their jags (went and drove some and thought they were utter crap), Americans love to praise Vettes or Caddys or whatever flavor of the moment muscle car, etc. I don't know enough German to be sure, but I assume German writers are probably the worst in their smugness .

The reality of owning and tracking a car is often very different. I've seen much lauded previous gen C63 at the track, passed them in the dry and in the rain without problems, saw them spill their oil through the dipstick and boil the fluid in their amazing Brembo brakes. Heard stories from CTSV owners of all sorts of heat related issues on track. All the while my E90 M3 soldiered on without a glitch or complaint. With the AC on every session.

Now everybody loves the new Z06 but it seems it cannot handle the heat on track, ironically the very environment it was supposedly designed for.

Magazine reviews are, as someone else has already remarked, very short. 1 or 2 familiarization laps and then one flying lap and that's it. The reality of track driving is 20-30 min of very hard sessions, often in crushing heat and humidity.

My advice, if you are looking for a trackable car, spend some time at the track talking with the owners. You'll find out about the good and the bad, so you can make an informed decision.

From past experience, I just know the C63 will be a very rare sight on track and I suspect it will have some heat and weight related issues. I'm eagerly awaiting reports of the ATSV, and I wish it absolutely no ill will. It's nice to have some alternatives in the price range...

[gthal]

Originally Posted by dmk08

I think the cars perform very well. I just dont like the way they look or their transmissions.

This is correct. There is zero doubt the C63S is a monster and, IMO, is only let down by the MCT transmission (although on the street its fine) and the look but that is totally subjective. Wish it weighed 300lbs less too but, as we discussed to death, the focus of the car isn't on buyers who care as much about that so why would MB bother.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by CARMASTERRACE

Posted this in the other thread posting it here as well.
Every C63 S thread is becoming absurd, full of fanboys for both car, my advice is cut it out. I find ridiculous BMW guys saying the C63 (old or new) is a pathetic car, and making bold claims about it, as I also find it ridiculous Mercedes guys coming here bashing on the M3/M4 saying it is a bad car and blah blah blah. Let's put it this way both are excellent, fun and exciting to drive, and deserve equal respect. To end discussion:

Winning points:
C63 S - exhaust, straightline speed, ride, and interior
M3 F80 - exterior, transmission, cornering ability

at least 3 of us here that have owned 204's have stated our experiences with the car. that's not fanboy or "bmw guys"

i had my c63 for 3 years, and I think I know enough about it to say what I want.

[Crescendo]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

at least 3 of us here that have owned 204's have stated our experiences with the car. that's not fanboy or "bmw guys"

i had my c63 for 3 years, and I think I know enough about it to say what I want.

You aware that all of these threads about the C63 are in reference to the new W205, not the W204? I just hope you're giving Merc the benefit of the doupt that they will have improved many aspect of the car(transmission amongs other things) just like BMW did with the latest generation.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by Crescendo

You aware that all of these threads about the C63 are in reference to the new W205, not the W204? I just hope you're giving Merc the benefit of the doupt that they will have improved many aspect of the car(transmission amongs other things) just like BMW did with the latest generation.

merc lost me when they repeated the same problems as the w204 and added turbo.

1. weight

2. add hp and massive trq but keep the same rear width as reg c class

3. mct

4. cooling system for engine is questionable turbo engines need massive cooling to be track ready- i have not read how mb is going to remedy this. see bmw's (7) cooling systems for m3/m4- massive engine, oil, tranny, coolers etc- start at 5:50 min mark.

[Crescendo]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

merc lost me when they repeated the same problems as the w204 and added turbo.

1. weight

2. add hp and massive trq but keep the same rear width as reg c class

3. mct

4. cooling system for engine is questionable turbo engines need massive cooling to be track ready- i have not read how mb is going to remedy this. see bmw's (7) cooling systems for m3/m4- massive engine, oil, tranny, coolers etc- start at 5:50 min mark.

I think your problem is that you are judging the C63 as if it was trying to be an M3, but it's not. It is something else and it is really good at it.

[CSanto]

Originally Posted by Crescendo

I don't think "underpowered vs" has anything to do with being a good or a bad car, it only means this:

C63S with pano roof(+200lbs) vs M3 with down pipes(+~20hp)

Does the pano roof really add 200 HP? That thing pulls like a mad man!

[Crescendo]

Originally Posted by CSanto

Does the pano roof really add 200 HP? That thing pulls like a mad man!

I wish!

But seriously, somewhere between 150 and 200lbs.

[seandalal]

great video and comparison

[JL1]

Thought i would give my opinion to those still considering which car to go and buy between the c63s and the f8x. This is just one persons opinion so please don't take it to heart.

I am lucky enough to have owned both a 2014 f80 m3 and a new 2015 c63s.I sold my M3 because i didn't feel it excited me enough, however i was wrong.

In my opinion and in a perfect world you need to have both, the c63s is pure luxury and an absolute beast of a street rod. The sound of the engine in sport + and race mode makes your jaw drop and it is Fast in a straight line.

The M3 is simply the best looking saloon car on the market, I am a massive fan of the S55 engine and the DCT gearbox. Standard the M3 is fun, however once chipped with downpipes and exhaust module the M3 is to me the better value for money car!

If you shop around in OZ and get a good deal the M3 is over 30k AUD cheaper and with 10-15k spent on it, the M3 would still be 15k cheaper than the c63s and i believe a lot more fun.

If I had to choose, i would buy an LCI M3 and spend 15k on it!

mods in order

1. exhaust module
2. downpipes and tune
3. lowering springs
4. Mperformace exterior accessories
3. Mperformace interior upgrades
4. nice wheels and bigger tyres

Then Enjoy it!