2015 F80 M3 vs. C63 S AMG and ATS-V instrumented comparison test by Car and Driver

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by swanson

What difference does that make? Its still the same info.

it can't be posted on the front page of bimmerpost if the article is not released by the magazine on their webiste.

now that it is posted on c and d's website, they can put the info on their site "officially"

[Jmpascual]

I don't understand what's the big deal with the start/stop button, It's been mentioned on plenty of reviews. You don't even have to press it twice... If the engine goes to ready when you park, unbuckle, then open your door and lock. Everything just shuts off when you lock the car. I've never had to press the button twice unless I'm trying to put the windshield wipers up or something.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

Yep, I definitely agree.

Lieberman also ranked the amg gt above the 911, which is contrary to most magazines.

He loves the new AMG's. He is biased, but then so is every car enthusiast. It is hard to be objective when performance is so close these days.

Sutcliffe... he loved the w204, because of the v8 (6.2 is indeed one of the greatest engines). Obviously, did not like the I6 in the M3/M4.

I actually prefer bias in automotive writing — any writing, really. I like to be aware of it, but I'm glad it's there. Objectivity is most clearly expressed through a spec sheet and lap times. Good stuff to have, but it makes for boring reading

[JunkStory]

All three are so close in terms of performance that I think it comes down to a matter of personal preference. On the street, it would be difficult to realize these micro second differences.

with that said, I'd take the C63. It's classy, and a sleeper. The M3 looks too flamboyant and screams "look at meee I'm fast!!!". The Cadillac is ugly as hell.

[autopal]

We should take these comparisons for what they really are, opinions. When majority of the scoring is subjective, I don't think we should put much weight in the final placings. Heck, the last comparison I saw on these same 3 cars, had the M3 in last place! I am a BMW fanatic, but I would choose the AMG over the other 2 in a heartbeat. I am not saying the C63 is superior, and I would not be tracking my car or trying to approach anywhere near the limits, I would choose the C63 just because of the thundering V8 and the gorgeous interior.

[3M TAPE]

Wow looks like Caddy dominated the chasis department.
Isn't that what car enthusiasts really care about?

[3M TAPE]

Originally Posted by Ramos

It's sad that nowadays BMW M cars win comparison tests because they have the best interiors and not because they are dynamically superior anymore. The competition has surpassed BMW where it matters.

+1

[3M TAPE]

Originally Posted by mkoesel

Another close race. Good on BMW M for taking this one.

Close race? I don't think so.
BMW won this comparison due to the high scores of ..say.. fuel economy, interior, exterior stylings...
BMW totally lost this one IMO

[swanson]

Originally Posted by BigMacMeal

Wow looks like Caddy dominated the chasis department.
Isn't that what car enthusiasts really care about?

Originally Posted by BigMacMeal

Close race? I don't think so.
BMW won this comparison due to the high scores of ..say.. fuel economy, interior, exterior stylings...
BMW totally lost this one IMO

Finally, someone else sees it the same way I do. This is the furthest thing from a win for the M3/M4.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by BigMacMeal

Close race? I don't think so.
BMW won this comparison due to the high scores of ..say.. fuel economy, interior, exterior stylings...
BMW totally lost this one IMO

Since it wasn't a comparison strictly based on performance, by "race" in this case I was referring to the overall test itself. If you prefer, "close competition" could be substituted instead.

Originally Posted by BigMacMeal

Wow looks like Caddy dominated the chasis department.
Isn't that what car enthusiasts really care about?

Different enthusiasts care about different things. For example, the vast majority of us don't track our cars and thus put a lot of weight into the overall package and value. You can't go wrong with any of these cars. The fact that each has had victories in various comparison tests is a clear indicator of how close things are between them.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by BigMacMeal

Wow looks like Caddy dominated the chasis department.
Isn't that what car enthusiasts really care about?

+1

Pulling 1.02 g, 0 to 150 mph in 19.8 sec.

The M won mainly because of the rear seat comfort and rear seat space.

[Kenu8187]

Interestingly is how the BMW fell short on chassis( even with the lowest weight and carbon fiber goodness) and engine and brakes even with those CCBs. It won largely due to having the smallest engine and thus 3 points bonus for fuel economy over the other two( this likely has been previously mentioned, I haven't read every post yet).

Though I will likely still pick up an F80 next regardless, as the Cadillac is hideously ugly and the merc is just not my style albeit compelling

I hope BMW takes notice of it's relatively mediocre reception of the new M3 over the previous generations( across almost every comparo) and really picks it up for the next generation. Electric turbos(no choice here) more carbon fiber(like a CF tub please), and a more visceral experience for the senses

[AudiA4]

Originally Posted by swanson

Finally, someone else sees it the same way I do. This is the furthest thing from a win for the M3/M4.

Agreed! Impressive for GM/Cadillac no doubt. Anyone who's ever driven an ATS or CTS (especially the V-Sport) knows why it scored well...beautiful dynamics and powertrain, yet let down in this comparo by a so-so interior and a poorly conceived (but conceptually upgradable?) multimedia interface.

[AudiA4]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

+1

Pulling 1.02 g, 0 to 150 mph in 19.8 sec.

The M won mainly because of the rear seat comfort and rear seat space.

^^^ and this...

[trey100]

Things that stick out to me -

1. Max sound level during full throttle - M3 at 89 and MB at 78? How can all the rave reviews about the MB sound yet the sound level is this low? Can that be right. There's a huge difference between these 2 values.

2. All cars are close performance. I just like how BMW makes their M3 subtle enough that a grown up could drive it and not feel like they are having a mid life crisis. The ATS just looks like a kid's car. And the interior is just too cheap. I love what GM is doing but they have to get the styling and quality up.

[shu5892001]

Seems like C63 lost due to pricing

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by V1.47fan

+1

Pulling 1.02 g, 0 to 150 mph in 19.8 sec.

The M won mainly because of the rear seat comfort and rear seat space.

That's how the E9X won it's comparisons too. You'd think these wannabes would catch on. Maybe you could explain the difference in how pulling 1.02 g differs from pulling .98 g?

[swanson]

Originally Posted by trey100

Things that stick out to me -

1. Max sound level during full throttle - M3 at 89 and MB at 78? How can all the rave reviews about the MB sound yet the sound level is this low? Can that be right. There's a huge difference between these 2 values.

2. All cars are close performance. I just like how BMW makes their M3 subtle enough that a grown up could drive it and not feel like they are having a mid life crisis. The ATS just looks like a kid's car. And the interior is just too cheap. I love what GM is doing but they have to get the styling and quality up.

1. How loud a car is does not equate to how good it sounds.

2. The M3 does not have a grown up look. Its why kids love it.

[nicknaz]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

Lieberman is definitely harder on the F80 than most. He's not as over the edge as Sutcliffe, but he's not a fan.

Not saying his opinion is wrong, but I'm not surprised.

Lieberman ripped on the 235 in a big way a while back, no surprise he isn't an F80 fan

By the way, interesting quote about ATS-V tires from the C&D article

You’ve even got the right tires, Michelin Pilot Super Sports, the segment standard. Except that the tires on the ATS-V are custom-made for Cadillac. We could see wider shoulder blocks and fatter center traction bands. These GM guys are serious.

Obviously it is too simplistic to chalk up all of the ATS-V goodness to the tires, but so many things are influenced by tires (such as ability to launch hard and get a nice 1/4 mile time, put up big skid pad lateral grip numbers, and get on the throttle sooner on corner exit) that I do wonder how much of the "chassis" goodness is really "more aggressive tires"

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by Never Convicted

That's how the E9X won it's comparisons too. You'd think these wannabes would catch on. Maybe you could explain the difference in how pulling 1.02 g differs from pulling .98 g?

Expect the next M3/M4 to be bigger-er, plug-in hybrid.

[JUSTIN335]

Originally Posted by LDSM

All body panels are stamped from a piece of metal nowadays, it can be a crease, fold, flare, etc
They're mentioning the rear 1/4 panel of the M3 because that wide flare is unique to the F80 and is not on the standard 3 series.
Compared to the competition the Ats-V and C63 use more carry over body work from the standard models to the performance models, less unique body parts

Ahh thanks. I guess the word I missed was *unique*

[stahlgray]

What's up with after market looking screen on the C63?