Autocar Compares F82 M4 vs C63 507 Edition

[M4TW]

Well that was the most unconvincing win ever.

He liked the throttle response of the Merc but that has to be tempered by the prodigious torque he praised in the M4. He liked the steering better in the Merc but he must have been steered in that direction by it being equipped with God Save The Queen side steering. The M4 certainly looked much more nibble in his hands.

Meanwhile, he critiqued the Merc's crappy transmission, weight, seats, and interior. He complimented how light the M4 felt, how easy it was to drift, its brakes, chassis, how easy it was to place, that it was more efficient, its vastly superior DCT, smoother ride, and less tire noise.

I was amused by the fact that in spite of having 500 HP, that the Merc was a tick slower.

I came away from his review all the more convinced that I'd much rather have the M4. I agree with him about the sound to an extent, but it doesn't sound any better to me than a Mustang or Camero. A classic sound to be sure, but dated like he said repeatedly about the C63. The turbo M4 makes a new sound.

From the future.

[Lups]

I found a new reason to hate AMG product today! The worst pickup attempt award can be handed out to the man in my shops parking lot. Okay, I have boobs, but still, I did not ask the price tag of the car, I asked about power and handling. I asked about a lot of stuff, and I think only thing he registered was that my shirt was a see trough kind. I came from the beach, for crying out loud, try still form a sentence!

Now, just in case he reads this, let it be known ones again, that I will never be interested. Not to either of the things offered. And I eat meat, so vegetables and vegan did not work. And no, I will not ever, ever want to see you again.

It's not even summer, and my asshole quota is full. I'm dying my hair, and cutting them short tomorrow.

Yes, this was a rant. sorry.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by Mdecisive

Time will show the reliability of those motors. However you are right though, They aren't to be over looked.

Yeah that's a lot of boost. A lot of guys have already tuned them to over 400+ horsepower and they seem to be holding up.

I know that the engine is sand cast. They really over-engineered it. For the AMG GT and the W205 C63, they are going to be splicing two of those motors together.

[SoCali E36]

Originally Posted by mrkhanna16

Weird.....he said the benz had better steering and the M had more torque.

Pretty crazy huh?

[dondula]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

http://www.formula1.com/results/team/

Well neither does BMW lol. And the C63 is 6-7 years old man haha!

But . . . Mercedes does use quite a bit of this new technology for their flagship performance car, the AMG GT. And the new AMG GT will share its engine with the next-generation C63.

The new W205 comes out in September. It will weigh 220+ lbs less than the current generation. It will also produce 500+ horsepower from a 4.0L biturbo V8.

Also, the M3 and C63 are NOT purebred sports cars. If you haven't driven a Porsche 911 GT3, go do it and then you'll understand what I'm talking about. The C63, M3, RS4, etc. are nothing more than fast grand touring cars. And that's a fact.

Some of AMG's recent innovation can be found in the CLA45, which has the world's most powerful 2.0L, 4-cylinder engine. About 155 horsepower per liter. Not bad, IMO.

And this is not going to end well. The 5-Series (including the M5) is one of the fattest, most bloated cars on the market. And BMW M has had to compensate for that by dropping a huge turbocharged motor into the M5. Doesn't mean it's a bad car, but it's no cutting edge lightweight.

with all the talk of other models. I am speaking e92 M3 for c63.. If we want to talk about the new M4 carbon drive shaft and other new goodies, we can.

But prefer to focus on the two cars at hand.

The e92 M3 is F1 inspired. High revving engine for one. Carbon fiber components for weight reduction is two, dual clutch gear box is 3.

In the review you posted and in many others, the exterior style looks dated with 80's style graphic. His words not mine. Rest of the car exterior of the c63 is nothing special. performance and style are very important

[///FCB]

I try to like the new M3/M4 but the more stuff I see and hear about it the less I do..

Seems like a souped up 335/435 with chassis tweaks. Wtf bmw.

[M4TW]

Originally Posted by ///FCB

I try to like the new M3/M4 but the more stuff I see and hear about it the less I do..

Seems like a souped up 335/435 with chassis tweaks. Wtf bmw.

You should consider supplementing your seeing and hearing with a base amount of reading in order avoid writing nonsense.

[Baldeagle]

Can I offer a different perspective to this discussion and especially to my North American friends. I don't believe if I spend $160000 on a new M3 I am an average consumer. I have owned an E46 M3 previously and loved it to death (except for the SMG) but I think BMW and M need to be advancing technology to the nth degree. This means more power, less fuel and emissions and still get me around the track the quickest.
What other objective could M have?http://f80.bimmerpost.com/forums/ima...lies/smile.gif

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by dondula

You are comparing 507 pack car in the Audi review and a 507 c63 in the first review in this thread was shown. The 507 is 110k Not a fair comparison at 30k more then a loaded M4 to begin with. 30 thousand dollars more, c63 507 better be something...

507 isn't $110k. The 507 edition is a $9,750 package on top of the coupe base price of $62,750. So you could get into one starting at $72,500.

[kevinlevrone]

Originally Posted by chiplee

Especially when compared to the M3. I needed 4 doors so until M4 GC comes around, I can't touch the M4. Of course the $57,300 military sales pricing on the M3 didn't hurt either. But now I'm just gloating.

I hope you realize that there is also an M3 available. And it looks better than the M4.

[KKM3]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

Most of these gripes are based off of your personal preferences and experiences though.

First of all, the C63 sedan has much better seats than the coupe. They come with the integrated headrests, much like the new seats on the F80/F82. There are controls that adjust the side bolsters, the thigh bolsters, and the lumbar support.

Second, the brakes on my C63 don't squeal at all. In fact, one of the reasons why my first F30 M Sport 335i was bought back (it was a lemon) was because they could never fix the squealing brakes. That is a risk you run with ANY big brake hardware, not just the AMG's.

Third, whether you like the temperature set at 71 or 72 is a very minor (and certainly unique) complaint. It's incredible that you can feel the difference between 71 degrees and 72 degrees. I have not seen that complaint elsewhere (that is, this issue is something that is personal to you, which is fine).

Fourth, just because one car offers a carbon fiber roof doesn't mean that the other car is inherently flawed. Not many manufacturers offer a carbon fiber roof. The E90 M3 did NOT have a carbon fiber roof available.

Fifth, the M156 revs out to over 7,200 rpm. That's less than the M3 but generally still very impressive. I would trade that extra space on the tachometer for nearly 150 lb-ft of torque any day.

So what I'm basically getting at is that most of your criticisms pertain to why the car did not fit your particular needs.

Edit: Also, the MCT does in fact shift faster than the previous transmission. I have no idea where you found information stating otherwise.

I also wouldn't say that 100 millisecond shifts are crappy. Are they slower than the M DCT? Yes. But Porsche's DCT also puts the M DCT to shame. Everything is relative.

I owned a 911 c2s and an e92 m3 both equipped with dual clutch transmissions and I disagree with your statement about Porsche's Pdk. It certainly does not put the m3s dual clutch to shame. The m3 transmission was far more responsive to commands and worked much better than the Pdk in my Porsche.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by KKM3

I owned a 911 c2s and an e92 m3 both equipped with dual clutch transmissions and I disagree with your statement about Porsche's Pdk. It certainly does not put the m3s dual clutch to shame. The m3 transmission was far more responsive to commands and worked much better than the Pdk in my Porsche.

The one in the 991 GT3 does. I have test driven a new 991 S, the pdk is the best dual clutch I have driven. I could only imagine the GT3.

[clar]

If their recent M5 vs Vauxhall VXR8 review was any indication, they will next release another review branding the new M3/M4 the best thing since slice bread...

[KKM3]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

The one in the 991 GT3 does. I have test driven a new 991 S, the pdk is the best dual clutch I have driven. I could only imagine the GT3.

991 gt3 is probably the best dual clutch in existence right now however the 997 and to a lesser extent the 991 is not quite up to par with the e92's dual clutch. The 991 does a much better job than the 997 but there are still slight delays in upshifts when you pull the paddle. Downshifts on the other hand are instantaneous.

I would say that that the Pdk in the standard non gt3 models work better than the m3 dct only in auto, dct is better when manually controlling shifts.


Edit: FYI I had both cars at the same time and I would drive them back to back several times to see which transmission is superior and in which ways. Overall I prefered m dct to Pdk mainly because of the responsiveness of the dct and the fact that it felt more engaging to drive. The Pdk felt more like a traditional automatic with stupid buttons instead of proper paddles.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by KKM3

991 gt3 is probably the best dual clutch in existence right now however the 997 and to a lesser extent the 991 is not quite up to par with the e92's dual clutch. The 991 does a much better job than the 997 but there are still slight delays in upshifts when you pull the paddle. Downshifts on the other hand are instantaneous.

I would say that that the Pdk in the standard non gt3 models work better than the m3 dct only in auto, dct is better when manually controlling shifts.

My E90 is a DCT. After the test drive in the 991 S, my drive home felt boring. The PDK shifts in sport plus were so crisp and definitely felt as fast as the DCT. PDK just felt more racecar-ish, for lack of a better term.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by dondula

with all the talk of other models. I am speaking e92 M3 for c63.. If we want to talk about the new M4 carbon drive shaft and other new goodies, we can.

But prefer to focus on the two cars at hand.

The e92 M3 is F1 inspired. High revving engine for one. Carbon fiber components for weight reduction is two, dual clutch gear box is 3.

In the review you posted and in many others, the exterior style looks dated with 80's style graphic. His words not mine. Rest of the car exterior of the c63 is nothing special. performance and style are very important

You're all over the place man. You brought up the general topic of brand philosophy and technology.

This was after stating that BMW uses F1 technology . . . when they haven't participated in F1 for years. When you didn't like what I had to say there, you narrowed the topic again.

Also, there's a difference between actual F1 technology and F1-inspired technology. I don't think either are particularly relevant here, as carbon fiber has been used for weight reduction purposes in several classes of racing. The same goes for high-revving engines.

And again, were there any carbon fiber components on the E90 M3, you know, the sedan, that either came with a sunroof or a steel roof?

If someone doesn't like the graphic, they can order the car without it or peel it off. This nit-picking of trivial things is getting tiresome for me and probably for everyone else suffering through reading this.

And to say the E9X M3 is F1-inspired just blows my mind. How can less weight be a component of that when the E9X was the heaviest M3 ever made?

It's gotten heavier and heavier every generation until the F80.

You don't think the exterior looks special. I happen to like the exterior of the E90/E92, the F80/F82, and the C63.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by dondula

The e92 M3 is F1 inspired. High revving engine for one. Carbon fiber components for weight reduction is two, dual clutch gear box is 3.

F1 cars don't use dual clutch gearboxes.

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

You're all over the place man. You brought up the general topic of brand philosophy and technology.

Don't even worry about it. No offense to the guy, but he is type of guy you meet at cars and coffee and after about 1 minute you realize he can't carry on a technical discussion about cars.

[kgroschi]

Originally Posted by chiplee

I'm in Fort Worth. My profile might not be up to date. Headed back to CA though. 16th? Awesome! Mine was shortly after with cert ride shortly after my 17th.

I guess the only other thing I'll add is anyone who ever thought BMW was more loyal to any enthusiast or purist than it was to profits was kind of fooling themselves. If you appreciate capitalism, and like great cars, you want BMW to make as much money as possible, even if it means disappointing a few "fans" especially considering fan is the root word of fanatic.

Very cool!

And yes this is sadly the truth of the world we live in. Sometimes I wish I would have been born in like the 60s... Now it's all about making more profit than last month, which is destroying the enthusiasts car little by little. That's why the only way to get around it is to make good money and buy a 458, GT3, F12 and such.

[KKM3]

Originally Posted by Blipit_

My E90 is a DCT. After the test drive in the 991 S, my drive home felt boring. The PDK shifts in sport plus were so crisp and definitely felt as fast as the DCT. PDK just felt more racecar-ish, for lack of a better term.

I disagree, to me the Pdk in the 991 felt less responsive to upshifts especially shifting at lower rpms. The 991 may have felt more "racecar-ish" because it's a small 2 door sports car that sits lower and your e90 is a larger 4 door sedan with a much higher seating position. When you truly focus on the transmission itself and block out all other characteristics of the car, you will see what im talking about.

[kgroschi]

Originally Posted by dondula

But prefer to focus on the two cars at hand.

The e92 M3 is F1 inspired. High revving engine for one. Carbon fiber components for weight reduction is two, dual clutch gear box is 3.

Guys give him a break. The E9x was F1 inspired. At least the high revving / low torque engine philosphy, just like the S65 V10.

BMW btw did compete in F1 from 2000 till 2009... the E9x M3 was introduced in 2006.

As for weight reduction, it's hard to say because the E9x was heaver than the E46, however it had also a lot more gimmicks onboard. It did use lighter components though, no doubt.

As for the DCT... the concept of shifting on the wheel might be from F1 but again, F1 cars don't have a Dual Clutch Tranny, so in that respect the SMG was a little closer to the F1 philosophy.

[DieGrüneHölle]

Originally Posted by KKM3

I disagree, to me the Pdk in the 991 felt less responsive to upshifts especially shifting at lower rpms. The 991 may have felt more "racecar-ish" because it's a small 2 door sports car that sits lower and your e90 is a larger 4 door sedan with a much higher seating position. When you truly focus on the transmission itself and block out all other characteristics of the car, you will see what im talking about.

I was referring to the shifts, they just felt more aggressive. To me the DCT is very smooth and more seamless.