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

[utenigma]

Originally Posted by AlterZgo

The 0-150 time for the Caddy is shockingly good - 3-4 seconds faster than the M3 or C63. That Caddy must be seriously underrated.

What it means is that the caddy's rear end ratio's too tall. They shorten the ratio and it'd destroy the other 2

Maybe they're "learning" from bmw - protecting the ATS-V's big brother by neutering the little one a touch

Damn thing is god awful ugly though

[DantonIzzo]

Here's a counter narrative from Motor Trend (M3 got last place among the three):

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

[hbu]

I believe there is miscalculation of the AMG C63s under the Chassis category. 19+8+8+9+8=52, not 53.

[justinco]

Surprised the M was the lowest in the chassis scores. We all know how good an M chassis is, so the others must be really good

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by JUSTIN335

Can anyone tell me what a rear quarter panel stamping is?

The quarter panel ("rear" is redundant since by definition quarter panels are in the rear) stamping he refers to here is the die used in the machine to make the quarter panel. His point is that the M3 uses a unique one that is distinct from the 3 series, while the ATS-V and C63 share the exact same part that the lesser car they are based on uses.

Edit: Sorry, I did not see someone had already answered above.

[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.

[Jockey]

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.

Well, no, BMW doesn't. MB has the best interiors.

While even though MB might be faster in a straight line and Cadillac handles really well (never thought I'd say that), BMW still is the better package.

[Bahn360Photo]

ATS has good specs but anyone who even sat in new ATS would puke for paying anything over 20k for the car. its worse the disgusting. i cant believe that anyone in charge would be ok with releasing a car with that kind of inside

[Jai 302]

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.

Wait till the M3 CP is out. The regular M3 destroys the regular C63 and the M3 CP will do the same to the C63S.

I disagree with the comment about interiors though. The current 3/4 series probably have the worst interior in the segment. Benz C-class has an interior on par with the current BMW 5-Series/X5. Probably the only thing keeping me from trading in my 6er for a new M4 is the interior. It felt straight out of an early 2000's Honda when I test drove it.

[spuntyb]

Pretty impressive. I expected the M3 to get spanked, relatively speaking. That said, the real-world difference is pretty limited - any one of these would be sweet. I think the take away here is how well the V chassis does (maybe it's not surprising?), and how awesome it is to be shopping in this segment right now.

Now if they could just make one of these with a D pillar.

[eMvy]

"Don’t even get us started on CUE, the navigation/infotainment system, units of which should be dropped over ISIS territory to create mass confusion."

[solstice]

Wow, 122 mph 1/4 mile with a so-so tranny, there's some juice in that Caddy V6.
Thing is, whether it's a Benz, Caddy or Audi they never manage to make their cars feel as intuitive and "right" from the driver seat. Jump into a Porsche and it immediately feels right, just as a BMW. What I'm saying is that numbers just don't tell the whole story, it's difficult to build a better M3 and unfortunately Porsche refuses to enter the game so we are stuck with the awkwardness of the others

[phoenixbmwlife]

Great performance for the ATS-V. I do however think its over priced. It should have started at $57k - $59k to really be competitive in terms of people deciding which performance makes more sense to them. I don't see too many cross shopping the caddy when the better car (IMHO) starts at $1,500 more.

Why buy the uglier looking one (IMO) when its so close to the M3 in price? But what do I know I'm not that guy that sets the prices for Caddy.

[tacoman]

Meh.. The interior is not that bad.

Go ride in a Caddy Cimarron....and then look at the ATS/CTS V line...
lol

I do like the 2016 CTS V based upon pics seen and articles read.

[goj]

Great all around saloon. I'm expecting the M3/4 chassis to be back on top when the next iteration on the 35up platform is released

[aajami]

Last in chassis rating? This was supposed to be BMW's forte. Chassis that's faster than the engine and all that.

Hopefully they tighten all those bits up with the Competition Package.

[MDIVISION]

Good news is i dont give a rat's a$$ if a car is faster than my M3. I love the M.

[solstice]

Originally Posted by Ebolo

Hummm, not so much IMO, ATS-V chassis with M3 DCT, C63 engine and Quattro from Audi, that would make a better M3!

But who builds that car? Nobody, and with the next generation being hybrids all bets are off other than that the BMW will feel "right" from the driver seat. Other than that it's a new chapter with little resembles to the formula that has made BMW the drivers choice among luxury cars for so long. But with their investment in affordable CF production with the first sporty hybrid already in production with the i8 it's likely the others will continue to play catchup. The only upset I can see is if Porsche decides to enter the game with an affordable M3 segment car ( the 918 is a formidable show of know how). Before the complete and utter disaster in F1 I would had hoped Honda was interested in the sporty segment but now when they reduced the 2nd best team and the best driver in F1 to nobodys competing for the jumbo position I have no such illusions...

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by DantonIzzo

Here's a counter narrative from Motor Trend (M3 got last place among the three):

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/viewall.html

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.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by swanson

This article was posted a while ago. Too much AMG/ATS-V talk, huh? lol

this article is being posted now because it is officially on c and d's website.

the previous posting was a scan from a forum member's magazine that was not released on the website yet.

[swanson]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

this article is being posted now because it is officially on c and d's website.

the previous posting was a scan from a forum member's magazine that was not released on the website yet.

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

[dkhm3]

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.

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.