M3/M4 vs W205 C63 AMG

[catpat8000]

Originally Posted by ixse

traditional auto is def smoother than dct.. i did do a back to back comparo between used c63 n e92 dct couple yrs back. i just felt sports cars need something to engage (which i prefer manual over anything). DCT seems to bring a bit more engagement with what im doing vs c63 where sound dominates over everything else.

Traditional automatics with torque converters are very smooth, perhaps that what you drove? The C63 had a torque converter as late as 2011. I think the 2012 model year moved to the MCT.

The Mercedes MCT (no torque converter) doesn't feel smoother to me than the DCT. Just my $0.02.

Pat

[435iaffair]

Originally Posted by catpat8000

In driving the 2014 E63, the main problem you notice with that transmission experience is that from the time you press the shift paddle to the time the tranny shifts, a shocking amount of time elapses. Far, far more than the DCT. For example, from a dead stop, I can start in manual mode, floor the gas pedal, and immediately pulled the shift paddle but I still hit the rev limiter in 1st. That car can't be launched in manual mode simply because it takes to long to process inputs from the shift paddles.

Pat

Huge this. The MCT just doesn't hold a candle next to the DCT, or even the ZF tranny in my 435i. Doesn't ZF offer variants that can withstand much higher torque capacities? I've always wondered what the E63, or even better, the C63 would drive like with a tranny as responsive as the ZF unit in the F3x BMWs...with a DCT these AMGs might just be perfect with that powerplant.

Originally Posted by catpat8000

The C63 had a torque converter as late as 2011. I think the 2012 model year moved to the MCT.

Pat

You are correct. IMHO the MCT is a huge improvement over the 7g-tronic, but still not up to par for cars that house the m156/m157.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by 435iaffair

Huge this. The MCT just doesn't hold a candle next to the DCT, or even the ZF tranny in my 435i. Doesn't ZF offer variants that can withstand much higher torque capacities? I've always wondered what the E63, or even better, the C63 would drive like with a tranny as responsive as the ZF unit in the F3x BMWs...

Well we may find out once the new 9G-Tronic gets the AMG treatment in a few years. That is, if they don't go DCT first.

with a DCT these AMGs might just be perfect with that powerplant.

I have to agree. Although the SLS and A/CLA use DCT I think Mercedes is a bit averse to going DCT in all performance applications due to the fact that they still design their transmissions in house. NIH syndrome and such.

[gee-m-w]

Originally Posted by ///M235i

Not sure how the DCT will look, but this is the standard auto


.

This is a very good idea. I rented a 2013 328i for a week and the most useless thing was the "transmission lever" in the middle of the console. It's shaped like a sex toy, it's not connected to anything except a wire, and like a joystick it doesn't even click or move off of center. The cabin is so small it just wastes space where you could be storing stuff like your phone.

[mkoesel]

Originally Posted by gee-m-w

This is a very good idea. I rented a 2013 328i for a week and the most useless thing was the "transmission lever" in the middle of the console. It's shaped like a sex toy, it's not connected to anything except a wire, and like a joystick it doesn't even click or move off of center. The cabin is so small it just wastes space where you could be storing stuff like your phone.

I actually agree with you on that. As far as I am concerned, paddles are the way I shift the car. No need to waste valuable console space just for reverse and neutral.

And I like the auto-park feature for the Exx M DCT implementation too, but I think they've moved away from that now with the Fxx M DCT.

[renaissance]

New C63 AMG is going to use V8 4.0-liter twin-turbo engine. How next generation M3/M4 compete with new C63?

[Ghetto2315]

Originally Posted by renaissance

New C63 AMG is going to use V8 4.0-liter twin-turbo engine. How next generation M3/M4 compete with new C63?

Really?

[Ash83]

Originally Posted by Ghetto2315

Really?

90% of the people here does not track their car and do not care if they will get 4 seconds faster lap time on Laguna Seca with the new M3/M4.

The new C63 will be 500+ hp stock with huge margin for safe tuning, 90% of street drivers will be thrilled with that car. this 500+ club is a segment by itself and I am sure most people will think if I can get into that club with 70K then why would i even look into a crazy boosted M3/4 !!!!

I have no clue why BMW did that decision to drop the M3/M4 to an I6 with similar displacement as 135/335/535. They definitely put themself below the next AMG/RS5 segment.

[wisesoul]

Originally Posted by Ash83

90% of the people here does not track their car and do not care if they will get 4 seconds faster lap time on Laguna Seca with the new M3/M4.

The new C63 will be 500+ hp stock with huge margin for safe tuning, 90% of street drivers will be thrilled with that car. this 500+ club is a segment by itself and I am sure most people will think if I can get into that club with 70K then why would i even look into a crazy boosted M3/4 !!!!

I have no clue why BMW did that decision to drop the M3/M4 to an I6 with similar displacement as 135/335/535. They definitely put themself below the next AMG/RS5 segment.

You obviously care more about power, so buy the C63. The M3 has never been about grunt, it's been about chassis balance.

[austinla335d]

Originally Posted by Ash83

90% of the people here does not track their car and do not care if they will get 4 seconds faster lap time on Laguna Seca with the new M3/M4.

The new C63 will be 500+ hp stock with huge margin for safe tuning, 90% of street drivers will be thrilled with that car. this 500+ club is a segment by itself and I am sure most people will think if I can get into that club with 70K then why would i even look into a crazy boosted M3/4 !!!!

I have no clue why BMW did that decision to drop the M3/M4 to an I6 with similar displacement as 135/335/535. They definitely put themself below the next AMG/RS5 segment.

Merc's are sledgehammers- as heavy as they are brutally powerful. They really don't compare on the track in stock form to the balance and chassis of the M3 (and now M4). The M3 has always been the ultimate driving machine, not the "go fast in a straight line machine and then brake wayyyy early for your 2 ton super car to slow for the next apex" car. On a personal note, I have always been turned off by the C63. To me it is a terrible looking car, and I hate how the AMG rides worse than a slammed civic. The M3 is firm but perfect.

From a comparative sales perspective, the $ for hp argument is typically a worthy point. From the perspective of probably 60% of actual buyers in this category, it is not as worthy of a point. What it really comes down to for most is: A bunch of power but mega heavy and the looks of the C63 vs a great total package and the looks of the M3/M4. That is pretty much it. When the auto mags come out with their comparison data, the results are almost as important to your average U.S. buyer as their own opinion. For instance, auto mags seem to have a desire to surprise their readers by choosing the better handling but underpowered car, unless it is truly a total package. If the M3/M4 is doing a 3.6-3.7 0-60 by some car and driver editor, it will likely match the 0-60 of the C63, if not getting nudged by a nose. Ride, handling, braking, technology, innovation. You never know what they'll say, but so many buyers will buy the one the auto mags say is the best.

By the time I finish this comment someone else will have said it... because I rambledddddd sorry about that

[Chill72]

Originally Posted by renaissance

New C63 AMG is going to use V8 4.0-liter twin-turbo engine. How next generation M3/M4 compete with new C63?

"Old" GT-R uses a turbo V6. How is the new C63 AMG going to compete with that?

Exactly, what matters here is the total package silly.

[Ash83]

Originally Posted by austinla335d

Merc's are sledgehammers- as heavy as they are brutally powerful. They really don't compare on the track in stock form to the balance and chassis of the M3 (and now M4). The M3 has always been the ultimate driving machine, not the "go fast in a straight line machine and then brake wayyyy early for your 2 ton super car to slow for the next apex" car. On a personal note, I have always been turned off by the C63. To me it is a terrible looking car, and I hate how the AMG rides worse than a slammed civic. The M3 is firm but perfect.

From a comparative sales perspective, the $ for hp argument is typically a worthy point. From the perspective of probably 60% of actual buyers in this category, it is not as worthy of a point. What it really comes down to for most is: A bunch of power but mega heavy and the looks of the C63 vs a great total package and the looks of the M3/M4. That is pretty much it. When the auto mags come out with their comparison data, the results are almost as important to your average U.S. buyer as their own opinion. For instance, auto mags seem to have a desire to surprise their readers by choosing the better handling but underpowered car, unless it is truly a total package. If the M3/M4 is doing a 3.6-3.7 0-60 by some car and driver editor, it will likely match the 0-60 of the C63, if not getting nudged by a nose. Ride, handling, braking, technology, innovation. You never know what they'll say, but so many buyers will buy the one the auto mags say is the best.

By the time I finish this comment someone else will have said it... because I rambledddddd sorry about that

For the M3/4/AMG/RS5 club, buyers do not buy their car because Mag A said it is the best!! you have 2 groups:Track freaks and others. Personally I think majority of the others section will look at the car and say V8 is always better than I6, less turbo sound is better than more Turbo wind boost (Do not forget people who buys a 70K car are not kids) and absolutely hell NO to that exhaust sound that we heard for test M3/4 mule on the ring (I hope BMW fix that and make more elegant and aggressive with no farting).

Just my $0.02 why I think BMW screwed themself with dropping the V8 and going a little bit more aggressive to attract limited section of people. It is still a great car but I think more people will jump ships with this car to AMG and RS5.

[Never Convicted]

Originally Posted by renaissance

New C63 AMG is going to use V8 4.0-liter twin-turbo engine. How next generation M3/M4 compete with new C63?

Go faster. Turn better. Stop quicker.

[pkimM3r]

i think for the majority of us, we would prob stick with the m3/4 knowing its capabilities rather than looking at shear numbers. From what I recall, the last C63 coupe was even closer in the handling dept than previous versions and has become less of just a muscle car. it will be interesting to see how merc approached the performance for the new model. there is no denying that the engine in the AMG cars are awesome. lets see what they did for the other characteristics of the car.

i think for the average car buyer, 500+hp is an great buy. People love AMG's for their power and they may possibly win over some customers with such an engine.

I mean cmon, how many times have you had a c63 driver "show off" his exhaust note when driving around in an m3. happens to me always!

[lux]

I'm on the wait list for a new M3 but I wonder how it will compare with the next generation C63.

The 2012+ C63 has a killer engine, awesome sounds, and great handling. Not a fan of the current generation interior/exterior design but the next generation interior C-class looks really nice. If MB is really able to drop ~200 pounds off the next C63 and add biturbos to the V8, it should be an interesting competitor. I am sure MB will make the stock turbo setup sound good.

My main concern would be the lack of a true DCT. It is one of the main features I love about my current ///M and am not interested in a downgrade in that area.

[F82_SID]

The current C63 has WAY more power than the E92 M3 and yet, I still see the M3 wining the overall high score in all the comparisons. Power is nothing without grip and handling. Yes a TT V8 SOOUNDS good but.. It is still FI (Which everybody is complaining about), and does not really fit the character of the M3.

Without sounding like too much of a fanboy, I am confident that we will all grow to love the F8X M3/4. If all you want is power then go by a GTR, GT500, or Stingray. If you want class, practicality, and just pure driving pleasure, then we have a car for you! ;-)

[lux]

Originally Posted by E92_SID

Without sounding like too much of a fanboy, I am confident that we will all grow to love the F8X M3/4. If all you want is power then go by a GTR, GT500, or Stingray. If you want class, practicality, and just pure driving pleasure, then we have a car for you! ;-)

I'm greedy and want it all

[Ezio]

Originally Posted by Ash83

For the M3/4/AMG/RS5 club, buyers do not buy their car because Mag A said it is the best!! you have 2 groups:Track freaks and others. Personally I think majority of the others section will look at the car and say V8 is always better than I6, less turbo sound is better than more Turbo wind boost (Do not forget people who buys a 70K car are not kids) and absolutely hell NO to that exhaust sound that we heard for test M3/4 mule on the ring (I hope BMW fix that and make more elegant and aggressive with no farting).

Just my $0.02 why I think BMW screwed themself with dropping the V8 and going a little bit more aggressive to attract limited section of people. It is still a great car but I think more people will jump ships with this car to AMG and RS5.

oh and that fart noise is here to stay. somehow everyone else with turbo engines doesn't have fart noise. but BMWs do...

i remember showing my friend a sound clip " what the fuk with that fart sound" "sounds awful"

[F82_SID]

Originally Posted by Ezio

oh and that fart noise is here to stay. somehow everyone else with turbo engines doesn't have fart noise. but BMWs do...

i remember showing my friend a sound clip " what the fuk with that fart sound" "sounds awful"

Jermey Clarckson likes the farting on the RS5

I remember when Audi first came out with this and everybody thought it was so cool.. I could take it or leave it. Part of me thinks it is cool but the other part, thinks it will be annoying. That being said, wasent there something put out about the F8X having a variable exhaust that allowed you to open and close flaps? Might that also have the ability to disable the "farting"?

[Ash83]

Originally Posted by Ezio

oh and that fart noise is here to stay. somehow everyone else with turbo engines doesn't have fart noise. but BMWs do...

i remember showing my friend a sound clip " what the fuk with that fart sound" "sounds awful"

lol my N54 does not have it!!! I even barely hear the turbo spooling. That is a sound is a bi product of bigger boosting like civics racers!!!

and if you gonna argue that the new M3/4 sounds awesome and better that the E92 then good luck.

[Ash83]

Originally Posted by E92_SID

Jermey Clarckson likes the farting on the RS5

I remember when Audi first came out with this and everybody thought it was so cool.. I could take it or leave it. Part of me thinks it is cool but the other part, thinks it will be annoying. That being said, wasent there something put out about the F8X having a variable exhaust that allowed you to open and close flaps? Might that also have the ability to disable the "farting"?

LMFAO !!! dude FART does not equal V8 burble sound. and since you mentioned TG then you should know that Fart is Fart and that V8 sound is the dragon giggling sound (the quote from the episode to test the best driving fun car)!!!!

[19x]

I don't understand what most people are bitching about.

These are and always were two entirely different cars, for a reason.

If you are seriously considering the AMG Merc over the M3/M4, then you should absolutely go for the Merc.

The reason I say this is because true M3 enthusiasts see past the horsepower figure. To us, there's more to a car than just price, power, and looks.

If you cannot grasp this concept, then by all means go for the Merc. The M3/M4 won't appeal to all audiences. And that's a good thing for many reasons.

Historically, BMW M models were always underpowered vs the AMG competitors. And that's okay.

I've owned my e46 M3 for 9 years. I drove plenty of faster cars, including non-AMG Mercs that would absolutely crush my M3 in a drag race. Hell, at this point, possibly even at the track.

But guess what? - I don't care!

There's just something rewarding about driving my car, a feeling that I simply never achieved when driving any of those other faster competitors, be it Merc AMG, Audi S/RS line, WRX/STi, etc.

If this is not something that you understand, then you definitely shouldn't own an M3/M4.

Some people simply don't "see" this "rewarding" experience, the maneuverability aspect, the nimbleness, and the precise feedback characteristics of the M3. And, again, it's okay if you don't.

If you have to question owning an M3, then you probably shouldn't own one.