LOL at this guy with the M3 (CURI0) calm down dude its not that serious. Anyway I want in on this lil race between the C63/M3 dude I really really do. This should be really fun. That's if the dude with the M3 doesn't bust a vein in his neck from the frustration he must be going through geez. Like I said PM me (BLACKC63LSD) maybe before and after the ECU would be nice to get both examples.

BTW Can I get in on the $500 wager.

The more the merrier, I don't think the world is coming to an end if he doesn't step up.

Why write all this talk about the C63 being faster if he can't back it up? On Mbworld it looks like we will be able to get a group of cars to go to the track in November, you are welcome to join.

This thread has really gone to ****. CURIO has taken it way too seriously, others have as well. It's a back and forth **** talking session now. I hope they race for the $500 just for ****s. I also think to be fair, the C63 needs to be stock without the RENNtech ECU.

a fully optioned C63 is just the based price of a M3.... dont forget you still need to add all those M-DCT, leather, navi and premium package.
a similar equipped M3 will cost 80k+

agreed at least in canada. a fully loaded c63 is 74 vs 87 of the m3.

OK, I read what you had to say and now I have a couple of questions for you:

1. There should be a lot more M3's on the road then C63's because the M3 is a mass production car in comparison to the limited production C63 and its predecessor's (C55, C32, C43, C36). However, why are there so many less 2008 M3's on the road then in previous years?

mmm??? Possibly, because the M3 is overvalued and not as much fun to drive on the streets then many other cars at that price point, such as a C63 or the 2009 CTS-V (which spanked both the M3 and the C63 at the track)....or maybe because you are better off buying a 335i, modding it and still have close to $20K left in your pocket....

2. When you test drove the M3 and the C63, which car felt more powerful under 4,000 RPM's?

3. Why is the market softer for the M3 (Cars Direct reflects a discount of $1,500 for the M3 and nothing for the C63)?

4. If you are concerned about gas mileage none of these cars are for you. Why not buy a GEM (General Electric Motor Car)?

5. Why are you comparing a 2 door car (997S) to a 4 door car (C63)?

If I were going to buy a "used" 2 door it would be a 996 Turbo. (The 997S runs the quarter mile in about the same ET as an Infiniti G37 (13.0 v. 13.3) for over twice the price.)

Just some interesting questions to ponder....

1. There are less new sports cars on the road in general because of the economy. Sales are down with every company. That is why there is less than previous years. In addition to the competition in the market. Has no bearing on the capabilities of the car itself. Every car magazine says the m3 is a better all around drivers car.

2. The c63 felt more powerful, but I don't get most of my fun under 4000 rpms. I get my fun from the limitless feeling high rev's. What would be more fun driving around the streets, an F1 car or a monster truck. Also, the c63 also felt like a boat.

3. There are more m3's being produced and it has been out longer. There were no discounts when it first came out. When MB has more c63's on the lot there will be plenty of discounts.

4. When you are spending 70k on a car you should take everything into account. An extra 20 bucks a week adds up after a few years and gets annoying when you have to fill up every few days. Why can't I have a sports car with decent gas mileage? I don't need a hybrid. The new Carrera has DFI and gets up to 29 mpg.

5. I don't need the extra doors, all I need are 4 seats even if the back two are small. I see no point in a small 4 door car. If I wanted a sedan I would get a full sized one.

The 997s actually runs mid 12's in the 1/4 mile. Not everything is 1/4 mile and not everything is about going in a straight line.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Lg-zkn-EaM&feature=user
A convertible 997 s beating a c63. Convertibles are heavier than coupes also. That's what you get with a slush box and a heavy car.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CnRgT...eature=related
An m3 beating a c63. Again, not everything is within the quarter mile. Torque can only do so much. DCT >> slush box



The c63 is a great car, but you go around bashing other cars because your subjective opinion is that your car is more fun. That is great for you, but doesn't help others at all. Everyone doesn't want huge amounts of torque with a low revving engine in a heavy car that doesn't handle that well. Sure it might be fun for some, but does nothing for true sports car enthusiasts like me.

Just get over it Curio. I have been a BMW guy all my life and owned the X5 4.8, 645 Convertible, 330ci, and I got the 535i as my company car that gets me to and from meetings at work. I am no ways a AMG guy or Mercedes guy for that matter and the C63 seems to be the better bang for your buck.

It seems like BMw is always coming up short on the HP race. When the G35 first came out with its high HP years back, BMW took forever to match the performence numbers. Now after a generation of the G35, BMW falls behind again. Competition is healthy for the brand. The e46 M3 was far superior to anything in its class AT THE TIME. COme to 2008, MBZ has closed the gap and so has the Audi with its RS4. I personally think both cars are far superior compared to BMW. I have driven the M3 in both the manual and dct, going into the dealership to purchase the vehicle. I came out empty handed thinking how is this car any better then a 335?

When I drive the RS4 and C63, these cars were in a different league. How many people realistically track there cars? How many people can fully take advantage of the handling BMW has to offer when you are driving in LA's stop and go traffic? It's nice to have an athletic car that you cannot use to its full potential.

In more ways then one, the C63 is the GT-R while the M3 is the Porsche Turbo. Some people are too stubborn to believe that a car is far superior then theres cause of sheer ignorance. If you were a real car fanatic, you would look at the comparision between cars subjectively. It seems like you got your panties all in a bunch CURIO.

Agreed...the bmw is over-priced in comparison...in canada at least...and uses its racing and supreme handling "heritage" as a somewhat skewed form of justification for the premium price and lack of certain key attributes ...
at least there is now healthy competition in the segment

If you were a real car fanatic you would realize there is more to a car than straight line performance and a big engine with lots of torque. Every car magazine has said the m3 is a better overall car. The GT-R is a poor analogy because it handles well and can actually beat a 997 turbo around a track. The c63 can't beat an m3 DCT in a straight line nor on a track. If you were a real car enthusiast you wouldn't want a car with an automatic transmission. Sure the c63 is a great car, but I don't think it is a car for the true enthusiast. Like you said, handling isn't made for stop and go traffic. C63's are great cars for the typical Southern California person. Most of the time they are stuck in traffic and when the freeway opens up sometimes they just want to floor it and go fast in a straight line. Hardly exciting from a true car enthusiasts stand point. For me it's the shifting, braking, corning and accelerating. As far as pricing go, a loaded C63 runs about 68 grand and a loaded m3 DCT runs around 71. For the 3 grand difference you get a Dual Clutch Transmission. I think both cars are over priced, but would take the m3 over the c63 any day. They are both great cars, but one is more for the true car enthusiast and one is made for the guy who wants to drive fast in a straight line occasionally and have the look and feel of a sporty car.

How old are you? You sound 15... Do you even own a BMW or Mercedes? Use paragraphs - it's very hard to read all of that.

Get over it nobody cares about the small advantage the BMW has over he C63 in terms of corning and handling. The C63 would run circles around the M3 on the street and would give it a great run on the track with the performance package. That's what most people are after, power, straight line performance. Especially since 99.9% of these cars will never ever be tracked.

Stop acting like the handling of the M3 is so much better, it's really not. It's a small difference, but it's not as big of a difference as you're making it sound. The C63 is the better bang for the buck and even DIEHARD BMW enthusiasts are agreeing that it is the better car.

How old am I? 26. Do I own a BMW or a Mercedes? I own both, 3 series and S class. Use paragraphs? Give me a break, this is an online forum. Anyhow, I would probably never buy either of these cars. My next car will be a 911. I drive my 3 series for my daily commute and my Mercedes is a comfy luxury sedan I use to drive friends or family around. Sure the Benz is fast in a straight line, but it is a boring car to drive. The Benz has a slush box. If you were a true car enthusiast and wanted a sports car, you would not get an automatic sedan. The c63 is heavier and only has 30 more hp, stop acting like it is that much faster in a straight line. Check out vids on youtube. The m3 DCT is as quick or faster in a straight line.

Find me a magazine article where it says the c63 is a better all around car than the m3. Oh ya thats right you can't find one.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/...st+page-4.html
^
The M3 wins because it is the best—the most sporting and emotionally appealing car in this group. It's not the fastest, but its relatively light weight and deft handling, and the relationship it fosters with the driver, are the most compelling. And by the way, it is the least-expensive car of the three.

Small advantage in handling? Have you driven both? Go test drive them. Every magazine has shown the m3 to be aster around a track and only slightly slower in the quarter mile. I don't think most people would notice a tenth or two slower in the quarter mile. Beyond the quarter mile the m3 is just as fast or faster. They also state the c63 has a harsh ride for something, which is sad because it doesn't handle as well as the m3 and has a harsher ride.

Exceptional C63 handling
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nvCdnyw5CI


Explain why the c63 is a better bang for the buck. It is only a couple thousand cheaper than an m3 with DCT and it is almost the same price as a manual m3. I'd pay 5 grand extra just to drive a car with a proper manual or DCT instead of a slush box.

This post should have been deleted after you said all people are after is straight line performance or just performance on the street.

Tell everyone with their 997 GT3 they picked the wrong car, the turbo makes much more sense based on your criteria.

How a car delivers its power and performance is vital, you seem to only care about the numbers on paper. The M3 is a much better handling car and just feels tighter and more responsive, which is why it is chosen as the best in practically every comparison. DCT gives a huge advantage on the street, but I guess it is not convenient for you to acknowledge that.

Curio Dude youre a bit over the top and I defended you on another post.
Now here is the unbiased truth about these two cars. My history is I have had a 993 TT a 996 GT3 and a 997 GT3 tracked all of them. I am a HUGE BMW fan
I have a 4.8X5is Which I think is better than the 06 Cayenne S. a 335i and a Z4m.
First of all RIGHT NOW the C63 is more desirable here in California than the M3. The M3 can be had at invoice around 60K and the C63 is around MSRP.
In Bakersfield there are 7 M3s on the lot, The Mercedes dealer got ONE AMG C63 for the WHOLE year.

Curio you dont know much about the C63 you said it was a joke and the typical mercedes with the big motor. Thats not true. Its the first ground up design by AMG chasis suspension and motor. You would have known that if you had researched both cars instead of just bashing the AMG.

Because of a back problem and upcoming surgery I decided to sell my 07 GT3. I had my heart set on a M3. But the substandard Brake package bothered me. The car is untrackable without a pad and fluid change and it really needs a whole package upgrade. BMW knows this and signed on with Brembo and the 08 135i already has the better brake package. So I researched the other cars in this class and drove them all RS4, and the Lexus.

I drove all kinds of 08 M3s, the coupe the convertible the sedan. Over and over. I had settled on the white coupe carbon roof etc etc.
But a friend who has a Black series told me he had just got back from the AMG event in Vegas and told me about the C63. He said it was 80% Black series. So I went and test drove one. OMG!! on the street the power was unbelievable. The 140 lbs more torque was huge and easily noticable.

Also important to me was the AMG seats are much better than the M3 seats for MY back. The 335i seats are the second best in the world for MY back. Better than my Porsche seats. I just loved the whole AMG package. The Nav package and all the electronics is MUCH easier to use than the iDrive on my 335i. I still dont know how to use the 335i package and voice recognition is horrible on the BMW. The AMG is intuitive and I can operate everything.

Its better looking than the M3 which looks just like my 335i. The Suspension is as good as I have found on a Mercedes. The M3 is better but I think the C63 suspension is easily fixable. The only reason I can figure the M3 suspension is better is because the AMG has a much bigger motor over the front suspension and causes the push. I have the Performance package and its not as bad a push as I thought. Close to the more nimble M3. But on the street there is just not as much fun in the M3, it feels like it runs out of breath way before the AMG. The M3 needs to be driven like a GT3 High RPMs and paying attention to the RPMs because the lack of torque. The AMG is just much more fun to drive. The M3 takes a better driver so out of the box the AMG is more fun. The car in sport mode with the ESP on off or in sport is a hoot.

Curio you need to realize the AMG is as good as the M3. BMWs response with the Brembo package will be interesting BUt here is the deal- The AMG is the least expensive of the AMG models yet it has the same motor as the Black series. So its easily modded to 550 hp and 540 lbs of torque. I dont think ANY M3 will see 500hp.

The 335i is a better bargain. It has 90% of the M3 and can be modded to be an equivalent partner on the track. The M3 then is over priced even at 60K and it has components of the lesser model. The AMG has most of the components of the MORE expensive models and it has more bang for the buck. Either way you cant go wrong but I think more fun in the long run is in the AMG

[quote=OldGuy;2084151] BMWs response with the Brembo package will be interesting
/quote]

is this for sure. are they coming on the 2009's or in the future...?
when you say these brakes are inferior, i assume its regarding track performance only or even as a dd they arent any good?