Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63

Just_me · 11-02-2007, 01:48 PM

0-100 kph | 0-200 kph | 80-120 kph
M3: 4.8s | 15.2s | 2.6s
C63: 4.7s | 14.9s | 2.6s

Braking distance:
M3: 34.5m - 35.6m
C63: 35.3m - 35.9m

Weight:
M3: 1614kg
C63: 1818kg

Consumption:
M3: 13.1l/100km
C63: 14.9l/100km

Both cars were on 18" tires.

Verdict:
The author is addicted to the sound of the C63, but the M3 wins (5 points difference) due to its more direct and more economical "nature".

Just_me · 11-02-2007, 01:49 PM

Wow, this is the best 0-200km/h number for M3 I ever seen. Earlier the best one was 15.7 sec.

Good boy little M3

castagna · 11-02-2007, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just_me

Wow, this is the best 0-200km/h number for M3 I ever seen. Earlier the best one was 15.7 sec.

Good boy little M3

The C63 still beats it.

And the M3 wins the comparo only because it is more economical, lol, like if that was really important to judge these kind of cars.

atuv · 11-02-2007, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by castagna

The C63 still beats it.

And the M3 wins the comparo only because it is more economical, lol, like if that was really important to judge these kind of cars.

Exactly..kinds makes u wonder about the reviewer is he stupid or what? those are V8 performance cars!

S'Pimp · 11-02-2007, 05:02 PM

main Question is: which car has larger trunk?

Yannis · 11-02-2007, 05:11 PM

M3 only won by 5 points so that sounds like a draw to me.

monster · 11-02-2007, 10:23 PM

The C63 is 204 kg heavier than the M3, and to come within 5 points of victory shows how good the new C63 really is, but it also shows how much better the C63 would have been if it is 200kg lighter.

Sunny · 11-03-2007, 12:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by monster

The C63 is 204 kg heavier than the M3, and to come within 5 points of victory shows how good the new C63 really is, but it also shows how much better the C63 would have been if it is 200kg lighter.

I can turn that around and say how much better the M3 would have been if it had 40 more HP, but I frankly find these 'if' arguments pretty frivolous. I mean it is MB that decided to make the car 400lbs heavier and put an automatic transmission not some unavoidable act of nature.

fortuner · 11-03-2007, 03:06 AM

Its silly that the tester gives it to m3 because off econemy...this segement off cars and drivers have nothing to do with econemy it about power speed handling and fun....

if they worried off econemy they wont worry off the amg or m

they would settle for a c220cdi or a 320d or simalair...

so its crap if the editor found the m3 better for another reason i would like to no but not econemy bull.....

anyway i would have to wait till next year to drive both and see what i think...i must say from what i read the c63 is not a pushover like the c55

it seems the c63 has caught up with the m3 or maybe even surpassed it

would like to read a test of the m3 sedan and c63 soon....

Guibo · 11-03-2007, 03:37 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Just_me

Verdict:
The author is addicted to the sound of the C63, but the M3 wins (5 points difference) due to its more direct and more economical "nature".

What is meant by "more direct nature"? Is that about the purity of the driving experience?

11-02-2007, 01:48 PM	#1
Just_me Executive Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Sweden Posts: 15,487 Thanks: 1,062 Thanked 3,722 Times in 1,583 Posts	Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 0-100 kph \| 0-200 kph \| 80-120 kph M3: 4.8s \| 15.2s \| 2.6s C63: 4.7s \| 14.9s \| 2.6s Braking distance: M3: 34.5m - 35.6m C63: 35.3m - 35.9m Weight: M3: 1614kg C63: 1818kg Consumption: M3: 13.1l/100km C63: 14.9l/100km Both cars were on 18" tires. Verdict: The author is addicted to the sound of the C63, but the M3 wins (5 points difference) due to its more direct and more economical "nature".

11-02-2007, 01:49 PM	#2
Just_me Executive Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Sweden Posts: 15,487 Thanks: 1,062 Thanked 3,722 Times in 1,583 Posts	Re: Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 Wow, this is the best 0-200km/h number for M3 I ever seen. Earlier the best one was 15.7 sec. Good boy little M3

11-02-2007, 05:02 PM	#5
S'Pimp Enthusiast Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Bavaria Posts: 243 Thanks: 153 Thanked 117 Times in 58 Posts	Re: Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 main Question is: which car has larger trunk?

11-02-2007, 05:11 PM	#6
Yannis Contributor Join Date: Sep 2005 Location: Greece Posts: 8,281 Thanks: 1,886 Thanked 1,800 Times in 1,025 Posts	Re: Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 M3 only won by 5 points so that sounds like a draw to me.

11-02-2007, 10:23 PM	#7
monster Fanatic Join Date: Oct 2005 Location: Sydney Posts: 2,083 Thanks: 808 Thanked 927 Times in 485 Posts	Re: Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 The C63 is 204 kg heavier than the M3, and to come within 5 points of victory shows how good the new C63 really is, but it also shows how much better the C63 would have been if it is 200kg lighter.

11-03-2007, 03:06 AM	#9
fortuner Enthusiast Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: south africa Posts: 123 Thanks: 0 Thanked 37 Times in 20 Posts	Re: Another comparison Autobild: M3 vs C63 Its silly that the tester gives it to m3 because off econemy...this segement off cars and drivers have nothing to do with econemy it about power speed handling and fun.... if they worried off econemy they wont worry off the amg or m they would settle for a c220cdi or a 320d or simalair... so its crap if the editor found the m3 better for another reason i would like to no but not econemy bull..... anyway i would have to wait till next year to drive both and see what i think...i must say from what i read the c63 is not a pushover like the c55 it seems the c63 has caught up with the m3 or maybe even surpassed it would like to read a test of the m3 sedan and c63 soon....

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode