M3 vs C63 AMG-S

[Hugo_za]

http://www.autoblog.com/2015/06/20/bmw-m3-mercedes-amg-c63s-racetrack-video/


Sent from Tapatalk, iPhone 6 Plus.

 

[Twinz]

Great video.

M is track boss. :clapper:

 

[ASH M]

Well that was expected. Great review on both cars.

0.7s not to shabby. They getting there slowly lol.

But I think Merc need to understand that power will never always be the solution. Imagine if the Merc had identical power to the M3. It would have been much much slower. Shows you how well sorted the chassis on the M is. The M division, always knows how to produce a well balanced drivers car.



Sent from my Samsung Galaxy Note 4

 

[Magneto]

:sorry: :repost:

http://www.bmwfanatics.co.za/showthread.php?tid=66835

 

[polly]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

 

[STEVEN COOL]

:clapper:

 

[hoosain]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

400kgs more but has two more cylinders and 1000cc more displacement
should be much faster for what it has yet it's not
Just shows how good bmw engineering is

 

[ASH M]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

So why didn't they make it lighter? BMW could have went with more cylinders and displacement but didn't.

Each to their own, Merc have come a long way. They getting closer. But they unfortunately have to eat humble pie now. Short or long tracks, a car must perform everywhere.

I always feel that BMW M car chassis can handle more power, Merc always seem to engineer just enough and in some cases not enough.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[babyboss]

M - Is BoSS :=):

 

[Kimeran]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

400kgs more but has two more cylinders and 1000cc more displacement
should be much faster for what it has yet it's not
Just shows how good bmw engineering is

That whole line of "Merc has a bigger motor etc." is getting tiring.
What everyone needs to understand is that the car has a specific power output for its segment.
If you really want to know what that 4.0 litre biturbo is capable of, wait until the new E63, SL63 etc etc comes out, they will all be having the same motor.

 

[hoosain]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

400kgs more but has two more cylinders and 1000cc more displacement
should be much faster for what it has yet it's not
Just shows how good bmw engineering is

That whole line of "Merc has a bigger motor etc." is getting tiring.
What everyone needs to understand is that the car has a specific power output for its segment.
If you really want to know what that 4.0 litre biturbo is capable of, wait until the new E63, SL63 etc etc comes out, they will all be having the same motor.

why should it be getting tiring it is a fact
merc cannot make a 3.0TT to match the m3 3.0TT output or else they would
its like taking a f10 m5 motor and putting it in the f80 m3
you get what iam saying?
with all that being said mercs 4.0TT makes only 45bhp more than bmw 3.0TT

 

[Xack]

Iam keen to see how the new //M3/4 Competition pack is going to fair with the water injection,should be able to hold boost for longer, a few more hp added, exiting times ahead.

jus adding to the above discussion, Mercedes realised many moons back already, that there was no use trying to match bmw by producing same displacement engines, they had the C32 3200 cc, had to supercharged it to keep up, then C55 5500cc, then the beautifu C63l ,6200cc, to do battle with bmw 40000 cc, I mean both cars are brilliant, but I see a trend Hoosain refers to.

 

[Kimeran]

But the merc is 400kg more fully loaded
Waiting for the ring times.
The merc is not designed for a small track like that

400kgs more but has two more cylinders and 1000cc more displacement
should be much faster for what it has yet it's not
Just shows how good bmw engineering is

That whole line of "Merc has a bigger motor etc." is getting tiring.
What everyone needs to understand is that the car has a specific power output for its segment.
If you really want to know what that 4.0 litre biturbo is capable of, wait until the new E63, SL63 etc etc comes out, they will all be having the same motor.

why should it be getting tiring it is a fact
merc cannot make a 3.0TT to match the m3 3.0TT output or else they would
its like taking a f10 m5 motor and putting it in the f80 m3
you get what iam saying?
with all that being said mercs 4.0TT makes only 45bhp more than bmw 3.0TT

Merc had the most powerful production 2.0 Litre turbo motor, are currently the best turbo package in F1, what makes you think they can't make a powerful 3.0TT?
Maybe you right, they can't. Or maybe they just aren't interested in making a different motor for each model. What they doing is a lot more cost effective in my eyes

 

[Yuben]

Kimeran, any idea how the E92 M faired against the old C63 over the 400m and 1000km-

And the same comparison for the F80 vs C63 S:coolShake:

 

[Magneto]

Merc had the most powerful production 2.0 Litre turbo motor, are currently the best turbo package in F1, what makes you think they can't make a powerful 3.0TT?
Maybe you right, they can't. Or maybe they just aren't interested in making a different motor for each model. What they doing is a lot more cost effective in my eyes

I think you are correct. This was a business decision rather than a we can't do it decision. Nothing wrong with the way Merc used one engine. I don't think anyone should doubt Merc's engine making capabilities. All these brands can make any engine they desire, but does it make business sense.

 

[Kimeran]

Kimeran, any idea how the E92 M faired against the old C63 over the 400m and 1000km-

And the same comparison for the F80 vs C63 S:coolShake:

http://fastestlaps.com/comparisons/bmw_m3_e92-vs-mercedes_c_63_amg.html

According to fastest laps, its quite close. Although I dont really believe either car can do low 12s 1/4mile times.
In the real world, not too sure. A lot of guys say the C63 is just slow in standard guise, some say its a lot faster

Shot Magneto, finally we agree on something haha!

 

[Magneto]

Shot Magneto, finally we agree on something haha!

Lol! Yeah sorry. I am sure we agree on lots :grin:

On the topic of Merc engines, I see the new A45 may have some serious 2.0T power.

280kw A45
294kw A45-S

How true, I don't know, but that is hectic. One never knows with rumours, but they usually not far off. Whoever thinks that Merc struggles to get power out of smaller engines needs just look at the A45.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/115061895425/possible-mercedes-benz-a45-amg-official-image-emerges

 

[Fuzz@tinyNET]

Question:

What's wrong with the normal C63? Why is everyone pitting the F80 M3 against the C63 S and not the normal C63?


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

 

[Magneto]

Question:

What's wrong with the normal C63? Why is everyone pitting the F80 M3 against the C63 S and not the normal C63?


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

I suspect its because the M3 has the weight advantage. On the road there will be little between all 3 of these cars.

edit: there is not much in it as far as weight goes. My bad.

 

[Xack]

Question:

What's wrong with the normal C63? Why is everyone pitting the F80 M3 against the C63 S and not the normal C63?


Sent from my iPhone 6+ using Tapatalk

I suspect its because the M3 has the weight advantage. On the road there will be little between all 3 of these cars.

503 vs 469 hp, if these two cars are anywhere close to each other i'll be very very disappointed to say the least. let's leave the //M3/4 with its earth shattering 425hp to show them efficient dynamics And performance.

I am stirring:rollsmile: