[The Automotive Enthusiast]

Originally Posted by Year's_End

It looks to be far more capable, which might not translate into being as (or more) sporty than the W204. It'll be hard for them to topple your C63.

Unless it's with another C63.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

Also, you said c63 was faster than the e9x M3, and I already showed you the ring times on the M3 are significantly faster.

I know I'm not the poster you were responding to but that's not true.

The base LCI C63 is 4 seconds faster than the E9X M3 around the 'ring:

C63: 8:01.00

M3: 8:05.00

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

What times were you looking at?

[pr0gi]

All these track times remind me of this

[u2b]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QyTyjQbvylg[/u2b]

[TheBingoBalls]

Fastestlaps.com, while it's a good reference, shouldn't be looked as something to prove a point IMO. You can't have concrete evidence if the drivers and other variables aren't the same. For example, both the C63 AMG and C63 AMG w/ performance package both clock in at 8:01? I don't think so.

That's not to say the C63 AMG isn't faster than the M3 or vice versa. I haven't looked at other times from different media sources so I'm not sure if the LCI C63 is faster on average but people using that site as definitive proof doesn't really work IMO.

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

I know I'm not the poster you were responding to but that's not true.

The base LCI C63 is 4 seconds faster than the E9X M3 around the 'ring:

C63: 8:01.00

M3: 8:05.00

http://fastestlaps.com/tracks/nordschleife.html

What times were you looking at?

sport auto did both times before either LCI (which is what I was referring to), where the M3 is 8 seconds faster.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by TheBingoBalls

Fastestlaps.com, while it's a good reference, shouldn't be looked as something to prove a point IMO. You can't have concrete evidence if the drivers and other variables aren't the same. For example, both the C63 AMG and C63 AMG w/ performance package both clock in at 8:01? I don't think so.

That's not to say the C63 AMG isn't faster than the M3 or vice versa. I haven't looked at other times from different media sources so I'm not sure if the LCI C63 is faster on average but people using that site as definitive proof doesn't really work IMO.

I agree that there are variables but that's always going to be a problem when dealing with lap times (especially when comparing lap times of different cars). The skills disparity between professional shoes, journalists, HPDE enthusiasts, and beginners is great. However, that website does have a method when it comes to accepting and posting lap times. I'm sure the full methodology can be found somewhere. For example, only non-modified (i.e., "stock") cars are listed.

Also, it doesn't really surprise me that the PP and non-PP C63 achieved the same time.

Why? The suspensions are identical. When the facelift/LCI W204 debuted in 2012 (late '11 abroad), all C63s received a new (and more aggressively tuned) suspension. Also, the brake setups on each car are virtually identical.

The only major "hardware" differences between the PP and non-PP cars are: the PP cars have composite rotors (calipers are the same); the PP cars have a modest horsepower increase and speed limiter increase.

So if you increase the power output on a car with the same suspension setup and virtually the same brake setup, it actually might have a tendency to be more difficult to control.

The PP cars have the option of being fitted with a LSD but we don't know whether 1) the base car tested had the LSD added as an option; 2) the PP car had the LSD fitted.

My 2 cents.

[ybbiz34]

Originally Posted by tallshortguy

sport auto did both times before either LCI (which is what I was referring to), where the M3 is 8 seconds faster.

Gotcha. I have seen all sorts of E9X M3 vs. W204 C63 track comparisons and I've seen the results go both ways. The cars are very evenly matched.

On fast tracks with lots of high-speed sweepers, I'd give the advantage to the C63. On tighter tracks filled with plenty of technical, hairpin turns, I'd put my money on the lighter M3.

[Slops]

fixed

Originally Posted by pr0gi

All these track times remind me of this

[tallshortguy]

Originally Posted by ybbiz34

Gotcha. I have seen all sorts of E9X M3 vs. W204 C63 track comparisons and I've seen the results go both ways. The cars are very evenly matched.

On fast tracks with lots of high-speed sweepers, I'd give the advantage to the C63. On tighter tracks filled with plenty of technical, hairpin turns, I'd put my money on the lighter M3.

Yeah, MB did a god job with the LCI. I agree, seems to be the LCI models are evenly matched with technical tracks going to M3 and tracks that let the C63's power stretch it's legs go to the merc.

[rjpeaks]

if you want a third pedal, M3 or F3x or audi.

if you don't care then the decision opens up.

personally love the new look of the C and E. interiors are def a leg up.

the E is losing the V8, which they have had in their portfolio since 92.

[BMW F22]

Maybe it will grow on me later but I'm not feeling the car at all. I'm not being biased as I like to give credit where it's due. I love the S-class and this C-class isn't what I would compare to that.

[Alext]

I own a 2014 model W204 C250 coupe. I can say hands down it is a better put together car than the 3-series equivalent. Except I prefer the leather smell in my BMW. Leather quality, however, appears better in the Benz. Interior feels more solid and so far no rattles. Both my BMWs have had rattles. The Benz is just nice to drive around and the coupe handling & ride quality feels lovely. I have been converted to Benz....the latest C class definitely offers a much more premium feeling.