the mercedes c63 AMG problem

[freedomweasel]

I am ONLY talking about lap times, at NO POINT have I said that anyhting the presenters say is fact. Why can't you lot learn to read posts before getting all high and mighty?

So you then post a list of cars like the E class AMG versus a boxster spyder?

You've got a midsized luxury sedan with an elaborate sports package compared to a stripped out track toy sports car.

That's like comparing the towing capacity of a miata vs an F-350 dually.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

The SLR is built by McLaren, and is STILL slower than an R35 GTR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_SLR_McLaren

.....

Looks like a big Mercedes emblem to me...

Who owns who...

Oh jointly developed? Wonder what that means...






Stop while you're... behind?

 

[freedomweasel]

The SLR is built by McLaren, and is STILL slower than an R35 GTR.

Ignoring the details about who made what, you're still comparing a GT to a sports car.

Learn how cars compete, then come back with decent comparisons.

 

[Poppins]

And in the same conditions, a 350bhp (nearly 200bhp less than the Mercedes) Ford Focus RS500 lapped 2.4 second faster 2.4 seconds slower per lap means that, on a ~1:30 lap the focus would be able to lap the mercedes in something like 37.5 laps LOL

Watch the in-car shots of the merc, the understeer/oversteer/understeer is CLEARLY visible. If you think I've never driven a fast car before then you are ever so slightly wrong LMAO

While that Focus is nuts he even says if it was dry that car would have gone faster then the Murcielago around the track so how does that make it right comparing it to that insane ford focus?

And of course it is clearly visible that was the point for my comment. It is RAINY out, have you honestly never experienced that U/O/U before? Ive had that in my old FWD honda civic. But more the opposite and me having oversteer into the corner due to back end sliding out and then understeer trying to get the back end straight again and more oversteer trying to pull out of the corner.

Happens with any car in the rain.

PS. All Im saying is that the handling of SL55 Video in the rain can happen with any car.

They are very good handling cars for how big they are and how much they weigh.

 

[TwinturboCH]

And of course it is clearly visible that was the point for my comment. It is RAINY out, have you honestly never experienced that U/O/U before? Ive had that in my old FWD honda civic. But more the opposite and me having oversteer into the corner due to back end sliding out and then understeer trying to get the back end straight again and more oversteer trying to pull out of the corner.

Happens with any car in the rain.

No it doesn't happen in any car. I've driven enough big power rear-drive cars to know how they handle. It's my job FFS. LOL

 

[freedomweasel]

No it doesn't happen in any car. I've driven enough big power rear-drive cars to know how they handle. It's my job FFS. LOL

And you still compared and E class to a boxster?

 

[Vautwin]

Well twinturbo, we need a proof for that statement cause this is going to ludicrous claims post.
If u are i. The business you claim to be in so a 190 evo2 is bad handling, the other c class from 94 bad handling car?? Dude they tested 6 cars like the nissan gtr the the above mentionned the new lancer evo... And the audi rs6 this was a 4 wheel drive test a d yes the audi won guess who was second? Right without any super fancy electric gimmicks or diff locks the merc with it's total standard permanent 4wd was second.
And now you wanna sell me that every merc is a bad handling car?? True they got the image of beein more on the easy driving side for grandpas but yhen again something i never understood, why didnt gt5 get the mercedes clk Dtm road version? That car is a killer. Slk 55 amg??

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

no it doesn't happen in any car. I've driven enough big power rear-drive cars to know how they handle. It's my job ffs. Lol

hahahahaha

 

[charliec]

Well twinturbo, we need a proof for that statement cause this is going to ludicrous claims post.
If u are i. The business you claim to be in so a 190 evo2 is bad handling, the other c class from 94 bad handling car?? Dude they tested 6 cars like the nissan gtr the the above mentionned the new lancer evo... And the audi rs6 this was a 4 wheel drive test a d yes the audi won guess who was second? Right without any super fancy electric gimmicks or diff locks the merc with it's total standard permanent 4wd was second.
And now you wanna sell me that every merc is a bad handling car?? True they got the image of beein more on the easy driving side for grandpas but yhen again something i never understood, why didnt gt5 get the mercedes clk Dtm road version? That car is a killer. Slk 55 amg??

Honestly, Merc has some fast cars but also has many cars that are just tuner versions of heavy luxury sedans. They're handicapped from the start. It's like training Kirstie Alley to do an Ironman Marathon...I mean, you can do it but...maybe you'd be better starting with someone already in shape? AMG strips out a little weight and adds gobs of power, braking, and suspension improvements, but they're still bound by the laws of physics. That's why some of the AMG models pull the same lap times as hot hatches and underpowered midengined roadsters on tighter technical courses. They're more at home on the autobahn. Doesn't make them bad cars.

 

[Poppins]

No it doesn't happen in any car. I've driven enough big power rear-drive cars to know how they handle. It's my job FFS. LOL

Umm well obviously you havent buddy if you're trying to say that IN THE RAIN, you arent going to get understeer into a corner, then oversteer when you accelerate hard in the corner, and more understeer trying to steer out of the oversteer you just caused IN THE RAIN?!?!?!

all while trying to drive as fast as you possibly can without going out of control?

you sir must be insane!

seriously, like i said ive had that occur in my old 1990 honda civic sedan on dry cement before going extremely fast

 

[GTP_Fangio]

Well, i have two C63 AMG. One stock and one fully tuned and both handle great. I love to drive this cars
Tell me something, how many of you drive with a steering wheel?

 

[McLaren]

Can you say power to weight ratio?
And don't worry about quoting the lap times of the SLR or SL both of which bested... Zonda, Murcielago, and every car you have listed.

The SLR beat the 6.2 Murcielago & the Zonda S. That wasn't terribly difficult for McLaren to achieve.

Fast forward a few years & the LP640 & every Zonda since have eclipsed the SLR by a decent margin. I'm more surprised the SLS is slower.

The SLR is built by McLaren, and is STILL slower than an R35 GTR.

Very 2 different types of cars.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_SLR_McLaren

Looks like a big Mercedes emblem to me...

Stop while you're... behind?

Pot calling the kettle?

The SLR was built entirely by McLaren in Woking, & was only supplied Mercedes engines. Truth be told, the Germans screwed over their English co-builders with the SLR.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

The SLR beat the 6.2 Murcielago & the Zonda S. That wasn't terribly difficult for McLaren to achieve.

Fast forward a few years & the LP640 & every Zonda since have eclipsed the SLR by a decent margin. I'm more surprised the SLS is slower.

Very 2 different types of cars.

Pot calling the kettle?

The SLR was built entirely by McLaren in Woking, & was only supplied Mercedes engines. Truth be told, the Germans screwed over their English co-builders with the SLR.

Welcome to the argument. You can now leave. Try to figure out what it is the argument was about maybe... Oh thats right... Way to pick and choose what to quote from my post. Try reading the whole thing again. Thanks!

 

[McLaren]

Welcome to the argument. You can now leave. Try to figure out what it is the argument was about maybe... Oh thats right... Way to pick and choose what to quote from my post. Try reading the whole thing again. Thanks!

I see what the argument was about, and Twinturbo was rather correct in his part about Mercedes.

Now try not looking so misinformed, & maybe your argument will hold some sort of ground.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I see what the argument was about, and Twinturbo was rather correct in his part about Mercedes.

Now try not looking so misinformed, & maybe your argument will hold some sort of ground.

Oh ok. Well in that case... Since YOU said so it must be true. GTFO.

"Mercedes" SLR Mclaren

Owned by Mercedes

Original concept by Mercedes

Powered by Mercedes

Body and production Mclaren

Its a ****ing Mercedes.

 

[TwinturboCH]

Oh ok. Well in that case... Since YOU said so it must be true. GTFO.

"Mercedes" SLR Mclaren

Owned by Mercedes

Original concept by Mercedes

Powered by Mercedes

Body and production Mclaren

Its a ****ing Mercedes.

Firstly, using acronyms does not excuse you from the AUP, so I suggest you check your attitude at the door. Telling people to 'get the **** out' is NOT acceptable and is only making you look stupid.

Since you seem to want 'direct comparisons', how about the RS4, M3 and C63 AMG comparison. The M3 is fastest with a mere ~400bhp, the RS4 and C63 are slower but run similar times, except that the Audi ALSO has ~400bhp, whereas the Mercedes had 463bhp.

Or how about the more recent test of Ferrari 458 vs 911 GT3 RS vs SLS AMG. The SLS was AGAIN trounced by the opposition.

Seriously dude, stop making yourself look so stupid. Mercedes cars have never been meant to be 'track monsters' and as such they don't even try to make them good on a track, it's just not what they care about. Stop trying to claim something that not even Mercedes themselves would claim. The cars you are talking about might be 'ok' on track, but put them up against something that REALLY handles well and they just disappear backwards.

And btw, the full name of the car you are talking about is the 'McLaren Mercedes SLR', to me that sounds like McLaren are getting top billing. But hey, what do I know...

 

[McLaren]

Oh ok. Well in that case... Since YOU said so it must be true. GTFO.

I guess we're resorting to looking like the little, pissed off child we are now, right?

"Mercedes" SLR Mclaren

Owned by Mercedes[/quote]
Well, duh. The SLR name name itself dates back to the 50's.

Original concept by Mercedes

The original concept was a joint venture between McLaren & Mercedes.

Powered by Mercedes

Body and production Mclaren

Unsurprising that this is the absolute depth of your knowledge of this car. The details behind the SLR's production & the eventual split of the 2 companies show it's not as simple as you think it is.

Its a ****ing Mercedes.

Only because there's a little silver arrow badge on the car's hood. Everything beyond that little emblem is McLaren built besides a supplied AMG engine. McLaren are the ones who even did all that post-production testing for each car whilst the Germans sat in Stuttgart counting their sales.

With all that said, I think you can now get of this thread as you clearly don't have the ability to present any form of a counter-argument in content or attitude.

And btw, the full name of the car you are talking about is the 'McLaren Mercedes SLR', to me that sounds like McLaren are getting top billing. But hey, what do I know...

The car really is known as the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, which is one of the things that ticked off McLaren Automotive when they were together.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Firstly, using acronyms does not excuse you from the AUP, so I suggest you check your attitude at the door. Telling people to 'get the **** out' is NOT acceptable and is only making you look stupid.

Since you seem to want 'direct comparisons', how about the RS4, M3 and C63 AMG comparison. The M3 is fastest with a mere ~400bhp, the RS4 and C63 are slower but run similar times, except that the Audi ALSO has ~400bhp, whereas the Mercedes had 463bhp.

Or how about the more recent test of Ferrari 458 vs 911 GT3 RS vs SLS AMG. The SLS was AGAIN trounced by the opposition.

Seriously dude, stop making yourself look so stupid. Mercedes cars have never been meant to be 'track monsters' and as such they don't even try to make them good on a track, it's just not what they care about. Stop trying to claim something that not even Mercedes themselves would claim. The cars you are talking about might be 'ok' on track, but put them up against something that REALLY handles well and they just disappear backwards.

And btw, the full name of the car you are talking about is the 'McLaren Mercedes SLR', to me that sounds like McLaren are getting top billing. But hey, what do I know...

Obviously nothing. Because you are definitely not talking about the correct car.

Who the hell wanted comparisons between those cars? I sure as hell didn't.

I never said Mercedes were a track car. Thats the whole point of this. YOU are comparing them to track-race ready cars. And once again here you go basing a cars performance merely on power.

And by the way... It is called the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren.

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

I guess we're resorting to looking like the little, pissed off child we are now, right?

"Mercedes" SLR Mclaren

Owned by Mercedes

Well, duh. The SLR name name itself dates back to the 50's.

The original concept was a joint venture between McLaren & Mercedes.

Unsurprising that this is the absolute depth of your knowledge of this car. The details behind the SLR's production & the eventual split of the 2 companies show it's not as simple as you think it is.

Only because there's a little silver arrow badge on the car's hood. Everything beyond that little emblem is McLaren built besides a supplied AMG engine. McLaren are the ones who even did all that post-production testing for each car whilst the Germans sat in Stuttgart counting their sales.

With all that said, I think you can now get of this thread as you clearly don't have the ability to present any form of a counter-argument in content or attitude.

The car really is known as the Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren, which is one of the things that ticked off McLaren Automotive when they were together.[/QUOTE]


The original name dates back to the 50's hence the original concept by Mercedes.

The interior is Mercedes.

The transmission is Mercedes.

The brakes are Mercedes.

And I never claimed it was not built by McLaren.

 

[KingSakery]

This just plain isnt a good set up.

AND btw any AMG car handles amazingly. The SL65 is an extremely fast and good handling car.

So give me your settings and I´ll try to beat my Rome-Times !
Just saying that "the setup isn´t good" doesn´t mean it isn´t good

For me it´s working very well (I use DS3) and I have almost no problems.
It has just to much power sometimes but that´s fine for me (little drift coming out of a corner)

 

[sirdingo]

my c63 is a nurburgring killer at 890 hp.

Its very simple to why your car cant handle corners, you need to tune it.
Suspension is as important as power upgrades,
Even with soft racing tires mine will slide around corners but thats the way i love it and you just need to adjust your driving accordingly.

dont expect to buy any low powered car in the game and turn it into a pure racing machine with some power upgrades, you need to tune everything.

ill post my tune on here for you the next time im online and try it out for yourself

 

[eight6er]

A good handling Merc is the exception rather than the rule, from my experience. The c63 has a better power to weight ratio than a M3, but it is still slower around a track, how is that only thinking about power? The fact it's slower around a track, means the HANDLING must have something to do with it.
TwinturboCH's statement about all mercs having rubbish handling might be a bit over the top, but he's not too far off the truth. I don't see a reason to jump down his throat over it lol.

 

[With a EG6]

The Mercedes C63 AMG handles like the wheels are on sideways. It doesn't corner, it rolls through the corners helplessly.
(Un-Tuned that is)

 

[khj94704]

A good handling Merc is the exception rather than the rule, from my experience. The c63 has a better power to weight ratio than a M3, but it is still slower around a track, how is that only thinking about power? The fact it's slower around a track, means the HANDLING must have something to do with it.
TwinturboCH's statement about all mercs having rubbish handling might be a bit over the top, but he's not too far off the truth. I don't see a reason to jump down his throat over it lol.

I don't think many were jumping down his throat when he said Mercedes doesn't really make canyon carvers, but when you compare an E-class AMG to a Boxster you're not helping your cause.

The Mercedes C63 AMG handles like the wheels are on sideways. It doesn't corner, it rolls through the corners helplessly.
(Un-Tuned that is)

I guess we can mark you down as a Top Gear viewer.

 

[Leonidae@MFT]

The original name dates back to the 50's hence the original concept by Mercedes.

The interior is Mercedes. Sadly this is true. while it's a nice place to be, it weighs a lot. Not a good thing in a supercar.

The transmission is Mercedes. five speed slushbox.. in a supercar.. FAIL.

The brakes are Mercedes.The only good thing that came from Mercedes.

And I never claimed it was not built by McLaren.

Frankly speaking, M-B asked McLaren to design a supercar for them, which they did. Afterwards, M-B did their thing to the SLR which turned it into fat GT coupe.

 

[slayclops]

hello, i have 1 merc c63 AMG and its fast and stuff....
but, it steers like crap! and ive got 766hp out of it and a friend of mine 840!
though i dont think i installed all parts and stuff.
please help me!

I have the same problem with Merc. Currently at ~880 bhp, it handles like 🤬 on every corner, you must at least lift off or it'll become uncontrollable. Great car overall.

 

[Heyhuub]

I suggest you check the lap times on this link before telling people they are spreading 'bunk crap'. Video's prove nothing, lap times prove everything.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/show/powerlaps.shtml

E.G.
E63 AMG matched my a Boxster Spider
CLS55 AMG matched by a Holden Maloo
CL65 AMG matched by a STOCK Evo VIII
S63 AMG matched by a BMW 130i
SL55 AMG matched by a Golf R32

And none of that is down to opinions, that is down to outright laptimes by 'the stig'.


Yes, CLS 63 AMG. Annoyed the hell out of me after half an hour.

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

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


This puts the C63 among the M3 sedan, F355, 360 Modena, BMW M5, Lotus Exige, DB9, 997 Carrera etc.

Not bad for a luxury boat huh?

 

[II-zOoLoGy-II]

Frankly speaking, M-B asked McLaren to design a supercar for them, which they did. Afterwards, M-B did their thing to the SLR which turned it into fat GT coupe.

Only good thing? I've never driven an SLR and I doubt you have either, but in game that 5 speed seems to do pretty well. Especially since the SLR is a street car. And I guess that engine doesn't count? Financing, joint design, I could go on. Try not to take the side of someone who thinks the name of the car is the "McLaren Mercedes SLR." Thanks for your input but 'frankly speaking' we have already been here and are already done with this argument. Please don't bring it up again.

 

[mrcardio1]

The Mercedes C63 AMG isn't a bad handling car by any stretch. The M3 may be a bit more precise but the C63 isn't too far behind.

And comparing lap times from just 1 track like Top Gear doesn't prove anything. Even worst would be to take what J Clarkson from TG says as fact because he knows next to nothing about cars.

He's funny but a complete moron when it comes to knowledge about cars. He's basically the typical ignorant moron who thinks people buy Porsche Boxster / Caymans because they couldn't afford a 911.

Yeah okay never mind the fact that the Boxster / Caymans mid engine power train set up is dynamically superior to the 911's full diaper 39/61 ass heavy weight ratio. Anyway the point is don't take what Clarkson for Top Gear says as fact or even relevant just entertainment.

I can't imagine how many people he's misinformed over the years.

 

[popcorn]

You just kind of have to get used to how it handles. It's a handful to drive but it's very fun.