… there it is, front and centre. The Mercedes-AMG C63 S is quicker than the BMW M3 M-DCT by a fraction of a second. If the only aspect that matters to you is how fast a car can sprint from zero to 100 km/h, you’re welcome to skip ahead to the next test. But if you continue reading, welcome to a Battle Royale: the most eagerly anticipated, hotly debated comparative road test you’re likely to read all year. Since the launch of the BMW M3/4 twins in mid-2014, fans of both brands have awaited the arrival of the bruiser ’Benz, and now it’s here. Seconds out…
Round 1:
In the METAL
Sitting in a lay-by alongside our favourite mountain pass directly after the photo shoot for this feature, gave the assembled team members a chance to soak in both cars, and conveniently let the adrenaline levels abate after a spot of spirited post-shoot driving. For sheer kerbside presence, the BMW wins hands down, there was no debating that. In this lurid shade of yellowy-green, which wouldn’t be everyone’s first choice, the lines, creases and bulges are all immediately evident. The domed bonnet and flared wheelarches, in particular, draw your attention to the areas where the hottest Three differs from its cooking variety siblings. If you want a sports sedan that looks as if it means business then there are very few, if any, more shouty than an M3.
Mercedes-AMG has taken a slightly different approach with the C63 and C63 S. These models have the same elegant lines as the regular C, which looks like a scaled down S-Class. Trained eyes will note the slightly elongated snout to accommodate the largest engine in the range, and a pair of subtle longitudinal ridges on the bonnet. Our test unit was fitted with the Edition 1 visual treatment. Comprising matte black alloys, red detailing inside and out, a swathe of decals and a black carbon-fibre boot spoiler, the kit offers owners a degree of exclusivity with the Edition 1s being manufactured only in this generation C63’s inaugural year. Presented with a choice, however, this R175 000 option is not a box any of us would tick.
Visually, the M-car drips machismo, while the AMG is quietly confident. The Beemer is Arnold Schwarzenegger to the Benz’s Bruce Lee: just by looking at it you know it’ll hurt you given the chance, whereas the C63 S is more subtle but no less dangerous. Both models present a quartet of exhaust tips to those left flailing in the jet wash.
Slide into the two cabins and there is a bit of a turnaround. The BMW is actually quite restrained whereas the Merc presents a visual assault. There are a few highlights in the M3, most notably the fat sports steering wheel, sports seats and the discreet application of BMW’s Motorsport colours. By contrast, the C63 S has deep bucket seats with diamond stitching, generous lashings of carbon-fibre – unusually, the chequered charcoal motif is laced with red as well – and a small diameter steering wheel clad in suede-like microfibre. In both cases, the defining traits are those that can’t be seen.
Seconds out…
Round 2:
In the gym
We already know about the M3’s powerplant. After a brief foray with eight cylinders, BMW has returned to its iconic inline-six. The 3,0-litre S55 mill develops 317 kW and 550 N.m thanks to an added 1,25 bar of pressure forced in by a pair of Mitsubishi (MHI) turbo units. Power is fed to the rear wheels via a limited-slip differential. Buyers have a choice of transmissions, with either three or two pedals in the footwell; the Austin yellow test unit was specced with the latter.
Mercedes has stuck to its V8 lineage – one that includes the C43, C55 and (W204) C63. For the latest C63 models though, as with many new models, the badge is a bit of a misnomer. Gone is the characterful and frankly bonkers 6 208 cm3 naturally aspirated V8, and in its place we find a new-generation 4,0-litre motor. This is the same engine that features in the new Mercedes-AMG GT/S sportscars, except in this application it features a conventional wet sump.
Nestled within the V of the block, the “bent-eight” boasts a pair of Borg Warner turbochar-gers. With a relatively high compression ratio of 10,5:1 and 1,2 bar of boost, this M177 engine cranks out an impressive 375 kW and 700 N.m. Those figures trump those of the “regular” C63, which offers 350 kW and
650 N.m. It is the latter car
that we wanted to test against the M3 as it is a closer match on power and price for the M car.
Unfortunately, Mercedes-Benz South Africa could not provide the regular model so it was the full-fat S that arrived at the CAR offices. Power is delivered via an automated multi-plate clutch to a traditional automatic transmission. In the case of the S variant, an electro-mechanical limited-slip diff doles out torque to the rear wheels.
Seconds out…
Round 3:
Against the clock
Typical of our experiences with M cars, the M3’s launch control proved a rather reluctant playmate. This isn’t just a car that you get into, mash the throttle, and turn in quick sprint times all day long. Very obviously programmed to engage only at optimal temeratures, its picky algorithms mean perfect launches and quick times are few and far between. The boffins at Affalterbach, meanwhile, have clearly been taking notes from criticism levelled at its system during previous AMG press tests, and the launch control system in the C63 S has been revised. Once initiated, it is far more user-friendly and consistent, completing multiple runs without acting up.
As this story’s opening lines declared, the AMG is the quickest of the pair. When we downloaded the data from our VBox recorder, we knew that there had to be a winner but did not expect such a small gap. Despite its 58 kW and 150 N.m deficit, the M3 lagged by only 2/100th of a second in the comparative sprint times. The vehicles’ mass difference plays a large part in this equation, as the C63 S needs that surfeit of torque to move its extra 212 kg.
Of course, zero-to-100 km/h times aren’t a proper yardstick of a car’s capability – especially machines as powerful as these. At 100 km/h they are only starting to get into their stride. Both pull equally hard once a head of steam is built up, but it is the AMG that feels fractionally stronger through the upper reaches of the rev range.
Whereas its M3 arch-rival may exhibit hints of turbo lag, the C63 S doesn’t. Such is the torque delivery of the force-fed V8 that you can short shift and not feel short-changed, and the Benz relishes revving out even if its limits aren’t as high as those in the M car. The M3 is electronically limited to a top speed of 250 km/h; as for this particular AMG test unit, we can confidently predict the needle could graze 300 km/h…
As quick as they are, the manner in which these cars stop is even more impressive. Both test units were specified with carbon-ceramic rotors at extra cost; the AMG’s optional front discs measure a whopping 402 mm apiece and BMW’s 400 mm. The best stops for both were in the 2,6-second region and the average times were 2,74 and 2,81 seconds for the C63 S and M3, respectively.
Seconds out…
Round 4:
On the road
Until now there has been virtually nothing to choose between these two heavyweights, each have punched and counter-punched in perfect sync. The picture changes somewhat when heading onto the road, though.
Setting off in the C63 S, one is instantly taken aback by the motor. Thankfully, the soundtrack has not been dulled by the sound-sapping turbochargers. What starts as a basso profundo builds through a hard-edged mid range and terminates with a racecar-like yowl. Each gearshift is met by an eructation from the tailpipes. Grab the next cog and it happens all over again.
It’s quite addictive and will ruin your fuel bill. Shifting down is equally enjoyable as there are loud pops and crackles on the over-run. And if you tire of all the histrionics, you can set the active exhaust to its quietest, most neighbour-friendly setting. Judging by some of the tripe played on the airwaves these days, the exhaust-note engineers at Mercedes-AMG deserve to win Grammy Awards…
By contrast, the M3’s aural performance isn’t quite as grin-inducing. A tad more anodyne compared with the AMG, but no less interesting to the real enthusiast.
As with previous C63s, the engine is the star attraction, but there has been serious development in other areas of the dynamic package. The entire setup has been tuned to work with, rather than dominated by, the engine’s prodigious power output. The multi-stage damping in particular can be tailored for around town comfort or set for more spirited driving. Helping to produce direct responses are the active engine mounts, which can be relaxed or tensed up as the situation changes.
However, one area where we feel the Benz could use a bit of polish is in controlling its mass. Regardless of how well your suspension reacts, it’s still difficult to hide 1,8 tonnes from the laws of physics. Grip levels and the impending resignation are not telegraphed to your palms through the electrically assisted helm: instead, signals are sent up through your twin-cheeked yaw sensor into your spine for processing. Flirt with the far end of the grip envelope and the C63 S will announce an attitude change with a neutral stance, which feels great.
BMW knows how to build and set up fast sedans, and nowhere is this more evident than in the M3. With more than 200 kg less than the Benz to hustle, the M-car feels and acts lighter on its feet. Compared with the AMG, driver inputs are met with faster reactions and dealt with more eagerly by the BMW’s passive suspension. Few cars we’ve driven have displayed such a planted front end. As with the C63 S, the M3’s electrically assisted tiller doesn’t offer much in the way of feedback.
You have to trust that the front end won’t let go, and it probably won’t if the driver has any sense of self-preservation. The grip levels across the front axle line are relentless, so much so that it is the rear end that you need to be wary off. Initially, this is a trait that less experienced pilots will need to be wary of as it can be unnerving, but as confidence builds you’ll realise just how high those limits are. The BMW’s non-adaptive dampers deliver a brittle ride quality at low speeds, but the handling prowess at higher speeds more than makes up for it.
Seconds out…
Round 5:
Test summary
It was interesting and enjoyable to evaluate this pair. They’re superb proponents of the fast sedan genre and devastingly quick. The latest C from Affalterbach is a true rival for the M Division’s 3. More so than ever before, the AMG proves a worthy rival; capable in virtually every facet.
Having said that, there are few automotive experiences as thrilling, enticing and downright exciting as an M3 when fully lit. After all, these are sporting sedans, and if we weren’t going to judge them on outright driving dynamics then we could just as easily opt for models down their respective family trees.
Our on-road analysis was backed up by the lap times set at Killarney Raceway, where CAR’s track tester Deon Joubert drove the cars to near identical times, with a half-second advantage going to the yellow corner. Joubert felt the Beemer to be the more communicative and pointy of the two, being noticeably more adjustable and responsive to driver inputs than the Mercedes.
As it stands, there is no real loser here – the Mercedes-Benz C63 S has more grunt and everyday driveability, while the BMW M3 is lighter and ultimately quicker if you have the abilities to explore its limits. After a long and often very vocal deliberation, the judges gave the nod to the M3, and it retains its belt by a split decision.
