[chalkem77]

In Motor trend's latest issue (Apr '02), there is an interesting comparison test that pits the BMW M cars against their AMG counterparts

Here are the lineups:

1) M5 vs E55
2) M Roadster vs SLK32
3) M3 vs CLK55
4) X5 4.6is (not really an M, but they included it) vs. ML55

They choose the M car over the AMG car in all four matchups (even the non-M X5 ), a clean sweep! :thumb:

I know Motor Trend isn't the most objective magazine, but I still found it interesting that they didn't give any of the AMG versions the nod...

 

[bol]

Buddy of mine has an AMG SLK 32... damn nice car and it's very quick.

 

[Chris330Ci]

Interesting results. I've never driven any of the AMG Benz's, but I'm sure they're a very close second. If they ever get around to making a 6 speed manual worth a [email protected], maybe the playing field might become a little more equal.

By the way, in an article I read, the X5 4.6 is considered in the M class, but since it was not a passenger car, they decided to not badge it as such.

Even if AMG does best M one day, I'll probably still stick with the Bimmers..!

:thumb:

 

[nate]

In all 4 of these categories, the M car is better :thumb:

 

[OJ330i]

the real reason the X5 4.6 is not a "M"

By the way, in an article I read, the X5 4.6 is considered in the M class, but since it was not a passenger car, they decided to not badge it as such.

The reason they didn't badge it as a "M" is because its all-wheel drive. I think someone asked this to a BMW exec. and that was their answer. Something about how true sports cars are all rear wheel drive. The same answer was given about if they were going to make an AWD M5 to compete with the new Jag S-type-type R. The Exec's responce to the crowd was "Does anyone want an AWD M5?" and no one answered.

 

[ALEX325i]

AMG cars are nice... But NO manual tranny? What's up with that? I actually like the CLK55 (the CLK is the only MB I like), and I wouldn't mind having one , but there's no way I'll buy a sports car without manual tranny... Maybe one day (in the distant future)...

 

[Chris330Ci]

Re: the real reason the X5 4.6 is not a "M"

The reason they didn't badge it as a "M" is because its all-wheel drive. I think someone asked this to a BMW exec. and that was their answer. Something about how true sports cars are all rear wheel drive. The same answer was given about if they were going to make an AWD M5 to compete with the new Jag S-type-type R. The Exec's responce to the crowd was "Does anyone want an AWD M5?" and no one answered.

That's right, that was the answer. Thanks for the clarification! :thumb:

 

[JST]

Re: the real reason the X5 4.6 is not a "M"

The reason they didn't badge it as a "M" is because its all-wheel drive. I think someone asked this to a BMW exec. and that was their answer. Something about how true sports cars are all rear wheel drive. The same answer was given about if they were going to make an AWD M5 to compete with the new Jag S-type-type R. The Exec's responce to the crowd was "Does anyone want an AWD M5?" and no one answered.

The S-type is not AWD, in either the base incarnation or the R version. It's the X-Type R that will be AWD.

The lack of a manual tranny in the S-type R (and in all the AMG cars) would prevent me from buying one, though in truth Mercedes' six-speeds are so unpleasant to use that they do not really qualify as manual trannys, IMHO.

If it had a stick, though, the S-type R would be a formidable contender.

 

[TD330ci]

Why not compare the C32 to the M3?

More direct I think.

The CLK55 costs sooooo much more and the C32 is faster. I think the C32 even outruns the M3. :yikes:

Would never have one because of the auto only, but that thing is FAST!!

Can't wait to see what Audi does with the new S4.

Sucked when the current S4 was new, it beat the E36 M3 in one of these comparo's. The M3 needs revenge!! :thumb:

 

[chalkem77]

AMG cars are nice... But NO manual tranny? What's up with that? I actually like the CLK55 (the CLK is the only MB I like), and I wouldn't mind having one , but there's no way I'll buy a sports car without manual tranny... Maybe one day (in the distant future)...

A friend of mine actually just took delivery of his CLK55 a few weeks ago. It's a beautiful and fast car for sure, but the $80K price tag makes it hard to justify, especially when the M3's performance is similar for $20K less. In fact, in the Motor Trend comparison, they liked both cars so much that it came down to that price difference when choosing the winner.

The lack of a manual tranny in the AMG bugs me too because buyers are paying that huge premium over the regular versions to get the extra performance and the slushbox just dilutes it... :thumbdwn:

 

[ed325i]

Has anyone driven a new AMG Mercedes? I wonder how well their "speedshift" auto tranny works. How much control does the driver have? Just curious.

Ed

 

[The HACK]

In Motor trend's latest issue (Apr '02), there is an interesting comparison test that pits the BMW M cars against their AMG counterparts

Here are the lineups:

1) M5 vs E55
2) M Roadster vs SLK32
3) M3 vs CLK55
4) X5 4.6is (not really an M, but they included it) vs. ML55

They choose the M car over the AMG car in all four matchups (even the non-M X5 ), a clean sweep! :thumb:

I know Motor Trend isn't the most objective magazine, but I still found it interesting that they didn't give any of the AMG versions the nod...

No stick shift means it's a poseur for the crown. Noticed Porsche 911 turbos up to this iteration does not even offer an automatic transmission? Ferrari's and Lambo's NEVER offered automatic transmissons. BMW ///Ms never come with automatic transmissions.

Not bagging on people who drive autos...Drive what you will. But if a car wants to be a true sports car/sedan it NEEDS to have a stick shift. PERIOD. So unless AMGs are offered with stickshifts, I will continue to lust over ///M cars and pass AMG up.

 

[Plaz]

Re: Re: BMW M cars vs. Mercedes AMG cars

No stick shift means it's a poseur for the crown.

...

if a car wants to be a true sports car/sedan it NEEDS to have a stick shift. PERIOD.

In the above, do you define SMG as a "stick shift?"

 

[JST]

Re: Re: BMW M cars vs. Mercedes AMG cars

No stick shift means it's a poseur for the crown. Noticed Porsche 911 turbos up to this iteration does not even offer an automatic transmission? Ferrari's and Lambo's NEVER offered automatic transmissons. BMW ///Ms never come with automatic transmissions.

I agree with your sentiment, but the E36 M3 was offered with an automatic transmission in each of its body styles.

 

[nate]

Re: Re: BMW M cars vs. Mercedes AMG cars

No stick shift means it's a poseur for the crown. Noticed Porsche 911 turbos up to this iteration does not even offer an automatic transmission? Ferrari's and Lambo's NEVER offered automatic transmissons. BMW ///Ms never come with automatic transmissions.

You are wrong on several counts...

The 911 Turbo is now offered in Tiptronic
The Ferrar 456 GTA is Automatic, and I belive there was an auto model in the 80s too...
The E36 M3 was offered in automatic in the '95 coupe and the sedans and cabrios...

 

[BiGGieStuFF]

yeah the S4 beats the US E36 M3 but how about the euro E36 M3. I guess that's what the RS4 is for.

Why not compare the C32 to the M3?

More direct I think.

The CLK55 costs sooooo much more and the C32 is faster. I think the C32 even outruns the M3. :yikes:

Would never have one because of the auto only, but that thing is FAST!!

Can't wait to see what Audi does with the new S4.

Sucked when the current S4 was new, it beat the E36 M3 in one of these comparo's. The M3 needs revenge!! :thumb:

 

[OJ330i]

yeah the S4 beats the US E36 M3 but how about the euro E36 M3. I guess that's what the RS4 is for.

Yeah, this is very true. Until the E46 M3 they did have 2 different engines in the M3. The US version (240HP) and the Euro (320HP). The RS4 still blows both of them away. One blew past me on the autobahn when I was doing about 145mph in my Contour SVT. It was a RS4 avant (wagon), he had to be doing at least 155-160.

 

[BiGGieStuFF]

So how much is the RS4 converted into US currency? Only reason why I don't like it is because it's a wagon.

Yeah, this is very true. Until the E46 M3 they did have 2 different engines in the M3. The US version (240HP) and the Euro (320HP). The RS4 still blows both of them away. One blew past me on the autobahn when I was doing about 145mph in my Contour SVT. It was a RS4 avant (wagon), he had to be doing at least 155-160.

 

[OJ330i]

So how much is the RS4 converted into US currency? Only reason why I don't like it is because it's a wagon.

$60,000 US or somewhere around there. I've only seen 2 or 3 of them ever. Fast as hell though. 0-60 in well less than 5 seconds. Probably can out run a E46 M3 and looks like a typical wagon with rims and duel exhaust.RS4

 

[Mystikal]

Hmm, too bad the SL55 isn't in mass (relative term here) production, or else a Z8 vs. SL55 comparison would have been interesting. Not like anyone really cares which car has better handling balance at this price range, but it's still fun to read.