C32 AMG 0-60 in 4.6 seconds!

www.c32life.com

>> 0-60 in 4.5 seconds according to AutoCar. >> It will go 0-100 in 10.9 seconds. With a 13 second 1/4 at 109. It looks like that the 0-60 time or the whatever-to-whatever times are the most important thing in the US. Pity, they miss the point. Cu styx

If your looking for performance (which you may not, and thats totally repectable), you just went back a couple of steps if you sold your 996 to get the C32, i.e., softer chasis, heavier engine and car, standard 5-speed automatic, less cornering grip, brakes less resistant to fadding, softer tunned suspension settings, higher center of gravety,etc,etc ... but I�m sure its confortable and has a large trunk though. BTW, the E46-M3 has all the advantages of the C32(4 seats, trunk space, confort,etc.) but is better handling, faster and more fun to drive (6 speed manual with a L-6 cyl. atmosferic engine and rear viscous diferential)than the C32, it can even get close to a 996 on the track. Carlos.

Carlos, Ohhh man I'm sorry for you. The E46 M3 is NOT faster nor does it handle better than the C32 AMG. I'm sorry to break this news to you. More than three magazines have now tested both these cars back to back. The C32 was faster 0-60 and 1/4 mile. It also killed the M3 in 0-100. Ohh and it was a better handling car too. The M3 is a heavy car with mechanical problems. The C32 IMHO and in others is the superior car. It also only has 2 doors which isn't practical and a small back seat. Want to see proof?? Well, go to this link and click on reviews. C32 Reviews

Which issue of Autocar ? My 27 Jun issue of the C32c vs M3 8 page comparo shows 0-60 4.6/4.8 0-100 10.8/11.5 and qtr mile 13.0/13.4 - faster times all to the C32. However, the editors called the M3 a " dynamic masterpiece" and a "landmark sports coupe". They also praised the C32 as a "deeply impressive " car , but said it felt like a base C320 with gigantic power." "As speed rises, the M3 exposes the C32 for what it is : a mildly tweaked C320". Hey- I'm an ex- BMW owner with two MBZs currently. Just reporting on THAT article, FWIW.

Good luck to you - that is a very nice car and I bet it will be fun to drive - however, its more of a sports sedan than a "feel the road" sports car. The M5 is another stand out sports sedan. Obviously (since I'm on this Board) my preference is the porsche - but if I was in the market for a sports sedan - I like your choice (or the M5). Regards.

I don`t mean to ofend but "AMG" never made a better handling car than "BMW M" not because the AMG engineers aren�t good enough, its just because their product is intended to appeal to more confort oriented drivers than BMW M. By the way, when I mean "faster" I don�t mean clocked figures in a drag strip, I mean overall faster in a certain road strip with curves or in a circuit, say nurburing (I sure all Porsche drivers here understood that, thats why they bought a Porsche and not a Ford Mustank) You will learn that 0-60 figures are realtive when an E-36 M3 with just 321HP or a 996 with 300HP will leave you behind in a mountain road, not to mention a Lotus Elise with "just" 200HP and 1500lps weight and aluminum back-bone type chasis. Some people become suddently dislexic when they read mag articles about their cars, I have yet to read a mag with say s the C32 is a better handler than a E46-M3 (just look at the engine type and you will see what AMG intended vs. BMW M) or due a lap time faster... but then again some people�s idea of performance just doesn�t comprehend more than 0-60 figures.(BTW my motorcycle does 0-60 in 4 secs and my quad bellow 3,5 secs but thats not why I bought them). Carlos

Well Carlos, I have seen two articles that state in their opinions that the C32 handles better than the new M3. The C32 also managed BETTER lap times than the M3. I will agree with you that the M3 was built for one purpose and the C32 is a modified luxury sport car. I take my cars to the track. I took my 996 to the track as well as my NSX and my 98 M3. I know a performance car when I see one. I don't attend drag strips but I may in this car. :-) From what I hear of this car, I think it will be equal to my other cars in the handling department. Once the US reviews come out, we shall see how well the C32 fairs against your mighty M3. If it were me, I would NEVER have sold my 996 for anything less. Esp not a clunky, broken, bulging, M3.

C32, can you point us to those two articles? The only comparison I've read was from Autocar and in that article the M3 was deemed superior to the C32.

I've always had a problem with MB's transmission. If you stomp on it, in any gear, the transmission will say, "Oh really? Do you really want to take off now? Oh, OK." And then it takes off. I wish MB would make the linkage akin to Ferrari's electronic gas control. Maybe the new MB's don't have this problem anymore.

C32, I get the impresion that you think I�m attaking the C32 since you are taking this too seriously. Well, I�m not , I just want to get things straight. The C32 is not better handling than a E46-M3 (just like the 190 2.5 16v vs. the E30-M3 and the C43 AMG vs. E36-M3 Euro spec) because it was built with a different intention (for God�s sake, its a STANDARD 5-speed automatic). You seem to be the only one here who reads that the C32 is better handling than the M3. I�m sure the C32 is a great car, but its strong points are not sport performance. Its impossible that if you take an NSX or 996 to the track you will not notice a big difference to the C32, simply impossible. BTW I don�t own an E46-M3 and I couldn�t care less about it (Though I said goodbye to my mod. Euro spec E36-M3 not long ago). Anyway, don�t take things so personal, we just give our personal opinions here and thats all they are worth Carlos

I�ve noticed that too on MB automatic transmissions (they have gotten quicker)but if you think thats slow, you should try Jaguar�s (you need to wake it up from a coma first before it shifts... drives me nuts) but then again they are more confortable and smooth which is what their are designed for and MB automatic trans. are since always among the best. Carlos

-------------

Ahh, but its not as much fun when the computer does it for you (respectfully). As I said in my earlier post - this does sound like a great car, even if it is an automatic. Good luck with it - give us a report when you get it. Brian

MB's Speedshift is probably the best automatic in the business. I believe I read that the automatic (tiptronic) in the 996 TT was made/designed/something by Merc. However, it is not the 2nd fastest shifting transmission on the market. BMW's SMG (which is available for the M3) is the fastest. It shifts twice as fast as Ferrari's F1 system, which is the second fastest. Both BMW's and Ferrari's systems are real manual transmissions (with computer controlled clutches). Those are the type of systems in formula 1 cars. MB's system might have a similar user interface, but it's definitely not related to anything in formula 1. Speedshift is an auto (a damn good auto, but still an auto). A stick is more fun than any of them, though!

PS: C32, you still haven't told us which two articles said the c32 handles better than the m3. I'm really curious since I'm going to be buying one of those 2 cars soon (I'm on the waiting list for both). Thanks.

MB�s Speedshift is not the second, not the third fastest either. In fact the three fastest are the only three REAL sequencial transmissions (true manual with automatic mode) on the market today. These are Ferrari�s 360M, Alfa Romeos Selespeed and the new BMW M3 SMG II generation. MB�s is still an automatic with manual override, even though is one of the fastest automatic (0-60 figures prove it) its still an automatic so can�t compare to the TRUE sequential. The most advanced now is the BMW M3 SMG II. Derived from Ralph Schum.�s F1 sequential transmition it incorporates some computer aids that are not allowed in F1. For ex: it has incline sensors that adjust the gearing speed and timing depending on the incline of the roads, for example a hiil. It will select the appropriate gear when you BREAK for a curve and not afterward when you ACCELERATE out of the curve so you have instant power. If you hold the gear peadal on the steering wheel down on first gear and you accelerate to raise the rev�s up, when you let go of the gear pedal the car will lauch at those rev�s like dropping the cluth with a manual so you avoid that lag with the automatics when you floor it from a stop light because they start from idle. It has 5 selectable computerised modes in automatic and 6 in sequential mode, the last one (the most aggressive), S6, can only be engaged if you disconect the DSC(BMW�s version of the PSM) Now thats a transmission I would even think about, being a diehard manual driver (no pain, no gain). Carlos

Juno, what are you priorities in a car? Carlos.

Carlos, My priorities for a car are: 1. fun to drive 2. looks good 3. quality, reliability, etc. I don't need 4 doors or backs seats. If I could afford a 996TT, I'd get it. The regular 996 is my choice in that price range (over the M5; E55 is not an option). For the $50K range, I don't think you can beat the M3 (given MY priorities). The C32 is not offered with a manual, so it loses a lot of points in my view. Also, I prefer the M3's looks. And I believe the M3 has superior handling, but what do I know? I've never driven a c32! Oh, and I didn't forget about the Boxster S. If I didn't hate convertibles, I would have bought one months ago instead of waiting on the M3 list! BTW, I spec'ed out an M3 today with my dealer. I'll be getting my c32 deposit back on monday.

June, congrats. If those are your priorities you made a great choice IMO. Here is why: The C32 AMG employs a V6 3.2l (354HP) engine with a SUPERCHARGER which produces loads of low end torque for comfortable driving since the engine doesn�t need to downshift as much due to its elasticity, and its also cheap to build. But the drawback is that supercharged engines lack end power and are lazy to rev so its not very sporty thats why its not used in competition (other cars that I know of that use it are Jag XKR, Aston Martin DB7/Vantage and the GM 3.8 V6 enginge... not exactly pure sport cars but more confort oriented). Supercharging also increases fuel consumption. The M3 has the same displacement but uses a L-6 (inline 6 is more efficient and smother than V6 but less space efficient so no good for small cars)ATMOSPHERIC engine (343HP) with the HIGH ENGINE SPEED CONCEPT and Variable Valve Timming(VVT) ("double vanos" in BMW M3) to be able to pull 107 HP per litre from an atmospheric engine. The result is that it rev�s to 8000RPM so it has to employ expensive materials to tolerate this engine speeds but give the car a special caracter (other cars that use VVT is F360M, Lamb Diablo SV and of course, Porsche�s Variocam). This is why F1 cars for example rev up to 18,000RPM because at high engine speeds the more power and the engine is quick responding and faster reving. For example a tracktor with the same power of a F1 will have 5 times more torque but doesn�t rev or accelerate much (though pulls like hell) and a F1 has similar torque to a C32/M3 but at 18,000 RPM it flies! The C32 uses a 5-speed and automatic transmission standard( speedshift is 35% fatser that C-class auto) but the M3 uses a 6-speed manual or optional sequential so C32 is more confortable but can�t compare to a sequetial transmission wich is again the choice in competition. In terms of weight, the C32 is 150 Kg heavier (partly due to the transmission) thus hindering handling and also the power to weight ratio (C32 4.78 Kg/HP, M3 4.57 Kg/HP) so you can expect better acceleration from the M3 combined with the transmission differences (in Europe official O-100 Km/h are M3=5.2 sec and C32=5.4 sec). You�ll find the M3 suspensions a bit harder (especially with the op. 19" wheels... a must) because they are tunned more for the handling and sportiness and the C32 though still hard will be more on the confort-soft side. So its a personal choice here. The C32 has 4-doors so more accesability to the rear seats but the M3 with 2-door is more sporty looking (along with the powerdome, side grills and 4 exhaust tips). If you consider trunk space important, they both have fair trunks but the C32�s is 13% larger. And last but not least is the price, because with the difference in price you can load the M3 with a few mod�s (chip-exhaust, SMG trans,aerokit, etc) to your liking. So bottom line is that they are both great cars but with distinc caracters, one sportiers the other more confortable oriented. So its a matter of your own preferences. My choice is clear Carlos

You're preaching to the choir, Carlos! I agree with most of the things you said about the M3. I didn't find the ride too harsh for my tastes, though. I was only on the c32 waiting list because I wanted to cover all bases. When one hears the hype (way before the car ever comes out), it's hard not to think that finally MB wants to compete with Motorsport. Reality is proving otherwise... Oh, and since I'm in the states, I can't get the 19" wheels (or the cross-drilled, floating rotors).

June, drop a post on your impressions on the M3 when you get it! That engine (MSS 54) is a blast! Did I forget to mention the aluminum hood and unique rear variable viscous differential? Too bad about the 19" wheels, I don�t see why they can�t make them available in the US Rumors have it that the next version (Evolution) of the E46-M3 will have a V8 400HP engine either from the M5 (I dought it ... too heavy) or most probably a 4litre engine derived from the M3r used now in GT series which is banking of the first places the 911GT3�s. Carlos

Carlos, you're starting to sound like a BMW dealer! Seriously, though, the engine is pretty nice. When I test drove the M3, it was awesome, but the dealer didn't let me take it above 5K rpms. It still pulled with authority thanks to its Double Vanos. I can't wait to try 8K! The M3 lightweight that should be coming out will have a 4-4.5L v8. It's only going to be sold in Europe and it's going to be very expensive. BMW is only making them to satisfy ALMS racing requirements. Most of the cars, BMW says, will be sold to people who will race them. They will be very uncomfortable road cars. Oh, and since you mentioned the aluminum bonnet, new for 2002 is a lightweight front bumper. Every bit of extra weight saving counts!

June, I just like when things are done right. I don�t even own a BMW car right now (I do a motorcicle). If I had to choose a car in the same category-class besides the 996 C4 (which I own) which is my first choice, it would be the M3 (with harder suspension upgrade of course and 19" wheels). Here in Europe, the E30-M3 was substituted with a version with new engine and chasis mods four years after its presentation, called E30-M3 Evolution. With the E36-M3 (1992)the same thing happened, The 286HP was increased to 321HP in the E36-M3 Evolution of 1996 four years later (A M3 GT and M3r versions were also sold on the side). So expect four years from now an Evolution version of the E46-M3 (besides the lightweight version)with similar price and features but with more HP (But then again maybe it won�t be sold in the US ) Carlos.

Yal are being very kind to Mr. C32. MB is not even close yet to making a sport luxury vs. a luxury sport. The driver feedback in ANY production MB (AMG included) is totally absent. They're ALL boats - still! That said, once they learn how to make a car that handles and communicates with the driver, I'd very seriously look at them given their power plants and service departments are so awesome. It really is a shame cause I'd love to get what I want out of the 03 SL55 as a TT cab surrogate (since Porsche refuses to make one). But, that car won't be ANYTHING like a BMW or Porsche when it comes to handling. The AMG MBs are great cars for novices or those who don't drive their cars anywhere near the limit. For those that do however, they are DANGEROUS in that they communicate so little as to what is going on and offer so poor a response to driver imput at the edge, that that imput is often useless.

You read my mind, Ben In Lj. Just didn�t want�t to be so bold and clear. Light steering with no feedback, soft chasis, plush suspensions, automatic transmission, and lifeless engines all wrapped up in an overweight and overpriced package ...not what I look for in a car, but thats a matter of personal preferences. They are great in the confort-luxury class just don�t try to pretend its a sportcar! although it may fool some inocent people at that. Here is an example of similar cars, different caracter: Q: Whats the difference between a Bentley and a Rolls Royce? (they are made almost by the same people and in the same place, similar looks, chasis and engines, though just now were split up; bought by different companies and seperated.) A: One is made for driving it and the other to be driven in the back seat. I.e. the Bentley is a bit sportier and fun to drive and the Rolls a bit more confortable and intended for the rear seat passenger. What is the better car? Depends on your preferences, just don�t pretend one to be the other. Carlos.

-------------

C32, All you mention in all the posts is the Autocar "review". You should do some thinking by yourself and not let "a" magazine article be your bible and tell what to believe. I admit though that the E46 series has lighter steering (thats the first thing I noticed on the E46 series) than the E36 series but still better than MB�s. Statements such a "C32 rocks!" lack arguments, like the ones I listed earlier (notice I compared the M3 vs. the C32 because the 911 is already a different world in performance) and may lead me to believe that you are in denial because you may be repenting your decision on the C32 because you were looking for a sportcar(to substitute a 996 )and not a powerful luxury sedan which is what the C32 actually is. You may still have time to switch your deposit for an M3 Carlos from Spain

Just wondering, what's "C32" man doing trying to pump that silly automatic, luxo cruiser here on the "996 Forum"?

Yes, trying to push an AMG as a sportcar in a "Porsche" forum is askig for it, try the oldsmobile forum next , maybe they swallow it. We just find it amusing to put it mildly Carlos.

He (Mr. C32) was doing the same thing on the M3 board a few weeks ago. I must say that the 996ers have been WAY nicer to him than the M3ers were! I guess it's because the C32 is much more of a M3-rival than a 996-rival, and so Mr C32 came off as a major league troll over there. He's only a little troll on this board. As you can see by his posts, he's just trying to cause trouble and when someone challenges his baloney, he just spews more baloney. Case in point: he said there were three articles--the Autocar article plus 2 others--that said the C32 outhandles the M3. Anyone who can read will notice that the Autocar article favored the M3's handling. Mr. C32 still has not told us what the other 2 mystery articles are (probably because they don't exist).

Hi Juno. I subscribe to Autoweek, Automobile, Motor Trend, Bimmer, and a few others. While I don't know which one I read it in, I do remember the AMG MB being deemed unworthy in their comparison with the E46 M3. We all know here that this beefed up entry level, new millenium 190E ain't no match for a real sports car :-)

I am new to this forum but I am quite amused with what is said for all cars mentioned ie c32, m3 and 996. I do have to say when I purchased my 996 coupe back in 1999 I have nothing but good things to say about the car both as a daily driver as well as tracking. To me, the 996 has the best of both worlds and to hear comparisons with the c32- i say its a great car for the regular day driving because if it is as performance oriented as the c43 the ability to change lanes ie going from 50-70 mph with a touch of the throttle is amazing. Even my 996 could not go from 50-70 that quickly. But the bad thing is with that kind of acceleration on a twisty road makes me kinda nervous especially with an automatic even though it has that Speedshift function. I dont think any automatic can replace the sure joy of a manual. To me I feel more in control then with an automatic. Thats my 2 cents worth. Take care.

I had a C32 on order and was on the waiting list for about 3 months. It's a very nice car, and is a perfect stealth - invisible to ticket happy cops and vendalists. I thought that was the best performance car I could get for under $55K. (list any way). Then my MB dealer kept upseting me, by moving my delivery dates up 2 months and then out 6 months. Other people on the MB board had better luck with other dealers but I think I got stiffed. In all that frustrations, I finally bought a used practically new MY99 911 for about the same money. It turned out that the pre-owned market is a buyer market, and you get very good deals these days. I am very glad with the purchase and now thank my MB dealer for screwing it up. The main thing with the C32, other than performance, is whether it has the staying power in its styling. I kept mistakening C320 with sport package as C32 and that was the only thing that was pissing me off. Paul

PaulT, If I were you I�d give the MB dealer a big kiss . He just made you a huge favor. The C32 isn�t even comparable with the 996 in terms of a sportcar, just because it has HP doesn�t make it fast (the "sportiest" version of the Bentley�s has 550HP but that still doesn�t make it a sportcar). Sure, the C32 is more versatile and made for relaxed driving, but �the 996 is a sportcar which can also function as a dailydriver fairly enough. Have you ever seen a performance oriented car have standard: automatic, 4-doors, supercharger (instad of atmospheric or turbo), weight over 3600lbs. and soft suspension settings?...maybe for my grandmother Carlos 996 C4 Aerokit and Sport chasis/18" Sportdesign.

Carlos: You are right. I need to drive my 996 to the MB dealer one day and thank him. The other benefit I didn't expect, is the experience of Porschephile culture. I am already making new friends and taking the car to driver ed soon. The car is a surprisingly good daily driver, and yet I can go to the track with it! Paul

OK guys, just bought todays Autocar (I live in the UK), and they have a shootout of 20 best performance cars of the year (360 Modena, Diablo right down to Toyota Celica / BMW 325i etc). OK - C32 Merc - 16th place!!! I quote - Fish have ridden bicylcles better than the way the C32 howled its way round the Rockingham circuit in a noisy mess of understeer and confused automatic gearchanges. It was frankly, a shambles. Where did the new M3 come in the test?? 6th. That settles that then. Eric

Oh yes, sorry, forgot to mention, 996 GT2 - 5th place - 1.7secs a lap faster than the 6.0 Diablo VT. Eric

Can you give us a rundown of places 1-5 or 1-10 if possible? Their associated lap times would be great too. Thanks!!

OK - top 10 here we go - It was a handling test, not outright best laptime won - you will be pleased to see that the GT2 beat everything time wise! 10 Ariel Atom 190 - 1m 21.48s 9 Lamborghini Diablo - 1m 21.28s 8 TVR Tuscan S - 1m 22.28s 7 Mini Cooper - 1m 32.08s 6 BMW M3 - 1m 24.40s 5 Porsche 911 GT2 - 1m 19.58s (!!!) 4 Ferrari 360 F1 - 1m 21.52s 3 Mitsubishi EVO VII - 1m 24.23s 2 Noble M12 - 1m 21.35s 1 Lotus Elise - 1m 25.03s Eric

How did the base 996 do?

Thanks Erik, that about settles it. Great post BTW I always wanted to drive one of those 700Kg Lotus Elise�s, pretty impressive for what, 150HP? Carlos From Spain

Wow, of the cars available in the U.S. the M3 fared pretty darn well.

Thanks Eric. It is nice to see the GT2 dominating everything else. Lap times from the Nurburgring. >> 7:46 - Porsche 996 GT2 >> 7:56 - Porsche 996 Turbo >> 7:57 - Lotec Porsche 993 Turbo (600 HP, racing suspension) >> 8:07 - Ferrari 550 >> 8:09 - Porsche 996 GT3 >> 8:09 - Lamborghini Diablo SV >> 8:09 - Ferrari 360 Modena >> 8:10 - Chrysler Viper GTS >> 8:12 - Porsche 993 Turbo (430 HP version) >> 8:15 - BMW Z8 400 HP >> 8:17 - Porsche 996 C2 >> 8:18 - Ferrari F355 >> 8:22 - BMW M Coupe 321 HP >> 8:25 - Audi RS4 375 HP >> 8:28 - Porsche 993 C2 >> 8:28 - BMW M5 400 HP >> 8:32 - Porsche Boxster S >> 8:35 - BMW M3 Coupe 321 HP >> 8:37 - Mercedes C32 AMG >> 8:38 - Honda NSX >> 8:39 - Honda S2000 >> 8:40 - Chevrolet Corvette >> 8:42 - Audi S4 265 HP >> 8:42 - Lotus Exige >> 8:49 - Jaguar XKR Coupe >> 8:52 - Mercedes CLK 430 Source

Adrial, that was very interesting post too, lap times are the bottom line, all else is relative like 0-60,etc. Separates the men from the boys BTW Walter Rohrl laped 7:56 in an officially timed lap with the 911GT3. Here go some of Jarama�s lap times: 993 turbo 1:49:85 996 C2 1:52:07 NSX 1:54:39 F355 1:51:31 Viper GTS 1:52:40 BMW Z8 1:53:52 BMW E36-M3 1:55:90 BMW E46-M3 1:53:36 BMW Z3M 1:53:62 MB C43 1:57:57 MB E55AMG 1:56:51 AUDI S3 1:58:89 AUDI S4 1:59:23 AUDI S6 1:57:43 MIT EVO VI 1:51:77 CITROEN XARA KIT CAR 1:48:08!! PEUGEOT 306 MAXI KIT CAR 1:46:31!! Ok, so we all already new this: Porsche is faster than BMW, BMW faster than MB�s and AUDI�s. Carlos from Spain.