Mapped C43 better than C63?

[John Jones Jr]

Depends how you define "way better". Plainly C43 drivers have their own definition...

Actually, each really is "way better" than the other - for a given value of "better".

'Way better' as in motoring enthusiast parlance, surely...or is this a forum about canal barges?

 

[DRIVER200]

The map has been developed so that it is undetectable my mercedes, but they will switch it off prior to any warranty work that involves them .

Crabbing is a small issue when tyres are cold on full lock but the turning circle is so good you dont need to full lock it so it doesnt bother me. I understand a tyre upgrade fixes this tho.

Lets hope so cos if MB do a recall on this crabbing issue then you will need to take your car in and if MB detect Mr Chippy then they might not touch it as they will say ''Sorry Sir this is not the car we sold you'' Have a nice day. Next please.....

 

[ash59fifty-uk]

Lets hope so cos if MB do a recall on this crabbing issue then you will need to take your car in and if MB detect Mr Chippy then they might not touch it as they will say ''Sorry Sir this is not the car we sold you'' Have a nice day. Next please.....

Or he could do what everyone else would probably do if needed in such a situation, and just delete the map- reload after

 

[Flash]

End of the day the C43 AMG is classed and marketed as a genuine AMG by MB,

The A45 AMG and CLA 45 AMG only have 2 litre turbo charged engines and are still classed as genuine AMG vehicles.

The new W205 C63 is a seriously fast car with a 4 litre V8 engine and out performs the old W204 C63 which is a 6.2 litre V8 engine, so does that make the new W205 C63 any less of a AMG vehicle in comparison???

 

[John Jones Jr]

The new W205 C63 is a seriously fast car with a 4 litre V8 engine and out performs the old W204 C63 which is a 6.2 litre V8 engine, so does that make the new W205 C63 any less of a AMG vehicle in comparison???

I'm sure some would consider the W205 C63 less of an AMG compared to the W204 simply on the basis that the W205 is turbo charged, after all AMG has always been a company that employed N/A engines only. Yeah, yeah I know times are changing and it's all about emissions nowadays and thus the turbos but according to many motoring scribes there's still a preference for non turbo 911's and for older N/A Ferrari V8's for example.

So, I'd argue the W205 is a lesser AMG (if no doubt awesome in it's own right) compared to the W204. After all a faster and lower emissions car doesn't make it a better performance car in the eyes of many including myself. Not to mention that there's possibly far more cost savings to be had sharing a similar basic V8 in non AMG versions thus the AMG uniqueness of the C63 is lost even further to an extent.

Don't get wrong I'm not knocking the new C63 just saddened at the loss of large displacement and the introduction of forced induction.

 

[Riverside Red]

I'm sure some would consider the W205 C63 less of an AMG compared to the W204 simply on the basis that the W205 is turbo charged, after all AMG has always been a company that employed N/A engines only. Yeah, yeah I know times are changing and it's all about emissions nowadays and thus the turbos but according to many motoring scribes there's still a preference for non turbo 911's and for older N/A Ferrari V8's for example.

So, I'd argue the W205 is a lesser AMG (if no doubt awesome in it's own right) compared to the W204. After all a faster and lower emissions car doesn't make it a better performance car in the eyes of many including myself. Not to mention that there's possibly far more cost savings to be had sharing a similar basic V8 in non AMG versions thus the AMG uniqueness of the C63 is lost even further to an extent.

Don't get wrong I'm not knocking the new C63 just saddened at the loss of large displacement and the introduction of forced induction.

I'm totally with you on the loss of NA engines, the W204 and W205 C63s are different cars and I don't think they should really be compared, even if they always will be. While the W205 is a more modern car it doesn't have the unique feature of that 6.2 litre V8.

As the owner of the last NA AMG, the R172 SLK55 I was totally gutted when Mercedes replaced it with the SLC43. Mercedes didn't understand that in the clinical world of Porsche Boxsters, the SLC43 no longer had the character of a 5.5litre V8 and I think the new car with its 3 litre turbo is just a joke.

Mercedes-AMG only produce the 43 range to compete with Audi (S models) and the new Motorsport range from BMW, but why not keep AMG unique and the AMG model in each class should be the pinnacle model not some tarted up version with a half hearted engine and 4 wheel drive.

There rant over, I thought I'd gotten over the 43 range but obviously not........I just hope that all future "63" models are not going to be 4WD (an option would be good, but not the switchable drift mode on the new E63) as that would be a massive loss to the mega-sports saloon scene. Anyone for the nanny state......

 

[dejongj]

My GLC43 is most definitely better than its alternative

 

[flowrider]

I'm sure some would consider the W205 C63 less of an AMG compared to the W204 simply on the basis that the W205 is turbo charged, after all AMG has always been a company that employed N/A engines only. Yeah, yeah I know times are changing and it's all about emissions nowadays and thus the turbos but according to many motoring scribes there's still a preference for non turbo 911's and for older N/A Ferrari V8's for example.

So, I'd argue the W205 is a lesser AMG (if no doubt awesome in it's own right) compared to the W204. After all a faster and lower emissions car doesn't make it a better performance car in the eyes of many including myself. Not to mention that there's possibly far more cost savings to be had sharing a similar basic V8 in non AMG versions thus the AMG uniqueness of the C63 is lost even further to an extent.

Don't get wrong I'm not knocking the new C63 just saddened at the loss of large displacement and the introduction of forced induction.

What about the supercharged SL55's and E55k's, are they not really AMG's?

 

[flowrider]

My GLC43 is most definitely better than its alternative

Whats it's alternative......a 2.1 diesel?

 

[dejongj]

Whats it's alternative......a 2.1 diesel?

Exactly

 

[developer]

What a genuinely strange thread .

If it's on here it's a Mercedes-AMG, at least that's what Mercedes-AMG think - which is good enough for me.

You pays yer money etc:

https://www.mercedes-amg.com/home.php?lang=eng

 

[renault12ts]

I'm sure some would consider the W205 C63 less of an AMG compared to the W204 simply on the basis that the W205 is turbo charged, after all AMG has always been a company that employed N/A engines only. Yeah, yeah I know times are changing and it's all about emissions nowadays and thus the turbos but according to many motoring scribes there's still a preference for non turbo 911's and for older N/A Ferrari V8's for example.

So, I'd argue the W205 is a lesser AMG (if no doubt awesome in it's own right) compared to the W204. After all a faster and lower emissions car doesn't make it a better performance car in the eyes of many including myself. Not to mention that there's possibly far more cost savings to be had sharing a similar basic V8 in non AMG versions thus the AMG uniqueness of the C63 is lost even further to an extent.

Don't get wrong I'm not knocking the new C63 just saddened at the loss of large displacement and the introduction of forced induction.

Have you seen how much turbo 911s command compared to non turbo?

 

[renault12ts]

I'm sure some would consider the W205 C63 less of an AMG compared to the W204 simply on the basis that the W205 is turbo charged, after all AMG has always been a company that employed N/A engines only. Yeah, yeah I know times are changing and it's all about emissions nowadays and thus the turbos but according to many motoring scribes there's still a preference for non turbo 911's and for older N/A Ferrari V8's for example.

So, I'd argue the W205 is a lesser AMG (if no doubt awesome in it's own right) compared to the W204. After all a faster and lower emissions car doesn't make it a better performance car in the eyes of many including myself. Not to mention that there's possibly far more cost savings to be had sharing a similar basic V8 in non AMG versions thus the AMG uniqueness of the C63 is lost even further to an extent.

Don't get wrong I'm not knocking the new C63 just saddened at the loss of large displacement and the introduction of forced induction.

The 55k cars are awesome.

 

[HB]

Have you seen how much turbo 911s command compared to non turbo?

Don't you start about that car of yours....

 

[V8andTurbos]

Another one of these threads lol.

Mapped C43 will be a weapon but looks bland, sounds synthetic and honestly overall doesn't really compare to a C63 ESP the new W205.. This is something only a true petrol head will understand..

IMO W205 C63S coupe is a beautiful machine, only if I could afford one :-(

 

[Nitro]

Anyway AMG had better look out! There's a new kid on the block now.

KIA Stinger!

 

[renault12ts]

Don't you start about that car of yours....

I wish.

 

[bob6600]

I don't see why MB-AMG can't have two varients

Look at Audi's 'S' cars, they have for example an S4 and then an RS4. Two different cars for two different customers.

Yes the '43 is not a '63 but it is an AMG

 

[001]

Admins please open sub sections for 43s and 63 s.
63s at the top of course !

 

[AMGeed]

I don't see why MB-AMG can't have two varients

Look at Audi's 'S' cars, they have for example an S4 and then an RS4. Two different cars for two different customers.

Yes the '43 is not a '63 but it is an AMG

I wonder if RS4 owners look own their nose at S4 owners?

My take on the 43 v 63. Different cars for different owners. Neither is better than the other if one suits the needs of the owner better than the other.