is a mercedes c63 amg 2.5 times the car of a fpv 335 GT?

[F6E]

Originally Posted by data_mine

FPV and HSV make plenty of changes to the taxi spec too.

Badges and spoilers, everything else is a half arsed effort, which is why we all pour mega $'s , aftermarket, into these cars to make them go, stop, handle and look like they should have from the factory in the first place.

Pretty hard (nigh impossible and mega expensive) to improve on the offerings from AMG, ///M, RS, etc. Believe me, I have tried....

[loxxr6]

Not that I own one, but there are a few go fast shops for these high end cars. Brabus, Renntech etc.

These guys don't look like they sell anything much different to what we buy for our "taxi's".

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by data_mine

What more would you add to a XT? They're already pretty well equipped for a fleet/taxi model. Ford wants private buyers getting into a XR6 or G6.

By...cutting the RRP by $10,000 and packing them with even more extras....

IMO, apart from adding production volume, that strategy adds nothing to Ford's bottom line.
It was an evolution from offering Falcon SR and ES Packs, something that was quite successful.

What Ford need to be doing is using XT, a good looking one in the above role and start
charging more for XT and G6, maybe not $47K drive away but certainly above $40K....

I'll admit it's hard to change anything when Holden is doing exactly the same thing with SV6.


Anyone who can afford a 170,000 MB but then pi$$es and moans about $5K for
brake brake pads and discs must be living beyond their means...

[bouka]

GT 335 is faster in a straight line! Fact!

Build quality and materials used etc in C63 is NOT great.

New one just released addresses this issue.

As mentioned, it is a 6.2 litre. 63 badge used because of historic links.

Investigated both very closely, C63 lost.

Has spent a fair amount of time in, around, next to, side by side etc one.

To compare the two is unfair to the GT.

I do LOVE them and at 110k it would be a no brainer, but at 160k it is too much for what you get (IMHO).

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by bouka

GT 335 is faster in a straight line! Fact!

Build quality and materials used etc in C63 is NOT great.

New one just released addresses this issue.

As mentioned, it is a 6.2 litre. 63 badge used because of historic links.

Investigated both very closely, C63 lost.

Has spent a fair amount of time in, around, next to, side by side etc one.

To compare the two is unfair to the GT.

I do LOVE them and at 110k it would be a no brainer, but at 160k it is too much for what you get (IMHO).

Got a documented source for your claims?

[Rodge]

Good mate had an E63 AMG which as we know has the 386KW motor, (subsequently traded on a Nissan GT-R) and at the time I had my F6 310 stock and they were far closer than the difference in KW count would suggest. The other thing that really surprised me was how much smaller his E Class was than my F6.

My money would be on the SC to see away a C63.

He frequently comments that despite the lower KW count of his GT-R, its performance makes the his former E63 look silly.

For some strange reason I havn't seen fit to line up my SC GT-P against his GT-R

[SLO AU XR8]

Originally Posted by data_mine

Harun made the trek down to Temora for the 1000m sprint on the runway yesterday.

IIRC he was doing 23s passes, I did high 24, and some low 25's

The car went down last week for that, how nuts does it sound though!

[XR6T0Y]

GT is betterer !! My 2 cents

[bouka]

Originally Posted by Wretched

Got a documented source for your claims?

All anecdotal I'm afraid.

The C63 is as close as you will get to a German Hot Rod.

Truly a great piece of automotive machinery.

The fact that the GT is even being compared is a tribute to the motor/gearbox and FPV's efforts.

Remember though, it based on a small (by comparison) C Class with an engineering budget that would rival Ford Australia, let alone FPV.

I am a fan but it's price point in Australia is not insignificant.

Is it 2.5 (or 2.78) times better than a GT? We all know the answer to that question. Let's not kid ourselves.

But in a straight line or rolling start will sucumbe to the Broady Beast.

[FPT]

edit: bouka, you're spot on!

Originally Posted by XR6TOY

GT is betterer !! My 2 cents

It's bestest, not betterer.

Speed is about the same although I'd think the 335 would have the wood over it in all rolling acceleration tests.
The day to day handling of the FPV is good enough for most occasions except for ten tenths around a tight circuit.
The fit and finish, quality, prestige, w factor, etc, you need to pay 2.5 times the price.
My conclusion is it comes down to what the buyer wants. For me, I'd need to be a real badge snob to get the amg over the GT.

[XR6T0Y]

[quote=FPT]edit: bouka, you're spot on!


It's bestest, not betterer.

Haha, yes I know it is, just thought i'd say that instead (more childish 'cause FPV makes me melt) haha. To be honest, I would still rather FPV

Cheers

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by bouka

All anecdotal I'm afraid.

The C63 is as close as you will get to a German Hot Rod.

Truly a great piece of automotive machinery.

The fact that the GT is even being compared is a tribute to the motor/gearbox and FPV's efforts.

Remember though, it based on a small (by comparison) C Class with an engineering budget that would rival Ford Australia, let alone FPV.

I am a fan but it's price point in Australia is not insignificant.

Is it 2.5 (or 2.78) times better than a GT? We all know the answer to that question. Let's not kid ourselves.

But in a straight line or rolling start will sucumbe to the Broady Beast.

So just another person on the internet with a hunch.
All publications I have read don't seem to agree with you, these range from EVO, Motortrend, Wheels and Motor.

This is not to say the GT isn't any decent, a few chassis tweaks and it would be a good car, for now it appears to have too much engine.

Yes the AMG has a bigger budget, it also has a bigger price, bigger expectations and bigger rivals than the GT. They are chalk and cheese in just about every aspect.

[FPT]

Originally Posted by XR6T0Y

Haha, yes I know it is, just thought i'd say that instead (more childish 'cause FPV makes me melt) haha. To be honest, I would still rather FPV

Cheers

With you 100%. When you start measuring things with dollars and cents as opposed to what's in the heart everything is turned on it's head. If I was a rich elitist snob there's no way I'd even entertain the idea of comparing the two.

The AMG, to some here, is worth 2.5 times more than the GT and they go on and mention the prestige and the presence, but then, there are people like you and me (true Ford faithful) that respect and love the GT badge as well as the FPV range, will always have something to say about it.

As I said earlier though, in isolation and without prejudice it comes down to what the individual buyer wants from his hard earned.

[FPT]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So just another person on the internet with a hunch.

Actually, he's another person on the internet that owns one and knows what it's like flogging his mate's C63.

[kinksta]

I don't think the C63 is 2.5 times the car than the 335GT, but the AMG in my opinion is the superior car of the pair. I would even take a second hand C63 or E63 over the 335GT, but I am not saying I wouldn't have a GT.

I chose the G6ET over a C32 because of the money/warranty/age etc. It always comes down to your situation..

[flappist]

It is somewhat ironic that threads which rely so heavily on perceived straight line acceleration capability always tend to go around and around and around.....

There is nothing new here.

Game over.

[Wretched]

Originally Posted by FPT

Actually, he's another person on the internet that owns one and knows what it's like flogging his mate's C63.

that's fine but again like I said just someone on the internet with no tangible evidence to prove his claim the C63 "will sucumbe to the Broady Beast."
He even said it himself with "All anecdotal I'm afraid."

[bouka]

Originally Posted by Wretched

So just another person on the internet with a hunch.
All publications I have read don't seem to agree with you, these range from EVO, Motortrend, Wheels and Motor.

This is not to say the GT isn't any decent, a few chassis tweaks and it would be a good car, for now it appears to have too much engine.

Yes the AMG has a bigger budget, it also has a bigger price, bigger expectations and bigger rivals than the GT. They are chalk and cheese in just about every aspect.

So just another person on the net that gets all their info from car magazines.

Any of the mags you mention conducted a head to head between the two?

I actually agree with your last paragraph! As I wrote in my last post!

I have had enough experience with both, side by side, to know the answer.