Roadfly Home | Features | Car Review Videos | Car Reviews | Cars For Sale | Used Car Parts Classifieds | Forum | Car Review Archives | Forum Archives Index


05-30-2001, 01:41 PM
The C32 goes 0-60 in 5.2 and the m3 in 4.7. The C32 is also about $6000 more.(Car and Driver magazine test results)

it compares clk
05-30-2001, 01:46 PM

n demand
05-30-2001, 01:49 PM
no clk 55 was the comoparison,and it placed number 2

tually test the car as they did the M3
05-30-2001, 01:51 PM

C class and the SLK
05-30-2001, 01:52 PM

read article again
05-30-2001, 01:58 PM

05-30-2001, 01:58 PM
There was a half page thread on this topic over the weekend. The whole thing is getting tiring and going around in circles. First off no one has personally test driven a C32 yet to make any comparisons here. Secondly the majority of M enthusiasts don't want an automatic transmission so the C32 isn't a car they'd enjoy anyways. And last, a stock vette or a slightly modified Supra will smoke any M3 or C32. If anyone's top priority is fastest acceleration than neither the benz or BMW is the right car for them.

05-30-2001, 02:06 PM
Agree. However I think a closer comparison to the M3 would be the SLK32 than the C32. 2door to 2door.

05-30-2001, 02:08 PM

05-30-2001, 03:04 PM

refering to and...- TIFOSI
05-30-2001, 04:21 PM
the supercharged C32 can just as easily be modified as the slower less powerful Supra so there is no logic at all in your argument my friend. the regular vette C5 vette cannot smoke either car.
The ZO6 may be a fair comparison to the upcoming "rumored" M3 lightweight, both would be limited edition pure sport machines with no amenties to save weight and max performance...

05-30-2001, 05:09 PM
My God, are people really this dense? The C32 AMG and M3 are both rated 0-100 KPH (62 MPH) in 5.2 seconds by the manufacturers. The American car magazines haven't officially tested the C32 yet so who knows how much faster than the manufacture's claim it is going to be. A European test had the M3 and the C32 clocked even from 0 to 60 but the C32 was ahead handily by the 120 MPH mark. My guess is that the M3 will have the edge if driven by an expert under ideal circumstances. In real-world driving, give the C32 the edge. Both very fast cars, I don't think anyone is going to be betting pink slips on the outcome. As for price, they should be about the same when you add the equipment to the M3's base price to equal all the stuff the C32 has as standard. The C32 seems to be a better value (feature for feature) on paper, but I'll defer judgment until M-B makes the pricing official.

05-30-2001, 06:00 PM
Damn, you have a funny definition of what is "stock" and what is not. In that case your limited edition M3 is also not stock. Get real!

05-30-2001, 06:01 PM
The official manufacturer's 0-100kph (NOT 0-60mph) figure for the C32 is 5.2s, which is the same as the official manufacturer's 0-100kph time for the M3. The preliminary 0-60mph time, according to the MBUSA press release, is 5.0s.

To my knowledge, no US magazines have tested the C32. All articles so far have been "first drives" that quote manufacturer's data.

05-31-2001, 11:36 AM
Tifosisan... thought you'd like this new M3 website. Best part... this guy owns an 850 too.

Love you,


are 2 vettes. if one is not specific
05-31-2001, 04:27 PM
these arguments make no sense. the Z06 is a specialty car since it is not an everyday driver that was the point.
btw, my definition of everyday driver is a car that has the usual basic creature comforts of an expensive sports car...

05-31-2001, 05:06 PM
Thats the Euro M3(5.2) the US(4.7) is much faster. Look at page 75 in the new Car and Driver magazine(June). The first drives have almost or exactly the same results.

Roadfly Home | Car Reviews | Forum Archives Index