Which Mercedes would you buy?

[gwoods]

2006 S65's are in the 40-50k Range
2007/8 E63's are in the 40-50k range
2009 C63's are in the 50k range

Which would you buy and why? And these are the only choices

[MinisterofDOOM]

I wouldn't go near a C-class with a 40 foot pole. I don't care how much power it's making.

[Kompresshun]

C63 AMG, the exhaust note is just wicked and it's a dead sexy car in black

Seriously, if I had 50k to blow on a car, this one would be in the top 5. I love the amount of power it offers but yet is still a 4 door sedan with comfort in mind as well.

[krash]

I wouldn't go near a C-class with a 40 foot pole. I don't care how much power it's making.

That is one hell of a car. I actually like it better than the 5-series BMW.

[frapjap]

E63 wagon (HA! You didn't specify sedan or wagon!)

[AZ89two4Tsx]

Big family - S Class
Not a big family - C Class

Both are great looking cars. I'd take ANY newer Mercedes, except an R-Class....yuck.

[Jesda]

The new C-class has a trashy interior (the Sebring of luxury brands in that regard), but very recent MB's are much more dependable than those from 1998-2007.

I guess the power in the C63 and its newness make up for its other shortcomings.


This is like being forced to pick a fat girl.

[Bubba1]

The E has a better reliability record, making it a better long term DD. The C63's power makes it a more fun car to take to a track day. The S is the best for a long road trip, but to me it's bit too big.

The bigger question is why only these three?

[Jesda]

W211 is a potential nightmare. Better than W210, but still a royal pain to keep on the road, even if you have CPO coverage. W204 incorporates more "post-malaise" engineering improvements but makes up for it with cheaper materials inside and out.

[LEMHEAD16]

My dad has a CLS55 AMG. The only reason he bought it was because the Nissan dealer laughed at him when he wanted to test drive the GTR he previously had his mind made up on. MoD you might see it cruising around Layton

Looks I give it a 7.63 it really grows on you

Interior I give a 4. The bolsters inflate to support you in whatever direction you are turning, neat idea. He drives like a grandpa so it is pretty useless. The leather seems cheap and the "Chrome" is peeling on the cup holder and shift knob.

Ride I give a 7. It's firm but set to the softest setting it is comfortable on the highway. I've yet to have a chance to test the sport settings on the suspension and trans.

Engine I give a 9.3. This thing MOVES for a pretty heavy car. I don't know the curb weight but it can't be light. It is for sure the fastest factory car that I have ever driven.

I'd pass on any MB at this point though. For 80K I wish he would have waited for a Nissan dealer that had a GTR in stock and actually wanted to sell it. He is eyeing an Audi R8 for his next car. I'm keeping my fingers crossed.

[gwoods]

The bigger question is why only these three?

These are the 3 cars I'm looking at to replace my wifes daily drive 2007 Sequoia Limited. We would keep the Sequoia (own it so why not) as a 4th car.

I LOVE the S65 huge car that doesn't feel huge, Aunt and Uncle have a 2006 S430 and it feels like it is just missing about 200 hp to be fun. I am scared to death of the V12 but being an AMG makes me feel a little better. AMG engines have great reliability vs standard Mercedes. I would say S65 is the choice to be made but if I'm keeping the Sequoia do I really need a car this big? There are 5 in our family so the CLS series is out.

I think I will most likely end up with the E63. I love the power plant and the E is just slightly smaller then the S on the interior dims. The biggest loss backseat head/leg room. The E has 97 cubic feet of passenger where the S has 105 cubic feet.

I threw the C63 in there because it has the same engine (almost) as the E63 but weighs about 400lb less. It is smaller but I can get a much newer car 09/10 for the same money as 07/08. That doesn't matter much too me but it does to the wife. And again if I'm keeping the Sequoia do I need an E or will a C be big enough.

No coupes in the mix, only considering Mercedes. The 2006 M5's are a bargin but I HATE BMW's.

[gwoods]

This is like being forced to pick a fat girl.

Says the guy who owned a Chrysler Crossfire with a rainbow bumper sticker

[gwoods]

E63 wagon (HA! You didn't specify sedan or wagon!)

If it was for me, yep E63 wagon in white or black with black interior and black rims! I wish Audi sold the S6 wagon over here! Top gear tested it and I fell in love.

I will replace my G35 in about 2 years with either a Porsche or GTR, probably the GTR cause I LOVE Nissan's

[Bubba1]

The bigger question is why only these three?

These are the 3 cars I'm looking at to replace my wifes daily drive 2007 Sequoia Limited. We would keep the Sequoia (own it so why not) as a 4th car.

I LOVE the S65 huge car that doesn't feel huge, Aunt and Uncle have a 2006 S430 and it feels like it is just missing about 200 hp to be fun. I am scared to death of the V12 but being an AMG makes me feel a little better. AMG engines have great reliability vs standard Mercedes. I would say S65 is the choice to be made but if I'm keeping the Sequoia do I really need a car this big? There are 5 in our family so the CLS series is out.

I think I will most likely end up with the E63. I love the power plant and the E is just slightly smaller then the S on the interior dims. The biggest loss backseat head/leg room. The E has 97 cubic feet of passenger where the S has 105 cubic feet.

I threw the C63 in there because it has the same engine (almost) as the E63 but weighs about 400lb less. It is smaller but I can get a much newer car 09/10 for the same money as 07/08. That doesn't matter much too me but it does to the wife. And again if I'm keeping the Sequoia do I need an E or will a C be big enough.

No coupes in the mix, only considering Mercedes. The 2006 M5's are a bargin but I HATE BMW's.

If you have your mind set on a Mercedes and are comfortable with their considerably higher cost to own/repair (compared to a Sequoia), then good luck. But I think there are other choices available besides BMW and Mercedes that give you the same level of comfort and performance. I understand the problems that Mercedes upper models have been experiencing were not the engines, but electical gremlins and overall workmanship. If you intend to make the Merc a DD, I would suggest keeping that Sequoia for when the Merc is in the shop.

[MinisterofDOOM]

I wouldn't go near a C-class with a 40 foot pole. I don't care how much power it's making.

That is one hell of a car. I actually like it better than the 5-series BMW.

The C-class is miniscule, ugly, misproportioned, bland and--most importantly--distinctly cheap-feeling. Adding power just means you'll smoke your tires more. It doesn't make it a desirable car. The latest generation is a huge improvement as far as looks, but it still has the car's trademark malformed a**-end.

The C-class has long been the cheapest feeling of the entry-lux department. It really has no problem being the "poor man's luxury car." I realize $50k for an AMG version is hardly "poor" but we end up in the same place as the Evo: it's still a cheap car at heart, regardless of the power AMG is wedging into it. And when I say cheap I don't mean MSRP, I mean quality, feel, and assembly.

I prefer to start with a GOOD car I actually want to own and THEN add power. I don't at all like the philosophy of taking the bottom of the barrel and gluing lots of power inside it. Even with American muscle cars I like to stick to the cars that had their own merits before the big V8 iron was wedged inside (Chevelle, Galaxie, etc. not Mustang II). The C-class's very nature IS "bottom of the barrel." Power changes nothing.

And, sure, you'll grin a lot more in a C-class that roasts its tires on demand than a regular C-class. But wouldn't you rather get those grins in a DECENT car?

A big problem with MB and, by extension, AMG is that you can never disable the electronic nannies completely. That's bullcrap, especially from cars with the kind of sledgehammer attitudes AMG cars tend to have.

[gwoods]

If you intend to make the Merc a DD, I would suggest keeping that Sequoia for when the Merc is in the shop.

Mercedes like Infiniti gives you a car to drive for 'free' while they rape you with the repair bill. The Sequoia's 3rd row comes out and the 2nd row folds up turning it into a pickup. Mine has the tow package and seats 8. Its hard to give up the utility. And when you want to go camping, skiing, road trip with 5 plus luggage the Sequoia is nice. It gets 15mpg in town and hwy. Whats not to love, I wish I would have sprung for the 4x4 but buying a 07 in September 06 there were no Blue 4x4 Limiteds on the lot and we had to have blue and a Limited cause the SR5 doesn't have power folding mirrors and my 3 car garage has gay single car doors with Pillar between.

I am not a fan of the C series and agree with Ministerofdoom on all points... but the car is not for me. Although since I will probably drive it once in a while it needs to have the biggest motor possible and be able to get out of its own way. Nice comparison on the EVO!

*edited to add
Whatever we get will get the Renntech ECU, pretty much disables the nannies
c63 stock 451 HP @ 6800 RPM; 443 LB-FT @ 5200 RPM

Gains:
517 HP @ 6800 RPM; 485 LB-FT @ 5200 RPM

Price: $2,995

E 63 (212) Stock performance:
518 HP @ 6800 RPM; 465 LB-FT @ 5200 RPM

Modified Performance:
534 HP @ 6800 RPM; 485 LB-FT @ 5200 RPM

Price: $2,995

S 65 (W221) Stock Performance:
604 HP @ 5500 RPM; 738 LB-FT @ 2000-3000 RPM

Gains:
670 HP @ 5500 RPM; 840 LB-FT @ 3500 RPM

For Model Year 2004-2006
Price: $3,950.00

For Model Year 2007-UP
Price: $4,750.00

Price: $4,750

[Jesda]

This is like being forced to pick a fat girl.

Says the guy who owned a Chrysler Crossfire with a rainbow bumper sticker

Which means I can speak from direct and personal experience about Mercedes build quality and engineering. The only non-German part on the Crossfire was the oil I put in it. Even the stereo was a Becker! The decade of Mercedes malaise isn't that far behind us.


You've presented us with a list of three cars with major compromises and issues. The one that won't leave you on the side of the road is the newest one. Plus, that big engine shoved inside that smallish car means BIG GRINS.

[Jesda]

The C-class is miniscule, ugly, misproportioned, bland and--most importantly--distinctly cheap-feeling. Adding power just means you'll smoke your tires more. It doesn't make it a desirable car. The latest generation is a huge improvement as far as looks, but it still has the car's trademark malformed a**-end.

The C-class has long been the cheapest feeling of the entry-lux department. It really has no problem being the "poor man's luxury car." I realize $50k for an AMG version is hardly "poor" but we end up in the same place as the Evo: it's still a cheap car at heart, regardless of the power AMG is wedging into it. And when I say cheap I don't mean MSRP, I mean quality, feel, and assembly.

I agree, but the other two cars aren't exactly decent. While they're beautiful inside and out, they're headaches with big price tags. The W204 C-class has an ugly body and cheap interior, but in exchange, its unlikely to break down or explode. Plus, you'll be moving so fast that no one from outside will catch a glance of who the unfortunate owner is. Its a four-wheeled trash can that flies.

[gwoods]

If it was reliability I was after I would purchase a range rover or perhaps a older Jag lol

[Jesda]

In that case I agree with your choice. E63 is a stunner.

[driverdriver]

C63 Black

[Jesda]