raptorduck

I know we have all seen the press on the new E92 M3. Although a coupe, I hope it gets compared by the car mags against the RS4. I tend to compare cars of simlar sizes and these are all 8-cyl midsize cars.

So far specs say the E92 M3 displaces 4 liters, has 420hp, 295 lb-ft of torque, and will weigh a tick under 3500lbs. Its 0-100kph time is estimated at 4.8 sec.

That is the same 0-100kph as the RS4, which has the same hp, weighs 500lb more, has a little more torque at 317 lb-ft, and displacement at 4.2 liters.

But what about the new CLK63 Black Series Coupe? I got my eye on this one. As a former CLK55 owner, I don't underestimate what that thing can do (mine used to eat up E46 M3's).

On paper the CLK63 Black Series looks scary with 6.3 liters of displacement, 500hp (25 more than the current CLK63), 465 lb-ft of torque, and a 0-100kph time of 4.1 seconds. If they have improved handling/suspension on this car, I sure hope the car mags run these three together. What a comparison that would be!

Der Kimbo

CLK63 Black will be twice the price of the RS4

larryV

exactly. my dealer estimates $130k

raptorduck

And I did not realize it will be a two seater, although I picked the RS4 over a much more expensive E63, Porsche 997 Twin Turbo, and Bentley GT Coupe and my choice was not based on price. It was based on the entire package.

If only the CLK63 could be a 4 seater. $130k is Twin Turbo territory though. I dunno about that one.

Bob W.

it will be interesting to see if they actually put Pirelli Corsa tires on the US-spec model....that's what they put on the Euro spec RS4, but sadly we didn't get them.

kngmin

my favorite. I loved the subtle use of carbon fiber on the front, and for the rear diffuser.

Fluffhead

<img src="http://images23.fotki.com/v766/photos/2/201040/4826521/DSC09672-vi.jpg">
<img src="http://images24.fotki.com/v768/photos/2/201040/4826521/DSC09673-vi.jpg">
<img src="http://images22.fotki.com/v757/photos/2/201040/4826521/DSC09674-vi.jpg">
<img src="http://images22.fotki.com/v762/photos/2/201040/4826521/DSC09675-vi.jpg">
<img src="http://images21.fotki.com/v725/photos/2/201040/4826521/DSC09676-vi.jpg">

justhacking

reliability and the handling. Afterall, those 2 things are not exactly the strong points of the old C class platform.

bpp

That babys' been DTM'ed.

raptorduck

I owned 2 W208 CLK's and reliablity was never an issue and as good or better than any BMW I have ever had.

On handling, you have a point. The one failing of my CLK55 (and the CLK430) was handling at the limit on twisty roads. Compared to most cars the CLK55 handled great, but compared to an M3 (and certainly an RS4) it was nibergut. Easy to get the rear to slide, kind of fun, but not confidence inspiring unless you are a drifter. Suspension was stiff, but not responsive enough in agressive turning and transition turns. In the rain . . . well never mind.

So I would say reliablity is a strong point, acceleration and power delivery is a strong point, and handling not so much reletively speaking for the W208 platform (and I hear for the W209 as well). That is why I mentioned I hope the new CLK63 has fixed the handling issue. It was that issue that leaned me towards the RS4, cuz the CLK55 excelled on all other levels.