TriShield

IL Track Tested: 2012 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe vs. 2011 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe



By Mike Magrath | November 9, 2011

During our first drive of the 2012 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe we said, "Blindingly fast in a straight line, the C63 AMG Coupe is even more impressive when the road truns twisty. A legitimate M3 competitor if there ever was one."

But what fun is that? The M3 is on its way out and its 414 horsepower V8 is nearly outgunned by a stock Ford Mustang GT. The Merc's big 6.2-liter V8 cranks out nearly 70 hp more with its $6,050 AMG Development package. Even with "only" the stock 451 hp, it would be a bloodbath.

Thankfully, Cadillac offers a coupe much more in line with the spirit of "more is better" embodied by the C63 AMG Coupe. The CTS-V Coupe also uses a 6.2-liter V8, but ups the ante with a supercharger that blows horsepower to 556 and torque to 551. It's a monster.

556 vs 481. Six-speed manual vs. seven-speed automated manual. 4,200 pounds vs 3,990. CTS-V Coupe vs Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe: Who takes it?

Mercedes C63 AMG Coupe - Cadillac CTS-V

0-30 (sec.): 1.9 - 1.9
0-45 (sec.): 3.0 - 2.9
0-60 (sec.): 4.2 - 4.2
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec.): 3.9 - 3.9
0-75 (sec.): 6.0 - 5.8
1/4-mile (sec @ mph): 12.3 @ 116.3 - 12.2 @ 117.5

30-0 (ft): 29 - 27
60-0 (ft): 112 - 107
Skid pad lateral accel (g): 0.89 - 0.90
Slalom 68.5 - 69.3

Vehicle: 2012 Mercedes-Benz C63 AMG Coupe (with AMG Development package)

Odometer: 3,798
Date: 11-01-2011
Driver: Chris Walton
Price: $81,715

Specifications:
Drive Type: Rear-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Seven-speed auto clutch manual
Engine Type: Longitudinal, Naturally aspirated V8
Displacement (cc/cu-in): 6,208/379
Redline (rpm): 7,200
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 481 @ 6,500
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 443
Brake Type (front):14.2-inch ventilated discs with six-piston fixed Brembo calipers
Brake Type (rear): 13-inch ventilated discs with four-piston fixed calipers
Suspension Type(front): Independent MacPherson struts, stabilizer bar
Suspension Type (rear): Independent multilink, stabilizer bar
Tire Size (front): 235/40ZR18 (95Y)
Tire Size (rear): 255/35ZR18 (94Y)
Tire Brand: Continental
Tire Model: ContiSportContact SP
Tire Type: Summer performance
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 3,990

Test Results:

Acceleration
0-30 (sec): 1.9 (2.2 w/TC on)
0-45 (sec): 3.0 (3.3 w/TC on)
0-60 (sec): 4.2 (4.5 w/TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 3.9 (4.1 w/TC on)
0-75 (sec): 6.0 (6.2 w/TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 12.3 @ 116.3 (12.5 @ 115.9 w/TC on)

Braking:
30-0 (ft): 29
60-0 (ft): 112

Handling
Slalom (mph): 68.5 ( 64.8 w/TC on, 67.2 w/TC in dynamic)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.89 ( 0.88 w/TC in dynamic )

Db @ Idle: 48.1
Db @ Full Throttle: 80.5
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 67

Acceleration: "Race start" requires some wheelspin to determine appropriate traction control / throttle application, and so while it is consistent, a Trac off, no-wheelspin, progressive throttle launch was quicker (in "sport+ and "drive"). Shockingly smooth and rapid upshifts and still pulling HARD across 1/4-mile mark. And what a noise this 6.2 makes!

Braking: I get the distinct feeling the brake hardware is more capable/robust than the tires because it sort of skipped/lurched with each ABS cycle -- not what I'd call a smooth, seamless stop. Otherwise, excellent brake feel and modulation, zero fade and straight.

Handling:

Skid pad: "Dyn" is a wider envelope (ESC Sport Handling) than default "On," and it is very lenient with understeer, hence nearly identical off/dyn numbers. Excellent steering feel/weight but expected more grip than this -- could use better/wider tires. Understeer at the limit.

Slalom: Supremely neutral (almost to a fault) that causes oversteer when I entered fast and bled throttle, and understeer entering slowly and adding throttle. Maintenance throttle had to be "just right" to balance between understeer and oversteer. Felt under-tired and far more capable than the numbers suggest. Probably a freaking blast on a racetrack. Hard to determine if this has a true LSD or a brake diff, but it worked very well on slalom exit.

Vehicle: 2011 Cadillac CTS-V Coupe

Odometer: 855
Date: 7/6/2010
Driver: Josh Jacquot
Price: $69,285

Specifications:
Drive Type: Rear-wheel drive
Transmission Type: Six-speed manual
Engine Type: Longitudinal, Supercharged, port-injected V8
Displacement (cc/cu-in): 6,162/376
Redline (rpm): 6,200
Horsepower (hp @ rpm): 556 hp @ 6,100 rpm
Torque (lb-ft @ rpm): 551 @ 3,800 rpm
Brake Type (front): 15.0-inch ventilated discs with six-piston fixed calipers
Brake Type (rear): 14.7-inch ventilated rotors with four-piston fixed calipers
Suspension Type (front): Independent double wishbones, coil springs, driver-adjustable two-mode magnetorheological dampers, stabilizer bar
Suspension Type (rear): Independent double-wishbone, coil springs, driver-adjustable two-mode magnetorheological dampers, stabilizer bar
Tire Size (front): 255/40ZR19 (96Y)
Tire Size (rear): 285/35ZR19 (99Y)
Tire Brand: Michelin
Tire Model: Pilot Sport PS2
Tire Type: Summer Performance
As tested Curb Weight (lb): 4,200

Test Results:
0-30 (sec): 1.9 (2.0 with TC on)
0-45 (sec): 2.9 (3.0 with TC on)
0-60 (sec): 4.2 (4.4 with TC on)
0-60 with 1-ft Rollout (sec): 3.9 (4.1 with TC on)
0-75 (sec): 5.8 (6.0 with TC on)
1/4-Mile (sec @ mph): 12.2 @ 117.5

30-0 (ft): 27
60-0 (ft): 107

Slalom (mph): 69.3 (67.9 with TC in competition mode)
Skid Pad Lateral acceleration (g): 0.90g

Db @ Idle: 58.1
Db @ Full Throttle: 80.9
Db @ 70 mph Cruise: 72.1

Acceleration: Wow! As usual, GM's supercharged 6.2-liter V8 amazes: No whine, no surge, no drama, just propulsion. Difficult to launch well, but still quite consistent with no apparent heat-soak. The Coupe scratches rubber on both the 1-2 and 2-3 shifts. No programmed launch control available -- seems an odd choice.

Braking: Amazing power and fade resistance from firm pedal with shallow jump-in. No dive, no wander, just dead consistent.

Handling:

Skid pad: Competitive driving mode works quite well in managing slip angles during rapid transitions. Still, CTS-V is easy to control and communicates well with all aids off. Best run using "sport" suspension setting.

Slalom: Competitive mode helps the big coupe rotate off throttle more effectively than with everything off. Moderate understeer is easily balanced away with throttle. Fun and remarkably nimble for a 4,200-pound car.

2002_Z28_Six_Speed

iTrader: (19)

Pathetic that the Caddy has so much more HP and the numbers don't show it at all. All that damn weight.

Buckwheat

iTrader: (13)

I wouldn't call a low 12 second stock caddie pathetic but yeah, she is a porker. The test states that you can't hear the blower. That is untrue. I drove one and while muted a lot, it was clearly audible to me...and I'm half deaf.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

You could be doing a lot worse in life if your current dilemma is which of these two cars to buy.

ls1ya

iTrader: (2)

I would never buy a C class for 81k.
Unless its was done by CEC and was a Dtm. Caddy on the other hand is a no brainer

2002_Z28_Six_Speed

iTrader: (19)

My blower is inaudible and I am missing half my hood liner + no baffles. Interesting they couldn't keep it quiet in a OEM application with baffles in the intake.

Z Fury

iTrader: (1)

CTS-V blower was very quiet in the one I drove. The sound deadening inside of a Cadillac is amazing. I could hear it with the windows down though.

deft

iTrader: (7)

One request......When they (journalists) do their comparisons, why dont they take the time to strap the cars to the dyno and get some WHP numbers. Would it be that bad for advertising?

SSCamaro99_3

iTrader: (1)

99% of the buying public wouldn't be able to conceptualise the idea of parasitic loss, or care.

justin455

More power is always good, but I'm sorry, one of the best things about driving a PD supercharged car is the sound. If I can't hear it that's one of the first things I'm fixing.

01ssreda4

iTrader: (96)

That's extremely flawed logic. It's a better performer in every way including braking (which has nothing to do with hp) and price. What is there to complain about here. I say Cadillac is kicking some major tail. And shame on that writer for calling it a Merc

GTOSE

iTrader: (1)

This. Definitely one of the reasons I'd buy a V.

Even though it is a pretty dumb reason, I'm still for it.

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

Nine Ball

iTrader: (38)

With a larger crank pulley on my CTS-V, you can definitely hear the blower. You can also hear it when stock, it isn't silent by any means.

Here is a vid of mine, doing a 167 mph pass in the standing mile.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iykopvjtiOk

LS1LT1

iTrader: (16)

itsslow98

iTrader: (18)

God forbid a LUXURY performance car not weigh 3100lbs. I cant stand seeing people complain about things like this when they think the ctsv was built just to be fast. The whole concept of the car is the best of both worlds, speed and LUXURY. Please remember it weighs about the same as a 5th gen SS which has half the interior a ctsv does.

Cole Train

iTrader: (30)

V's

The Alchemist

iTrader: (19)

People do understand that these are 'luxury' cars first and foremost, and oh, by the way, they happen to be damn fast as well. There's a reason the caddy weighs as much as it does, and that's because it is well equiped with nice amenities that people want in a caddy.

If you want a 3200-3300 lb car, buy a corvette.

Gaunt

iTrader: (11)

C63 > V car

The Merc is just classier, and if you want real speed, you wouldn't be in a 4000+ lb car anyway.

ThisBlood147

Great performance in a great lux package. Too bad the V is uglier than sin. Don't get me wrong, I'm no fan of the Merc's styling either...but both Audi and BMW are doing much better in the aesthetics department IMO. I wouldn't buy a lux saloon for performance anyways...that's what sport coupes are for.