BMW M4 Competition v Mercedes-AMG C 63 S Coupe 2016 Comparison

BMW M4 Competition v Mercedes-AMG C 63 S Coupe
Comparison Test

Otherwise motoring.com.au’s resident expert tester (read hoon-in-chief) Luke Youlden would be here all night burning long, smokey, oh-so-luxurious oversteer drifts in the BMW M4 Competition and the Mercedes-AMG C 63 S Coupe.

And I’d be out there too, performing pale imitations but enjoying myself just as much, headlights swinging and cutting through the dark, engines bahp-bahp-bahping, rubber squealing.

Ah, pure joy is made of such things.

So what are we doing here, apart from having a whole heap of fun? It’s the latest battle in the never-ending war between BMW’s M performance division and its Mercedes-Benz equivalent, AMG.

In the Bavarian corner we’ve got the latest evolution of the current BMW M4, the Competition. Coming off the long run from Affalterbach is the all-new Mercedes-AMG C 63 S Coupe.

To extract maximum performance in the appropriate environment, we’ve taken the fight to the track and enlisted Luke’s talents to gain the best braking, acceleration and lap times these cars are capable of. We’ve also hit the road to find out whether these bahn-stormers are livable day-to-day on our crook roads.

If this all sounds vaguely familiar, then you’re right. motoring.com.au pitched the C 63 S sedan up against the ‘standard’ M4 back in February. The BMW won that time. Before that back in late 2014 it was the M4 versus the previous-generation C 63 Edition 507 Coupe and its jolting 6.2-litre naturally-aspirated V8 engine. The Bimmer won that time too.

But with both these cars upgraded from what has come before, it’s time to go again. What a chore #motojournowanker ?

These two share some fundamentals that prompt this comparison. Both are tuned up versions of more mainstream mid-size two-door, four-seat coupes fitted with powerful turbocharged engines driving the rear wheels via a seven-speed dual-clutch gearbox and a tricky electronically-controlled limited-slip diff.

They both have adaptive driving modes that can change the performance parameters of the engine, gearbox, steering, dampers and electronic stability control from mild to wild. Importantly, in the case of both of our test cars, the final connection to the road is by excellent Michelin Pilot Super Sport tyres.

And they both cost a Scheisse-load; The M4 Competition retails for $154,615 and the C 63 S for $162,115 … before on-road costs are added.

Now to pick out a few key differences. The most obvious is under the bonnet, where the BMW moved from its M3 predecessor’s nat-atmo 4.0-litre V8 to a 3.0-litre twin-turbocharged inline six-cylinder. You’ll also find a super-sexy boomerang-shaped carbon-fibre strut tower brace under there. Yum. When first launched back in 2013 the M4 offered a meaty 317kW, but the Competition bumps that to 331kW at 6000rpm. Torque stays the same at 550Nm, delivered all the way from 1850 to 5500rpm.

The C 63 S is a monster and that’s saying something considering its much-loved predecessor. The M177 4.0-litre V8, with its two turbochargers mounted within the 90-degree vee, pumps out an incredible 375kW at 5500-6250rpm and 700Nm between 1750-4500rpm.

Those are the same numbers as the S sedan of course, but where the coupe takes a step forward is from the rear, where the five-link independent suspension has been redesigned and widened 25mm either side, AMG even going as far as replacing rubber bushings with metal uniball joints. The extra width allows bigger 20-inch, 285mm rear tyres to be fitted (it sticks with 19s up-front), boosting traction. Benz has also fitted the shorter final drive ratio to the coupe, helping drop the claimed 0-100km/h acceleration time by 0.1 seconds to 3.9 sec.

Suspension upgrades are also a cornerstone of the M4 Competition, which has a new combination of springs, dampers and anti-roll bars, 20-inch rubber front and rear -- up from 19s (including the same 285/30ZR20s as the Benz at the rear). There is also retuning of the steering, adaptive suspension, stability control and mode system (dubbed Drive Experience Control by BMW) and a revised sports exhaust.

All this supposedly results in an improved driving experience compared to the standard M4, which has been criticised for being a little digital in its responses through the steering wheel and the exhaust.

Oh yeah, M also claims these changes result in a 0.1-sec 0-100km/h improvement to 4.0 sec.

How can these two be so close on claims when there is a such a disparity in outputs? It’s all about the kerb weight. The AMG weighs in at 1725kg DIN (that’s 90 per cent fuel load but no passenger or luggage), whereas the M4 Competition is a feather weight by comparison at 1540kg. Do the sums and you’ll see that evens them right up on a power-to-weight basis.

First up it’s 60-0km/h braking followed by 0-100km/h sprints. Then we’ll let Luke do his thing on Broadford’s straights, curves and crests.

Braking first and with the aid of its $9900 optional 402mm front ceramic discs and six-piston callipers (resplendent in gold) it’s not surprising the AMG had the edge in this test, pulling up 300mm shorter at 13.4m, compared to 13.7m for the M4 fitted with its standard composite braking system and four-piston callipers. Both are really outstanding results – anything under 14m is impressive.

Now on to the 0-100km/h dash. Both cars offer launch control systems and we tried using those as well as just whanging the throttle and blasting off the line. Again, it was the C 63 S to the fore, setting a best time of 4.5 sec while the M4 Competition ran it close at 4.7 sec. There is no doubt you can get closer to the published claims but we tend to try and simulate a quick road start … these times certainly qualify for that description!

At this point it’s already clear the AMG wins the battle of the sound-tracks. It picks up from a gravelly bellow to high-pitched metallic shriek via a mid-range growl, belching, splatting and banging on the over-run and generally exuding the persona of a barely controllable beast emerging pissed off from its dungeon after a few years of solitary confinement. Inside or outside the car, it’s epic.

The M4 makes a reedier, hollower sound. In isolation it’s great, more high pitched and maybe purer. But comparing it with the C 63 S is like choosing between Taylor Swift and Dame Kiri. One’s professional and proficient and even enjoyable, the other shakes you to the core…

Now to the laps. Broadford is a better test for these cars than its short 2.16km length might suggest. There are two reasonable straights, a variety of corners including a blind third-gear bend that drops into an off-camber exit, two looping big bowls and enough variation in gradient to really get – and keep – your attention.

For this test both cars are set in their most aggressive driving modes with ESC completely off. Tyers are set to standard placard tyre pressures, which are orthodox for the BMW at 32psi front and 33 rear but a much higher 44/39psi for the Benz. Incidentally, when we checked, the C 63’s tyres were set at 35/34. Hmmmm.

Last time out the C 63 S sedan set a best time of 65.8 sec. Surely the coupe, with all its extra traction will be faster? It is. Youlden wheels around in a best time of 65.029 sec.

It’s an impressive achievement because it’s a wrestling match every time he tries to put the power down, the rear-end sliding and grabbing and sliding and grabbing. Even so he’s still pulling more than 180km/h at the end of the main straight before hammering the brakes.

In the esses he can be heard working the throttle hard, on and off and then working it back on only for the rear to forego grip again. The body is also clearly tipping from side to side as it is driven to its limit. Luke has to square the car up and drive it off the corner progressively.

On the 'warm-down' lap he simply lets rip, smoke pouring off the tyres as he arcs sideways from one corner to the next.

“It’s all oversteer -- you are just managing oversteer the whole lap,” he exclaims. “It turns in like a jet but even if it doesn’t turn in you just get on the gas and make it oversteer.

“You can really drive it on the throttle. You steer this car with the pedals not the wheel.

“Last time (in the C 63 S sedan) I was managing understeer, but not this time. It handles like it is a heavy car, the tyres are really protesting.”

Last time here the M4 ran a 65.5 sec, but that clearly isn’t going to be good enough to roll the C 63 S Coupe. Now’s the time to find out if the hard-nuts at M have improved the car, or it’s all press kit performance…

It looks real from the sidelines. The M4 Competition hunts more purposefully than the AMG everywhere, like a lean, mean shark. Youlden’s seeing 190-plus on the speedo on the longer back straight and he’s not having the same issues getting the power down either. Well not as severely anyway.

“The M4 gets its speed from being lighter and turning better. I think it’s just doing everything at a slightly elevated grip level compared to the Benz,” Luke says.

“Gee it’s fun.”

The best time is a 63.915 sec and all three flying laps are around the 64-sec flat. And just to show that the BMW plays hard as well as fast, Luke drifts in third gear right through the final complex of turns, engine howling, tyres shrieking, plumes of blue smoke billowing from under the body.

“The funny thing is the actual balance of the two cars feels really similar,” he muses. “You’d swear when you're driving them that you are almost in the same car. And that both cars just have way too much power.”

Now it’s my turn. Gawd these things are fast! Impressions are multiple: the M DCT box scythes through gears, scalpel-sharp yet rock-solid; the Benz shimmies over the back straight hump flat out in fourth gear, the rear-end retaining only the barest contact with the ground as you fight constantly to keep its rear-end under control; the eagerness and directness of the BMW’s front-end; the M4’s free-spinning engine feels like its internals are lighter but the V8 is thermonuclear.

In the end it's obvious the M4 can carry more mid-corner speed than the AMG and harness it more efficiently before driving on to the next straight. But both are incredible to drive, fast as hell and utterly, utterly engrossing.

And that’s the point of driving these things on the track. Extracting anything like their performance potential on the road is sheer lunacy. Not to mention severely damaging to your licence.

So what are they like driven more sedately in the real world? Well, both have suspensions set-up that are firm even in their most comfortable modes. But the BMW copes better with bumps, holes and crags than the AMG, which starts hard and moves on to lockjaw.

And that compliance gives the BMW a slight on-road advantage -- that and the fact it has the same slightly cleaner driving feel here as it does on the racetrack. It’s neater than the Benz at seven-tenths, just like it is at 10-10ths.

But in any mode other than ‘comfort', the BMW’s electro-mechanical steering becomes too heavy, too remote and just too artificial. It’s the same problem we’ve noted previously with the M4, now just a little diluted. The Benz’s system is better, offering a lighter and more natural set of choices.

In both cars the engine response and lickety-split gearboxes are terrific to drive on the road, just as they are on the track. When cruising as autos they are both good at their job, although occasionally they will clunk into gear or thunk on take-off. In more aggressive modes they will hold gears longer and shift with a harsh urgency.

We should mention fuel consumption at this point, which is officially claimed at 8.8L/100km for the BMW and 8.7L/100km for the Benz. With all that track work thrown in we were never going to get close to those figures, but the Benz ended up showing slightly better results. Slightly better somewhere above 20L/100km…

Both cars generate awful amounts of road noise and both are woeful for back-seat passengers in terms of both access and space. But we don’t really care about them do we? Heh heh.

Up-front in either car, you fold deep into superb single-piece powered sports seats and the driver grabs hold of a chubby sports steering wheel. The M4’s flappy paddles are longer, chunkier and feel more decisive to operate. The BMW also has the option of changing manually by the gearshifter, something the Benz can’t do because it has a column shifter.

So every now and then you get to pop the engine into neutral when you are turning left…

The Benz has a more dramatic interior presentation across the instrument panel and dashboard. It also edges the BMW on equipment with such items as a panoramic sunroof (you can have one in the M4 but that means deleting the standard carbon-fibre roof), plus a powered bootlid, a TV and even a powered steering column. Of course, neither has a spare tyre.

Safety equipment levels are high; the Benz comes with nine airbags including a driver’s knee airbag and a suite of digital driver aids including various semi-autonomous features like radar cruise control, steering assist, autonomous emergency braking with pedestrian recognition and lane-keeping and blind spot assist. The BMW misses out in the knee and rear side ’bags and doesn’t have quite as many sophisticated driver assist systems as the Benz.

Both have non-touch media screens and working your way around the controls can be somewhat laborious. The multiple-choice driving modes are aided by the ability to store our favourite settings; one in the Benz and two in the BMW. You can also adjust components such as drivetrain, dampers and the exhaust individually.

What great cars. Amazing cars, actually. The level of technology and performance even for pricing this high is utterly impressive.

And it takes a place like the Broadford racetrack to really appreciate what awesomely capable and fun things they are to drive unfettered.

The C 63 S is an animal that is only partly tamed and that makes it huge on character but just that tad harder to drive. So much of its character is emasculated when the traction and stability controls are engaged. When they are switched off the rear tyres just want to light up with only mild provocation of the throttle.

The M4 is more both civilised and more accessible, and at the same time faster on the road or on the racetrack. That makes it a tough combination to beat. Which is why it wins this comparison test.

But buy either of these cars and you are the winner every time you get in the drivers’ seat.

With that in mind, we’re already revving up for the next sideways go-round between AMG and M. I can’t wait.

Price: $154,615 (plus ORCs)
Engine: 3.0-inline six-cylinder turbo-petrol
Outputs: 331kW/550Nm
Transmission: Seven-speed dual-clutch
Fuel: 8.3L/100km (ADR combined)
CO2: 194g/km (ADR combined)
Safety rating: N/A

What we liked:
>> Pinpoint handling
>> Huge engine
>> Looks awesome

Not so much:
>> Noisy
>> Expensive
>> Steering still not quite right

Performance:
60km/h: 13.7m
0-60km/h: 2.9 sec
0-100km/h: 4.8 sec
50-70km/h: 0.8 sec
80-100km/h: 1.0 sec
Lap time: 63.915 sec

Mercedes-AMG C 63 S Coupe price and specs:
Price: $162,115 (plus ORCs)
Engine: 4.0-litre V8 turbo-petrol
Outputs: 375kW/700Nm
Transmission: Seven-speed dual-clutch
Fuel: 8.7L/100km (ADR combined)
CO2: 202g/km (ADR combined)
Safety rating: N/A

What we liked:
>> Beastly engine
>> Sounds brilliant
>> Dial-an-angle steering

Not so much:
>> Noisy
>> Harsh ride in any mode
>> Expensive

Performance:
60km/h-0: 13.4m
0-60km/h: 2.8 sec
0-100km/h: 4.7 sec
50-70km/h: 1.0 sec
80-100km/h: 1.0 sec
Lap time: 65.029 sec