HAMMAN gives the BMW M3 Coupe E92 upto 455-hp

It sucks having to dish out more money to the aftermarket just to keep up with one of AMG's offerings.

If you're looking strictly at numbers, sure. If you look at the full package (without the tuning) then you see the reason the M3 keeps winning comparisons over AMG's offerings. This will just enhance the distance of the win.

Ironman273 = Magazine racer.

The autobahn decided who really wins and the M3 just can't keep up with the C63. Nobody in their right mind takes a 4000lb car on a race track.

njshift, if all that matters is going straight really fast, then both the C63 and the M3 "lose" to a lot of cars. You could slap a supercharger kit on a 1990 Mustang and beat either of them in a straight line. Big deal.

There's more to performance than flooring the gas and holding on.

Car enthusiasts look more at handling than straightline acceleration.

JRobUSC, the C63 is plenty fast around a race track especially for a car of its weight. I never said going fast in a straight line was all that matters. I said nobody in their right mind drives these 4000lb behemoths around a road course.

95% of M3 and C63 owners will never have their car see a race track. Some people weigh the on-track performance about all else, however, in the real world the M3 will get walked by the C63 in virtually all day to day driving conditions.

nj, most M3's and C63's might not ever see the track, but when you say "in most day to day driving situations the M3 will get walked" that's not accurate. In a drag race, sure, the M3 will lose (though every indication is that the M-DCT will make the two cars virtually dead even), but that's about it. The M3 is also a much more rewarding car to a good driver than the C63. Anyone can hop in a car and smash the gas pedal. My grandmother could drive a C63 fast. The M3 invites the driver to explore the limits, to become one with the car.

Cheesy? Maybe. But when I was 16 I had that supercharged Mustang I mentioned earlier. I did my share of donuts and fishtails and super long burnouts. I got that out of my system though. So as fun as I am sure the C63 is, now that I'm twice that age, the scalpel precision of the M3 (which having driven one already is an almost perfect harmony of engine, transmission, brakes and chassis), is more appealing to me than the "giant V8 shoehorned into a decently capable chassis" formula of the AMG. I'd take either car, but I don't need a $70k Mustang with a three point star on the grill, no matter how much nicer than the Mustang it is.

I guess I should answer you even though some time has gone by. As for being a magazine racer, I'm not sure about your background but I try to get to the track whenever I can. Granted, I don't regularly race an M3 or C63 but I over the years I've taken Miatas, a 330 Coupe, VW GTIs, and an RX-7 through track and auto-cross courses. I've also gotten to drive on a one-shot basis the new M3, the Lexus IS-F, and the Audi S5. I've been told I'm not a very comfortable person to drive with because I like treating each stoplight like a drag strip and each off ramp like a skidpad. I'm pointing out the magazine articles because they would carry much more weight than my opinion would. And even though I haven't driven a C63 I can understand what they mean because I have driven the M3 against less capable competitors that have "bigger" numbers to compare.

As for your statement that the C63 is better in everyday driving and the M3 is only good at the track, let me point out Motor Trend's recent review: "So can (the Mercedes) match the M3 on these challenging German roads? Not quite. The lighter BMW is the more responsive, the more agile, its front end gripping with greater eagerness (the C63 will be understeering wide while the M3's nose is still under control; so will the RS4 run wide while the BMW tucks in nice and tight).

The ride of the C63 also is firm, and when the road starts to deteriorate, the AMG bucks and kicks and jars. At times, it becomes downright uncomfortable." As you can imagine the finishing order was BMW, MB, Audi. The parting words are: "1st place: BMW M3
Driver's choice for fantastic agility, tenacious cornering grip, sky-splitting road thunder."

In another article by another author from Motor Trend they pit the M3, C63 and the new Lexus. Here's what they say about the M3: "BMW's magnificent M3 is the newest in a 20-plus-year line and is the best one yet. A performer by any measure, and its best-in-test times on the racetrack and through our figure-eight test demonstrate that its various aspects work together better than the others. The BMW is lithe and athletic yet never punishing, and it comes in a package you can use and enjoy every day. The fact that it's also offered in a coupe and upcoming convertible, and soon with a choice of two enthusiast-minded transmissions, means "M3" is a driving philosophy, not just a single model. Good enough to draw first blood." Again, the finishing order is BMW, MB, Lexus.

Starting to see a trend? Generally the "beast" car like the C63 is not the daily driver or better track car. It's the well rounded car like the M's have been.

Last time I checked the M3 beat the C63 in the overall comparison so this aftermarket work is not aimed at beating the AMG - BMW already accomplished that. The Hamman kit is for someone who can afford the extra $$$$ on top of the price of the M3. In return they get extra HP and aero kit that makes their M3 stand out from the rest of the M3's.

When I want a rewarding driving experience I do it on a race track in my time trial srt. I don't care for rewarding in my bloated daily driver.

wow, that looks amazing. for once hamann kept it simple and it worked. bravo...

Well said, CLK, but I'm not too fond of the rear spoiler on the trunk. From certain angles, it looks "cheap", as in boy racer or worse, GM 1990's excess. With the listed performance numbers from HAMMAN, however, I do not doubt its worth.
Now let's see what Brabus or Carlsson will have up its sleeves in response for the C63 AMG!

It,s already long accomplished and its called the Brabus Bullit, is 730hp enough for ya???

lol Yeah, the bullit slipped my mind. 730hp is just rediculous. Let's see BMW tuners match that...

That Brabus Black Arrow is a biturbo 6.3L V12. Currency Motors got 810hp out of the V10 M5 with turbos, and Dinan got 628hp with only 5.7L, 17% fewer cylinders, and 100% fewer turbos. BMW themselves is rumored to be working on a 660hp naturally aspirated 6.0L V12. So those BMW tuners (and BMW the manufacturer) are doing a pretty fine job.

Jrob... I was referring to the M3, since that's what this post is about. I am well aware of the M5 with 800+ horsepower.

Yeah BMW trys to keep up with MB but performance talks on the Nardo test track and the top speed cars are Mercedes and Porsche while BMW are lower on the time sheets or are over heated. The big boys in Europe are porsche, mercedes, ferrari and lambo...

CLK, I know this thread is about the M3, but you were talking about a C-class with a modified 6.0L twin turbo V12 from the $190k SL65 AMG shoved into it. That engine STARTED with over 600hp. So if we're going to compare the tuner capabilities of the MB twin turbo 6.0L V12 with the tuner capabilities of BMW's engines, I don't think it's fair to limit them to the 4.0L V8 out of the M3 when the MB side gets to use their most powerful engine as a building block, do you? Of course not, that would be stupid, and you're not a stupid person. Hence my inclusion of the M5 engine and the upcoming 600hp 6.0L naturally aspirated V12. Hell, Dinan supposedly has a software and intercooler upgrade for the twin turbo 3.0 I6 that puts out something in the vicinity of 450hp and 500lb-ft of torque. Imagine what they could do to the new twin turbo V8!

Anyway, both MB and BMW have excellent engines and tuners, there's plenty of room for both to be good.

You definitely have a valid point Rob, however, even so, it seems as though BMW tuners shy away from insane amounts of power and Mercedes tuners live off of it. The amount of power they put in cars, such as the Sl65 with 700hp, and obviously the C with 700, is more than necessary and more that can even be put on the road. When it comes down to it, it depends on which tuner is insane enough to throw 700+ hp into their smallest car, and that is usually Mercedes. I really wasn't referring to how much power they were capable of pulling out of a certain size of engine, because we have Toyota Supras with 1000hp coming out of a V6 that would blow all of these German tuners away in that sense.

I think 414 hp is enough.