/o/, I own a 2010 Camaro 2SS/RS N/A LS3 with a few bolt on mods

i got my ass handed to me on the touge by an old guy in a c63 amg black, only thing that let me stay sorta close to him was that we had to pass traffic every once in a while. looks like a fun car

Curb weights :
Camaro SS 2010 3,750lbs
2013 Mercedes C63 Coupe 3,924Lbs

HP/TQ
2010 Camaro SS (stock) 426/420 (now approximately 500/??)

2013 Mercedes C63 AMG Coupe (stock) 451/443

Now the Power to weight ratio would be

8.80 Lbs per HP for the stock Camaro and 8.7 Lbs per HP for the C63

With the actual mods the ratio drops to aprox. 7.5 Lbs per HP for the camaro and with a good cam + push rods + valve springs + rocker etc etc my research seems consistent enough that I am capable of easily getting an extra 50 to 60 HP out of it. Which would put me at aproximately 550hp, dropping me to 6.8 Lbs per HP in the camaro.

NOW I am only speculating a lot of this. I am no engineer and no mechanic. But to me it seems like the power to weight ratio still favors the camaro right now. But i've also heard of people reaching stupid numbers by just going straight exhausts and retunes on C63's (something like 552 on a wagon C63 I saw on youtube with a simple exhaust system and tune).

Explain to me why I'm a dumb fuck and why I should still go get the C63. (I'd still want a Corvette more but the C63 is a fucking charm to drive I heard)

File: FB_IMG_1444940498203.jpg (2MB, 3264x2448px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3264x2448px

BAMP

plz sempai

get the C63 for sure

>>14189714
but mercedes can turn

lmao nice parking

typical dudebro muscle owner

if you have to ask about maintenance cost and insurance

>you can't afford it

>>14191583
>if you have to ask about maintenance cost and insurance
>>you can't afford it
No. Asking about those things are a valid concern for any car buyer, regardless of price. Unless you're so fuck off rich that you just don't care

File: bromarowelds.jpg (82KB, 960x540px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 960x540px

>>14189633
I rekt a c63 in my shitbox, I would stick with the camaro that is easier to maintain and cheaper to fix if you fuck up
>>14191577
>weighs more
>can turn

also the camaro can turn, has IRS which is also easily upgradeable

>>14191583
Yeah my friends thought I had parked the chally too but thats the dealer's job. I had just parked it up front while he sent one of his guys to park it to the side of the building where they "deliver" cars. And if I'm considering a C63 I'd guess that its because I can afford it.

>>14189633
These are muscle cars, not sports cars that you own.

Also I would test drive and research and make your own decision, but if you get more joy out of following trends of friends then buy whatever they do too.

Youtube is nice for lots of sources of information on stuff, including cars.

Also you're wondering about power to weight, horsepower and torque are available on every site, and a quick google:

https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#safe=off&q=c63+curb+weight

There's also plenty of 0-60 sites or popular magazines like Car and Driver etc thatd have it when they test it

Anyway a Mercedes anything and a Camaro are two totally different types of cars, you're comparing power between an apple and an orange.

>>14191679
Its not that I am following a trend. I just miss the feeling of "new car, new power, new feeling". I'm sure that you understand what I mean. And THEY traded in their sports car (Evo X's) for high end BMW's.

And I agree that the C63 and Camaro are different cars. Lets look at it this way then ; Fun per hour and practicality/fun ratio

>>14189633
Kids drive camaro adults drive luxury muscle. That's pretty much what the AMG cars are.