C63 AMG

>>15509081
Also if you think there is a better daily performance car than the C63, please do say. Make sure it's under 100K.

>CTS-V
>GS-F
>BMW M5
>Challenger S R/T Hellcat
>Chebby Camaro SS
>Ferd Shelby Mustang
>Z06 Corvette
There are plenty of other options out there depending on if you want pure speed, confort, or a bit of both (which you presumably do). I'm personally not a fan of Mercedes after my dad's E63 AMG Wagon had multiple electrical issues and needed a transmission replacement under 30k miles.

>>15509108
comfort*

I'd go for the F80 M3, it performs better on turns and is cheaper
Also i kind of dislike the wet fart exhaust sound of the new amg's

>>15509108
I don't particularly want a coupe as I have a wife and twin babies. Alternatively I'll go for the M3 but I'll wait for more opinions on the C63 AMG.

>>15509081
If you spent a long time saving up 100k it would be foolish in my opinion to turn it into 60k in a year buying something like that.
If money ain't a thing then sure.

>>15509081
This is just my opinion so take it with a grain of salt, but I hate the interior of these cars. Realistically you're paying a large amount of money for a well modified and tuned C class, which means you do get the shitty, cheap interior with some cute carbon fiber bits and maybe different seats and a new steering wheel. I'm assuming you're getting the 2017 facelift version which I haven't seen yet so this might all be a moot point. That's just what kept me from seriously considering one in the past.

M cars are an option despite /o/ constantly shitting on them. M3 or very lightly used M5 would probably treat you very well.

>>15509321
Adding on, if you're willing to buy used you can get an M6 GC for less than $80k with around 20k miles, or a late model E63 AMG S/ CLS63 for around the same. These are all light years ahead of the C63 and still under factory warranty. I'd strongly recommend looking in to any of those cars, but the C63 is a very good car in its own right if you insist on buying new.

>>15509081
Buy the AMG and invest the rest

File: 2014-chevrolet-SS-front-view-closeup.jpg (673KB, 2048x1365px) Image search: [Google]

673KB, 2048x1365px

>>15509081
>Is the C63 AMG the best performance car under 100k?
no.

>>15509133
>Alternatively I'll go for the M3 but I'll wait for more opinions on the C63 AMG.
so you're a moron then?

Pic related. Best performance car under 100k.
>manual transmission
>415 HP 6.2L LS3 V8
>IRS
>magnetic Ride control means comfy when you want it, fantastic performance when you need it.
>under 50k

Grab one now before production ends.

File: S124-E73T[1].jpg (306KB, 818x466px) Image search: [Google]

306KB, 818x466px

>>15509081
>no V12
>under 7 litres
sounds like a cuckmobile desu anon

>>15509081
skinny tires. buy a real performance car with meat in the bones and have something to show for your 100k desu dont get a tarted up 40k car for your 100k

>b but youre superficial

buy a car that looks like it costs 100k

File: porsche-997-turbo.jpg (91KB, 720x400px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 720x400px

>>15509081
buy a used 997.2 Turbo. better performance, better looking, better resale value, more fun, etc.

>>15509806
nice beetle.

>>15509707
how do i obtain one of these?

>>15509081
>Mercedes
It's shit

>>15509813
it is. the hair blow dryers on it make it really fast

>>15509817
buy a aston martin one-77 or a zonda

>>15509676
I agree that this thing is a beast but the CTS-V is better (and much better looking)

File: 4L_HWaPeE5Y.jpg (19KB, 429x262px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 429x262px

>>15509081
GET THE GUILA
U
I
L
A

>>15509876
its better because it has a supercharger?
CTSV HAS A TERRIBLE TRANSMISSION
have you driven that? slow shifting pos.
at least the ss has a third pedal

>>15509892
Shit I forgot about that. You're right actually I'd probably rather have an SS just for the manual. That or an ATS-V

>>15509081
Buy a used Corolla and buy Ethereum with the rest.

In one year you'll have enough money to get a Chiron.

File: alfa05.jpg (234KB, 1700x956px) Image search: [Google]

234KB, 1700x956px

>>15509081
>>15509130
"no"

>>15509886
>GUILA
Lol how did you manage to fuck up the name so hard?
Btw, i would get it over the competition no doubt.

>>15510138
no one asked for your opinion you cancerous tripfag

>>15509108
>>15509676
So the general opinion is to buy a Cadillac. So which should I get? ATS-V or CTS-V?

I have a question about the CTS-V. It has the same engine the Z06 uses so does that mean there will be future heat issues with the CTS-V?

And I liked the SS too.

>>15510239
The ATS is on Consumer Reports and Motortrends "do not buy list" for awful reliability ratings and poor interior.

The CTS is just a comfy camaro though, so get that.

>>15510150
Stop bitching, faggot.

>>15510150
>Glorious Italian Design
>Fantastic sounding 3.0 Twin Turbo V6
>505hp / 0-60 3.8s
> Manual transmission
>Active aero, great suspension, etc.
>Better performance and price

I don't what's not to like about it.

i like my m5. I've driven an s-class and I used to own an XJ and I really prefer the balance of BMW

>>15510256
The ATS is based on the Camaro, not the CTS. Never heard about those reliability issues either

>>15509886

I can't understand why any sane person would buy one of these new, the value will plummet way more than anything else in the class. And it won't be reliable.

As a used purchase though, absolutely. Lovely looking thing.

>>15511097
other way around. Camaro is based on the ATS, as is the new CTS. All of them use the Alpha chassis, but the ATS was the first one out, followed by the CTS and then the Camaro.

hellcat charger or one of those new jaguars would probably be my pick if i were you

>>15509081
Pretty much all performance cars in this price range are dope. I say go for a test drive.

>>15509081

Best performance car?

Nissan GT-R

I've driven some of the newer sports sedans but my favourite has been the M3 so far

>>15509081
Yes

File: 1391628151453.png (181KB, 404x266px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 404x266px

>>15511312
>automatic only

>>15511745
>Paying more than 40k for a car
>not being a professional driver
>getting a manual

Are you fucking stupid. Modern automatic gearboxes are faster than any fucking manual there is. Also most performance cars have paddles for sequential drive.

>>15511161
>Camaro is based on the ATS
Yeah you're right, that's sort of what I meant to say. But anyway, the ATS is certainly closer to the Camaro than the CTS is. If only it had a V8.

>>15511762
>muh paddles
I get the feeling you've never actually driven a manual. Or any car at all for that matter.

>>15511787
one will fit

someone will do it soon

>>15511797
Dude, I live in europe. I have driven more manual than automatic(even my current driver is manual), but i would still get automatic if i were to splurge so much money on a new car. It's so fucking convenient it's amazing. And performance trade-off is negligible unless you intend to fucking go around a race track.

>>15511097
They include CUE in reliability issues. I can easily see it being unreliable at that point. God, CUE sucks donkey dick.

>>15509085
if I were you I would buy a slightly used 911 turbo or a new 911

>>15509886
>tfw distinct Alfa front end
I remember one of my teachers in primary had a 159 in black. It was an imposing looking vehicle.

>>15511745

The GT-R would be terrible with a manual you would have to remove most of the 4WD system since no computer could keep up with the ass hattery of most manual drivers

Same with the LFA in manual. You'd kill the engine in a week

>>15509108
>GS-F

555comeonnow

File: based.png (461KB, 1193x592px) Image search: [Google]

461KB, 1193x592px

>>15513376