http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans...ison/index.html

 

No manual, no thanks.

 

it's the way of the world now
Enzo - no manual
F458 - no manual
F430 - mostly no manual
911T - faster with auto
and the list goes on....

 

how depressing

I like my third pedal and stick.

 

Love the new E63 and I agree it's the better overall car to the CTS-V, but it's very hard to overlook the $25-35k real world price difference. That's a huge price margin for all but the most hard core AMG fanatic.

I'd still take the CTS-V and have an extra $30k in the bank.

 

I just want to be able to shift the car on my cue. If that means using a pedal and stick, then that's cool. But if the same feat can be performed without actually using a 3rd pedal, then maybe that works, too. But if I push the button and it takes a full second before I'm into the next gear, like most old sportshifts were, then I'll pass. But if it's a automated manual transmission with 100-200ms shift times... I'll take it. I want the shifts to be telepathic... I don't want to have to call ahead before shifting.

 

Bah - they compared the automatic CTS-V to the semi-automatic (manual with no clutch) E63. In a sports sedan, you want to try the manual (or semi-manual) gearbox if at all possible. CTS-V has a 6MT option and they should've used it. It'd probably have made it a more engaging car and reduced the "brilliance" of the semi-manual E63 tranny.

It costs you $25K more for the Benz in order to get virtually tied or beaten by the CTS-V in every performance category. I fail to see how the E63 is a better SPORT sedan. It may be a better overall package but with emphasis on the sport, I don't think it is the best car.

I haven't driven either one.

 

it's funny how your post looks next to your avatar.

 

WTH? Did they train at the Interwebz skool of journalism? That's just embarrassing.

 

I don't care if it is faster, if you're not having fun, why do it?

Last i checked, you can still get an old fashioned stick on some great cars.