The hybridized four-cylinder Mercedes-AMG C 63 has not received much love since its debut in 2022. In fact, it’s been pretty universally hated by the internet, car journalists, and buyers. It only took a couple of years for rumors to spread about Mercedes replacing the inline-four with a new powertrain—either an inline-six or a V8, depending on who you ask.
Now, Mercedes has finally confirmed which engine will be replacing the widely disdained four-cylinder: The company’s turbocharged 3.0-liter inline-six, currently found in the Mercedes-AMG CLE 53. Mercedes-AMG boss Michael Schiebe confirmed the switch to Edmunds yesterday. The new car, which is expected to make its debut in the second half of this year, will reportedly adopt the CLE’s nomenclature and be called the Mercedes-AMG C 53.
While that inline-six is certainly more interesting than the outgoing four-cylinder, I don’t think it’s the AMG-branded C-Class’s savior. Anyone who’s driven a car with this inline-six will agree with me. Let me explain.
Here Is AMG’s Plan
Before discussing why I think the new C 53 won’t really move the needle, it’s worth explaining exactly what’s going down. Unlike the C 63, which leans heavily on hybrid tech and an electric motor to make its massive 671 horsepower and 752 pound-feet of torque, the upcoming C 53 will have no electric assistance at all. From Edmunds:
Schiebe said the company will be “replacing our four-cylinder” with the inline-six and that “the engine will also come to the C-Class.”
“That means we will also have C 53 in our portfolio,” Schiebe continued. “We’re taking the combustion engine from the CLE 53. No hybrid engine — pure inline six-cylinder.”
[…]
“Under the regulations of EU7, it’s quite difficult to carry [the four-cylinder engine] into the future,” Schiebe said. “That’s why we will stop offering the M139 and in the midsize segment we will replace it with the inline six-cylinder.”
This is an important distinction. In cars like the new S-Class and the lovely AMG E 53 wagon, this turbocharged inline-six is paired with an electric motor between the engine and the transmission, powered by a 21.2-kWh battery pack. In the E53, this combo is good for 577 horsepower and 553 pound-feet of torque (and up to 604 horsepower if you toggle Race Start mode).
But on cars like the CLE 53 coupe and the GLE 53 crossover, the engine makes do with only a 48-volt integrated starter-generator that provides temporary boosts in torque. In the CLE, this setup is good for 443 horsepower and 443 pound-feet of torque.
This isn’t necessarily a bad thing, obviously. Sure, you get less power without hybrid assistance, but you also don’t have to lug around the heavy, complex e-motor, inverter, battery, and charging system, either. The outgoing C 63 may have been powerful, but it was also supremely heavy for what it was, tipping the scales at nearly 4800 pounds.
Here’s Why I’m Not That Excited
The thing is, I don’t think switching from a heavy-set hybrid four-cylinder powertrain to a pure inline-six setup will be enough to convince buyers for a couple of reasons. The inline-six in question, the M256, isn’t exactly a fire-breathing, high-revving, excitement machine that’ll get people’s hearts racing.
I’ve driven several versions of this engine in the past, both with the full-on hybrid assistance and with the lighter 48-volt mild-hybrid system. All of them were nice and smooth, and delivered good power through a healthy midrange. It’s the perfect “AMG-lite” powertrain—powerful enough to deliver real performance, but not so high-strung or inefficient that it can’t be used as an everyday commuter.
But as the spiritual successor to the C63, which for years offered some of the most thrilling V8 powertrains on the market, the M256 just can’t keep up. The concept of the top-level C-Class being powered by an eight-cylinder drivetrain is still fresh in everyone’s mind, and I don’t think going from one uninteresting engine to a slightly less uninteresting engine is the solution.
I’m sure the new AMG C 53 will be nice to drive. With all the weight it’s expected to drop, it might even be great to drive. And without the hybrid tech, it should be a bit more affordable. Whether that engine will be enough to convince buyers, though, I’m not sure. I’ll save my final judgement until I actually get behind the wheel.
Top image: Mercedes-Benz
All they have to do is put some AMG work into the I6 and hey presto, C63. I’m curious to know exactly how much lighter this C53 will be compared to the I4 C63.
Having never driven the car, I have a hard time believing that a car with 671 hp is boring. Who cares what it sounds like when your face is being torn off and your stomach is in your throat under full acceleration.
It’s a “compact” sedan also weighs in at 4850lbs with a full tank.
Over 5K with driver, which contributes to not “feel”ing like 670HP. Turbo 4s are torque plateaus, not megaphone torque curves. Quick, but not in an interesting way.
I think Farah summed it up best with his, “There’s Mustang horsepower and there’s Porsche horsepower. You get in a 500HP Mustang and you feel maybe it’s more like 400HP. Then you get in a 400HP Porsche and you swear it has to be 500.”
I’ve had sub-400HP cars people were convinced had to be 500-550HP.
I’ve driven the new C63. Quick? Very. Interesting? Nope.
A lot of this is to broaden to capture more buyers, sport sedans keep getting increasingly comfort focused. More weight from more comfort, luxury features.
On the street, 700 HP may be a lot, but the times you’re able to actually tap into it in a meaningful way is extraordinary limited. You can make a couple blasts to 120, 130, but you can do that at 500 HP and get very similar sensations.
A street car that is interesting while doing 40 is way more interesting to me than something that propels me well beyond “go to jail” speeds half a second faster. I’d honestly take a C63 with less power over either of these. You could even hybridize it and add power that way.
A turbo inline six is as boring as a four cylinder?
Not to gatekeep (which as we all know is code for “I’m about to gatekeep”), but please turn in your enthusiast card and don’t let the door hit you on the way out. 😛
He’s not saying *a* turbo inline 6 is as boring as a four cylinder, but *that* turbo inline 6 is as boring as a four cylinder.
I’m part of the die hard I6 club so this is a win for me.
Was Merc hoping the hybrid set up would remind people of their F1 cars?
Slightly off topic but someone at my kids school has one of the earlier C43 AMGs. It must be the old V6, and whatever exhaust it has sounds really nice.
If an inline six is nearly as boring as a 2.0-liter four, then it’s either a terrible six or Brian’s arguing that the freak chimera C63 was quite interesting…because it was so terrible.
I get that European regulations are stingy and that these manufacturers have their hands tied when trying to make performance cars they can sell at home…but the C63 was just such a bizarre freak that I really have no idea how they convinced themselves it would sell. It’s a bad gas car, it’s a bad PHEV, it’s way too heavy to fulfill its intended purpose, who the hell was it made for?
It’s basically a compliance car that happens to be the pinnacle of their C class lineup. I have less than 0 interest in any of these 5,000+ pound electrified German “performance” monstrosities and they’re going to be worth absolutely nothing the second the warranty is up because no one will be willing to work on them due to the complexity on top of complexity for the sake of complexity German engineering….
As a big fan of quirky engineering, I usually push back against the “nobody wants to maintain it” argument, but in this case I fully agree.
There’s nothing about this car that makes the trouble worthwhile, it’s not special, exciting, or even particularly comfortable. It put everything it had into being almost as quick as an Ioniq 5 N on a track, for a customer base that will never do so. And the Hyundai is a legitimately usable, affordable, sensible vehicle.
Nobody that can afford its extravagance can put up with its mediocrity.
I agree, I love weird shit. But this vehicle has a turbo 4 cylinder making over 200 horsepower per liter on its own, a 9 speed planetary gearbox, batteries, electric motors. all the tech to make all of that get along, a two speed transmission for the electric motors…dear god. These things are going to be getting mechanically totaled at 50,000 miles….
It’s horrifying to think about. The kind of maintenance needs that would make me seriously reconsider whether a real dream car is worth it, except there’s nothing to consider, because behind that nigh-insurmountable 3-star paywall is an overcooked nothingburger.
And how’s that short lifespan for the environment? At some point, they either need to outlaw certain power levels or allow engineering for at least some longevity at the cost of a bit of emissions (paying a fine for x ppms of whatever compounds percent over the limit with an absolute ceiling that can’t be exceeded?) vs compliant engines that technically pass, but are expensive hand grenades.
It’s made for refined performance, not batshit madness, which was much of the appeal of the V8.
I wouldn’t jump to conclusions. I think this is probably going to replace the C43 and hold folks over until the next gen V8 is finished. I don’t think there’s been a full fat AMG with the 53 designation…or if there has it’s been a while. They’re currently finishing up the CLE63 AMG and it has the 4 liter V8 but it’s being updated to meet European emissions.
I think that’ll show up in a reborn/final/special edition C63. Meanwhile the C53 will be way cooler than the current C43 and it’ll be competitive with the equivalent BMWs and Audis that are also 6 cylinder.
AMG buyers fit into two buckets.
1 Enthusiasts who want a fire breathing monster that they can thrash
2 People with money who want to both showoff that they’ve got the AMG, and want to be able to mash the pedal and be faster than the unwashed masses.
And I’m going to guess that MB betting that the second bucket buys more cars, and spends more money. And they were feeling betrayed feeling that having only four cylinders didn’t make them feel special, and better than us plebs.
Does the second group know or care how many cylinders their car has? Or only what the MSRP is?
They care. They all solidified their car opinions in the late 70’s or early 80’s. My father in law makes fun of my work truck for being v6. We both have F150s, me for work, he owns his. I tow a lot short range with it, and I wanted the 3.5. He always talks about how I should have paid for the V8 if I wanted a real truck. His truck can tow about 9k, but mine can pull 13k. He just won’t understand that the rules set in 1981 for anything have changed in 45 years.
I mean, I care how many cylinders my vehicles have and I wasn’t even born then.
But for the consumer described in the OP, I can’t help but think of the stat about how many BMW drivers thought their cars were FWD.
tHeReS nO rEpLaCeMeNt fOr dIsPlAcEmEnT!
I believe you meant…
There’s no substitute for cubic inches! Lol
I hate that phase so much.
I can make nearly any engine a little bit smaller and a little bit better.
They will when someone else tells them.
Exactly. Someone will say “Oh, you got the 4 cylinder” and then they will revert to old rules where cars with more cylinders under the hood are better than those with less.
The second group has a second-hand concern for how many cylinders their car has. It doesn’t matter too much to them, but if they find out that it matters to the people they’re trying to impress, then they start to care.
If bucket 1 loses interest, bucket 2 eventually takes notice of that. Once something becomes labeled as a “poser” product/brand/activity, the posers abandon it, because they only want to be associated with the genuine thing.
This used to take a long time, because you’d have to hear it through word of mouth from your friend who had a friend who read a magazine about it, and then it would take a while for word to spread that (insert brand) has gone down the gutter, but now you need to impress people on social media, and they can just google what you’re showing them and immediately call you out for having a so-called AMG with an engine the size of a juice carton in the comments, for everyone to see.
There’s definitely more of the latter than the former.
I’d regularly see Asian Grandpas in their AMG S Classes cruising thru San Francisco or LA with uncomfortable-looking Asian Grandmas in the passenger side – And you just knew he bought the AMG because it was the biggest, most expensive one in the showroom.
Which is clearly why MB finally came out with Maybach (which is German for “Brougham”) versions.
Definitely more posers than enthusiasts, always has been. Works with sports cars, too, which is why they tend to get more bloated and watered down in successive generations—they’re catering to the larger market that wants to be seen in the cool car, but doesn’t want the compromises in noise and comfort that often come with capability. I actually know of people who bought AMGs because it was the most expensive and they didn’t have much care about the extra performance (I mean, an AMG SUV, how f’n stupid, anyway). I had joked about it prior, but they’re really out there. I swear I’m a different species that convergently evolved to be of similar appearance to humans.
My ex-wife’s X5 35sDrivei was (or whatever) ruined when her previous husband talked her into opting for the M package. She didn’t need it or appreciate it. That’s not to denigrate her. She just would’ve had a car more in line with her desires. And thousands cheaper.
The turbo I6 was perfectly adequate. It and the ZF AT were very well sorted. But the wide run-flat tires and suspension tuning were abysmal
We traded it in on an ’18 MDX and it was much nicer to drive. After she divorced me she foolishly, I believe, traded it in with ~60K miles on it for a Lincoln Aviator. The MDX was paid off and now she has a hefty monthly note. But she loves it and that’s not my circus anymore.
A lot of people would be happier and wealthier if they were less concerned about impressing other people they probably don’t like who aren’t impressed, don’t notice, or are jealous of everyone. Then these buyers complain that the performance version they spent too much for is too performance oriented and the manufacturer waters it down to please them, which pisses off the people who actually bought them for the performance aspect, but the OEM doesn’t care because the former group is so much larger.
I can’t help but think that, much like the E53, this is more of a replacement for the 43 cars than the 63s? Any word from MB on if the C43 will continue? I think the price will be the biggest indicator (until MB launches something called 63), but, this seems like a rush job to get something people can stomach onto the market, while they come up with something more extreme for the C63.
I think that’s exactly what it is, and everyone hates the C43 and GLC43 too because they still have the universally despised 4 cylinder without the PHEV tech. Everyone focuses on the abortion that is the 63 but Mercedes also borked the 43s too….
I had to look up if there even still was a C43 – I’d completely forgotten it existed. I’m strongly MB>BMW, but even I’d almost certainly end up with a 340i over one of those.
The B58 is a trump card for me
I mean, if the bottom end is stout enough to take some extra boost…that’s how straight sixes go from mundane to absolute legends. But it’s Mercedes so I’m not holding out hope for four figures out of tuners anytime soon. At least, reliably.
Maybe they’ll put the flatplane 4.0 in the Mercedes-AMG C63s+ 4-Matic AMG Pro model then
At least they aren’t calling it a “C63” though. Maybe a hybrid assisted one will come out with that nomenclature
Now can we get a straight six in the SL please?