This is the new Mercedes-AMG GT coupe, and my word does it ever lean into its name. Bigger, plusher, and with more seats than before, this new top-shelf AMG coupe is an SL with a fixed roof in pursuit of both the Porsche 911 and greater mass appeal. It turns out the old car might’ve been a little too nuts for country club clientele. Oops. Might this new AMG GT fulfill its mission, and how does it relate to its nameplate’s legacy? Let’s find out.
Up front, the new AMG GT certainly looks the part. Rounder, almond-shaped headlights score a friendlier face than on the fundamentally similar SL cabriolet, and the front fascia is substantially cleaner with the necessary grille area for cooling hidden within a deeper, single-frame grille. It’s a relatively successful cheat, bringing some AMG GT DNA onto a new form.
Less successful is the taillight treatment, akin to the bridged-by-plastic setup seen on the recently-unveiled Mercedes-Benz CLE coupe. As this is supposedly an all-AMG car, it feels weird to see a styling link to a standard Mercedes model like that, and it’s doubly strange because the treatment just looks cheap. It would be perfectly acceptable on a $35,000 midsize sedan, but on a flagship coupe? I don’t think so.
Around the side, the new AMG GT’s differences from the outgoing car become most stark. The dash-to-axle ratio is substantially smaller than on the extremely cab-rearward previous car, with the whole silhouette adopting far more normal proportions. While the old SLS-derived architecture likely wasn’t sustainable for another generation, the new car is so much less visually-crazy than the old one, it almost doesn’t feel like a clean lineage.
Inside the new AMG GT, you’ll find a seating surprise. Instead of a parcel shelf, two tiny rear seats offer Porsche 911-like second-row accommodations, perfect for quick jaunts to the tennis club or carrying small dogs. If that sounds impressive, you’ll likely appreciate how the front row is more luxurious than ever before. It adopts the SL roadster’s dashboard wholesale, 11.9-inch touchscreen infotainment system and all. Of equal importance, the new car’s shifter doesn’t require you to dislocate your shoulder to go from reverse to drive, a marked improvement over the old car’s haphazard ergonomics.
Thankfully, downsizing nonsense seems to have steered clear of the AMG GT for now. Regardless of whether you choose the AMG GT 63 or the AMG GT 53, you’ll get a four-liter twin-turbocharged V8. In the entry-level 53 model, it kicks out 469 horsepower and 516 lb.-ft. of torque, while the 63 model pumps that up to 577 horsepower and 590 lb.-ft. of torque. Regardless of which model you choose, something else lurks beneath the skin that would’ve been unthinkable on the previous car — all-wheel-drive. AMG’s 4MATIC+ system helps the entry-level model run from zero-to-62 mph in a claimed 3.9 seconds, while the 63 lights off the dash in a scant 3.2 seconds. This new car should be more controllable by newbies than the old AMG GT, but part of the appeal of the old car was that it wasn’t.
The new AMG GT also receives way more active handling systems than the old car. We’re talking about inter-linked hydraulic dampers, active roll stabilization, and four-wheel steering. All stuff designed to mask the curb weight of this new, softer AMG GT. In GT 63 4MATIC+ trim, this thing weighs 4,343 pounds. That’s 716 pounds more than the old AMG GT S, an enormous amount of weight for a performance-oriented coupe and a signal of the new car’s intent.
The old AMG GT always erred more on the side of sports car than GT. Agile, fast, and relatively raw for a Mercedes-Benz, it was modern big phallus-shaped sports car nirvana with just enough trunk space and ride quality to possibly grand tour, if you’re a bit mad. The new car seems to have pulled a 180, with tiny rear seats, a huge curb weight, and enough gadgetry to attempt a run as an S-Class coupe successor.
If anything, it seems like an AMG SLC. You know, like the long-wheelbase, fixed-roof SL from the ‘70s and ‘80s. Back then, it was a more comfortable, more family-friendly hardtop version of Benz’s popular roadster. The new AMG GT should appeal to far more people than the old one, but it seems like it’s lost the edge that the old car had. Has the German Viper been de-fanged? We’ll have to drive one to find out. However, from where we sit, the new AMG GT seems to have grown out its wisdom teeth. It’s no hardcore sports car, but instead a Porsche 911-fighter built down to a science. Let’s hope some of the old car’s feral nature remains.
(Photo credits: Mercedes-AMG)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
Mercedes-AMG Lops Half The Cylinders Off Of The SL
-
This Mitsubishi Galant Is One Of The Few Non-Mercedes You’ll Find With An AMG Badge: Holy Grails
-
Buy This 505 HP Mercedes-Benz R63 AMG And Have The Fastest And Rarest Minivan In Your Neighborhood
-
The Porsche 911 S/T Is A Subtler GT3 RS With A Manual Gearbox And An Ozempic Prescription
-
The Porsche 911 Carrera T Is The Cheap Way To Get A Great 911
Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.
This new car looks sharper on the side, but that rear end is a bit of a mess.
…
Gonna need a ‘Ring time. Whip out the ‘Ring time. That’s how we’ll KNOW.
What’s up with that BMW fender vent behind the front wheels?!
I also feel the long hood is what gave the outgoing model presence.
Front end looks clean and modern. Rear end is just an incoherent mess, with creases and waves seemingly everywhere.
As if this thing wasnt heavy enough, for Comparison, the new C63 AMG is roughly 200 KGs HEAVIER than this one. Of course thats because of the batteries, but jesus Christ..
It is pretty, I do like the front end more, the tail lights maybe not so much.
I guess they can’t call it mid-engine anymore, that was one of the benefits of the old platform as the engine was very behind the front axle and it gave it that long front end and rear cockpit look which was cool, now the engine is sitting pretty over the axle like most other models.
I like the way it looks but it looks generic GT sports car, I liked the old one more. I loved how far back the cab was and how long and ridiculous the hood was. It was like a Batmobile or like a modern interpretation of the Bill Thomas Cheetah.
The old one reminded me of this at times…
https://media1.tenor.com/images/49dcdb3ff5e68abe6911242a6fba5657/tenor.gif?itemid=7746730
Though likely not as “sport,” I like the overal look of this new one better.
Look at the rear view.
Look up those four stylised exhaust tips fixed to the rear bumper.
See those four round exhaust pipes? You know why they don’t line up with the stylised exhaust tips? Because…
… it’s home time! That’s good enough, no one ever looks at the back of a car.
If they can’t be arsed lining up bits you can see, what did they do to the bits you can’t see?
Thanks, now I can’t unsee the fact that they cut that particular corner.
I wish I could use my engineering insights to bring happiness and joy, but no, it’s mostly misery and disappointment.
It doesn’t make me happy either, if that helps?
woof!
and my first thought on the taillights was that the designers had visited a junkyard and were inspired by a flattened 98 Taurus
Enjoy the outside quite a bit. That screen inside though is ugly and ruins the car.
You mention the shifter being better, but don’t have a good shot at it.
911 over this 100 out of 100 times.
it’s column mounted like the rest of the lineup now. just bleep-bloop with your fingers. every car should do it.
Narrator: they are both the same fucking car.
I must say, I can find little to complain about the design. If I really had to nitpick, I’m not in love with the reflectors right above the exhaust tips, but otherwise that is one attractive vehicle. I loved the design of the old one, and the SLS before it, but I dare say this is even better.
The weight though….wow. Just…wow.
*sigh*
4350lbs. For a 2-seat sports car. Wut?!
The recent C63 AMG I believe is north of 4900lbs, possibly at 5000lbs with certain options. Isn’t the current M2 right around 4000? Seriously, this is such nonsense.
I don’t care how fast it can accelerate, or how well it can, “manage its weight.” We’ve really lost the plot here. I realize that despite being someone who buys this kind of stuff that I’m the opposite of most of the market — which is mostly 50-60 year olds who’ve mostly driven mid-size luxury vehicles for the past 20-30 years and demand extreme comfort all the time — but dammit, it sucks watching sports cars die in this fashion.
The 3000 SL (W198), the inspiration of it all, was considered a powerful heavy car in its time, weighing in at curb weight of 3131 lbs. The new one looks about 1200 lbs more.
A M-B “sports car” as viewed from the comfort of the GLS and I imagine aimed quite well at the market.
Even if you include the newer 4-door AMG-GT “4-Door Coupe” sales in the US, the Porsche 911 outsells the AMG GT (currently at 3600lbs) four to one.
Take the “4-Door Coupe” out, and during the time it didn’t exist, the Porsche 911 outsold it EIGHT to one.
With the 911 (992 in particular!) being rightly criticized for getting too large and refined, where you need to buy a GT3 to have a “more authentic” experience. Mind you, 50-60% of 911s sold in the US are a Turbo or Turbo S — so still massively turbocharged, AWD, and maximum tech for comfort.
Gaining 700+ pounds IN A GENERATION is madness. Yes, transfer cases, front diffs, front axles and all, but that doesn’t weigh 320kg.
I thought this looked pretty cool until I saw the weight. Jesus tap dancing Christ…
If I wasn’t so staunchly in the I’ll never intentionally own another German car ever again camp, (Porsche excluded) and had infinite money, this would look great in my garage parked next to the RS6 avant… I didn’t think the old one looked bad per se, but this one looks much much better in my opinion.