0-60 or quarter mile on c350...
You'll find that the differences in the 0-60 time are because you guys in the US use 0-60mph but in most other 'metric' Countries it's 0-100km/h or 0-62mph if measuring with the imperial system, that 2mph does add 10ths of a second to the times, especially in manual transmissions where in some car types you need to change up a gear to get over 60mph.
As far interior goes:
Audi > Mercedes > Infiniti > BMW
Performance:
S5 > 335i > G37 > Mercedes
Bang for your buck:
G37 > 335i > toss up between an S5 & C350.
Last edited by Ubiquitous5; Aug 16, 2012 at 11:20 AM.
Another reason why I think MBenz is not trying to be as competitive as they should. Infiniti, BMW, and Audi all offer manual transmission in their lineup.
Although a manual transmission is not "popular," it should still be offered if they are trying to cater to enthusiasts.
Pretty sure a manual 350 would have posted even better times than an auto (if it means anything).
Trending Topics
Now, on the freeway, the G has a bit of an advantage in getting the jump from a 60-xxx pull, buy once you enter the low 100's you will start to catch up and slowly but surely pass the G. I did this in Mexico with him...

The Best of Mercedes & AMG
As far interior goes:
Audi > Mercedes > Infiniti > BMW
Performance:
S5 > 335i > G37 > Mercedes
Bang for your buck:
G37 > 335i > toss up between an S5 & C350.
Interior on the Audi is garbage in my opinion, and I think that I share a common opinion with others if I were to change it to:
Mercedes > Infiniti > (Audi = BMW)
Performance wise I think your rating is skewed. The S5 competed with the C63 and M3, in both power and MSRP. So I think again it should be:
335i > G37 > C350 > A5
As far as bang for your buck or value, unarguably the Infiniti has the best value, but 335i being a value, the C350 coupe is a FAR better value. It should be as follows:
G37 > C350 > 335i > Audi
Depending on what your specifically wanting with these the relevant competing model variants need to be looked at separately and in the same or competing classes.
In terms of performance, the Audi S5 is in competition with the BMW M3 and MB/AMG C63, not C350.
Above that the RS5 lines up with the BMW M3 GTS and MB/AMG C63 Black.
If you wanted to compare a C350 to an Audi A5, it would be against the 2 A5 V6 models they have.
The MB C Class is also in competition with the Audi A4 range.
the S5 is a claimed 4.9 sec, and the RS5 is a claimed at 4,5 which puts it on par with a C63 which is claimed at 4,4. The current M3 is around 4.8 so thats where the S5 is compared to. The 63 black is claimed at 4,2 which is quicker than all. Not sure about M3 gts
As far interior goes:
Audi > Mercedes > Infiniti > BMW
Performance:
S5 > 335i > G37 > Mercedes
Bang for your buck:
G37 > 335i > toss up between an S5 & C350.
Why would I put > or < between cars with different size of engine's like S5 and 335 for example? As far as interior G37 sucking special place from C350, as well as from many other aspects. I just switched from 2009 G37 coupe and nothing will turn me back to ugly Nissan made design again. 0-60 depending on many factors this is why it is different, I am sure on stock tires it is worse than on good summer tires for example. Different drive modes also makes difference, testing on E which is starting from 2nd gear and switching slow would be different to S mode. I don't feel much of difference in speed to G37 since torque of the engine is about the same. But I feel much better fuel economy, suspension, brakes etc
Last edited by Breitling65; Jul 28, 2012 at 12:02 PM.
A4/A5, 328, C250/300, G25, IS250, etc
S4/S5, 335, C350, G37, IS350, etc
RS5, M3, C63, ISF
M3 GTS, C63 BS
I ran a new (dealer plates) C350 sedan in my then new (now dead) '10 G37S from a dig. Put two cars by 70. I believe there have been some performance improvements in the C that put them neck and neck.
Believe me, I drove two Infiniti one after another G35 sedan & G37 coupe, it is not very quick cars and E55 will dust it. Besides ugly as any other Nissan made, needs tons of mods to look good. I will never comeback there.
Please keep in mind. The S5 comes stock with AWD which drives its price high. Like others have mention...it is at a price point between a 335 and M3 (About 7k more than a 335 AWD and 7k less than an M3). However, for MY 2008 - 2012, the Audi S5 used a V8 engine (underperformed) and is now using a V6 Supercharger. The car also dropped in price for the reason of that and there is no longer a gas guzzler tax that is incorporated onto the car.
The '13 S5 is now approx $5k more than a 335 AWD and $15k+ less than an M3.
The RS5, which finally arrived in the States, is now at $69k (starting) competing directly with the M3 and C63.
Going back to the interior debate. I still stand by my personal opinion that Audi has the nicest interior, but I do think Mercedes is easily second. This is a big deal for me, otherwise I would have bought a 335 or G37 instead.
Other guys on bimmerpost.com also share the same voice as far as interior is concerned. I think its kind of funny that you think Audi has the ugliest interior Steve. I respect your post, but I find this one is a little skewed.
Carbon Fiber Inserts, Smooth Flat Bottom Steering Wheel, MMI functions within reach, and the Navi superior to MB.
Please keep in mind. The S5 comes stock with AWD which drives its price high. Like others have mention...it is at a price point between a 335 and M3 (About 7k more than a 335 AWD and 7k less than an M3). However, for MY 2008 - 2012, the Audi S5 used a V8 engine (underperformed) and is now using a V6 Supercharger. The car also dropped in price for the reason of that and there is no longer a gas guzzler tax that is incorporated onto the car.
The '13 S5 is now approx $5k more than a 335 AWD and $15k+ less than an M3.
The RS5, which finally arrived in the States, is now at $69k (starting) competing directly with the M3 and C63.
Going back to the interior debate. I still stand by my personal opinion that Audi has the nicest interior, but I do think Mercedes is easily second. This is a big deal for me, otherwise I would have bought a 335 or G37 instead.
Other guys on bimmerpost.com also share the same voice as far as interior is concerned. I think its kind of funny that you think Audi has the ugliest interior Steve. I respect your post, but I find this one is a little skewed.
Carbon Fiber Inserts, Smooth Flat Bottom Steering Wheel, MMI functions within reach, and the Navi superior to MB.

About a year ago when I was shopping for a near car to replace my 2009 C300, I found the MMI system to be very inconvenient and hard to maneuver. It just didn't seem intuitive like the comand knob, but I'm sure you would get used to it; however, I didn't have to with BMW or Mercedes interface. As far as navigation, I'm not familiar with Audi's, but the Mercedes' navigation isn't bad at all. But to that point, I have never found any in-car navigation system to be great, I would much prefer my iPhone's, but in the car. I'm glad that Audi is finally coming to their senses as far as pricing and competition placement. Until now they seem like their stance was, they are Audi, we do what we want. We outsell any other competitor globally, so we are the best.
If the OP cares about 0-60 I would go with 335/S5.
There are also a couple of vids of a 2012 C350 coupe. One with a 0-60 time around 6 seconds in "E" mode, and the same care again in "S" mode and I've timed that a few times with a stopwatch and it comes in a hair over 5 seconds.
Looks like the times that Mercedes posts are somewhat conservative, compared to what these cars are actually capable of.
And no, I'm not looking for a 'this is faster than that' debate...I owned a muscle car before this and that stuff get's a bit tiring, frankly. I'm just sayin', the coupe seems to be quicker than the factory spec numbers suggest. Naturally, there are a lot of factors to get a good time out of your car, starting with the abilities of the driver.
There are also a couple of vids of a 2012 C350 coupe. One with a 0-60 time around 6 seconds in "E" mode, and the same care again in "S" mode and I've timed that a few times with a stopwatch and it comes in a hair over 5 seconds.
Looks like the times that Mercedes posts are somewhat conservative, compared to what these cars are actually capable of.
And no, I'm not looking for a 'this is faster than that' debate...I owned a muscle car before this and that stuff get's a bit tiring, frankly. I'm just sayin', the coupe seems to be quicker than the factory spec numbers suggest. Naturally, there are a lot of factors to get a good time out of your car, starting with the abilities of the driver.

Perhas maybe the coupe is slightly lighter then the sedan, making up for a faster then advertised 0-60 time? Additionally, I find that Merc conservatively publishes their power and 0-60 times. I live at sea level too, which may help, perhaps where they test officially is at a higher elevation?




