T-Roll

Can someone please tell me what the 0-60 time is for a 1998 C280 Sport? I am beginning to hunt for an E55 ('99-'01) and need the same info for that if someone knows it...thanks.

Tom

Rincewind

prolly around 7-8 sec

inbetween there

Rincewind

e55 is like 5 sec

blackmercedes

I haven't driven a C280 M112 on the strip, by I have a friend that has. His 0-60 times ran pretty consistent 7.2-7.5 seconds and quarter miles times in the high 15's. The same night there was a 2000 E55 that was killing most everything with 13.3's and the radar gun got his 0-60's in the low-low fives. Traction was an issue.

For us aspro four-banger folks, my C230 ran consistent 0-60's in the 8.3-8.5 range with quarters in the mid 16's. My aunt's W203 C240 ran almost the exact same times. I thought the extra 18-20 ponies of the M112 six would mean better times, but didn't work out that way.

I wonder why MB understated the C230's times so much? It took a pretty lame launch to get the 0-60 over 10 sec.

C230Kompressed

what bout c230k

DougandhisC280

I've done 6.7 shifting myself.

tpliquid

i got my in abuot 3 seconds. in the rain

sph17

You can check www.mbusa.com to get information about past models in the StarMark section. As per the website:

Acceleration 0-60 mph in 8.0 seconds.

Fuel economy EPA estimate 21 mpg.2 Highway estimate 27
mpg.

C280Sportster

My guess is 7.8, stock (MBUSA times are always high). But Doug said 6.7, I'd love to get under 7 secs stock. So, maybe 8 sec. in the summer (90 degrees) and 7 secs in the winter (20-40 degrees).

I'd like to add Evo-sport underdrive pullys, electric fans, K/N filter, 5w-30 mobil 1 (I'm running 15w-50 from the dealer, blah), lose the 40 pound spare and maybe I can see 6.5.

Someday: Headers, free flow cat, exhaust, etc...I can dream, can't I.

DougandhisC280

I did my 6.7 in the middle of winter. My friend was in the passenger seat with a stop watch.

C230Kompressed

so if your 280 did 6.7, is my kompressor able to do.......low 6's?

FrankW

6.7? interesting...

7.2-7.5 like previous thread said is pretty much what a stock C280 can do.

anyway, 99 E55 can run low 5's (some ppl got it into the high 4's) and 00-02 E55 can easily do high 4's with decent traction. What do you mean hunting btw? looking to buy one? If so, try avoid the 99 E55 for being the first year car and have less goodies than the 00-02.

DougandhisC280

I have 20 more horsepower than you.

FrankW

nope only 5 more hp. His 99 C230 kompressor make 189 hp and 200 lb-ft of torque out of the 4 banger. A C280 in the same year makes 194 hp and 195 lb-ft of torque. Even if it's the older inline-6 C280, it would only make the same hp and 4 lb-ft of torque more than the later V6 280.

DougandhisC280

Well then, I guess you should be able to do about the same. Where did you get those numbers. I thought it was someting in the 170 HP range for the C230K.

FrankW

MBUSA.com...15 years overview.

C240 has 170 hp. The C230 without kompressor had 148 hp. The W203 C230k sports coupe had 192 hp when it was using the 2.3 liter unit, now it has 189 hp with the new 1.8 liter unit. The same 1.8 liter unit is use in the C230k sports sedan that only became availiable again this year ( the previous C230k sport ended in 2000 with the W202 chassi).

KurumaGOD

mine hits 60mph in 3.3 sec...TOP SECRET shifting...puahahaha

C230Kompressed

so yeahh...my car is faster :p

C280Sportster

Do you have any mods ?

Chip and pully ?

How does your car run on a cold winter day and on a hot summer day (big difference?) ?

C280Sportster

http://mbusa.com/brand/container.jsp...&rnav=01234567

MBUSA website has a 2001 W202 C230k shown, but then they have the numbers from the W203 C240...

What I don't get is why the C230k isn't a lot quicker then the C280. Power is about the same, and the C230k has a "higher" rear axle ratio 3.27:1 and weights 67 pounds less. All this should equal something, but MB has the C280 being .1 second quicker 0-60. I know C230K drivers believe ther cars are faster and on paper they should be. I'd say the C230k should be .5 seconds faster...but I don't think it is.

I believe, and the numbers can't show this, but the V6 pulls harder/smoother. Talking to people who have driven both, they say the V6 smooth power starts right away and is more continuous then Kompressor power..

In defense of the C230k it can "upgraded" rather easily into a nice sleeper sedan. I'm going to have to spend $2000 to get 20-25 HP from my car, but I guess that isn't too bad in MB-land.

blackmercedes

Except for the AMG cars, MB is rarely accurate on their stated acceleration times. In Canada, the C230K was priced about $10-15K less than the C280. Was it possible that they fudged the numbers so the C280 buyers didn't feel slighted?

The W202 C230K sedan should be a tad quicker than the C280, as it has just as flat torque curve, nearly identical peak power, slightly lower weight and steeper final drive with identical transmission ratios.

Traction isn't a big issue with either model.

That all said, I wonder what the big deal is. Mercedes' strong suit is the highway, not the intersection. Even the slowest Benz is a strong performer at speed. If you want a jackrabbit, there are lots of other cars to buy. Go get an early '90's 300ZX Twin Turbo or last of the Supra Turbo cars. With a few mods, these are 400hp+ cars that can rip off 4.0 sec 0-60 times, with the total cost not much more than a new CL230 coupe.

A bone stock C230K would be hard pressed to run mid 6's. Our 268hp C36 ran mid sixes mostly.

FrankW

not even AMG's accurate about their times. It's about everything (weather, driver, tire pressure, altitude, humidity, etc) when the run is taking place.

C230Kompressed

ive seriously never seen acurate times for c280, c230k, or any AMG c's. does anyone have exact times?

C280Sportster

Maybe, I was thinking the same thing. But I don't think most MB buyers care about 0-60 times that much...even though we do.

Wow 10-15k, man, then hands down you buy the 230k, but in the USA it was like 4-5k I think, and you get a bunch of 230k "options" standard. I love the V6, the sound and feel.

I'd love to see some 0-60 and 1/4 times for a stock C280 and C230k, anyone ?

I think Speedybenz got 0-60 in 7.2, but his car had mods.

One good thing about the C-Class is/was the sport package is a real sport package (not just wheels) and a bargain for all that you get.

blackmercedes

I don't know anyone with a C230K, but my friend has a 1998 C280 that we've had on the strip. He ran 7.5 second 0-60's pretty easily, and if his launch was just perfect could get a 7.2. I would call the 7.5 pretty accurate.

Our 1995 C36 ran 6.3 0-60's all day long without any drama. With some pretty stressful tranny loading and wheel-spin that didn't enagage the "off" portion of the ASR, we got a few 5.8/5.9 runs. That was on Michelin Pilot Sport street tires with only 22lbs pressure in the rears and LOTS of tranny abuse. Slicks would be no better, as you need the tires a little loose off the line to keep driveline momentum up. My wife did one (just one!) run where everything came together. The car launched hard with just enough spin to keep the ASR off but momentum really high. The car grabbed right at the sweet spot and really pulled down the line. Her 0-60 (mph, not feet) run was 5.5 sec and the quarter came up in 14.0 at 100.5 mph.

The real pleasure of the C36 came while moving. On the highway one day I roll-on killed a WRX. He was dealing with turbo lag and I was gooone. The look on the kid's face was priceless. Around town he would stomp the C36.

The only regret I have with the C36 was selling it to buy our lemon 1998 E300 turbo. At over 100K-miles, the C36 was tight, strong, and never had a single problem.