c230K loaner
05-20-2005, 02:45 AM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
c230K loaner
i got 2005 loaner today, how do u guys drive it, it has no power at all, and doesnt have the pleasent grumble the 320 does. i must admit at HWy speeds its feels fine, but seems to really lack at lowe speeds. jus t my opinions i guess
05-20-2005, 03:16 AM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C230SS 6MT, 1966 Triumph TR4a IRS, Shelby Cobra 427 Supercharged
That seems to be the general opinion. The C230 in stick lets you use the powerband more efficiently. Only test drove the C230 auto once and didnt realize it was in C and not S till i got back to the dealer, so I really cant compare!
05-20-2005, 05:03 AM
#3
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Scripps Ranch, San Diego CA.
Posts: 495
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05' C230 Kompressor SS Mars Red 6speed--1990 300D 5speed
yea the c230 manual is way different then the autos in low speed power. i drove the auto and it is slower but in my manual c230 it puts me into my seat when i press on the gas in every gear :p
05-20-2005, 08:19 AM
#4
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: GA
Posts: 1,823
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'06 Lexus GS300 RWD, '07 Camry SE V6 auto, '91 190E 2.6 auto
My wife and I recently went to our local dealer, considering trading in our manual for an auto. Other than a slower "launch", the auto didn't "feel" as underpowered as others here would have led me to believe (my lead-foot wife would've have noticed as well). Lots of exageration on this forum.
05-20-2005, 08:42 AM
#7
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C230wz 6M
Originally Posted by AdamVax
yea the c230 manual is way different then the autos in low speed power. i drove the auto and it is slower but in my manual c230 it puts me into my seat when i press on the gas in every gear :p
Trending Topics
05-20-2005, 10:11 AM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Long Island, New York
Posts: 1,238
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C230SS 6MT, 1966 Triumph TR4a IRS, Shelby Cobra 427 Supercharged
I remember when I was looking at cars, I read a review of the 2005 C class, and even the professional review said not to buy the auto as it saps too much power. I think though if it had an AMG shift program it may be a lot better. Is that possible to have done? I know the tunners have upgraded software for the AMG transmissions when you do a large power mod to an AMG model, but never seen it for non AMGs.
05-20-2005, 10:22 AM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C230wz 6M
Originally Posted by Capt Nemo o2
Only test drove the C230 auto once and didnt realize it was in C and not S till i got back to the dealer, so I really cant compare!
would have told me when I mentioned the lack pf pick-up. But I can say quite unabashedly after driving the 5-speed loaner, in proper S mode, for two weeks that it doesn't do the car justice, and falls below a level of performance I think I would need on a day-to-day basis.
05-20-2005, 11:17 AM
#10
Member
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Montreal
Posts: 130
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 White C230 SS
In the beginning i feel the same, but after 4 months of trainning, the transmission sheft at much higher RPM now, heh guess when the car is new, the ecu didn't learn anything yet
05-20-2005, 10:03 PM
#12
Senior Member
Originally Posted by Lookin4Benzpart
c230 does suck and sounds pretty cheap. 
I test drove both and could have got either, but the price difference - the 320 seemed like a real poor value (plus my wife did not feel any big difference).
05-20-2005, 10:28 PM
#13
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C230wz 6M
Originally Posted by Frank Rizzo
I'm tryin hard not to say "so does your _____" here....
I test drove both and could have got either, but the price difference - the 320 seemed like a real poor value (plus my wife did not feel any big difference).
I test drove both and could have got either, but the price difference - the 320 seemed like a real poor value (plus my wife did not feel any big difference).
05-20-2005, 10:38 PM
#14
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 C320wz
Originally Posted by delbomber
230 vs 320, pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the 230 is a better car. It's not like the 320 was leaving anyone in its dust, either at just 0.6 secs faster to 60.. Ah, but with the 350 out, things get more interesting. I don't think anyone will be able to continue arguing 230 vs 350, especially with the '06 230 taking an apparent dip performance-wise and the 350 getting a nice boost.
05-21-2005, 03:43 AM
#16
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: West Covina, CA
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 C230k (SOLD), 2005 C230k (Lease ended), 2004 Carrera 4 Cab, 2007 530i
man only if I get a 230 loaner, everytime they give me either a 240 or even worst a freaking wagon....
05-21-2005, 11:43 AM
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 3,543
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
excites your girlfriend
Originally Posted by vdubpower
i got 2005 loaner today, how do u guys drive it, it has no power at all, and doesnt have the pleasent grumble the 320 does. i must admit at HWy speeds its feels fine, but seems to really lack at lowe speeds. jus t my opinions i guess
05-21-2005, 08:00 PM
#20
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Diego, CA & San Jose, Costa Rica & Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 9,498
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
1959 220S / 1979 230 G / 2002 A210 AMG / 2003 C320 SC / 2004.5 C320 SS / 2005 ML350 SE / 2008 smart
Originally Posted by mick1
that 0.6 sec cost me $8k more
