2006 C230 SS vs. 2005 C230 SS
07-22-2005, 01:45 PM
#27
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Philadelphia, PA/Naples, FL
Posts: 258
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C320 Coupe
the new A4 2.0T might be faster than the c230, but i don't know, is it just me or is the '05 A4 styling worse than the previous model? the '02-'04 models were beautiful cars.
07-22-2005, 02:32 PM
#28
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 prodigy1387
the new A4 2.0T might be faster than the c230, but i don't know, is it just me or is the '05 A4 styling worse than the previous model? the '02-'04 models were beautiful cars.
07-22-2005, 03:12 PM
#29
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: mars
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bike
Originally Posted by ctC230K
the new S4 is so awful looking the first time i saw it from the rear i thought it was an A3!!!
07-22-2005, 03:36 PM
#30
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
Yes people. The A4 2.0T is pretty quick, much faster than any C230. Hey, but speed isn't everything. Whether you like the new Audi look is another matter altogether.
. Damn los angeles...
07-22-2005, 08:11 PM
#32
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08' BMW E92 Coupe
Originally Posted by ctC230K
when i drove the 2004 C320 I could really feel that extra power pulling the car from 0 to 60 and on the highway passing acceleration was excellent. it was also very easy to spin the tires from a stop even with an automatic! :v
07-22-2005, 08:12 PM
#33
Super Member
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: Long Island, NY
Posts: 694
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
08' BMW E92 Coupe
Originally Posted by PC Valkyrie
In the latest issue of Road & Track, they test the new A4 2.0T Quattro sedan with a 6 speed manual transmission and sport package. This engine has 200HP and 207 ft-lb torque.
0-60 in 6.4 seconds and 1/4 mile in 14.9 seconds
It pulled 0.86g on their skid pad and did their slalom at 65.5mph.
Compared to the 2005 or 2006 C230, the "base" A4 clearly is much faster, despite being "heavy" and with AWD. From a driving dynamics point of view the A4 clearly is the winner. Of course, other things like MB brand image and personal taste about styling/looks may still draw customers to the C230.
0-60 in 6.4 seconds and 1/4 mile in 14.9 seconds
It pulled 0.86g on their skid pad and did their slalom at 65.5mph.
Compared to the 2005 or 2006 C230, the "base" A4 clearly is much faster, despite being "heavy" and with AWD. From a driving dynamics point of view the A4 clearly is the winner. Of course, other things like MB brand image and personal taste about styling/looks may still draw customers to the C230.
07-22-2005, 09:39 PM
#34
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C230wz 6M
Originally Posted by prodigy1387
the new A4 2.0T might be faster than the c230, but i don't know, is it just me or is the '05 A4 styling worse than the previous model? the '02-'04 models were beautiful cars.
07-22-2005, 09:53 PM
#35
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
The A4 with the 2.0T motor is a 2006 model. If you tested a 2005 or earlier model, then it would have been the old 1.8T motor, which is a lot slower.
07-22-2005, 11:07 PM
#36
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 2,015
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 C320wz
Originally Posted by skahung
well, he drives alot
whoot? 3 full tanks with $100...no way, fillup for me is $40-45
whoot? 3 full tanks with $100...no way, fillup for me is $40-45
07-23-2005, 01:27 AM
#38
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Philadelphia
Posts: 331
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 C230wz 6M
Originally Posted by PC Valkyrie
The A4 with the 2.0T motor is a 2006 model. If you tested a 2005 or earlier model, then it would have been the old 1.8T motor, which is a lot slower.
Regardless, that 6.4 time is pure lunacy. Audi USA website lists 7.3 (multitronic CVT with FrontTrak and 6-speed manual with quattro) which is much more realistic and representative of the ride I had in it.
Last edited by delbomber; 07-23-2005 at 01:34 AM.
07-23-2005, 08:00 AM
#39
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
Originally Posted by delbomber
you're aware the 06 audis debuted before the 06 MB's right?...it was the 06 2.0T quattro, tested in April...just got my 05 c230 in May and had no interest in it until late April (still the 05)...
Regardless, that 6.4 time is pure lunacy. Audi USA website lists 7.3 (multitronic CVT with FrontTrak and 6-speed manual with quattro) which is much more realistic and representative of the ride I had in it.
Regardless, that 6.4 time is pure lunacy. Audi USA website lists 7.3 (multitronic CVT with FrontTrak and 6-speed manual with quattro) which is much more realistic and representative of the ride I had in it.
08-04-2005, 10:10 AM
#40
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 C230K Sport Sedan in Brilliant Silver/Black
Originally Posted by jan ken po
$2.09 for 91. Man I love the South.
Hey- what octane do you all put in your c230k's? midgrade or actual supreme? I was thinking I'd go for the highest octane (supreme) so the engine won't ping in the summer heat.
08-04-2005, 10:33 AM
#41
Newbie
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: SoCal
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'05 C230K SS - Obsidian Black
Originally Posted by Amy_fl
Hey- what octane do you all put in your c230k's? midgrade or actual supreme? I was thinking I'd go for the highest octane (supreme) so the engine won't ping in the summer heat.
08-04-2005, 02:11 PM
#43
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Avon, CT
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 G35 Sport 6MT, 2005 C230K SS (sold), 1998 Jeep GC 4x4 (da-heep!)
Correction on my funky math as well...
Power to Weight:
2005: 3250 / 189 = 1hp PER 17.2 lb
2006: 3405 / 201 = 1hp PER 16.9 lb
Winner: 2006
Though the 06 is heavier its slightly more horse power makes up the difference.
Power to Weight:
2005: 3250 / 189 = 1hp PER 17.2 lb
2006: 3405 / 201 = 1hp PER 16.9 lb
Winner: 2006
Though the 06 is heavier its slightly more horse power makes up the difference.
08-05-2005, 05:36 AM
#44
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Originally Posted by Burnt Toast
yep and if they did that i doubt the price would stay at what its selling for now. if it dose C32 resale will drop like a rock.
08-05-2005, 05:44 PM
#45
Newbie
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: moreno valley
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 clk500 2000 ford mustang,2002 ford exploer,2002 nissan frontier,2005 c230 komp
Originally Posted by FastBlack
Only the 91 octane (supreme) goes in my C. Down here in the OC, we're paying in the area of $2.75/gal for the good stuff....
08-05-2005, 09:49 PM
#46
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Alexandria, VA
Posts: 52
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2005 C230K Sport Sedan in Brilliant Silver/Black
Originally Posted by lorreno_17404
i agree. only 91 octane goes to c. I bit you do not want less for your car! Hi,i'm new.
08-11-2005, 12:49 AM
#50
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gas Mileage:
2005: 24 City / 32 Highway
2006: 21 City / 29 Highway
Winner: 2005
If comparing auto's the 2006; is 21 city/ 30 highway
I drove the 2005/2006 back to back in both auto's
and the the new 7 speed is super smooth and less
jerky in first touch of the throttle and first/second
gears. It seems almost too civilized,couldnt tell
a difference in speed. The car i drove was not
prepped yet being so new with overinflated
tires.
The 2005 engine felt more energetic, maybe it was the
supercharger, and that rush of the charger and
being lighter.
Not sure how anyone else feels. So it wasnt a great
comparison as far as handling b/c the tires sure
make a difference in feel.
I would surely get an 2005, but I wonder what subtle
imporvement they may have made to improve
reliability on the 06's worth getting.
2005: 24 City / 32 Highway
2006: 21 City / 29 Highway
Winner: 2005
If comparing auto's the 2006; is 21 city/ 30 highway
I drove the 2005/2006 back to back in both auto's
and the the new 7 speed is super smooth and less
jerky in first touch of the throttle and first/second
gears. It seems almost too civilized,couldnt tell
a difference in speed. The car i drove was not
prepped yet being so new with overinflated
tires.
The 2005 engine felt more energetic, maybe it was the
supercharger, and that rush of the charger and
being lighter.
Not sure how anyone else feels. So it wasnt a great
comparison as far as handling b/c the tires sure
make a difference in feel.
I would surely get an 2005, but I wonder what subtle
imporvement they may have made to improve
reliability on the 06's worth getting.
Last edited by blk900t; 08-11-2005 at 12:08 PM.
