New C230 V6 thoughts on performance.
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally Posted by schwarzwagen
and this is relevant how?
I started an honest thread about the performance difference and wanted to share my findings with the "community." First Outland trashed the thread, now you.
Take your own advice, because frankly, I don't give a s h i t what you think!
I started an honest thread about the performance difference and wanted to share my findings with the "community." First Outland trashed the thread, now you.
Take your own advice, because frankly, I don't give a s h i t what you think!
alright then...you went to test drive a new car and the sales let you drove off and "RACE" someone else?
Out Of Control!!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 28,933
Likes: 12
Actually, being a new engine, it might not have opened up.
I know that when folks have raced the new 4.5L X5 4.4i they are neck to neck with the old 4.4L X5 4.4i, but after a few thousand miles, the newer cars open up fully and can overtake the older X5's.
I know that when folks have raced the new 4.5L X5 4.4i they are neck to neck with the old 4.4L X5 4.4i, but after a few thousand miles, the newer cars open up fully and can overtake the older X5's.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,923
Likes: 3
Mercedes Benz
Originally Posted by FrankW
then why did you reply??
alright then...you went to test drive a new car and the sales let you drove off and "RACE" someone else?
alright then...you went to test drive a new car and the sales let you drove off and "RACE" someone else?
Yes Frank they did. Actually gave me the keys and said bring it back when u are done. It is a C230 not an AMG and I have refered 4 sales to the dealership in the last 2 months so I have a bit of "pull" -- if you really need pull to get a C230 for 12 miles of use. So I let someone drive my car and did some simple freeway pulls to see how the two stacked up. Well there was a "drag race on a empty back road with a 55 mph speed limit.
The 2.5L just felt slow. It sounded rather odd and rough for a small 6. I actually enjoyed the C230k a lot more and no longer wish I could have the new small 6. Maybe if the C230 had the 2.8L motor it would be a more logical car.
Admin Alumni
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 8,143
Likes: 19
See Garage
This constant bickering between V6 advocates and supercharged I4 advocates is getting tiresome. Sorta like the Israelis and Palestinians arguing over who got there first. There's no answer to either set of arguments.
Supercharger advocates can't be convinced otherwise... The C240 advocates are equally stubborn. It's nice that MB offers such a wide range of engine choices so that everyone can feel served. It generates the same amount of American dollars for MB, so they don't care if you guys want to have a pissing contest over which is better.
Some of these threads are started by people who want to bait an argument. Some of you should know better than hopping in so willingly. We have an ignore button on these forums. Think about using it.
Be happy with what you bought and let's move on... defending your decision only suggests to others that you are not happy.
Supercharger advocates can't be convinced otherwise... The C240 advocates are equally stubborn. It's nice that MB offers such a wide range of engine choices so that everyone can feel served. It generates the same amount of American dollars for MB, so they don't care if you guys want to have a pissing contest over which is better.
Some of these threads are started by people who want to bait an argument. Some of you should know better than hopping in so willingly. We have an ignore button on these forums. Think about using it.
Be happy with what you bought and let's move on... defending your decision only suggests to others that you are not happy.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,753
Likes: 0
From: York, PA
2003 C230K Sport Coupe, 1986 190E 2.3
Originally Posted by Outland
New machines alone don't make a new block. Most of your Toyodas, Triflexes and Cinncinatti's(just to name a few) can machine a wide range of engine designs and parts. Its more likely the old machinery was just that, old. Poor Cpk, unable to hold tighter tolerances on the "new" engine, or just plain faster cycle times.
You can change a few dimensions and call it new. Auto companies do this all the time. The Nissan V6, despite its very modern high output, is the same architecture engine its been for over a decade. There's too much money at stake and too much testing to be done to go with a ground up design unless you have to.
Doesn't matter. The point I was making is that here you have an engine, the 2.5L, that is a V6 just like the under achiever in the C240, running in a very similar block, but this time sporting 4 valves and dual overhead cams with variable valve timing. Not really a stretch to go from 3 to 4. Another cam on each bank, redesigned heads with the fourth valve and the VVT system.
So, in theory, the wieght of the engines should be the similar. The old engine dynos in at 168HP, the new one over 200. Then there's the supercharged four...its down quite a few ponies over the 6. So, how can these two perform so identical in the C230? Something doesn't add up at all.
Is the gearing in the 7 speed auto that bad? Is it optimized for the C350, and the other cars are just stuck with what works for the better performing 3.5L versions.
Given the short stroke, I'm surprised it doesn't rev higher.
You can change a few dimensions and call it new. Auto companies do this all the time. The Nissan V6, despite its very modern high output, is the same architecture engine its been for over a decade. There's too much money at stake and too much testing to be done to go with a ground up design unless you have to.
Doesn't matter. The point I was making is that here you have an engine, the 2.5L, that is a V6 just like the under achiever in the C240, running in a very similar block, but this time sporting 4 valves and dual overhead cams with variable valve timing. Not really a stretch to go from 3 to 4. Another cam on each bank, redesigned heads with the fourth valve and the VVT system.
So, in theory, the wieght of the engines should be the similar. The old engine dynos in at 168HP, the new one over 200. Then there's the supercharged four...its down quite a few ponies over the 6. So, how can these two perform so identical in the C230? Something doesn't add up at all.
Is the gearing in the 7 speed auto that bad? Is it optimized for the C350, and the other cars are just stuck with what works for the better performing 3.5L versions.
Given the short stroke, I'm surprised it doesn't rev higher.
Senior Member
Joined: May 2005
Posts: 466
Likes: 0
From: mars
bike
Originally Posted by mctwin2kman
The C230 is entry in NA for the C class so it is the slowest.
Lets not forget the C230 is a "Sports Sedan" and the C240 is a "Luxury Sedan" for the Entry Level C Class.
But both are still slow rides
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,753
Likes: 0
From: York, PA
2003 C230K Sport Coupe, 1986 190E 2.3
Originally Posted by skahung
Wrong.....
Lets not forget the C230 is a "Sports Sedan" and the C240 is a "Luxury Sedan" for the Entry Level C Class.
But both are still slow rides
Lets not forget the C230 is a "Sports Sedan" and the C240 is a "Luxury Sedan" for the Entry Level C Class.
But both are still slow rides
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,923
Likes: 3
Mercedes Benz
Originally Posted by amdeutsch
There is no 2.8 motor. There are 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5. 
C250 C280 and C350. Things were logical once upon a time.
is there something special about the C230 name?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,923
Likes: 3
Mercedes Benz
Originally Posted by MB-BOB
This constant bickering between V6 advocates and supercharged I4 advocates is getting tiresome. Sorta like the Israelis and Palestinians arguing over who got there first. There's no answer to either set of arguments.
Supercharger advocates can't be convinced otherwise... The C240 advocates are equally stubborn. It's nice that MB offers such a wide range of engine choices so that everyone can feel served. It generates the same amount of American dollars for MB, so they don't care if you guys want to have a pissing contest over which is better.
Some of these threads are started by people who want to bait an argument. Some of you should know better than hopping in so willingly. We have an ignore button on these forums. Think about using it.
Be happy with what you bought and let's move on... defending your decision only suggests to others that you are not happy.
Supercharger advocates can't be convinced otherwise... The C240 advocates are equally stubborn. It's nice that MB offers such a wide range of engine choices so that everyone can feel served. It generates the same amount of American dollars for MB, so they don't care if you guys want to have a pissing contest over which is better.
Some of these threads are started by people who want to bait an argument. Some of you should know better than hopping in so willingly. We have an ignore button on these forums. Think about using it.
Be happy with what you bought and let's move on... defending your decision only suggests to others that you are not happy.
How is it that people here are stubborn? Is it not logical to believe fact when fact is presented.
This thread was not to debate N/A vs. Kompressor C240 vs C230 it was to show that the new small V6 was not very impresive.
I think it is only nautural to see if the new version is any better than the old version. In this case it looks to be litte to no quicker than the car it replaced, gets worse MPG and has a less "sporting" sound (IMHO). I would say it sure is smoother at idle than the 4cyl and if that is something you value the V6 is the way to go.
If you feel inclined to dull the forum to a point where the qualities of respective motors should not be discussed, MBworld.org is dead just like Rover. I simply dont find people saying hey nice car interesting. Lets talk discuss and debate. How many picutres of a car can we see and how many posts can u write saying "congrats looks great man"? It gets really old really fast.
If we cant discuss the nature of the cars lets all just talk about trying to fit 20 inch wheels on the car and cutting out coils from the springs!
Last edited by CynCarvin32; Aug 16, 2005 at 01:23 PM.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
This constant bickering between V6 advocates and supercharged I4 advocates is getting tiresome. Sorta like the Israelis and Palestinians arguing over who got there first. There's no answer to either set of arguments.
I disagree. Some are in the process of buying one soon and go by these opinions in determining what engine they may want. It's all helpful in some way or another
I disagree. Some are in the process of buying one soon and go by these opinions in determining what engine they may want. It's all helpful in some way or another
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by Outland
I'm an engineer by trade. Maybe you should do more research than reading the press releases.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by FrankW
then why did you reply??
alright then...you went to test drive a new car and the sales let you drove off and "RACE" someone else?
alright then...you went to test drive a new car and the sales let you drove off and "RACE" someone else?
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by ricky.agrawal
Actually, being a new engine, it might not have opened up.
I know that when folks have raced the new 4.5L X5 4.4i they are neck to neck with the old 4.4L X5 4.4i, but after a few thousand miles, the newer cars open up fully and can overtake the older X5's.
I know that when folks have raced the new 4.5L X5 4.4i they are neck to neck with the old 4.4L X5 4.4i, but after a few thousand miles, the newer cars open up fully and can overtake the older X5's.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,498
Likes: 4
From: San Diego, CA & San Jose, Costa Rica & Stuttgart, Germany
1959 220S / 1979 230 G / 2002 A210 AMG / 2003 C320 SC / 2004.5 C320 SS / 2005 ML350 SE / 2008 smart
Originally Posted by CynCarvin32
I bet that wack nut of a human Wiedermann gave u that wonderful link. go drive the couple and leave an honest thread alone. If you dont care go watch something else. Maybe Mario needs a play date....u can keep him company.
hmmm.... haven't seen Mario since he ate those two 3/4 lb burgers at Fuddruckers.....
but anyway, yeah, driven both C230K loaners and my brother's C240,
and still a YAWN. My C320's are not as big of a yawn, but ok for daily driving. (Granted mine are no longer stock in performance). I can only imagine that the C350 would actually finally get the C-Class to an acceptable competitive (meaning brand competitor's V6 cars) level for regular schmo's like me (exception being C32 / C36 / C43 / C55 (V8)AMG's obviously). But when i drove the SLK55, CLS65 and SLR, i was actually quite impressed. Now there's some nice performance.
Never got to drive Weidermann's C32 though, so can't say anything more than whatever thing you might say that has you so pissed off at Mario.
not my problem, and i don't care, and i get to watch whatever i want !
Last edited by Saprissa; Aug 16, 2005 at 06:05 PM.
Admin Alumni
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 8,143
Likes: 19
See Garage
Originally Posted by CynCarvin32
I have a question for you before you lump people into classifications.
How is it that people here are stubborn? Is it not logical to believe fact when fact is presented.
If you feel inclined to dull the forum to a point where the qualities of respective motors should not be discussed, MBworld.org is dead just like Rover.
If we cant discuss the nature of the cars lets all just talk about trying to fit 20 inch wheels on the car and cutting out coils from the springs!
How is it that people here are stubborn? Is it not logical to believe fact when fact is presented.
If you feel inclined to dull the forum to a point where the qualities of respective motors should not be discussed, MBworld.org is dead just like Rover.
If we cant discuss the nature of the cars lets all just talk about trying to fit 20 inch wheels on the car and cutting out coils from the springs!
There are lots of fixed opinions on this forum. Some want the supercharged 4-banger, and will blast anything that isn't, especially some who have invested in said 4 which will eventually be replaced by something better. This happened when the 2.3L became the 1.8L, and is now happening when the 2.4L V6 is being replaced with the 2.5L V6.
If you think I wanted to stiffle debate, you miss the point. What I want is civil debate, not the name calling posted throughout this topic. It's my job as a moderator here. If you don't like it, then take it up with me in a Private Message.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by Outland
New machines alone don't make a new block. Most of your Toyodas, Triflexes and Cinncinatti's(just to name a few) can machine a wide range of engine designs and parts. Its more likely the old machinery was just that, old. Poor Cpk, unable to hold tighter tolerances on the "new" engine, or just plain faster cycle times.
You can change a few dimensions and call it new. Auto companies do this all the time. The Nissan V6, despite its very modern high output, is the same architecture engine its been for over a decade. There's too much money at stake and too much testing to be done to go with a ground up design unless you have to.
Doesn't matter. The point I was making is that here you have an engine, the 2.5L, that is a V6 just like the under achiever in the C240, running in a very similar block, but this time sporting 4 valves and dual overhead cams with variable valve timing. Not really a stretch to go from 3 to 4. Another cam on each bank, redesigned heads with the fourth valve and the VVT system.
So, in theory, the wieght of the engines should be the similar. The old engine dynos in at 168HP, the new one over 200. Then there's the supercharged four...its down quite a few ponies over the 6. So, how can these two perform so identical in the C230? Something doesn't add up at all.
Is the gearing in the 7 speed auto that bad? Is it optimized for the C350, and the other cars are just stuck with what works for the better performing 3.5L versions.
Given the short stroke, I'm surprised it doesn't rev higher.
You can change a few dimensions and call it new. Auto companies do this all the time. The Nissan V6, despite its very modern high output, is the same architecture engine its been for over a decade. There's too much money at stake and too much testing to be done to go with a ground up design unless you have to.
Doesn't matter. The point I was making is that here you have an engine, the 2.5L, that is a V6 just like the under achiever in the C240, running in a very similar block, but this time sporting 4 valves and dual overhead cams with variable valve timing. Not really a stretch to go from 3 to 4. Another cam on each bank, redesigned heads with the fourth valve and the VVT system.
So, in theory, the wieght of the engines should be the similar. The old engine dynos in at 168HP, the new one over 200. Then there's the supercharged four...its down quite a few ponies over the 6. So, how can these two perform so identical in the C230? Something doesn't add up at all.
Is the gearing in the 7 speed auto that bad? Is it optimized for the C350, and the other cars are just stuck with what works for the better performing 3.5L versions.
Given the short stroke, I'm surprised it doesn't rev higher.
I still don't see what evidence you have that the engines are the same or even similar.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
[QUOTE=SaprissaBut when i drove the SLK55, CLS65 and SLR, i was actually quite impressed. Now there's some nice performance.[/QUOTE]
You have driven a CLS65? How was that?
You have driven a CLS65? How was that?
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by MB-BOB
I appreciate your remarks, but I don't appreciate the attitude.
There are lots of fixed opinions on this forum. Some want the supercharged 4-banger, and will blast anything that isn't, especially some who have invested in said 4 which will eventually be replaced by something better. This happened when the 2.3L became the 1.8L, and is now happening when the 2.4L V6 is being replaced with the 2.5L V6.
If you think I wanted to stiffle debate, you miss the point. What I want is civil debate, not the name calling posted throughout this topic. It's my job as a moderator here. If you don't like it, then take it up with me in a Private Message.
There are lots of fixed opinions on this forum. Some want the supercharged 4-banger, and will blast anything that isn't, especially some who have invested in said 4 which will eventually be replaced by something better. This happened when the 2.3L became the 1.8L, and is now happening when the 2.4L V6 is being replaced with the 2.5L V6.
If you think I wanted to stiffle debate, you miss the point. What I want is civil debate, not the name calling posted throughout this topic. It's my job as a moderator here. If you don't like it, then take it up with me in a Private Message.
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
Originally Posted by schwarzwagen
I answered your stupid comment with another stupid comment. You English leaves something to be desired as I cannot really understand your second comment.?.?
why did you answer my "stupid" comment if you thought it was stupid?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 9,498
Likes: 4
From: San Diego, CA & San Jose, Costa Rica & Stuttgart, Germany
1959 220S / 1979 230 G / 2002 A210 AMG / 2003 C320 SC / 2004.5 C320 SS / 2005 ML350 SE / 2008 smart
Originally Posted by schwarzwagen
You have driven a CLS65? How was that?
my bad: CLS55
loved it ! luxury and power. But I wouldn't buy it.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,923
Likes: 3
Mercedes Benz
Originally Posted by MB-BOB
I appreciate your remarks, but I don't appreciate the attitude.
There are lots of fixed opinions on this forum. Some want the supercharged 4-banger, and will blast anything that isn't, especially some who have invested in said 4 which will eventually be replaced by something better. This happened when the 2.3L became the 1.8L, and is now happening when the 2.4L V6 is being replaced with the 2.5L V6.
If you think I wanted to stiffle debate, you miss the point. What I want is civil debate, not the name calling posted throughout this topic. It's my job as a moderator here. If you don't like it, then take it up with me in a Private Message.
There are lots of fixed opinions on this forum. Some want the supercharged 4-banger, and will blast anything that isn't, especially some who have invested in said 4 which will eventually be replaced by something better. This happened when the 2.3L became the 1.8L, and is now happening when the 2.4L V6 is being replaced with the 2.5L V6.
If you think I wanted to stiffle debate, you miss the point. What I want is civil debate, not the name calling posted throughout this topic. It's my job as a moderator here. If you don't like it, then take it up with me in a Private Message.
This was to talk about the new motor not being worth the added weight and how it really was no better than what it replacfed. There were threads before talking about power to weight ratios of the two cars in an effort to see which would be quicker. Our little (likely flawed) test was to just say the C230 2006 was not that impressive.
I think people jump out with attitude and then the fight starts. It seems like people jsut are not able to talk about the facts without getting personal. It is not about defending what you purchased its talking about cars. I have many cars and have had many others. I will say that I would not buy another E55 likely and that my E500 is not doing well (in the shop for a month straight). I dont come here to moan about that i just want to talk about cars.
I took your comments as a polite way of saying stop posting on the topic.I however dont see why the topic needs to be stopped.
We were confronted for not having proof. We provided proof and still were told to go find better proof. So we let that topic die. We tested a new car and people posted links about "gay" posting for us.
What happens here is not right but its not fair to make topics look closed off. I would love to talk about the differences in the two cars but maybe that can not take place.
Thread Starter
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,054
Likes: 1
From: Nashville
300SEL
Originally Posted by FrankW
yes yes...me Engrish bad...
why did you answer my "stupid" comment if you thought it was stupid?
why did you answer my "stupid" comment if you thought it was stupid?
Admin Alumni
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 8,143
Likes: 19
See Garage
Originally Posted by CynCarvin32
I am not saying dont do your job Bob..that is not the issue at all. I know you need to keep this under control here but the fact remains that I am not the one who keeps throwing mud around. People read a post then get all wound up thinking we are back to the C230k vs C240 debate. .
Originally Posted by CynCarvin32
I think people jump out with attitude and then the fight starts. It seems like people jsut are not able to talk about the facts without getting personal.
Originally Posted by CynCarvin32
I took your comments as a polite way of saying stop posting on the topic. I however dont see why the topic needs to be stopped... What happens here is not right but its not fair to make topics look closed off. I would love to talk about the differences in the two cars but maybe that can not take place.
For my part, I wouldn't buy any car based on a single word uttered on these forums, no matter how "objectively" offered. I would get off my lazy butt and go test drive the cars for myself and make up my own mind.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,424
Likes: 3
From: New York City
C55 ///AMG, 535xi
I'm sure the new 06 line up is faster in every level compared to the older engine line-up. old I4 1.8K/2.3K is uncomparable with the new v6, c280 will fly the old 3.2, and obviously the 2.4, the 3.5 is just eat my dust G35
but no matter what....I think that the 06 230ss have to "break in" first to compare with the old 230ss
but no matter what....I think that the 06 230ss have to "break in" first to compare with the old 230ss
