I just dropped my car off at the MB dealer, and the loaner is a 2000 C230K 4 dr sedan. It seems to be considerably more peppy, responsive, and pulls me back in the seat more when I step on the gas. It looks like it normally revs higher in each gear ( auto xmission ) than my 2002 C230K auto.
I wonder if the 2002 is heavier or if it is just tuned differently.
I assume they both have a 2.3 litre engine.

 

Yepp, I think the engines are pretty much the same.

 

There could be a very simple answer to your question.

As far as I understood it, the automatics "learn" and "adapt" to your driving style. So if you baby your '02 C230K and drive it reasonably, even if you stepped on the gas, it wouldn't go as fast as it could if it were always driven fast, cause it has "learned" how to adapt to your casual driving style.

On the otherahnd, the '00 C230 loaner is probably driven the **** outta by customers who abuse it (that's what loaners are for!) and it has learned to be more responsive to aggressive driving styles.

Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but this is how I understood the MB automatics worked.

 

Actually any car that is broken in will feel more responsive than a new vehicle.

 

Well, it looks like I'll be driving this loaner a few days ... why aren't parts stocked in the service department ?
My freind's BMW needed the same part as my MB. BMW had the part in stock, had a loaner waiting, and the BMW was fixed and ready for pickup at the time promised.
Why can't the MB service be at least as good ( or better ) !

 

is your friends BMW a first model year car. Probably not. Thats just a thing you trade off when you buy a new car. When I had my wreck, it took over 2 months to get all the parts in, because the factory wasnt making replacement parts yet. The spare tire tub had to be custom made for me, that took 6 weeks to make and get here from germany.

 

Well my family owns both cars and I regularly drive both and I think the 2002 is peppier (is that a word?). However, the 2000 is an auto, and the 2002 is a manual, so its not a fair comparison. Still, the 2000 has plenty of zip, especially right after a service! (clean oil I guess) BTW the 2000 is rated at 185 hp and 3250 lbs, the 2002 at 192 hp and 3305 lbs.

 

Andrewk,

It's good to hear someone speak from experience and thanks for the Facts ..horsepower & weights.
I still have the loaner, and I still feel the 2000 auto is much more responsive than my 2002 .

 

I think the point made about cars getting faster after they are broken in is a valid point. I've seen several long-term reports in car magazines where a car could be 9.5s 0-60 new, and 8.7 @ 30,000 miles. Thats a pretty significant difference and could be the factor making the 2000 feel more powerful.

 

still driving the loaner .. 4 days later

 

I thought it was just my imagination. The car did seem like it had a lot of grunt to it when I got it as a loaner a couple of weeks back.