well good it looks better. try to win a fight by talking about topics not at hand. steller debating ability right there.

well you know the moron at Casa Vega in Sherman Oaks last night with the E320 Sport that said E55 V8Kompressor thought his car looked good too... until i pointed, laughed and took off

who cares about looks? we are talking about performance here.

 

Just so you know the C240 comes manual as well. And go drive your car on a hot humid day with the A/C on see if you can race against a civic.

Listen buddy... the C240 owners haven'T started this ****, we really don'T care about speed and I guess that's why we bought the C240. Take it from me bud, I had both car. I sold the C230 after 1 year so I took a really big hit in depreciation, not so I would get a quicker car. I would have bought a friggin STI or something, I wanted a more quiet ride and that's what I found in the C240.

And try to accept this as well. after 100km/h the C240 has more pickup than the C230. final. It's even worse on a hot and humid day, the heat soak really kills the 1.8. Go WOT uphill on a hot and humid day and you'll know what I mean. The 2.3 was faster.

 

And what's will all the **** from the 2005 owners only, There was never this kind of issue with the previous 03-04 1.8 owners. I think they never should have made the C230 sportier looking, we're stuck with anally retarded kids who thinks their 299$ a month rented I4 is a friggin supercar that can outrace anybody on the street. Not trying to generalise but this is getting out of hand.

 

every time when ddrango posts stupid question, it always turns out C230 vs C240, lol.... both car will be history, no point to argue like this, I am sure that ddrango will post again soon about C230 V6 vs C230 I4 soon....

 

First, he said......and in the next breath he says...

 

Well do a search and go back as far as 2002 and you won't find a single thread about all this.

 

couldn't agree more. any idiot with average credit can get into a benz nowadays. doesn’t make them car enthusiasts, or even people with a hint of automotive knowledge. the idiots making comments about someone's age are the ones who are insecure about their lack of life experience. be it an age deficiency or a gray matter deficiency.

 

There's one good thing about this though. the more Mercs on the streets, the safer it is. 5 star crash testing, 8 airbags standard. emergency braking, ESP and traction control for that price , can't beat that...

 

IIHS

cant argue with that.

the new jetta is better than a c-class, overall.link

 

A couple who wish to remain anonymous had been involved in a serious accident. The couple shared their experience with the folks at the local Mercedes-Benz dealer while they were purchasing their replacement vehicle (edited to remove names and locations).

As offered and requested during our meeting with you yesterday, attached is a copy of the photographs (photo on the website) my wife and I showed to you of our C320 4MATIC after our accident on Saturday, December 27, 2003. As mentioned, my wife and I were fully stopped in traffic on Route 91 North, when we were hit from behind by a 4X4 truck moving at approximately 65-70 MPH. The truck driver admitted to the Connecticut State Policeman that he had been looking at a billboard and never saw the line of traffic stopped in front of him. The force of the impact pushed our car into a large commercial van stopped in front of us. As the photographs rather dramatically show, the Mercedes combination of crumple zones, passenger compartment safety cage, and seat/seat belt tensioners design clearly saved our lives.

The emergency medical technicians who first arrived on the scene all told us that, upon observing the extensive amount of the damage to both rear and front end of our car, they presumed that they were going to find the occupants dead. They were astounded to watch as I opened my driver side door and stood up, albeit it rather slowly.

As with all of our prior Mercedes-Benz automobiles, my wife's 2004 C320 was purchased largely based on the safety offered by the product line. While the appearance and handling (and mileage of my E class diesel) are all wonderful and attributes which make the cars a pleasure to drive, the design and construction of the safety features make the cars the best conservative choice to protect driver and passengers on today's high-speed, cell phone-distracted roadways. A number of our friends laughingly refer to our two Mercedes as our "tanks"; however, especially referring to the accident this week, all of them acknowledge that being in any other car than our little "tank" would have resulted in our being killed.

Please convey our thanks to the Mercedes-Benz design and engineering team (they should be very proud of their achievements) and feel free to use the pictures as proof of concept testimony from two very grateful live crash test dummies.

 

That is rich! lol

 

"Insecure about their lack of life experience"

You are the queen of drivel. Listen to your dumbass talk about lack of automotive knowledge...you can't even grasp HP, Torque and curb wieght. Its so simple, both cars have the same gearing, one has more torque, more HP, and less mass.

Must be your age...all that life experience...clogging up that rotting nut you call a brain. Did they teach physics back in your little schoolhouse?

 

I'd like to see the numbers on a dyno, WHP would be far from HP. especially on a hot day, the stock intercooler isn'T the greatest, heat soak really kills the 1.8. Especially with the AC on.

Driving my C230k on a cold winter day was a blast. on a hot summer day it's a whole different car

 

You really are an idiot. Have someone read your comments before you post next time. It might help your standing somewhat.

 

How about you take your car in and get a Dyno.

So far, its only been C230 owners putting up Dynos. What, the C240 crowd is terrified to post a pittful 130RWHP?

 

have you ever tested both cars? like cyncarvin32 and myself have? the whole point of this argument is that contrary to what logic might suggest, the c240 is faster than the c230. i know it must be an extreme leap of faith that you simple cannot accept under any circumstances.

 

I didn't see a C230k dyno either? I had both cars dude. I put 45k on them each year, I know what the f*ck I'm talking about.

 

Ive been in all of them. C240, C230 SS, C320, and even the C32. When I take my car in for service, I like to slap the Gtech on each one to see how quick it is. I know for a fact that a car like the C240 isn't in danger of beating a C230. The best time I got for a C240 was 9.17 seconds to sixty. All the 230 sedans were low to mid eights.

Now, have you? Or does that old junker of yours never find its way to the dealer?

 

Wow... When o when did someone talk about a c240 beating a c230 0-60?

 

the dyno does tell the whole story on a car that has a weak IC. unless you put the dyno on the freeway and measure rwhp after multiple 100+mph runs, it does not tell much about dynamic hp on an FI car. while the c230 heat soaks rather badly, the c240 does not suffer from any such ailment and can run at peak efficiency all day long in all conditions.

 

Dunno if this can help... Blue line is C240, red is optimized
Left scale Power in kW and PS (HP). Right scale Torque in Nm (x 0.738 = lbft).

 

at no time, he is making a red herring argument. typical.

 

Take a pill. I was talking the forumn in general. I have never seen a Stock C240 dyno'd by anyone here, or at MB Klasse.

If you got em, post em.

Look, hows this for convincing.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
The C320 is only a couple tenths faster than the C230. HOW THE HELL is a car that's identical in nearly every way, but down 47HP going to be faster than the C230?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mercedes Benz C320
Engine
3.2 liter SOHC 18-valve V-6
Horsepower
215
Torque
221 lb feet
0-60 mph
7.2 seconds
1/4 mile
15.5 seconds @ 91 mph
60-0 mph
130 feet

Mercedes-Benz C230 Sports Coupe
Engine
2.3 liter, supercharged, DOHC, 16-valve in-line 4 cylinder
Horsepower
192
Torque
200 lb feet
0-60 mph
7.4 seconds
1/4 mile
15.6 seconds @ 92 mph
60-0 mph
120 feet

 

1) the c320 is not 7.2 anything, factory spec is 6.9, i'll go with that thanks.

2) thats the *&^%$# 2.3 you are quoting. the 2005 c230 has the 1.8, or didn't you know that?

 

my junker is a real mb, not some cobbled together crx pos that mb made to reach "young" people.

if mbusa sucks so much, why don't you just sell your crx benz and just drive the rest of those pieces of crap in your sig?