C240 Perfomance
It's like Philly and New York. Philadelphians despise New York, while New Yorkers don't even know Philadelphia exists. Now, to keep things in perspective, the C230 is NOT the New York of MB's lineup....It's more like Miami...a fun, happenin' little town. What's the 240? How about, hmm, Cleveland? Ha, you think people in Miami spend time worrying about Cleveland?
this thread just keeps getting better!!
To the others...
It's simple Physics. I love how my debate skills are attacked and then the only evidence I get supplied with that the 240 is faster is "I've driven both, the 240 is faster. Period". Wow, real scientific there, buddy. You've earned yourself a Dewey button. It might feel faster, but that's because the springs they put in there are for 70-year old men, and the *** drops down every time you step on the gas.
You want to get into buying power and who deserves to be driving a Benz? Why don't you ask yourself why you're not driving a Bentley instead of lamenting MB selling to the masses. I'm not going to sit here and justify why I chose to buy a c230 over a c350, or a 330,or an s4, or an e55, all of which I was considering, but I will defend my car's limited acceleration against the biggest POS in MB's line-up, the C240.
Only the 2005 owner's are passionate about their cars? I beg to differ...but it's funny, I don't see the loudmouth 240 defenders in this thread ever adding anything constructive anywhere else...
Ok boys...enough already. You win. Your car defies the laws of physics and is faster from 65-85 than the C230. Happy now?
Cheers.
EXCELLENT POST Del!
Driving my C230k on a cold winter day was a blast. on a hot summer day it's a whole different car
your opinion means alot coming from a 300SEL owner

Um, anyway, here's another report on the C240's blinding accelleration:
"C320s best all-around. Test C320 sedan did 7.2 sec 0-60 mph, coupe 6.9; both had automatic transmission. Test automatic-transmission C230 sedan took 8.1 sec. Manual-transmission C240 sedan took 9.2 sec, weak for this class. Test C32 took just 5.1 sec, but supercharger-related throttle lag tempers midrange response"
Last edited by Outland; May 22, 2005 at 01:35 AM.
"Dude, my car is so fast, look man, I posted my vids to templeofvtec.com. Here, I wasted this Merc C32 in mybadass Honda Civic 1.7Del Slow Si Type R as he was turning into Mic Dees,... Yeah man.... it was cool. Huh?, Mickey D's? Probably got no chingchang after the lease payments on the C32...Yeah, anyway, he was turning, but I raced him till the drive-thru, and spanked him! Dudes, check back Monday!"
Put your money where you mouth is. Step up and settle it on the track.
last i checked street racers were not the ones who spend days at the track perfecting their driving ability. And by track I mean one with turns. These 1/4 mile long patches of road are just about as exciting as underwater basket weaving.
Stoplights really dont do much for me either. wow monkey push foot to floor and car go real fast. something about that just seems pointless.
but dyno plot or not a car that is left behind in 3 runs from 60-130 should not be considered faster than the car by which it got crushed.
this is all dumb but trash talking but I dont enjoy people yelling that im wrong and full of bs. I have done the testing and my video footage is here to prove it. If you are a non believer thats great but watch the video and tell me its full of bs. At that point there is nothing I can say. I am not about to go spend 80 bucks for a dyno pull on my C230k. I will tell you now -- it feels very very slow and it get beaten by just about any MB made (other than C240 4matics).
Last edited by CynCarvin32; May 22, 2005 at 03:27 AM.
Um, anyway, here's another report on the C240's blinding accelleration:
"C320s best all-around. Test C320 sedan did 7.2 sec 0-60 mph, coupe 6.9; both had automatic transmission. Test automatic-transmission C230 sedan took 8.1 sec. Manual-transmission C240 sedan took 9.2 sec, weak for this class. Test C32 took just 5.1 sec, but supercharger-related throttle lag tempers midrange response"
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
I don't even want to see this ridiculous thing...independent sources verify my, ct's, and outland's position. Unbiased, non-partisan. And you know why you don't see cars quoted for their time from 60-130? Because it's a BS statistic. It takes a week and a half for either of these cars to reach 130... How about 0-130? Why not say your car is faster from 45-57? It's dumb. And homeboy, I don't understand gearing and axle ratios? The rear-axle ratio for these cars is IDENTICAL. 3.46. Game. set. Match. So now we have same gearing, same axle-ratio, heavier, more drag, less HP, and less torque for the 240.
As for heat-soak, it applies to EVERY vehicle. I'll grant you it affects FI cars more, but until you're smart enough to figure out the precise effects it has, as I have posted in another post, stop bringing these anecdotal arguments to the table. If the 230 is sapped of 6% power and the 240 is sapped of just 4%, the 230 still has enough ponies and lb-ft to shred its ugly brother.
There, every fallacious argument has been dealt with. Ever see 'My Cousin Vinny'? I'M DONE WIT DIS GUY!
(Ok, that's a bit inflammatory of me...but I'm on 2-hours of sleep after flying to London, where every other vehicle is a C-class, and this has been pent up the whole ride form the airport)...Will check in later boys.
ct, Outland...keep it real

Nice torque curve. And you have a manual, imagine auto, on a hot and humid day after driving for 30 minutes. or going uphill.
Ok.. Case closed I guess.
The term is paper racing. And you guys do it all the time. IIRC, the C55 and crowds had a fit when some reviews were showing the C32 faster.
Nice torque curve. And you have a manual, imagine auto, on a hot and humid day after driving for 30 minutes. or going uphill.
Ok.. Case closed I guess.

I didn't think the filters would make a difference, how many HP did u gain from them?
I didn't think the filters would make a difference, how many HP did u gain from them?

Wow.. looking at Ctc230k's post and he's the one with the filters. I though you said the C240 had the filters.. that's even funnier :p

Guess there's not need for a video anymore. Delbomber just saved 100$
Last edited by Narcissus; May 22, 2005 at 12:16 PM.

Guess there's not need for a video anymore. Delbomber just saved 100$

Last edited by LMing; May 22, 2005 at 12:21 PM.
Last edited by LMing; May 22, 2005 at 12:38 PM.
It's a bit more money for a bit more HP but this is all done in an effort to put Freskies Kustoms on the map. Anyway, if I wanted more HP I would have kept the C230k. it's a lot easier to modifiy.
What's your name on MR?

I win.
Is that immature enough for you? On par with claiming to have (phantom) videos to support your position. You seriously just lost the tiny shred of credibility you had. That, and the fact that you hid the fact you modded your car to be able to "walk away" from stock c230s should get you banned from ever engaging in another debate, and forced to watch stock c230's eat up your stock geezer car.
Ok, this is finished. This turned out to be all a big joke...no video + mods = one desperate c240 owner.
Last edited by delbomber; May 22, 2005 at 12:51 PM.






