C-Class (W203) 2001-2007, C160, C180, C200, C220, C230, C240, C270, C280, C300, C320, C230K, C350, Coupe

Beaten by a late 90s Toyota Camry

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old 02-28-2007, 12:44 AM
  #26  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
patrick_y's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: SF Bay Area, CA
Posts: 2,090
Received 11 Likes on 11 Posts
2006 E55 and 2002 E320
Originally Posted by GDawgC220
Mmm, MazdaSpeed 6, 2.3L turbo 273hp/280tq w/ AWD! Quite a sedan and can be had for about 22k now.
My opinion of the Mazda Speed 3:

Has a bit too much torque steer, manual is pretty good but not as good as Honda, lots of turbo lag.

Good handling in terms of grip, but steering response isn't as precise as everything else.

I love the body though, it's very practical and roomy. Making it very practical.

My general rule, I don't buy cars with horizontal engine placement that are AWD cars. I think the engine should be placed longitudinally. However, Audi, the king of AWD cars is going against my rule with their A3 (as with the VW GTI and VW R32).
Old 02-28-2007, 12:49 AM
  #27  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Moviela's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Orange County
Posts: 2,848
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 15 Posts
2005 C Wagon (No snickering please!)
Avoid future embarrassment. Get a C55, rebadge it C240 and teach the next Camry a lesson!
Old 02-28-2007, 01:03 AM
  #28  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
yeuchau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SoCal, Irvine
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stage 2 C7 A6, QX60
Originally Posted by Boom vang
I got beaten in a similar situation by an older crappy Pontiac Grand Am

Embarassing!

Not sure why regular versions of German sedans are so underpowered compared to American or Japanesse

C320 3.2L 215hp
Accord 3.0L 244hp

C350 3.5L 268hp
G35 3.5L 280hp
Z350 3.5L 300hp

even a Altima has 260hp and a PT louser has 230hp from the Turbo version

MazdaSpeed 6 gets 274hp from only 2.3L!
the new G is 307hp and goes from 0-60 in about 5.3 and so is is350.
and the altima SER accelerates to 60 in 5.5 sec.
sigh

but if you put the c35, it's not that bad, and of course the new 335i is even faster.
but for same performance, we had to pay a lot more, cause it's german
Old 02-28-2007, 03:42 AM
  #29  
Member
 
MBNorCal's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Bay Area, CA
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2006 C350 Sport 6MT, 2000 BMW 323ci
Originally Posted by Moviela
Avoid future embarrassment. Get a C55, rebadge it C240 and teach the next Camry a lesson!
why not just get a SLR?
Old 02-28-2007, 08:54 AM
  #30  
Senior Member
 
k_lundquist's Avatar
 
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!)
Originally Posted by yeuchau
the new G is 307hp and goes from 0-60 in about 5.3
Don't I know it!
Old 02-28-2007, 01:30 PM
  #31  
Super Member
 
KleanC's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
White C
haha..No wayyy
Old 02-28-2007, 01:49 PM
  #32  
Senior Member
 
Slater126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
Originally Posted by k_lundquist
Yeah, I was smacked down in my 05 SS by a new 2.0T Jetta.

So sad.
Haha, another embarassing beat down I bet that one was a few car lengths. I wouldn't have even messed with a Turbo VW myself. No freakin' way. I bet it was driven by a sorority sister.
Old 02-28-2007, 01:52 PM
  #33  
Senior Member
 
k_lundquist's Avatar
 
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!)
Actually it was a middle aged guy. Its wan't too bad, but still saddening. I wrote about the story here:

https://mbworld.org/forums/c-class-w203/168210-2005-c230k-sedan-6mt-vs-2006-vw-jetta-2-0t.html
Old 02-28-2007, 02:00 PM
  #34  
Senior Member
 
Slater126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
Originally Posted by k_lundquist
Actually it was a middle aged guy. Its wan't too bad, but still saddening. I wrote about the story here:

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthread.php?t=168210
You were definitely at a disadvantage. The Jetta is lighter and more powerful. You lost valuable time when the ESP kicked in and by 4th gear, the Jetta's (please tell me it wasn't "Tornado" red) greater power left you in the dust like Wile Coyote, which wasn't unpredictable.
Old 02-28-2007, 02:41 PM
  #35  
Senior Member
 
k_lundquist's Avatar
 
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!)
Actually I think the Mercedes is a little lighter.

Nah it wasn't tornado red, if I remember right it was Silver.

I realize the C230 wasn't meant to be a rocket but it did bother me getting beat by a Jetta.
Old 02-28-2007, 03:59 PM
  #36  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
yeuchau's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: SoCal, Irvine
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Stage 2 C7 A6, QX60
Originally Posted by k_lundquist
Don't I know it!
u sure know it, that's why u have it right??
haha
Old 02-28-2007, 05:01 PM
  #37  
Senior Member
 
k_lundquist's Avatar
 
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!)
Hah! Yeah, not that my C230 wasn't a great car. It was adopted by my friend so I can still visit it every now and again.

At the end of the day I was sick of losing to friggin Jettas! And speed isn't everything, but I also was sick of driving a "luxury car" that didn't have bluetooth phone, voice activated systems, or real leather.

Although I do miss saying I drive a Mercedes. Infiniti just doesn't have the same ring to it. Someday when I can afford a car more in the 50 - 60k range I'll definately come back to the brand.

I'll stop thread jacking now...
Old 02-28-2007, 10:11 PM
  #38  
Senior Member
 
Slater126's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
Originally Posted by k_lundquist
Actually I think the Mercedes is a little lighter.

Nah it wasn't tornado red, if I remember right it was Silver.

I realize the C230 wasn't meant to be a rocket but it did bother me getting beat by a Jetta.
"Reflex Silver." Lol. Well, it is what it is. You can't possibly think the C230, lighter or not, is a race car. 0-60 in 7.5 is the published time though I think it may be a tad slower than that. Popular Mechanics tested an '05 C230 SS with a 6-speed in its 9/04 issue and it took 8 seconds to reach 60. A Jetta 1.8T is probably about .5 seconds quicker. I may take mine to the drag strip this summer for s--ts and grins but I'm not setting my expectations very high.

Look on the bright side -- 8 seconds is about on a par with an '84 Monte Carlo SS, which was considered a "muscle car" just 23 years ago. I just view the car as peppy, and half way fun to drive, and that's about it. If you want to hand that Jetta its tail next time, step up to a C32.
Old 03-01-2007, 12:09 AM
  #39  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
Outland's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: The blue white rock, third out.
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
2002 C230 Coupe(M111)
Originally Posted by tee_tz
Please don't do that, then you'll embarrass the whole brand.

Yeah, it sucks that you pay so much more than a Camry, Altima, Maxima but the performance isn't on par. Hopefully this changes in the W204 series. Nissan's and Toyota's need to not be close to a Benz.


Tee_Tz.
How are you embarrassing the brand exactly? I think that's great...hell, I'd put a 240D outback, and stick a turbodiesel badge on the other side. THat would be freakin' great. SLEEPER! Ever heard of a Q-ship ?

The W204 itself is plenty embarrassing...
Old 03-01-2007, 09:28 AM
  #40  
Senior Member
 
k_lundquist's Avatar
 
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!)
Originally Posted by Slater126
"Reflex Silver." Lol. Well, it is what it is. You can't possibly think the C230, lighter or not, is a race car. 0-60 in 7.5 is the published time though I think it may be a tad slower than that. Popular Mechanics tested an '05 C230 SS with a 6-speed in its 9/04 issue and it took 8 seconds to reach 60. A Jetta 1.8T is probably about .5 seconds quicker. I may take mine to the drag strip this summer for s--ts and grins but I'm not setting my expectations very high.

Look on the bright side -- 8 seconds is about on a par with an '84 Monte Carlo SS, which was considered a "muscle car" just 23 years ago. I just view the car as peppy, and half way fun to drive, and that's about it. If you want to hand that Jetta its tail next time, step up to a C32.
Never said or thought the C230 is a race car. The Jetta isn't a race car, neither is the late 90s Camry that started this thread. The point is that in terms of straight line performance the competition are making cars for less and that have more power.

Now did I buy the MB for straight line performance? Hell no! Do I expect it to at least keep up with a Jetta and a Camry?? Kinda yeah.

Eh, but that's what I bought an 07 G35 for - to beat Jettas and Camrys.
Old 03-01-2007, 11:24 AM
  #41  
Senior Member
 
TechSuperstar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Worcester, MA
Posts: 352
Received 12 Likes on 10 Posts
15' CLS400
Got beat down

Hp Stat's are only part of the equation. I've beaten many other cars which had more hp than my 192hp C230 coupe. The driver makes all the difference! The C230k can take off with the right driver. Take the traction control off, spin the tires! I can chirp thrid in mine and its stock!

...So, one day i'm at a light, and this guy in a subaru impreza thinks he's gonna take me. The light turns green he he took off leaving me in the dust. What I forgot to realize was it was wet and he had AWD. I had no traction in the rear! Makes you think, AWD even though it's slower, makes all the difference when its wet. All you 4matics out there, on a wet day, pull up to a light against anyone with just RWD and you'll toast them.
Old 03-01-2007, 11:37 AM
  #42  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
tee_tz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Posts: 1,159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ML63 AMG
Originally Posted by Boom vang
I got beaten in a similar situation by an older crappy Pontiac Grand Am

Embarassing!

Not sure why regular versions of German sedans are so underpowered compared to American or Japanesse

C320 3.2L 215hp
Accord 3.0L 244hp

C350 3.5L 268hp
G35 3.5L 280hp
Z350 3.5L 300hp

even a Altima has 260hp and a PT louser has 230hp from the Turbo version

MazdaSpeed 6 gets 274hp from only 2.3L!
Horsepower means nothing, unless your towing a cattle of cows. The torque does matter. Also what matters is the aerodynamics of the car, the weight distribution, the wider tires for increased handling (and wider sway bars) and the reliable engine. So yes, the Japanese cars, like the Infiniti G35, have more horsepower than the German counterparts, i.e. G35 versus the BMW 335, but I dare ... dare! a G35 to try and race a 335i (no experience drivers, just everyday people) and you'll suddenly start saying: "Oh, but the magazine said... well, the horsepower... but the ... wait the.."




Tee_Tz.
Old 03-01-2007, 11:44 AM
  #43  
MBWorld Fanatic!
 
tee_tz's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dar es Salaam, Tanzania
Posts: 1,159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
ML63 AMG
Originally Posted by TechSuperstar
Hp Stat's are only part of the equation. I've beaten many other cars which had more hp than my 192hp C230 coupe. The driver makes all the difference! The C230k can take off with the right driver. Take the traction control off, spin the tires! I can chirp thrid in mine and its stock!

...So, one day i'm at a light, and this guy in a subaru impreza thinks he's gonna take me. The light turns green he he took off leaving me in the dust. What I forgot to realize was it was wet and he had AWD. I had no traction in the rear! Makes you think, AWD even though it's slower, makes all the difference when its wet. All you 4matics out there, on a wet day, pull up to a light against anyone with just RWD and you'll toast them.
Not really. Ferrari had been winning F1 for years and years and years, not because Michael Schumacher was the best driver in the world, just because Ferrari had a better product. So I get what you mean, but if you're getting a V4 Jetta and some kid is given an E63, even if you race him on the Nuremberg track (hoping you'll out perform him in corners), the E63 (i.e. THE MORE POWER CAR) is so much more powerful that on the little straightways, he'll fly out of your sight once again.

So in the end, the driver is less and less important. Especially now that the electronics in a car practically do everything for you. Now don't get me wrong, if you're driving a C230 Kompressor and C230 V6, the cars are just about even, but if a bad driver and good driver drive each 10 times and race (a total of 20 races), the good driver will likely win all 20 or at least 18. It shows there that the cars are equal if driven by the right person.


Tee_Tz.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.

Quick Reply: Beaten by a late 90s Toyota Camry



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:00 AM.