When I was looking at the C230, I also took a look at the C240 but was terribly disappointed in the C240's performance. I then tried out the C320 which felt much more similar to the C230 than the C240. Is there anybody else out there that thinks Mercedes could do away completely with the C240 and move on with their better performing C230 and C320's?

CP

P.S. Obviously, virtually anyone who bought the C230 could have just as easily afforded the C240, so cost is obviously not an issue for everyone who opted for the C230.

 

r u retarded?

coupe on one hand and sedan on the other.

or maybe coupe in one hand and sh!@ on the other.

totally different cars. performance wise - yes the c230 outperforms the c240, but people have different needs. like families, duuuh.

i have a c240, my bro has c230, i enjoy the best of both.

 

lhoang,

Gee, thanks for a very intelligent response. Good to know that Mercedes does not discriminate selling you a car contingent on an IQ exam.

The point remains on whether or not the C320 is truly the only other iteration needed in the US C Class series besides the C230. The C240, in my opinion, was very similar to a standard (non-V6) Honda Accord in performance. For Mercedes to keep their prestige, they probably should dump the C240 or change it around.

 

so what is so wrong with the 240? I know it has less power than the 230, but what does prestige has to do with power? It actually sounds smoother. As far as your argument with the 4-cyl Accord, the Buick century I got as a loaner has defenetly more power than both of them, but prestige?!! I don't think so.

 

From a Hatchback owner??? Wow. What a snob!

Although I'm glad that there are others that agree with me on the concept that MB needs to watch how downmarket it goes in the US to protect its prestige image. Definately agree there.

MBs prestige seems to have done fine with small sedans - the C240 handily outperforms its predecessors, the 190e and the C220. Given that fact, I doubt that the C240 hurts MBs image in the US - its a clear improvement on its precedessors. We could debate whether the C240 hurts MB's image in the US- but I think the answer is pretty clear. (In any event, MB's image in the US is not that of a performance car maker).

MB's reproduction of a 1990 Corrado Hatchback is probably a better debate, if you want to talk about going downmarket and MB "keeping their prestige." 1990 Corrado - 1.8 liter supercharged 4 cylinder, 0-60 in 7.5 seconds, see the pic below for what it looked like. Look and sound familiar???

Finally, please check your Terms of Use:

"You agree, through your use of the Discussion Forums, that you will not post any material which is knowingly false and/or defamatory, inaccurate, abusive, vulgar, hateful, harassing, obscene, profane, sexually oriented, threatening, invasive of a person's privacy, or otherwise violative of any law."

In this particular case, I believe your remark out of the blue about people's C240s is patently "Harassing," possibly seen as "abusive" by the receiving party, and provoking of an argument. Further, IMO, it is meant to be "defamatory" to all members who drive the C240, and given the intentional nature of it also "harassing" and confrontational, at minimum and possibly "hateful," as well.

 

When I was shopping, I test drove all three, C230, C240, C320. I picked the C230 because it was a hatch not a sedan. As for performance, I felt the C240 was the quietest and smoothest of the 3.

If I were buying a sedan today, I would pick the C240 over the C320, no doubt.

 

As a litigator, your claims are completely unfounded, SoCal240/6. If you are still in college, I would recommend taking a basic course on legal theory. There is no point to act like you are being harrased or being a target of hate. I do agree that the C240 is better than the older entry MB sedans. However, there is really nothing to connect a VW Corrado with the current MB C230K either internally or externally beyond the hatch nature. I can post an image of a Hyundai and your C240 and say they were twins. However, that is as silly as your statement about the C230 and the Corrado.

 

If you are still in college, I recommend you take a course in Sarcasm. Or maybe Subtlety 101. You obviously have no concept of either.

 

My lowest internet and phone quote from about 7 dealers in Southern California before personally visiting a dealer was $22,500. I ended up paying $21,200 for my 2002 new base C230 Coupe and a new C240 can never touch that. The only other cars I even considred were a used 2000 Volvo C70, a 2000 Saleen Mustang, and a new S2000. At the time with of the decision with 4.7% 5 yr financing I couldn't pass up my perceived value for the Coupe. It took me 3 days of negotiations and I walked away happy.

My co-worker came in a week later with her slightly used C240 for I think $31000. I would have rathered buy the new S2000 for that money. I was more looking for a nice valuable toy car and the the Coupe satisfied that need.

 

And you do?

 

Wow, that's really low! I always wondered why anyone would spend around $30K for a MB Hatchback (that's what I figured most cost) when one can get a 285hp Z350 or G35 Sports Coupe for around that much (or less). But $21,200 for a MB Hatchback puts it in a much lower price league than those cars. You can't even get a decent Honda for $21K! As long as it reasonably holds together, you really can't go wrong for that little coin.

 

Yes. Point to any evidence that I don't.

 

Actually, now that I've read this entire thread, I can see that this will get out of hand in short order. So, to all here, let's watch the name calling. No one is to be called "retarded" and no one is to be called a "snob."

Debate is fine. Name calling is not. Keep it civil.

 

Your signature is sarcastic, true. But it is anything but subtle. Most members use their signature to post pictures of cars they own. You currently own neither. But that doesn't stop you from titty-twisting those who do...

 

I dont think M-B should do away with the entry-level sedan, but the new generation of (M271) 4 cylinders outperform the thirsty V-6s. The new C230 (1.8) gets 23/32 mpg while making 189 hp, the C240 gets 20/26 while making 168 hp. Where's the logic there, other than the negative stigma of having a 4 cylinder?

 

I just think the Kompressor should be an option on all MBs with an engine capable of having it added, and the sport package should be an option too, its not right now on the C240 is it?

 

i think mb should stop r&d and just raise their prices and they'll succeed at holding up there prestige. its not the quality of product, its all about the label. oh yeah, to further uphold their prestige they should only sell to middle aged white males.

we should do a demographics poll to see the average age, race, and gender to see what the ideal mb buyer is.

uuuh, let me guess...

 

They already had the 4 banger in the old C. It was panned and generally disliked as being too rough. The small V6 has been universally praised as the replacement for the 4 banger.

There are very limited uses for 4 bangers in the US these days, particularly in a BMW/MB. BMW doesn't offer ANY 4 bangers - in the US luxury buyers simply expect at least a 6. Smoothness is a MUST - being "thirsty" (20 v. 23 mpg) isn't really a concern with cheap fuel in the US.

Right or wrong, its just the way it is. Barring some major oil crisis, I doubt that a 4 cylinder will EVER make its way back into any US MB the size of the C sedan or bigger.

 

For the C, the average buyer is a white male, around 46 years old, with a household income of around $92,000.

 

I've tried other signatures that were more subtle. Because of the audience here, they proved to be too subtle - leading only to confusion.

Even my current one is STILL too subtle for some here - based on comments about it (for example, the intended insult to me that "Joe Blow could probably buy 4 of your VWs for the price of his Kleemann compressor"!)

I am a master of subtlety - which includes being able to adjust it to suit the reading audience.

 

The problem with this is most of the active participants in this internet forum are young people. We have over a dozen MB owners at my workplace and no subscribes to any MB forum.

 

Thats the point SoCal, the old 4 cylinders are rough (like the ones in both of our C230s) and have limited appeal despite making more power. But, the new generation of M-B 4 cylinders have dual balance shafts and are reportedly as smooth as a V-6. Can any 03 C230 owners chime in to confirm this?

 

Been watching too much **** videos have we?

 

1) Even with balance shafts, its difficult to get a really smooth 4 cylinder. I'm sure the 1.8 improves on the 2.3's NVH (auto engineering term, "noise, vibration and harshness"), but there was a lot of room for improvement there. It could be significantly improved but still not up to a 6 cylinder.

2) It also does come down to marketing. US consumers just would not take kindly to a 1.8 liter luxury (or near-luxury) MB sedan. Just ain't gonna happen in the US market, currently or in the foreseeable future.

 

To get back to topic:

I originally was considering the C240 sedan. Initially I had planned to buy a W202 C280, then they went and changed generations on me. I liked that the C240 came with a 6-speed and felt that it drove OK, power for me was fine, as I considered the sedan more of a stately cruiser.

I ended up going with the C230K primarily for two reasons.

First, I wasn't quite ready for a grown-up car (what's less grown-up than an economy hatchback ), and thought that the C230K would be a little more fun at this stage in my life. I usually keep my cars for a while (8-10 years), and felt that the C230K would have some potential for future modifications (which would help me maintain interest down the road).

Second, I wasn't planning to drive around with other people that much and room wise the C230K is essentially identical to the sedans in the back (other than loosing about an inch or two of head room), so I figured that I wasn't losing that much room-wise which would still make it fine for carrying excess passengers. This ended up working out OK - in 8+ months of ownership, I've had to carry people in the back less than ten times.

There ended up being another beneficial reason thing about the C230K. As an apartment dweller I don't have a garage (just a covered space) - so I'm kind of glad that I don't have a more expensive car being worked over by the elements. This is also how I justify to myself that I shouldn't pick up a new CLK.

Cheers, BT