C320 vs. C230K
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
2007.5 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD
C320 vs. C230K
I'm currently looking at a 2005 C230K and a 2004 C320.
I test drove the 230K and it seemed a bit lethargic, but I'm looking for MPGs more than performance.
I'm pretty new to the world of MB and looking for some opinions and data.
Thanks All!!
2004 C320
2005 C230K
I test drove the 230K and it seemed a bit lethargic, but I'm looking for MPGs more than performance.
I'm pretty new to the world of MB and looking for some opinions and data.
Thanks All!!
2004 C320
2005 C230K
Senior Member
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 477
Likes: 30
From: Maricopa, AZ
2012 S63, 2013 E350 Bluetec
I second BadAss' comment. If you're looking for mpg more than performance, this is especially true. Mine gets over 30 on the highway and not bad in city driving. I feel it has decent performance. The price on the window is about right depending on how many miles are on the car.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2006
Posts: 3,020
Likes: 0
From: SoCal, Irvine
Stage 2 C7 A6, QX60
MBworld Guru
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 22,058
Likes: 18
From: Diamond Bar, CA
W206 PHEV AMG
the 320 avg mpg's around 22-24 depends on how you drive like yeuchau said.
the 230k should avg something like 30-32mpg. not a whole lot of difference.
btw, the C320 you are looking at is a 2004.5 which has the same front brakes as the C32/55 but only says "mercedes" instead of "AMG" on it. same suspension setup as the 2005. the only drawback is the 2004 has the old interior. go test drive and sit in them and see how you like both.
personally I think you'll be happier with the 2005 c230k if you are not into modding. if you are into modding it gives you more reason to take the C320 since it has a more refined engine and gives you some fun to change the look of the car to the updated ones. 2004 C320 sport is rare btw.
the 230k should avg something like 30-32mpg. not a whole lot of difference.
btw, the C320 you are looking at is a 2004.5 which has the same front brakes as the C32/55 but only says "mercedes" instead of "AMG" on it. same suspension setup as the 2005. the only drawback is the 2004 has the old interior. go test drive and sit in them and see how you like both.
personally I think you'll be happier with the 2005 c230k if you are not into modding. if you are into modding it gives you more reason to take the C320 since it has a more refined engine and gives you some fun to change the look of the car to the updated ones. 2004 C320 sport is rare btw.
Last edited by FrankW; Jun 4, 2008 at 06:33 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,560
Likes: 2
From: Sacramento/San Gabriel/Riverside
01' C32o
the 320 avg mpg's around 22-24 depends on how you drive like yeuchau said.
the 230k should avg something like 30-32mpg. not a whole lot of difference.
btw, the C320 you are looking at is a 2004.5 which has the same front brakes as the C32/55 but only says "mercedes" instead of "AMG" on it. same suspension setup as the 2005. the only drawback is the 2004 has the old interior. go test drive and sit in them and see how you like both.
personally I think you'll be happier with the 2005 c230k if you are not into modding. if you are into modding it gives you more reason to take the C320 since it has a more refined engine and gives you some fun to change the look of the car to the updated ones. 2004 C320 sport is rare btw.
the 230k should avg something like 30-32mpg. not a whole lot of difference.
btw, the C320 you are looking at is a 2004.5 which has the same front brakes as the C32/55 but only says "mercedes" instead of "AMG" on it. same suspension setup as the 2005. the only drawback is the 2004 has the old interior. go test drive and sit in them and see how you like both.
personally I think you'll be happier with the 2005 c230k if you are not into modding. if you are into modding it gives you more reason to take the C320 since it has a more refined engine and gives you some fun to change the look of the car to the updated ones. 2004 C320 sport is rare btw.
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
Super Member
Joined: May 2006
Posts: 546
Likes: 10
From: Cumberland, RI U.S.A.
2005 C230WZ SS Capri Blue/Ash
Have to agree with the above comment on the improved looks of the 05. I have an 05 C230, and people are amazed at the fuel economy, especially for the size of it...it's not a tinny 3 cylinder japanese car. The best I've gotten has been 36.7mpg. Did a little test when I had to bring mine in for service a few years back. Brought mine down to the local stealer (about 25 miles away), and I got about 34 mpg. Took the loaner C320 back the next day to pick up mine. Same drive, same speed, very similar weather conditions, and that one came back with 24 mpg. About 10 mpg less.
I also prefer the interior of the 05, as this was the first year of the slight re-do. I prefer the 05's front and rear bumpers, and lower vaelance panels.
Although, like mentioned earlier, an 04 C320 Sport is indeed a rare find. I originally thought the previous owner just replaced his stock 16" with the Adharaz (funnel) style that came on the C230 Sports. Guess not.
Cintoman
I also prefer the interior of the 05, as this was the first year of the slight re-do. I prefer the 05's front and rear bumpers, and lower vaelance panels.
Although, like mentioned earlier, an 04 C320 Sport is indeed a rare find. I originally thought the previous owner just replaced his stock 16" with the Adharaz (funnel) style that came on the C230 Sports. Guess not.
Cintoman
Last edited by Cintoman; Jun 4, 2008 at 01:03 PM. Reason: add info
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 2
From: Central Florida
R129, XF Sportbrake, SC400
OP: I think you should go with the c230k especially with today's gas prices. Plus you'll get the updated interior and exterior.
Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
97 J30\71 220 gas 4-speed
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2006
Posts: 2,147
Likes: 2
From: Central Florida
R129, XF Sportbrake, SC400
Are you talking about a 2006? Those have the 2.5L v6. I'm not 100% sure but they probably get slightly worse MPG if that is what you're going for.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 7,424
Likes: 3
From: New York City
C55 ///AMG, 535xi
Thread Starter
Newbie
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
2007.5 Chevrolet Silverado 2500HD
side note:
Last night I took the wife to check out this 2005 C230K.
She totally digs it. Except she said it would look better with Blacked Out wheels.
Super Member
Joined: Sep 2005
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
From: Nuevo México
2005 C230K Sport Sedan, 6 speed manual
The 2005 C230K with the supercharged 1.8 liter engine will definitely give you the best fuel economy of the choices mentioned. If you want more power and better economy, skip the automatic transmission and find one with the 6-speed manual.
The 2.5 liter V-6, used in the 2006-2007 C230 is a nice engine. But expect about a 10-15% increase in fuel consumption over the supercharged 4-cylinder. Also expect slightly slower acceleration. Again, the 6-speed manual will improve performance and economy.
The C320 has a very nice 3.2 liter V-6. This is a strong running engine with good power and torque. This is NOT the engine to buy, if economy is a top priority. Expect about 30% increase in fuel consumption over the C230K. Also, this engine has 3 valves per cylinder (older technology).
The 2.5 liter V-6, used in the 2006-2007 C230 is a nice engine. But expect about a 10-15% increase in fuel consumption over the supercharged 4-cylinder. Also expect slightly slower acceleration. Again, the 6-speed manual will improve performance and economy.
The C320 has a very nice 3.2 liter V-6. This is a strong running engine with good power and torque. This is NOT the engine to buy, if economy is a top priority. Expect about 30% increase in fuel consumption over the C230K. Also, this engine has 3 valves per cylinder (older technology).
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2007
Posts: 640
Likes: 5
From: Phoenix, AZ, USA
2005 C240 4MATIC, 2020 GLC300 4MATIC
For what you're looking for, definitely get the 2005 230K. Plus it has the updated interior, which is much much better than anything pre-2005 model year.
