Help...convince me...
05-04-2003, 11:47 AM
#27
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SLK Special Edition
I'm sure they have already had their fair share of problems. That particular engine has some trouble I believe. My girlfriends sister had the previous 1.8t and the turbo went out at 40k miles. Thats just not supposed to happen. I think I prefer the 96-01 A4 to the new ones though. The A4 doesn't even have a 6-speed does it?
05-04-2003, 12:14 PM
#28
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Weston, FL
Posts: 394
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C230 Kompressor (02 Copupe)
hm...
I know the feeliong..
I got the c230 coupe....
but Now that I think about it I would go and buy an used S4 (2001 or 02) for around 30k-40k ytou can find them with not too many miles...
luxury, speed, turbos, ohh ****...
Between the 3.0 and the c230 Ill take the c230, and if you plan on moddign get the audi 1.8T...
if not stick with the c230 and put soem wheels on it, it looks awsome.
I got the c230 coupe....
but Now that I think about it I would go and buy an used S4 (2001 or 02) for around 30k-40k ytou can find them with not too many miles...
luxury, speed, turbos, ohh ****...
Between the 3.0 and the c230 Ill take the c230, and if you plan on moddign get the audi 1.8T...
if not stick with the c230 and put soem wheels on it, it looks awsome.
05-04-2003, 01:55 PM
#29
Administrator
Originally posted by noblert10
ITS A MERCEDES BENZ!!! i also want to note that.....relibility, and safety were my # 1 priorities in buying cars. MB is high in all those categories.
ITS A MERCEDES BENZ!!! i also want to note that.....relibility, and safety were my # 1 priorities in buying cars. MB is high in all those categories.
05-04-2003, 05:12 PM
#31
Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 VW Passat variant
RWD vs FWD (C230 sedan vs Audi A4): It depends on where you are and what kind of driving you do most of the time. If you’re running errands, getting from A to B, or just cruising down the highway, the drive system doesn’t make any difference. Most FWD system these days have pretty much conquered torque steering unless you push the car very hard on twisty roads or floor the accelerator coming out of a corner. FWD probably has a slight advantage in the snow belt, but sophisticated control systems like MB ESP seem to make RWD cars tractable in snow (do a search for posts about MB handling during this winter’s snow storms in the northeast).
If you choose the A4 3.0 without quattro, you’ll get a CVT transmission – interesting technology, though Audi has built shift-points into their version, so it doesn’t feel like a CVT.
I think choosing between the two is pretty much a toss-up. Both offer well-balanced packages of drivetrain and suspension which make them fun to drive, and both are good-looking cars inside and out. You do get a CD player with the Audi, as opposed to MB’s eccentric decision to charge everyone $400 extra for an optional CD-changer.
I wrote off the Audi because the closest dealer is 50 miles away, and both cars have a troubling tendency to return to the shop a bit more often than they really should. Otherwise, it’s strong competition for the C class. I think noblert10 is right: you drive the two cars, on the same day, and spend about an hour in each one. Then you buy the car which feels better – or makes you feel better.
If you choose the A4 3.0 without quattro, you’ll get a CVT transmission – interesting technology, though Audi has built shift-points into their version, so it doesn’t feel like a CVT.
I think choosing between the two is pretty much a toss-up. Both offer well-balanced packages of drivetrain and suspension which make them fun to drive, and both are good-looking cars inside and out. You do get a CD player with the Audi, as opposed to MB’s eccentric decision to charge everyone $400 extra for an optional CD-changer.
I wrote off the Audi because the closest dealer is 50 miles away, and both cars have a troubling tendency to return to the shop a bit more often than they really should. Otherwise, it’s strong competition for the C class. I think noblert10 is right: you drive the two cars, on the same day, and spend about an hour in each one. Then you buy the car which feels better – or makes you feel better.
05-04-2003, 05:25 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
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 Virginia Bill
Most FWD system these days have pretty much conquered torque steering unless you push the car very hard on twisty roads or floor the accelerator coming out of a corner. FWD probably has a slight advantage in the snow belt, but sophisticated control systems like MB ESP seem to make RWD cars tractable in snow (do a search for posts about MB handling during this winter’s snow storms in the northeast).
Most FWD system these days have pretty much conquered torque steering unless you push the car very hard on twisty roads or floor the accelerator coming out of a corner. FWD probably has a slight advantage in the snow belt, but sophisticated control systems like MB ESP seem to make RWD cars tractable in snow (do a search for posts about MB handling during this winter’s snow storms in the northeast).
Ha! Conquered? Haven't been in a recent Nissan product have you? Torque steer in the 240HP Altima is at times disturbing...the Sentra SE-R also had plenty....not like the Altima's lane change via the pedal version, but still noticeable.
Given decent winter tires, the C goes thru the snow like a trooper...especially when ESP gets to show off on slippery roads.
Either car is nice...the A4 is a great deal, but IMHO, it doesn't have the same commanding prescence that the MB does. Get the A4 now if you like it....Audi is getting set to ruin its looks with the angry chevy truck nose look found on the Pikes Peak showcar. Bleck!!! I hope the upcoming A4 Coupe retains the clean lines of the current front end.
05-04-2003, 06:17 PM
#33
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Other then considering the badge of the 3 pointed star, Audi offers more for the same price. Prolly the same reliability if not audi a little worse. Guess i'll have to wait and see for the 04 models.
05-04-2003, 09:05 PM
#34
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SLK Special Edition
If you like to drive kinda hard and take corners at speed and all that inner-city wannabe race car driving that us normal people do to enjoy our cars, I think you would prefer the RWD anyday. With all the new tech involved with skid control there really isn't much of a problem with RWD when nasty weather is considered. Also FWD cars have alot more weight over the front end so it's basically impossible to get anything close to 50/50 weight distribution which will really effect the handling. Even if you're just cruising around it's always nice to turn off the ESP and pull a nice power slide. Can't do that without the e-beake in a FWD car. My last car after the RX-7 was a 2001 V-6 Accord sedan. The power was nice but I hated the FWD setup so much that I sold the car and got the MB. Also you might prefer the supercharged engie to the V-6 even though it has a little more power. What is the difference in 0-60 and 1/4 mile between the V-6 Audi and the MB 1.8? Once again th MB would be the best investment. The only thing Audi has that can compare to MB's or BMW' is the A-8. Thats just my opinion though.
05-04-2003, 09:56 PM
#35
Super Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Wash., D.C.
Posts: 563
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C280
Originally posted by finalheaven
Adamrs80: I want a 4 door so 350z is out. And although technically the RX-8 is a 2door i really hate the looks. I can't stand it.
Adamrs80: I want a 4 door so 350z is out. And although technically the RX-8 is a 2door i really hate the looks. I can't stand it.
I've got to check the price of the RX-8, I was told the 250 HP version is about $27,000, not bad. Less than a 350z and much lighter.
My friend, who was looking at the Z, now wants the RX-8 and he owns a 1993 toyota supra, so I value his opinion of sport cars.
Too bad you want 4 doors, the G35 Coupe is pretty nice looking.
I don't buy into the Benz's are for old people thing, buy the car you like to drive.
Remember, at your age you will be paying out the wazoo for insurance, that's something to think about also.
C280Sportster
05-04-2003, 10:13 PM
#36
MBWorld Fanatic!
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 finalheaven
Other then considering the badge of the 3 pointed star, Audi offers more for the same price. Prolly the same reliability if not audi a little worse. Guess i'll have to wait and see for the 04 models.
Other then considering the badge of the 3 pointed star, Audi offers more for the same price. Prolly the same reliability if not audi a little worse. Guess i'll have to wait and see for the 04 models.
In all fairness, had the A4 Coupe been available when I got my C Coupe, I might have chosen differently
05-04-2003, 10:30 PM
#37
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Yes the insurance and my age is a huge turn off for sports cars. Which is why i am trying to avoid 2 doors to make it worse. But i do dislike the rx-8. I thought the rx-7 was ok though. Arguably though buying a benz will offset the price difference for the insurance. But at the end the benz will retain more valuable and will make it more valuable. Just thought that driving a evo will be a lot for fun at my age. Anyways away from the full sports cars...
C230 Sedan vs the A4 option for option, A4 will have the better value. C230 Sedan with options will cost the same as about A4 3.0. so comparing 4 cyl to six, 189 to 220hp, and 192 to 221 torque favors the A4 3.0 greatly even if its fwd vs rwd. Guess the only thing that will convince me now is a test drive? Unless there is some huge fact that i do not know.
C230 Sedan vs the A4 option for option, A4 will have the better value. C230 Sedan with options will cost the same as about A4 3.0. so comparing 4 cyl to six, 189 to 220hp, and 192 to 221 torque favors the A4 3.0 greatly even if its fwd vs rwd. Guess the only thing that will convince me now is a test drive? Unless there is some huge fact that i do not know.
05-05-2003, 12:48 AM
#39
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 144
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 SLK Special Edition
If it makes any difference I don't think there are really any serious parts available for the Audi. At least with the MB you can get some AMG stuff and install a larger intercooler. I'm sure there will be parts to hop up the MB 1.8 because it's going to be in the SLK as well so thats 3 cars that will have that engine. Parts are going to be on the market it just might take a couple of months.
05-05-2003, 01:28 AM
#41
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by finalheaven
Well actually i am pretty much convinced. But i have a few questions. I am going to wait for the 04 models as they are i think supposed to have some small face lifts. And now my 2 choices after ruling out the tsx is audi 3.0 and the c230 sedan. Audi 3.0 because they are having a very hard time selling and will go below mrsp. Comparing to those two spec by spec c230 falls behind. If compared to the c320 sedan it would win by all aspects but i do not have 40k
I love the audi 3.0 looks as much as the c230.
And again thanks for your advice. It did really pretty much convince me.
Well actually i am pretty much convinced. But i have a few questions. I am going to wait for the 04 models as they are i think supposed to have some small face lifts. And now my 2 choices after ruling out the tsx is audi 3.0 and the c230 sedan. Audi 3.0 because they are having a very hard time selling and will go below mrsp. Comparing to those two spec by spec c230 falls behind. If compared to the c320 sedan it would win by all aspects but i do not have 40k
I love the audi 3.0 looks as much as the c230.And again thanks for your advice. It did really pretty much convince me.
05-05-2003, 01:58 AM
#42
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by noblert10
ahhh yes the 3 series
i was actually considering a 330ci but didnt for a lot of reasons. i wrote this in another thread also
330i was ugly too as it has the those black rubber **** on the sides and comes with amber lens
bmw is was the worst dealership experience btw
here is the list
1. bmw's designs are getting pretty old. they have facelifted their cars for 87th time and its getting annoying. i personally think is way too dated
2.the interior is pretty gay. if you have any taste, this interior needs lots and lots of work, mb wins this department by a longshot
3. you are going to have to order $10,000 options to make this car decent. nothing is standard, not even on the m3!!!!
4. sport package - drove one with and without it. without imo bmw's supposed sportyness is gone. with it is very sporty but yet exremely uncomftorable for long periods of time.
5.chick car status. the 3 series is known for its female buyers i think the ratio is 10- 1 female to male. and every grandmother, mom and daughter drive one!
i can go on with bmw about the negatives but i think i ll stop. the only positve thing about bmw i like is that u can get a nice coupe with the 3 series
well that about sums it up.
unless your gonna get an m3 the 3 series is not worth it imo
ahhh yes the 3 series
i was actually considering a 330ci but didnt for a lot of reasons. i wrote this in another thread also
330i was ugly too as it has the those black rubber **** on the sides and comes with amber lens
bmw is was the worst dealership experience btw
here is the list
1. bmw's designs are getting pretty old. they have facelifted their cars for 87th time and its getting annoying. i personally think is way too dated
2.the interior is pretty gay. if you have any taste, this interior needs lots and lots of work, mb wins this department by a longshot
3. you are going to have to order $10,000 options to make this car decent. nothing is standard, not even on the m3!!!!
4. sport package - drove one with and without it. without imo bmw's supposed sportyness is gone. with it is very sporty but yet exremely uncomftorable for long periods of time.
5.chick car status. the 3 series is known for its female buyers i think the ratio is 10- 1 female to male. and every grandmother, mom and daughter drive one!
i can go on with bmw about the negatives but i think i ll stop. the only positve thing about bmw i like is that u can get a nice coupe with the 3 series
well that about sums it up.
unless your gonna get an m3 the 3 series is not worth it imo
1. Actually, the sedan has only received 1 facelift, & the coupe/vert have only received 1 facelift.
2. I have yet to see a single professional review give the C interior higher marks than the 3 interior. Consumer Reports, Edmunds, Car & Driver, etc all give the 3 interior higher or equal marks, never lower.
3. Both the 3 & C have too many options. Fully loaded, the 330i has more equipment & is only about $500 more. The 330i has come std w/ 17" wheels & cd player since 01 models in the US.
4. Fair enough
5. The 3 is not known for female buyers (not that it's a bad thing). You base this on what? I could sit here w/o facts & claim the C has a 10-1 ratio but I'd be lying. I see much more male than female drivers. You're the 1st person I've read whose tried to claim the 3 is known as a chick car & has a 10-1 ratio.
The C320 is a very good car, & I can understand why you bought it but your argument for why the 3 isn't very good is unsupported by any actual studies, statistics, & reviews/comparison tests.
05-05-2003, 02:29 AM
#43
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by J P
According to J.D. Power & Associates' surveys, BMW owners have better dealer service (but it really depends on your local dealer, so this varies).
1. Actually, the sedan has only received 1 facelift, & the coupe/vert have only received 1 facelift.
2. I have yet to see a single professional review give the C interior higher marks than the 3 interior. Consumer Reports, Edmunds, Car & Driver, etc all give the 3 interior higher or equal marks, never lower.
3. Both the 3 & C have too many options. Fully loaded, the 330i has more equipment & is only about $500 more. The 330i has come std w/ 17" wheels & cd player since 01 models in the US.
4. Fair enough
5. The 3 is not known for female buyers (not that it's a bad thing). You base this on what? I could sit here w/o facts & claim the C has a 10-1 ratio but I'd be lying. I see much more male than female drivers. You're the 1st person I've read whose tried to claim the 3 is known as a chick car & has a 10-1 ratio.
The C320 is a very good car, & I can understand why you bought it but your argument for why the 3 isn't very good is unsupported by any actual studies, statistics, & reviews/comparison tests.
According to J.D. Power & Associates' surveys, BMW owners have better dealer service (but it really depends on your local dealer, so this varies).
1. Actually, the sedan has only received 1 facelift, & the coupe/vert have only received 1 facelift.
2. I have yet to see a single professional review give the C interior higher marks than the 3 interior. Consumer Reports, Edmunds, Car & Driver, etc all give the 3 interior higher or equal marks, never lower.
3. Both the 3 & C have too many options. Fully loaded, the 330i has more equipment & is only about $500 more. The 330i has come std w/ 17" wheels & cd player since 01 models in the US.
4. Fair enough
5. The 3 is not known for female buyers (not that it's a bad thing). You base this on what? I could sit here w/o facts & claim the C has a 10-1 ratio but I'd be lying. I see much more male than female drivers. You're the 1st person I've read whose tried to claim the 3 is known as a chick car & has a 10-1 ratio.
The C320 is a very good car, & I can understand why you bought it but your argument for why the 3 isn't very good is unsupported by any actual studies, statistics, & reviews/comparison tests.
im not supporting my analysis on facts or statistics bro
this is all my opinion, you may have different ones, thats fine
where i live i see too many women driving 3 series and i see it every street corner. its quite annoying
most people on this forum would agree that the 3 series is not as good as the c class in terms of interior.
your looking way far into this
your being too technical, while im being a bit sarcastic
well you get my point
05-05-2003, 02:52 AM
#44
Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: LA, CA
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On a personal level i too see more females driving BMWs then females driving the c-class. And on another personal level the BMW interior to me seems much outdated. I've also read a few magainzes say that also. I guess some people really them but the buttons and all seem a little too old for me. They are redoing the 3rd class at 2005.
As for the audi no i am not getting quattro. I don't need it and it wastes more gas. And for the quattro gets the half mile done in 15.4 Seconds (C&D) while 0-60 in 7.1(C&D) 7.7(Audi Website that is an automatic) 6.9 (Audi Website that is quattro with manual). Now imagining all these speeds but without a quattro. That significantly will have better times. The benz website reports auto at 7.6 (manual) 7.8 (auto). I personally will be getting an auto but no the 3.0 is faster then the c230 sedan no doubt especially against the 3.0. Against the 1.8t c230 is better. This is kinda obivious it seem as the c320 is supposed to be a competition against the Audi 3.0.
And are you sure they only had one facelifts? Because it seems the 3 series has been out for a very long time and each year something is a little different. But i guess that's just me.
As for the audi no i am not getting quattro. I don't need it and it wastes more gas. And for the quattro gets the half mile done in 15.4 Seconds (C&D) while 0-60 in 7.1(C&D) 7.7(Audi Website that is an automatic) 6.9 (Audi Website that is quattro with manual). Now imagining all these speeds but without a quattro. That significantly will have better times. The benz website reports auto at 7.6 (manual) 7.8 (auto). I personally will be getting an auto but no the 3.0 is faster then the c230 sedan no doubt especially against the 3.0. Against the 1.8t c230 is better. This is kinda obivious it seem as the c320 is supposed to be a competition against the Audi 3.0.
And are you sure they only had one facelifts? Because it seems the 3 series has been out for a very long time and each year something is a little different. But i guess that's just me.
05-05-2003, 10:31 AM
#45
Newbie
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
07 VW Passat variant
Edmunds has a long-term test on a 2002 Audi A4; may be that will help you. Go to <<http://www.edmunds.com/new/2003/audi...ontent...Audi*>>
05-05-2003, 11:35 AM
#46
Member
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 92
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by noblert10
im not supporting my analysis on facts or statistics bro
this is all my opinion, you may have different ones, thats fine
where i live i see too many women driving 3 series and i see it every street corner. its quite annoying
most people on this forum would agree that the 3 series is not as good as the c class in terms of interior.
your looking way far into this
your being too technical, while im being a bit sarcastic well you get my point
im not supporting my analysis on facts or statistics bro
this is all my opinion, you may have different ones, thats fine
where i live i see too many women driving 3 series and i see it every street corner. its quite annoying
most people on this forum would agree that the 3 series is not as good as the c class in terms of interior.
your looking way far into this
your being too technical, while im being a bit sarcastic
well you get my point
However, my point about the interior is that almost all on E46Fanatics would say the 3 interior is better. It's bias because they own the 3, & people here own the C. In actuality, all professional reviews give the 3 higher or equal marks for interior.
And are you sure they only had one facelifts? Because it seems the 3 series has been out for a very long time and each year something is a little different. But i guess that's just me.
99-01 model yrs, original sedan
02-current, facelift sedan
00-03 model yrs, original coupe/vert
04-?, facelift coupe/vert
05-05-2003, 12:44 PM
#47
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Jakarta
Posts: 414
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
300E
GET BENZ.
how can you compare a steel with a can?. (kiddin)
eventhough Evo is fast and sporty, will you drive fast everyday??
I got M3, for the first month I like it so much because it is fast like hell but after that, for my daily driving car I still choose my C320.
C320 with big rims, Xenon light, it beats EVO.
and also its EUROPEAN.
consider that.
how can you compare a steel with a can?. (kiddin)
eventhough Evo is fast and sporty, will you drive fast everyday??
I got M3, for the first month I like it so much because it is fast like hell but after that, for my daily driving car I still choose my C320.
C320 with big rims, Xenon light, it beats EVO.
and also its EUROPEAN.
consider that.
05-05-2003, 01:51 PM
#48
MBWorld Fanatic!
You guys slate the WRX but think that this car looks good? The Lancer looks about as bland as a peanut butter sandwich; the Evo just is just a riced out peanut butter sandwich.
05-05-2003, 02:22 PM
#49
MBWorld Fanatic!
All this bickering . . .
BMW 3er, Benz, WRX, Lancer, etc., etc., girl's car, wimp's car, fast car. blah, blah, blah.
Kinda makes you want to get a mini-van just to get everyone to stop whining about how their choice is best!
Go with what you want, you're drivin' the darn thing!
BMW 3er, Benz, WRX, Lancer, etc., etc., girl's car, wimp's car, fast car. blah, blah, blah.
Kinda makes you want to get a mini-van just to get everyone to stop whining about how their choice is best!
Go with what you want, you're drivin' the darn thing!
05-05-2003, 04:38 PM
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
final heaven,
I'm not sure about your age, but you sound younger.
I'm 24, and bought the C230 sports coupe over the Audi A4, Lexus IS300, BMW 325, WRX and G35 sedan (if the coupe was out my choice would be different!).
I wanted a balance of comfort, luxury, sportiness, and sex appeal. The Mercedes does that better than all of the above.
1. Audis are too plain, you won't get noticed.
2. The interior in the A4 is awful, I've never seen anything uglier.
3. Without being totally stereotypical, BMWs are driven by women and guys who I don't wish to be associated with.
4. The bMW just didn't feel as great in rush hour traffic.
5. The Lexus wasn't fun to drive after 5 mins, and just didn't inspire me with its cheap looking parts.
6. The Infinit was the best of the bunch, but is a bigger car, and the sedan has that "mature driver" look to it, not something I wanted being 24.
7. The WRX is too common. Like the RSX Type-S, the body shape is shared with the lesser priced models and thus many similar cars are on theroad making your's less distinct.
OK, you want convincing... this is what does it for me everytime to convince me I made the right decision. Whenever I pull into a parking lot, or up to a spot where there's people, I get a ton of stares. The 3-point star attracts attention, and that appeals to me.
I'm not sure about your age, but you sound younger.
I'm 24, and bought the C230 sports coupe over the Audi A4, Lexus IS300, BMW 325, WRX and G35 sedan (if the coupe was out my choice would be different!).
I wanted a balance of comfort, luxury, sportiness, and sex appeal. The Mercedes does that better than all of the above.
1. Audis are too plain, you won't get noticed.
2. The interior in the A4 is awful, I've never seen anything uglier.
3. Without being totally stereotypical, BMWs are driven by women and guys who I don't wish to be associated with.
4. The bMW just didn't feel as great in rush hour traffic.
5. The Lexus wasn't fun to drive after 5 mins, and just didn't inspire me with its cheap looking parts.
6. The Infinit was the best of the bunch, but is a bigger car, and the sedan has that "mature driver" look to it, not something I wanted being 24.
7. The WRX is too common. Like the RSX Type-S, the body shape is shared with the lesser priced models and thus many similar cars are on theroad making your's less distinct.
OK, you want convincing... this is what does it for me everytime to convince me I made the right decision. Whenever I pull into a parking lot, or up to a spot where there's people, I get a ton of stares. The 3-point star attracts attention, and that appeals to me.
