ryan t

im wanting to purchase a c coupe and drove the 1.8 6 speed,but the dealership doesn`t have any 320 coupes and was wondering the difference in power.is it very noticable.does anyone have one with a 6 speed that has compared it to the 1.8

Outland

The V6 with 6 speed is considerably faster...I'd estimate mid 6s to sixty, with high 14s in the 1/4 mile VS. 7.3 and high 15's with the 1.8. With the auto it didn't feel much quicker than my 2.3 Kompressor 6speed. It did feel much quicker than the 1.8 thou...felt rather lazy- but I think much of that is perception- the v6 is so smooth and quiet, and the auto shifts very smoothly, makes you think the engine isn't trying very hard. T

The auto isn't a good match with the 1.8 IMHO...the stick makes you apprecieate the 1.8 more. Its pretty smooth for a four- but you need to wind it out more than with the 2.3, and V6 versions.

SynergyC320

^^^^^ What he said!

I just got my C320 fairly recently. I didnt get to compare the 6-spds, as I was looking for an auto this time around. But I did test drive the 1.8 auto c230K and immediately afterwards test drove the C320 3.2l v6 that I ended up buying.

I thought there was a rather large difference, most noticably right off the line. The 230K seemed plenty quick once I got going, but the v6 just felt so much more powerful to me.

The auto does shift very smoothly, which I definately like. At full accelleration the V6 just holds you back in your seat through all the gears, instead of making you lunge foward as the gears shift (which my old car did).

I would have gotten the manual transmission, but I figured since this is a sport-luxury car, I would get the auto.

Cris

Outland

Nice rims, Cris!

C230K

I have been lucky enough to have owned both. The 2002 C230 Coupe 6 speed and now 2003 C320 Coupe Auto. The auto seems to be quicker as it goes through the gears, it is very smooth. The harder you drive it the better the auto works, let the hammer down and it does not shift till 6K rpm. I like both, but after driving the new one, won't look back.
Tom

Robert Schrader

I drove a I4 with manual and a V6 with auto. Even with auto, the V6 is stronger
and well worth the extra money.

adamrs80

Although I can only compare driving my 2002 230 coupe with a C320 sedan I would say if you have the extra money it is well worth it. Not that there's anything wrong with the 1.8 but if I was in your shoes I would have been more likely to consider the 4 cyl if it was the 2.3 offered last year. The new 1.8 just doesn't have it in the low end like the V-6 or 2.3. The 2.3 has enough power and torque already and could easily be brought up to the V-6's power output with a few modifications but there is just too big of a difference now with the 1.8 in my opinion. The 1.8 does have alot of good improvements though to it's a toss up. You'll get better mileage, it weighs less, probably handles slightly differently (maybe better?) and sometimes it's just nice to hear that supercharger whine.

FrankW

didn't know you changed to the 320 already...congrats!

btw, ryan, if you can't test drive a 320 sportscoupe, try to test drive a C320 sport. They perform pretty much the same. note that the C320 sports coupe is actually a little heavier than the sedan.

eason

But how's the handling with the C320 Coupe compare to the C230 Coupe?? Won't the extra weight in the nose with the same suspension kill the handling?

trench

If both are manuals the sedan is 22-55 (depending on which MB webpage you look at) pounds heavier than the coupe. Although, add a panorama roof and the coupe will be heavier.

Although surprisingly, the C32 sedan is ~187 lbs heavier than the C32 Coupe. That one I don't understand.

Cheers, BT

tberry

i believe the weight diff is something like 75lbs or something so the power i'm sure make up for it. Of course I think a 2.3L c230coupe with pulley kit will probably do same as C320coupe (auto vs auto, manny vs manny).

Matt_NH

I was in the same boat. I drove the 320 Auto coupe and was going to order the manual w/o even driving the standard. Ended up going back and trying the 230 6 sp just to get the feel of the trans.
I like the 3.2 with the 6sp. It has a lot more torque than the 4 banger and pretty much loafs along most of the time tell you hammer it. Remember 3400 lbs is a lot of car to move around. Saw a S320 today wouldn’t want to own something that bib with the 320 but in the C its a blast.

Matt

any 320 coupe owners

im wanting to purchase a c coupe and drove the 1.8 6 speed,but the dealership doesn`t have any 320 coupes and was wondering the difference in power.is it very noticable.does anyone have one with a 6 speed that has compared it to the 1.8

trench

2003 C230K is 135 lbs. lighter
2002 C230K is 85 lbs. lighter

I agree, 2002 C230K with pulley is going to have essentially equivalent performance to a 2003 C320 Coupe. Maybe even a slight tick better, with the lower weight (all of which is in the front) it should have better handling. I think there will also be a torque advantage to a pullied 2.3L (there's only 14lb-ft difference stock), which will probably help it get off the line slightly better.

Cheers, BT

Wheens

C320 coupes with manual xmission are scarce as hen's teeth. I've been waiting since mid Jan to even place an order thru a dealer for one. Evidently, MB hasn't built many. I'm currently scheduled for a build date in the "last decade" in May, probably the last bunch of '03s.

FrankW

the C32 sportscoupe probably doesn't come with the panorama roof. not sure

trench

Initially, I actually thought that sunroofs might have something to do with it. I'm sure most of the listed curb weights are for cars without pano (Coupe) or regular (sedan/wagon) roofs. I think the C32 comes standard with the roof (even in Europe), so it's weight probably incorporates the roof.

However, the weight difference between the SLK320 and SLK32 is 90 kg (198lbs). Wonder what weighs that much?

Cheers, BT

FrankW

supercharger, suspension bits, bigger brakes, muffler...etc... or just a FAT guy was sitting in the driver seat when they weight the car...

C230K

Guess it would help if we knew, what parts beside the engine are different between the two coupes. Have noticed, that there is not much info or MB push on for the C320 Coupe. I can never understood why a new and different car, like the coupe and my late C70 Volvo Coupe are not pushed more by the company or auto Magazines. These two cars are fun, good price, nice style, loaded and as good as any other new car out there. Well at least not every body has one and we can enjoy.

trench

Yeah, guess all that little crap adds up...

But I didn't think it added up to nearly 200 lbs !!

- BT

SynergyC320

Thanks, Outland

ryan t

thanks everyone for your responses,i am also wondering the differences besides the motor between the two.does anyone know if the rear gear ratio is the same