mick1

yeah. but my sales rep. told me differently. according to him, this choice just became available. I'm only telling you guys what he told me.

Guest0001

Dont ever take any salesman advice man. definitely do you own research. They dont know jack **** about cars.

jbcritch

Hey....what about us poor slobs driving 240's? Damn! No respect!

CitronC230K_03

i like the sound of the 320 too, but im happy with my 230.

wawy

Well here's thoughts from someone that's had a 2002 C230 Coupe 6spd and currently drives a 2003 C320 Coupe 6spd. After the initial "Oh, I'm driving a new Mercedes" euphoria died down It was becoming apparent to me that the 2.3 just wasen't enough for the weight of the car and I was getting bored with it. I thought about getting the ASP pulley but was afraid back then because of warranty isssues. For the hell of it one day I took a C320 coupe for a test drive. I loved the sound and torque the V6 had and to me there was a big difference in acceleration. The C320 did seem a bit heavier in the corners but now with the AMG sway bars it's no longer an issue. Even though I took a hit with the depreciation(Going from a 2002 to a 2003) I'm way happier with the C320. Now I'll be the first to say that the C320's HP and Torque is starting to seem pretty average(Or below)however it's instantly there when I need it, always --low, med, high rpms. My 2002 c230 would seem noticibly slower when it was hot out or if I was running it hard. When I install the underdrive pulleys on my C320 it will hopefully be even better. That's my two cents.

Jon200

don't consider urself poor, its a Benz

Guest0001

CHATMANR

Good wirte up! Keep us informed on the install of the underdrive pully setup; I'm interested in them too.

mctwin2kman

Sorry got in on this one late. MB-BOB, the C320 Sedans have standard power seats and some other things as well. So the weight diference is most likely in the added standard features that exist in the C320 Sedan and do not exist in the C230 Sedan. Like the climate control diferences, standard power seats, extra filters, fans, engine cowlings and such. All light by themselves but the weight adds up!

Edit: Also I was a little shocked at how I could feel the engine running on a C240 Loaner I had compared to the little 1.8 4 banger Coupe I own. I was quite surprised that the coupe engine ran so much smoother, at least feel wise, than the V-6 engine did. I would only assume that the C320 V-6 is the same!

prodigy1387

i drove a c240 loaner once too, but i don't remember being able to "feel the engine running." on my c320, i know i can't feel the engine running. in fact, the c320 is very quiet...only when you rev it up can you hear it's growl. i don't understand how the c240 can produce so little power....

CitronC230K_03

i had a C320 coupe loaner and the torque on the thing was awesome i squeeled making a left turn at a stop light and got pulled over for loss of traction. fortunatly i didnt get a ticket.

mctwin2kman

Actually the C240 was a 4Matic and I think it has very good accel. and passing power for what the engine produces. I have driven a C320 as well and I think they are great as well. But I want to step up and could not justify the v-6 over the I-4 SC becuase it was not really that big of a diference. I also love the SC whine and sound of the M271 engine. Mine is very smooth running and quiet at idle, I most of the time don't even know it is running. I could feel the C240 running though. No biggie just felt it slightly. Then again I was looking for it for comparison. Now when the C350 comes out, I feel that is a great power bump and will have to think of that one next time. Maybe a CLK350 if it comes out and they really disontinue the Coupe. Or a C55!!! I really want an AMG, but may settle for a C36 or C43 since that is a big jump in price for a new one! Not sure I am ready or the wife will let me spend that kind of money just yet in life.

anal

I'm late, too.

I've done the whole "small-displacement/forced-induction" thing to death. Enough. The 3.2 V6 in my '01 E320 4matic is plenty peppy (the C230 SS Automatic that I test-drove recently seemed to pull about the same - once it got moving, but off idle, even in my heavy car, no contest!), smooth as glass, and while my long-term average mpg is only 26.1, I can't believe that the C320 SS 6sp. that I'm waiting for won't get 2-3 mpg better AND be even quicker! That 1.8 K did surprise me with it's smoothness, though. It must have a balance shaft...

anal

Wrong...the drag coefficient on the sedan is .27, on the coupe: .29! Something else to consider: the Euro C-class owner's manual recommends 93 or greater octane fuel for the 1.8K and only 90 or greater for the 3.2 V6. Why they're both 91 or greater here is anybody's guess...

As for economy, I'm long-term averaging 26.1 mpg on my '01 E320 4matic. I gotta believe a any C320 would be better than that...hell, they must be 300-400 lbs. lighter!

anal

I've been building engines for a living most of my career (30+ years). There's no way a 3.2 weighs 110lbs. more than a 1.8K! You have to remember to include ALL the extra hardware on the 1.8 (supercharger, brackets, intercooler, brackets, all that plumbing, electronic controls, etc.) that allows it to run like a V6, not just the bare engine. I'd be surprised if there was more than a 50 lb. difference between them, once you include all that extra crap...

A good bit of the extra weight is probably tied up in additional "options" that are included with the 3.2.

CHATMANR

All I know is; I love the torque my C320 has. I've embarassed many LS V8's from a standing start because I've debadged my car and they think it's a C230...

advans

I drove a c230k coupe and it was not as quick as my C320 Coupe...the 230k at first has a lag due to the super charge, but no doubt it pumps up pretty quick....but after it his 30mph, the c320's power comes in...and from then on...till about 85-90 then it starts loosing it...but...to me...the 320 is much more of a sweeter car....

the reason why 230k tends to feel "quick" is because when u accelerate, 1-2 seconds later the supercharger comes into feel...then it gives a quick jerk...but powerwise... 320 is more powerful

skywalker_benz

The C320 engine is smoother

Sincity

Plus the torque advantage. My wife and I test drove both and she liked the 320 more and that is from someone that knows nothing about cars!

Humbucker87

Hope you dont mean the new LS430's....with 300 hp and a zero to sixty of 6 seconds. Unless your car isnt stock :P

Capt Nemo o2

Im thinking he means GM's V8s.

Guest0001

I think hes talking about Lincoln's.

nukblazi

I am dying to know where the "lag" comes from in a supercharged application. Considering that a supercharger is belt driven by the crank pulley and the power from the SC is instantaneous, I am confused by your logic.

Secondly, I hope you're specifically referring to the M271 1.8l 2003+ 230 because yes, a C240 and bully that car in the top end, but the 2002 w/M111 doesn't suffer the same lack of torque. V6 motors are not torquey, the C320 power comes on after 30mph. Auto or manual? Gearing or powerband? What RPM are we talking about here?

Not sure why this thread was brought back to life from 2003 in 2004, and now 2005 from 2004, but it's a horse**** subjective topic with too many variables and too much personal back patting, it's absurd. Until you are doing 1/4 miles on track with timeslips, autocross with timed results, or a track event and you're beating up another car it's all just pointless.

The C230's don't just feel quick, they are well geared, have a nice broad powerband and the coupes are menacing on track if driven well. If you're tossing around a slushbox and then posting about how much faster which car is, your just blowing smoke.

Who are you people and what have you done to mbworld?

Guest0001

lol. Noobs really do kill this place.

Saprissa

Thanks Nuk...
and that's why I haven't posted in this thread until now.

Someone please CLOSE it !!!