A few more people signed up last time--there are now 197 C-Class owners for all years together--so I was able to add the 2003 and 2006 to the survey.

I'd like to provide the same information to potential C-Class owners that I currently provide for those considering competitors.

At this point, it looks like there will only be a result for the 2008 in May. Results are possible for the 2003, 2005, and 2006 with the next update, in August, but only if owners join up and participate. The 2005 might even squeak into the May results if this happens. It takes very little time.

To help us provide better informtion on your model year:

Vehicle reliability research

 

215 owners now across all model years. But we still only have enough responses to provide a full result for the 2008--the W204. A few more participants for each model year could make the difference between having a result and not having a result in August.

To help get your year included:

Vehicle reliability research

 

226 now across all years. Which makes results for the C203 more likely in August, but not certain. Additional participants would be very helpful.

Vehicle reliability research

 

If you buy an Italian car you should expect these things....
didn't anyone mention?
Mercedes make the best Italian cars in all of Europe!

Good thing I cut my teeth on FIAT's and Alfa's.

 

Too few owners have been signing up, and too few of those signed up have been responding, to have results for the C203 in August. There has been a much stronger response from C204 owners (it's doing well so far).

I'm doing everything I can to provide results for this car. But I can't personally provide the data--that's up to owners.

An August result could still happen--just need owners to sign up and participate.

Vehicle reliability research

 

The 2005 C-Class could still squeeze into the results, if a few more of those who are signed up respond.

Otherwise, the next update after August will be in November.

Help get your year included:

Vehicle reliability research

 

Well, the 2005 did squeak into this month's results. The repair rate appears to be worse than the average, but with a small sample size this result is not precise, and the result is asterisked.

I'd like to provide precise results for all fairly recent model years. Just need more people...

The lastest results:

TrueDelta Vehicle Reliability Survey results

 

Next set of results in November, with a preview for participants next month. A few additional model years might make it into this set, but this will depend on how many owners participate. I'm hopeful.

Vehicle reliability research

 

Just wondering what is more relable or over all a better car. Im going to try to get a MB soon!

2005-2006 c230 v6 Or 2004-2005c230 kompressor v4 BOTH are Manual

Or 2003-2005 CLK 320 Or 2006 CLK 350 or 2003 CLK500 Auto but still considering

Any takes on any of this?

Thanks for any feed back.

 

In your heading you talk about a C240 - in the message you are talking 230 V6 versus inline (notV4) 4 cyl Kompressor.

You have to decide whether you like the traditional MB smoothness of the 6 or prefer the punch of the blown 4 - go drive both.

I'm a V6 fan and in South Africa the V6s have proven more robust than the 4 Cyl models - many would probably disagree with this on the forum.

In my global job I have seen sixes with far higher mileage on them than 4 cyl models. 6cyl probably more expensive to maintain. It's a trade off and depends on how long you want to keep the car.

CLKs are nice - I also prefer MBs in automatic

 

Get the V4.

I'd go with the c230 (either the I4 or V6) over the C240.

 

Yup, it's an inline 4. I also like the 6 cylinders, Inline or V configuration. Smoother running engine, but more expensive for maintenance. But, it's your call.

 

I'd go the 230 V6 because it's newer but when you look at the range of vehicles that Wheaton is looking at it appears that bucks are not a problem. He may as well get a W204 if he wants a C

And while people look down on the C240 it's not a bad car at all. Seen one still running well at 700,000Kms in Malaysia in Taxi Service. We have an E240 that has just run 550,000 Kms at the office & it's still like a new car to travel in. One can't deny that they are tough - depends if you are a boy racer.

 

Wheaton,
I've got the inline 4...it's a screamer for sure. I'm with Glyn on the longevity issue though. That 4 seems like it's living fast...hopefully it doesn't die young.

Glyn...you have a 65 s type? Do you have the twin SU 6's on that. I still remember topping off those things off...you've really got to love a cat to keep that thing purring.

 

i'll take 06 Clk350 for you list

 

Yep! a 65 wire wheel S Type, manual, overdrive under full restoration. Sand blasted the body & started from ground up. Nearly finished. - & yes twin bloody SUs !!!!

a peep
https://mbworld.org/forums/attachmen...1&d=1223124826

Sorry it's dirty & I'm not ready to release

 

BR green ey...

I have a 59 MK II 1/18 scale model car which I just accidentally broke the Jag on the hood. as typing this...

 

Oh no! better glue it back on

Yep! BRG - whatever that is - 1976 XJ6 version of BRG - Spies Hecker paint 22 coats over black primer to get right. Biscuit Connolly hide, Wilton carpets, lambswool headlining - new genuine Dunlop wires - Oh god a labour of love. I'm not doing it all myself. Every number on the car as original.

 

Hello...

Thanks for your imput if anyone has more to ad pleas do so. and thanks in advance. Right now in in the process of pushing for a sale on my Fairlady Z 350z.

Manual or Auto??? I luv MT sounds like a lot of people are saying go with auto that MB have good auto trans.

I like the CLk, the syle is nice, 2door... vs 4 door, But i want the MT. so makes it hard.

seems like the v6 is smother ride going by what you guys said but cost more to keep up on the maint then the I4(notv4,my bad) sounds like its a little less.

Over the CLK 320 350 and 500. sounds like the 500 has better handeling. but the 03 clk 500 has a few little problem but not major.

I really want a mb, i was going to go back to BMW (i luv bmw) but i have never had a MB so want to give them a tray ad to my collection of all the cars i have had lol

 

Just to clarify your post for future newbies reading this....

2001-2005 C230's are 4 Cylinders, Supercharged
2006-2007 C230's are 6 Cylinders, Normally Aspirated

Your post makes it appear as if you are looking at a 2006 C230 that has a 4 Cylinder.

By the way, get the 2005 C230. You get the faster engine, better mileage, and it beats the 2001-2004's because you have the updated interior. Manuals FTW!

 

05 C230.

 

RIght there w/Glyn! Just depends on what u want...230 a little more zip,the 240 SMOOTHER ride...Wish mine was manual!

 

i am completely satisfied with my 06 230 V6 6spd manual, so far. lots of people have said that the V6's cost more to maintain but when i was doing my research i read about supercharger issues on higher mileage kompressors. also, something to note regarding the performance difference; i felt it was minimal. some people are making it seem like a huge difference but the all ones i drove it was really not that severe. it was noticeable don't get me wrong, but it was not night and day. and the V6 is surprisingly good on gas too, i am getting great mileage. and for the record i had much more fun driving the manuals i drove than the autos, it actually feels like driving to me for some reason. all the cars i have ever owned have been manuals, maybe when i am 40 i will get an auto and have a manual sports car for fun. i don't know about MB's manual reliability history but if you know how to drive a stick you aren't going to burn up a modern clutch and any manufacturers defects would be covered by warranty anyways.

if i were the OP i would have each car inspected by a mechanic and get the one that checks out the best with the lowest mileage in the color combination he likes the most. just my opinion.

 

You make a lot of sense. Let me assure you the V6 engines will run rings around the 4 bangers on reliability especially when the mileage gets up and all of a sudden the 4 costs more to maintain than the 6. There are no ways a Kompressor will do even half the mileage of a V6. Suffer head failure long before that.

The performance difference is negligible and hopelessly overplayed. A Kompressor might get a few yards ahead from the lights but once the revs are up on the V6, it holds it's own just fine. No standard 4 has ever been able to run away from me - in fairness my car only has 45,000 Kms on the clock & seems to run better every day. The 4 runs out of wind at high RPM whereas the 6 just keeps pulling to the red line.
See power curve
https://mbworld.org/forums/attachmen...4&d=1216674080

 

get the 05 c230k ss 6speed.... just hearing that blower at 5000rpms makes u forget about the v6's.... no offence to all the v6 owners.... and everyone seems to say in the long run the 4 bangers dont last but it seems like your a car flipper like me... i dont keep cars for more than 2 years so just get one with low km's..... but make sure u get the sport sedan w/ the bix or you'll kick your self after wards....