C320 VS C230k
08-20-2003, 11:09 AM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: San Diego, CA
Posts: 472
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'14 A6 3.0 TFSI
My take...
I believe this topic has been brought up before. It's a personal opinion deal. I was cross shopping the 3-series before I bought my C. Here's my take. Between 3 and C, the C230 is a better deal than the 325i (equipment, power, etc). But, if it's between the C320 and a 330i, I'd go with the 330i. It has more power, a smoother engine, and I like the way it drives better.
So to answer your question, no I don't feel the C320 is worth the extra dough over the C230k.
So to answer your question, no I don't feel the C320 is worth the extra dough over the C230k.
08-20-2003, 11:28 AM
#3
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Toronto, Canada
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C230K Sedan
My opinion is that the horse power increase for the 320 carries the penality of an extra 200 pounds in weight. The 320 feels front heavy. I think the C230K is the better deal.
08-20-2003, 12:10 PM
#4
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 230k sedan
We were also originally going for the C320 sport, but could not justify the cost difference for auto climate and bose with little power gain. In my opinion the C230k is very fast and it does not feel like a 4 cyl (which I am very impressed with). I am partial to BMW I6 for the past decade, but this engine is sweet. I am glad I got the C230K and have no plans to remove or alter my badge.
08-20-2003, 03:11 PM
#6
Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
C230 Komp Sedan - 2003
I own a C230 Sedan so obviously I couldn't justify the cost difference. But keep in mind this is a new engin/new car. NO aftermarket parts (specifically exhaust). Also the engin is 1.8 liter... C320 is 3.2 liter. You don't have to worry about this if you wanna keep the car stock, but if you are not happy with the power and you want to get more....there is no room for the 1.8 liter. the C320 has POTENTIAL. Throw a Kleeman supercharger on it and you be running with the big dogs.
08-20-2003, 03:14 PM
#7
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
I think the 320 is worth it. It has a lot more standard feature than the 230k. All depends on how you look at it. You definitely save a little more gas money for sure with the 230k though.
Trending Topics
08-20-2003, 04:13 PM
#8
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Huntsville, Al
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just got my coupe - YES - so a little one sided. I drove the 230's with the 320 before making my desision. The low end torque of the 320 sold me. And that nice exhaust rumble. The 230 has a nice motor, but that off idle torque of the 320 is wonderful and damn this thing wants to run - well worth the 2K.
08-20-2003, 04:39 PM
#9
In a coupe with an auto tranny, the 320 is well worth the couple extra grand. Not only is there more torque, but it is available in a much wider rpm range.
And you always can put a Kleeman on it for 330hp.
And you always can put a Kleeman on it for 330hp.
08-20-2003, 05:07 PM
#11
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 67
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's all a matter of what you can afford. We found a really sweet C320 Sedan that's 3 years old with only 6100 miles. Somebody else had taken the depreciation, so it was a no-brainer. If the 320 hadn't fallen in our laps, we would likely have gone for a 230.
The C230 is a wonderful, zippy vehicle. But as others have said, the torque of the 320 is nice to have...if the price is right!
The C230 is a wonderful, zippy vehicle. But as others have said, the torque of the 320 is nice to have...if the price is right!
08-20-2003, 05:37 PM
#12
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Silicon Valley
Posts: 54
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
04 230k sedan
It does depend on what you want to do with the car and ultimately it's whatever you are happy with. I bought the car primarily for my wife and it's much better than a 4 door 325i. It has decent performance (way more than my wife will ever use) and with the money difference we chose to load the benz with options.
08-20-2003, 07:30 PM
#13
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Costa Mesa, CA
Posts: 38
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
W463
I think it really depends on your wallet and what kind of amenity is important to you. If the price is the most important factor than the C230k is the way to go but if money is not an important factor then you must consider the following.
Power: you got to remember that the C230k is a 1.8L supercharge engine and you need to know the characteristics of a supercharge engine (supercharger whine and heat soak). You can’t really just look at the horsepower numbers. You need to look at the torque curve.
C230K
189 hp @ 5,800 rpm
Net torque 192 lb-ft @ 3,500-4,000 rpm
C320
215 hp @ 5,700 rpm
Net torque 221 lb-ft @ 3,000 - 4,600 rpm
The C320 only has a 26 hp advantage over the C230k but it has 29 more feet pounds of torque and a 1100 rpm wider torque curve. You really would need to drive the car back to back to feel the difference. When I test drove the C230k and C320 I was happy with the low end power of the C230k but there was nothing at high rpm. However C320 had a little more put at higher rpm. You also have to consider if you frequently use you A/C or not. You will feel the A/C on when you drive in the C230k because of the 1.8L motor but with the C320 you barely know the difference with the A/C on or off.
Now to the other amenities, the C320 comes with standard power seats, digital climate control and bose system. I know the bose system is not that great but hey it’s included. The digital climate control only comes in the C320, I know you can retrofit but you won’t get the charcoal filter and the sun sensor. The power seats are an option for the C230k but dealer doesn’t usually order that option. I think the choice and the money is yours. You need to go test drive the C230k and the C320 back to back. I did that and I don’t think I can live with the C230k due to the lack of top end power. I think you will notice the extra power that the C320 have. Just my two cent because I was considering the same thing two months ago.
Power: you got to remember that the C230k is a 1.8L supercharge engine and you need to know the characteristics of a supercharge engine (supercharger whine and heat soak). You can’t really just look at the horsepower numbers. You need to look at the torque curve.
C230K
189 hp @ 5,800 rpm
Net torque 192 lb-ft @ 3,500-4,000 rpm
C320
215 hp @ 5,700 rpm
Net torque 221 lb-ft @ 3,000 - 4,600 rpm
The C320 only has a 26 hp advantage over the C230k but it has 29 more feet pounds of torque and a 1100 rpm wider torque curve. You really would need to drive the car back to back to feel the difference. When I test drove the C230k and C320 I was happy with the low end power of the C230k but there was nothing at high rpm. However C320 had a little more put at higher rpm. You also have to consider if you frequently use you A/C or not. You will feel the A/C on when you drive in the C230k because of the 1.8L motor but with the C320 you barely know the difference with the A/C on or off.
Now to the other amenities, the C320 comes with standard power seats, digital climate control and bose system. I know the bose system is not that great but hey it’s included. The digital climate control only comes in the C320, I know you can retrofit but you won’t get the charcoal filter and the sun sensor. The power seats are an option for the C230k but dealer doesn’t usually order that option. I think the choice and the money is yours. You need to go test drive the C230k and the C320 back to back. I did that and I don’t think I can live with the C230k due to the lack of top end power. I think you will notice the extra power that the C320 have. Just my two cent because I was considering the same thing two months ago.
08-20-2003, 08:16 PM
#14
Guest
Posts: n/a
s14sr20det is right
when i compare the C230k sedan and the C320 sedan...
C230k with mettalic paint, full leather seats, power seat pkg, bi xenons, sunroof pkg, automatic, bose, and changer comes out to be about 37,000 plus tax and all the other fees you have depending where you live.
C320 with mettalic paint, full leather seats,power seats(standard), bi xenons, sunroof pkg, automatic (standard) bose(standard) and changer comes out to be about 42,000
the C240 is a joke as it comes out to be around 38000 and the power is just so weak (no offense). otherwise its a fine car.
these are must have options on any car for me. you can also get some deals right now, on the c230k you will get better deals for some reason i think.
its about a 5k difference and in my book you might as well spring for the 320. if you are making payments its not even big deal. unless you are paying cash. it wont be much of a difference.
also remember the C320 is a V6 with a more luxurious ride with wood trim and non sport tires noise is minimal.
if cost is a big factor for you and you love the aluminum trim and sport rims and dont want the extra power or options in the 320 then the C230 would be good for you
for me i hate the aluminum trim, the sport rims, lack of power at times, analog climate control, 4 bangers and superchargers. if you like more power and like the aformentioned things i hate then the 320 sport you should consider as well.
opinions differ, but just get what you want, and dont compromise too much on a big financial purchase like this. the C320 is the absolute perfect solution for me.
my .02
when i compare the C230k sedan and the C320 sedan...
C230k with mettalic paint, full leather seats, power seat pkg, bi xenons, sunroof pkg, automatic, bose, and changer comes out to be about 37,000 plus tax and all the other fees you have depending where you live.
C320 with mettalic paint, full leather seats,power seats(standard), bi xenons, sunroof pkg, automatic (standard) bose(standard) and changer comes out to be about 42,000
the C240 is a joke as it comes out to be around 38000 and the power is just so weak (no offense). otherwise its a fine car.
these are must have options on any car for me. you can also get some deals right now, on the c230k you will get better deals for some reason i think.
its about a 5k difference and in my book you might as well spring for the 320. if you are making payments its not even big deal. unless you are paying cash. it wont be much of a difference.
also remember the C320 is a V6 with a more luxurious ride with wood trim and non sport tires noise is minimal.
if cost is a big factor for you and you love the aluminum trim and sport rims and dont want the extra power or options in the 320 then the C230 would be good for you
for me i hate the aluminum trim, the sport rims, lack of power at times, analog climate control, 4 bangers and superchargers. if you like more power and like the aformentioned things i hate then the 320 sport you should consider as well.
opinions differ, but just get what you want, and dont compromise too much on a big financial purchase like this. the C320 is the absolute perfect solution for me.
my .02
Last edited by Guest0001; 08-20-2003 at 08:22 PM.
08-24-2003, 08:53 PM
#18
There is no substitute for cubic inches. I have driven both cars and the C320 has more seat in the pants torque across all gears.
If you need the auto transmission and the memory power seats anyway, and want the Bose system (a better Bose setup than the Coupe), the C320 (any variant) is a better choice, IMO. Besides, I feel you will have less depreciation on the C320 than the C230K Sedan. Few people buy the 4 cylinder sedan, and even fewer will want a used one, especially with the manual tranny.
No flames intended here. Just stating that the more typical Mercedes-Benz buyer doesn't know what a manual transmission is, and they've outgrown the 4-cyl engines of their youth.
If you need the auto transmission and the memory power seats anyway, and want the Bose system (a better Bose setup than the Coupe), the C320 (any variant) is a better choice, IMO. Besides, I feel you will have less depreciation on the C320 than the C230K Sedan. Few people buy the 4 cylinder sedan, and even fewer will want a used one, especially with the manual tranny.
No flames intended here. Just stating that the more typical Mercedes-Benz buyer doesn't know what a manual transmission is, and they've outgrown the 4-cyl engines of their youth.
Last edited by MB-BOB; 08-24-2003 at 08:57 PM.
08-24-2003, 09:35 PM
#19
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally posted by MB-BOB
There is no substitute for cubic inches. I have driven both cars and the C320 has more seat in the pants torque across all gears.
If you need the auto transmission and the memory power seats anyway, and want the Bose system (a better Bose setup than the Coupe), the C320 (any variant) is a better choice, IMO. Besides, I feel you will have less depreciation on the C320 than the C230K Sedan. Few people buy the 4 cylinder sedan, and even fewer will want a used one, especially with the manual tranny.
No flames intended here. Just stating that the more typical Mercedes-Benz buyer doesn't know what a manual transmission is, and they've outgrown the 4-cyl engines of their youth.
There is no substitute for cubic inches. I have driven both cars and the C320 has more seat in the pants torque across all gears.
If you need the auto transmission and the memory power seats anyway, and want the Bose system (a better Bose setup than the Coupe), the C320 (any variant) is a better choice, IMO. Besides, I feel you will have less depreciation on the C320 than the C230K Sedan. Few people buy the 4 cylinder sedan, and even fewer will want a used one, especially with the manual tranny.
No flames intended here. Just stating that the more typical Mercedes-Benz buyer doesn't know what a manual transmission is, and they've outgrown the 4-cyl engines of their youth.
Very well put
08-25-2003, 01:16 PM
#20
Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Atlanta, GA
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 C230 Kompressor Sedan
I went the other direction of most here. After driving both, I went with the 230 Sport Sedan. I liked the handling better, it felt more nimble, had plenty of power for me, as I can better the posted speed limit effortlessly, enough to have my license suspended if caught. You mean that blue sign that says 95 is not the speed limit?
Personally, I do not like wood trim, and after having more problems than I care to deal with again with digital heating and air, I was relieved that the 230 had analog. The seats are plenty adjustable for me, and I don't miss the total power seat. For the price difference I am more than pleased with my 2003 230.
Personally, I do not like wood trim, and after having more problems than I care to deal with again with digital heating and air, I was relieved that the 230 had analog. The seats are plenty adjustable for me, and I don't miss the total power seat. For the price difference I am more than pleased with my 2003 230.
