RWDlifer

Hello all, I'm a newbie here and I'd like y'all's take on a prospective purchase.
Option 1.
2005 C230K, 67K miles, Auto, sold by MB dealer asking $12,500
Option 2.
2005 C230K, 121K miles, 6spd MT, sold by Jeep dealer asking $9500

Both are within my budget, but here's the dilemma: Option 2 has the ext/interior color combination that I like, and I REALLY want the manual trans. Option 1 is cleaner, both in and out, I can live with the ext color but I don't much care for the interior color. Both are equally equipped, at this point it's down to the transmission choice.
I am mechanically inclined, I have tackled head gasket jobs solo in the past, so I'm not afraid of dirt and I plan to maintain the car myself as much as I can.
Opinions?

ncmudbug

It sounds like you really want #2, but I wouldn't go crazy over the 6MT. My 05 C230K with a 6MT. The pedals are placed really poorly and the tranny itself is not very smooth or fast. It can be driven smoothly, but it takes a lot of concentration. If you've driven #2 and you're happy with the way it works, then that's the one you should buy, but there are LOTS of cars that are more enjoyable to manually shift. The rest of the car is good with the possible exception of the potential problem with the timing chain which is a simplex rather than a duplex chain. The chain can stretch and a cam can jump time and you bend a bunch of valves and need a new head. Some on this forum have already run into this potentially expensive problem.

I don't want to scare you away from either car. Some have racked up a lot of miles without any timing chain event and some are so motivated to shift their own gears that they don't let that get in the way.

I like my car and I have no plans to sell it any time soon, but you should enter this with your eyes open.

Good luck and let us know what you do.

Moviela

The automatic is really the only way to go. The manual is only for people who are cheap, and still believe "mileage" is better. You don't save anything, you wind up with a car no one knows how to work on because they see so few manuals, and the mileage gives an edge to the auto.

The manual transmission was really a price point gimmick to get the attention of BMW and Audi drivers. If you like shifting for yourself, the automatic has Touch Shift (Mercedes speak for Tiptronic) which works the same as a manual except the servos throw faster than you can move your arm, and there is no clutch pedal. New Porsches have no clutch pedal either. Electronics are here to stay.

ncmudbug

I can't argue with a word you say, Movie. I just like to shift my own gears and I like the challenge of doing it smoothly and quickly - and on my C230, that is a big challenge, especially on downshifts - so for me, not having a clutch is sort of like cheating. I know it's the future, but still...

I don't think MB put much development into the manual trans. probably for the reasons you state. They do, however, have a very nice AT, and I agree with you that that's their main focus.

If you're not really motivated to shift your own gears, you should stick with the AT.

tommy

I can. The whole point of a manual is completely controlling the shift points yourself and driving a car that is more fun and involving. I think that everyone's known for many years now that new slushboxes are faster and yield better gas mileage, but those were always a side benefit of a manny, not the main one.

Saying that shops don't know how to work on manuals is just a nonsensical scare tactic. And what does it matter what Porsche is doing when talking about Benzes?

So I would obviously say get the car you want to, which would be the second car. But be forewarned that you'll need to be mechanically inclined, have deep pockets, or both, as these are pretty expensive to keep running correctly. Honestly, I would say to look into another marque if you're serious about getting a used car - I don't really see the value in our cars.

ncmudbug

I agree with everything you say. My point - and I think Movie's point as well - is that MB wasn't really serious about manual transmissions. If they were, they would have done a better job at it. Mine is slow and heavy and I mentioned before that the pedals are poorly placed. It really takes a lot of the fun out of it - but not all. I still say you have to be more motivated to drive a manual to own an MB with one. MB could have made it much nicer.

tommy

You'll get no argument from me on that one. Though I don't really find it a Sophie's choice - a not great manny is still better than none at all, at least on cars with our power levels. I drove a CTS-V for a freebie at Monticello racetrack last summer, and it had the auto. I would think that a manny would have really been a handful to work with that much power, not that I wouldn't have minded trying.

ncmudbug

We're in the more motivated group!

RWDlifer

Thanks everyone for your input...it's nice to see such diversity in opinion. Regarding this purchase, I am not looking for "value" per se. All I want is a fun commuter car to last me 3 ish years, that's why I'm keeping my budget around 10 k. My current car is a 5spd 2000 BMW 3 series that has seen better days and has a rear sub frame issue that plagued early e46 models(4 grand to fix). Having owned a 13 year old 3 series, I am comfortable taking on a used MB. And having owned a couple of VWs, Land rover and a Saab, I am also used to european quirkiness.
I'm finally gonna drive the AT today, will post back.

VVF

Pay attention to the timing chain rattle at startup. Seems like a couple of people here had stretched chains @ 70k miles approx.

ncmudbug

VVF is right about the chain. The ones I've heard about were mostly older than 70K. Mine's at 86K and I'm keeping my fingers crossed!

RWDlifer

Yeah, been researching for a while and read up on the timing chain issue. I changed a timing chain on a Saab using the open chain fed around the sprockets method already. I am actually looking to change it on whichever one I get regardless.
UPDATE: Upon further/closer inspection the MT car has rust spots around the wheel arch, CARFAX report indicates it spent most of it's life up north....crap

VVF

Well, duh... on the other hand, are there more choices, or have you already considered everything and zeroed in on those two?

I actually thought you settled with the AT one from your previous post ) You were probably just test-driving it though.

jkowtko

Get the AT, replace the interior

Or maybe just wait for an option 3 to roll around in a couple of months. You might be happy that you did ...

Esdub1775

I love my C but are you willing 12k for a 9 year old car you kinda like? I'm not sure how much you are willing to put down but check out http://www.edmunds.com/calculators/?...ktid=ga9911364 to figure out roughly what your payments will be. it might be similar to getting a newer one.

RWDlifer

I don't plan to shell more than 10k. Drove the AT yesterday, it's pristine...63k miles, one owner, the back seats look like no one ever sat on them. No chain rattle either (I'll change it anyhow). MB dealer was gonna send it to the auction (cheap cars take up their parking space) so I offered 9k out of the door, they said 11k OTD and after a bit of back and forth we settled on 10 grand. They did get another W203 that is still being processed in, I get to drive that tomorrow.
Now I have 2 AT options to pick from, thankfully they are both gray..

RWDlifer

The plot thickens....the dealer with the MT car just called, still trying to get me to buy the car. So I tell him I'm not sure about the rust on the wheel arch, high miles etc etc. He says, they'll knock off few hundred bucks and gives me a final take it or leave it price of 8,500 clams. Besides the tiny amount of rust, the car is pretty loaded: xenons, memory/power seats, (pass seat is power too), sunshine roof, black leather inside, heated seats. The AT car had manual passenger seats and no heated seats
So, what would you pay for it? (121k miles) I plan to keep it 5 ish years...

RWDlifer

yay or nay?

ncmudbug

I never know what the value of a car is (it's really what you think it's worth to you, right?). I would think that $8.5K isn't that bad. I've wished I had the memory seats whenever I have taken my car to a shop because it takes me ten minutes to get the seat back to where I want it. The black leather - I could take or leave but it is a plus. I would guess it doesn't show dirt as much as the light gray I have. The xenons, heated seats, and hole in the roof are things I really appreciate.

If you drove it and like it, I think you could do a lot worse.

Let us know what happens!

Moviela

There is no such thing as a tiny amount of rust. It is almost alive and will continue to grow. The price is too high for 121K. You get half the mileage for two and a half cents per mile. It will cost a lot more than that to operate a high mileage car to go the same distance.

tommy

I was just going to say the same thing - if you can see rust, multiply it exponentially for the amount that you can't see.

If you're serious about getting that particular car, have a bodyshop look at it. Otherwise, you're just pissing in the wind.