05 C230 sedan or Acura TL
#176
Originally Posted by jinijazz
Seems like you talk before you know
Despite stiff competition, the Boxster received more than 50 per cent of the votes cast by employees of the magazine worldwide. This is the third time that the Boxster has received a prestigious All-Star Award from "Automobile Magazine".
#177
Originally Posted by mick1
prestige is relative my friend. the other day, I saw a white S-class mercedes driving on the road. I thought to myself what a fantastic car. then I saw a silver rolls royce phantom and i thought whoa, this rolls is even more fantastic.
#178
Originally Posted by Tandrek
In this instance, the Rolls Royce seemed more prestigous... and it is. In the same way, the S-Class is more prestigous than the E-Class, which in turn is more prestigous than the C-Class. You are simply supporting my statement... there is no Mercedes less prestigous than the C-Class. It is the "bottom-of-the-barrel Mercedes" and is also the cheapest Mercedes sold in the United States. Can you dispute these statements?
you know bmw 3-series is the cheapest bmw but i like the 3-series more than the 5-series and the 7-series. i don't think the 3-series makes bmw less prestigious in any way.
#181
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 996TT,2004 996 C2,2005 C230K
Originally Posted by Tandrek
In this instance, the Rolls Royce seemed more prestigous... and it is. In the same way, the S-Class is more prestigous than the E-Class, which in turn is more prestigous than the C-Class. You are simply supporting my statement... there is no Mercedes less prestigous than the C-Class. It is the "bottom-of-the-barrel Mercedes" and is also the cheapest Mercedes sold in the United States. Can you dispute these statements?
#182
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Alright, i'll do it for you. ![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
![thumbs](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thumbsup.gif)
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#183
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Scottsdale, Arizona
Posts: 69
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 996TT,2004 996 C2,2005 C230K
Originally Posted by mick1
nah. you should go for the 997 since you're the type of person who would appreciate the higher end models. I think the 997 will go on sale in the fall ![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#184
Originally Posted by SergC
This coming saturday at all Porsche dealler's, would be a Presentation of 997 S in black with ceramic brakes
I am a great fan of the 997S
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
#185
Guest
Posts: n/a
Tandrek, you know you are driving a the cheapest CLK in the USA? Which is about 6,000 more than my C320 right? Your 320 isnt THAT much more prestigous than my car. Maybe if you had a 430 or a cab you can have some "prestige" bragging rights here. But you are arnt gaining ground here with your statements. You are probably one of those people who would buy a used car just so you dont drive entry level Mercedes.
Last edited by Guest0001; 08-24-2004 at 03:40 AM.
#186
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by SergC
No.But ( no offence )you sound like a guy who has made one a liiittle step up and emmediately start bashing C230
#187
1) For the umpteenth time: I believe that the C-Class are fine vehicles. I personally love the interior of the 2005's, and the new aggressive grill on the coupe. I simply do not believe that the "prestige factor" of the C-Class allows it to overcome all of the shortcomings when you compare the C240 to the Acura TL.
2) At no point did I state that I had "bragging rights" for owning a CLK320. Additionally, this vehicle is neither new nor my first luxury vehicle. This is a temporary vehicle, as I will be living in this place for six months and the hit that I would take on a new vehicle over six months is absolutely unacceptable. I will be moving to another country and bringing my vehicle with me simply isn't practical. This is, however, my first used car... hence the emphasis on the Starmark Warranty.
3) Numerous individuals choose the CLK320 over the CLK430 for reasons of practicality. Paying an additional $10k for the extra horses simply isn't practical when you spend most of your time driving in 2-20mph rush-hour traffic. Whether you're driving a Kia or a Viper, you're not going to move any more quickly. The CLK320 has the same luxurious interior as the CLK430, and looks the same above-the-hood. I saw no reason to opt for the CLK430.
2) At no point did I state that I had "bragging rights" for owning a CLK320. Additionally, this vehicle is neither new nor my first luxury vehicle. This is a temporary vehicle, as I will be living in this place for six months and the hit that I would take on a new vehicle over six months is absolutely unacceptable. I will be moving to another country and bringing my vehicle with me simply isn't practical. This is, however, my first used car... hence the emphasis on the Starmark Warranty.
3) Numerous individuals choose the CLK320 over the CLK430 for reasons of practicality. Paying an additional $10k for the extra horses simply isn't practical when you spend most of your time driving in 2-20mph rush-hour traffic. Whether you're driving a Kia or a Viper, you're not going to move any more quickly. The CLK320 has the same luxurious interior as the CLK430, and looks the same above-the-hood. I saw no reason to opt for the CLK430.
Last edited by Tandrek; 08-24-2004 at 04:19 AM.
#189
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2001 ML320 E, 2003 C230K Sport Sedan
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Many would disagree with your rebuttal. There is a reason why the Porsche Boxster is often called a "fake Porsche", or a "poor-man's Porsche". Also, the SC430 and the Porsche Boxster are not in the same class. One is a luxury convertible, while the other is a roadster. SL vs SLK, etc.
The C-Class is, by far, inferior to every other sedan in the Mercedes lineup. It should be... it's the cheapest Sedan in the Mercedes lineup.
The C-Class is, by far, inferior to every other sedan in the Mercedes lineup. It should be... it's the cheapest Sedan in the Mercedes lineup.
Poor man's Porsche - only by those who don't have it. It's obvious you haven't driven one. It's awefully hard to get something that handles better than a rear engined vehicle, with a flat six that is almost set at the height of the rear axle centerline!!! Don't think for a second that you can call that car a fake. There is little compromise in it and it will easily out-handle just about any other of so-called sports cars out there. How did you figure that is fake.
The C is a car specifically designed for a market segment. Just as the E and the S are, similarly the 3, the 5 and the 7. Interestingly, the CLK is pretty much the same parts on a slightly different chassis.
However, given the Mercedes rep for a solid well built car in the C, with a lineage that goes back to long before Honda built mini-bikes with wings on them; the prestiege easily goes to any Mercedes over any Honda.
And, when you think about it, that is really what pisses off the rice owners isn't it? They have got a really nice Honda or Toyota, literally a dressed up to copy, at least in concept (sometimes in form too), vehicles that have been designed and built for a specific purpose, by a quality manufacturer.
It's really like ....a short person complex, isn't it?
Ed.
#190
Senior Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 272
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 C32, 2011 VW GTI
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Acura TL: 270hp V6, extremely reliable, very high resale value, and a host of standard options.
MB C230: 189hp V4, average reliability, average-poor resale value, next-to-no standard options.
The MB looks a bit better both inside and out, but the prestige factor is questionable. Yes, it's a Mercedes... but it's also the cheapest Mercedes sold in the United States. I would rather have a mid-level Acura than a bottom-of-the-barrel Mercedes. Take a look at a used CLK for that price... you should be able to get a Starmark Certified 2000-2001.
MB C230: 189hp V4, average reliability, average-poor resale value, next-to-no standard options.
The MB looks a bit better both inside and out, but the prestige factor is questionable. Yes, it's a Mercedes... but it's also the cheapest Mercedes sold in the United States. I would rather have a mid-level Acura than a bottom-of-the-barrel Mercedes. Take a look at a used CLK for that price... you should be able to get a Starmark Certified 2000-2001.
#191
Originally Posted by Slater126
With a 0-60 time in the mid-7s and a quarter in the mid/high 15s, the '04-05 C230, with a 6-speed anyhow, is quicker than the revered and pricey Cosworth '86-87 190E 2.3 16-Valve
Originally Posted by fasteddie
Poor man's Porsche - only by those who don't have it. It's obvious you haven't driven one.
#192
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2001 ML320 E, 2003 C230K Sport Sedan
Originally Posted by digital_b
its amazing all the idiots who believe the tl is a lesser car that the piece of **** c230. theres no way you fools have driven the tl so stop lying. I bought one which I recently traded for an incredible deal on a lexus ls 430 ultra otherwise I would still have it. the is no category aside from the tls ridiculous turning circle that the c class [ANY C CLASS] can beat the tl in. the tl is a very well built car early build models excepted. I could see if you were talking about an s class vs an rl but a C CLASS? all this proves it that the c class lovers are relatively broke and stupid. c class? hahahaahahaah.
Hahahahahaha you traded a POS for another POS. Get rid of it and get the real thing!!! Even that car mags acknowledge that the SC just Toyota trying to copy an MB. Thing is, they say it lacks character. What you really have is a cheap, fuc#ed up copy of an SL.
Ed.
#193
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2001 ML320 E, 2003 C230K Sport Sedan
Originally Posted by Tandrek
That's fine, but the competition in this thread (Acura TL) still blows it away with 0-60 times in the mid-low 6's and 1/4 mile in the mid-high 14's. If you're not pushing superiority in performance, why bring it up?
I test-drove two Boxster's today. I was not impressed by the base, but the S was acceptable. The handling is superb, and the power of the S was acceptable. However, I still don't feel that it is worth the sticker of $62K. Other vehicles with similar handling, more luxury, and far superior performance cost less (M3, etc).
I test-drove two Boxster's today. I was not impressed by the base, but the S was acceptable. The handling is superb, and the power of the S was acceptable. However, I still don't feel that it is worth the sticker of $62K. Other vehicles with similar handling, more luxury, and far superior performance cost less (M3, etc).
Sorry bud.....
M3 doesn't handle like the boxter (at least not the S)......not even close. M3 might have quite an edge on power though.
Ed.
#194
Originally Posted by fasteddie
M3 doesn't handle like the boxter (at least not the S)......not even close. M3 might have quite an edge on power though.
Performance Specs for the Porsche Boxster S vs BMW M3 Coupe:
Porsche:
3.2l V6 258hp
0-60 in 5.7 , 1/4 mile in 13.9s
BMW:
3.2l V6 333hp
0-60 in 5.0 , 1/4 mile in 13.1s
#195
Member
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: CA
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boxster987 C230KSS M3
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Actually, it does. The M3 offers handling similar to every other 3-Series, which is famous for being quite excellent. As for "might" have quite an edge on power? The M3 blows the Boxster S out of the water, for performance...
'outperforms' most of fancy car out there,
'similar handling' as Boxster
'not overpriced(translation-you can affod)' not like Boxster S
I'm done with this thread, too.
#196
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Actually, it does. The M3 offers handling similar to every other 3-Series, which is famous for being quite excellent. As for "might" have quite an edge on power? The M3 blows the Boxster S out of the water, for performance... that is its forte.
Performance Specs for the Porsche Boxster S vs BMW M3 Coupe:
Porsche:
3.2l V6 258hp
0-60 in 5.7 , 1/4 mile in 13.9s
BMW:
3.2l V6 333hp
0-60 in 5.0 , 1/4 mile in 13.1s
Performance Specs for the Porsche Boxster S vs BMW M3 Coupe:
Porsche:
3.2l V6 258hp
0-60 in 5.7 , 1/4 mile in 13.9s
BMW:
3.2l V6 333hp
0-60 in 5.0 , 1/4 mile in 13.1s
Tandrek, have you ever test driven a Subaru WRX-STI ? I don't like the look of that car but according to the car magazines, that car can easily out accelerate both the boxster and M3. I was driving next to one yesterday. The engine really sounded very powerful.
#197
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: San Diego, CA & San Jose, Costa Rica & Stuttgart, Germany
Posts: 9,498
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
1959 220S / 1979 230 G / 2002 A210 AMG / 2003 C320 SC / 2004.5 C320 SS / 2005 ML350 SE / 2008 smart
This Thread Sucks !
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
![thread](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/thread.gif)
Somebody please kill it !
#198
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2001 ML320 E, 2003 C230K Sport Sedan
Originally Posted by Tandrek
Actually, it does. The M3 offers handling similar to every other 3-Series, which is famous for being quite excellent. As for "might" have quite an edge on power? The M3 blows the Boxster S out of the water, for performance... that is its forte.
Performance Specs for the Porsche Boxster S vs BMW M3 Coupe:
Porsche:
3.2l V6 258hp
0-60 in 5.7 , 1/4 mile in 13.9s
BMW:
3.2l V6 333hp
0-60 in 5.0 , 1/4 mile in 13.1s
Performance Specs for the Porsche Boxster S vs BMW M3 Coupe:
Porsche:
3.2l V6 258hp
0-60 in 5.7 , 1/4 mile in 13.9s
BMW:
3.2l V6 333hp
0-60 in 5.0 , 1/4 mile in 13.1s
Ed.
#199
Originally Posted by jinijazz
not overpriced(translation-you can affod)' not like Boxster S
I love the CLK500, but I certainly wouldn't pay $100k for it. Why? I don't feel that the CLK500 is worth $100k. In the same way, I don't feel that the Boxster S is worth $60k. Is it a good car? Sure. Does it handle well? Sure. Can I afford it? Absolutely... Is it worth $61K to me? No.
Originally Posted by mick1
Tandrek, have you ever test driven a Subaru WRX-STI ? I don't like the look of that car but according to the car magazines, that car can easily out accelerate both the boxster and M3. I was driving next to one yesterday. The engine really sounded very powerful.
PS: Yes, my next vehicle will be the 2005 CLK500. As stated above: My current vehicle is temporary... when I move in six months, I will "upgrade"
![Smilie](https://mbworld.org/forums/images/smilies/smile.gif)
Originally Posted by fasteddie
M3 may handle well, but Porsche is literally a big cart!!!!! Sorry but M3, and even an MZ doesn't stand a chance against the Boxter in handling.
#200
Member
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Eastern Ontario
Posts: 165
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2001 ML320 E, 2003 C230K Sport Sedan
The thing you have to remember is that, like in the comercial, on the Porsche.there is no compromise!!!!
What I mean is that the M3 is by comparison a souped up grocery-getter(i hate to say it because I love the car too) Literally, it is a car that is designed to be a basic 4 seater, front engine, nice handling grocery-getter - that someone has gone to town on, and turned into a mean street machine.
If you had to pick the optimal configuration to run on a track, you would logically select the Porsche over the M3. On the track - fast in corners is where is counts.
It isn't a V6, it is a flat 6. Better still!!!
The center of gravity on the Boxter is probably about a good foot lower than the M3.
Boxter-s starts at $52K US vs the M3 Convert. starting at $57KUS.
The 0 to 60 on the M3 Conv. is 5.4 vs 5.7 on the Porsche.
The top speed on the M3 conv is 155 vs 165 on the Porsche.
Also, if you buy a Porsche, in 20 years it is a member of the family and not just a old BMW.
To me , seems the Boxter is the way to go. Buy it, be happy, thrash it every weekend, and give it to someone in 20 years.
Ed.
What I mean is that the M3 is by comparison a souped up grocery-getter(i hate to say it because I love the car too) Literally, it is a car that is designed to be a basic 4 seater, front engine, nice handling grocery-getter - that someone has gone to town on, and turned into a mean street machine.
If you had to pick the optimal configuration to run on a track, you would logically select the Porsche over the M3. On the track - fast in corners is where is counts.
It isn't a V6, it is a flat 6. Better still!!!
The center of gravity on the Boxter is probably about a good foot lower than the M3.
Boxter-s starts at $52K US vs the M3 Convert. starting at $57KUS.
The 0 to 60 on the M3 Conv. is 5.4 vs 5.7 on the Porsche.
The top speed on the M3 conv is 155 vs 165 on the Porsche.
Also, if you buy a Porsche, in 20 years it is a member of the family and not just a old BMW.
To me , seems the Boxter is the way to go. Buy it, be happy, thrash it every weekend, and give it to someone in 20 years.
Ed.