tanktube67

For $10.000.00 less than BMW ans AUDI the new C class is a VERY GOOD CAR

Take a look at the high performance modles resolts
http://www.caranddriver.com/assets/d...orts_final.pdf

tanktube67

2007 BMW 335i fully loaded $52,000.00
2008 MB C350 fully loaded $42,000.00 & $10,000.00 in my bank acct. less power and handle I can leave with that

MBE50003

waitttt C&D chose BMW to winnn!?!? WHAT A SHOCK

rb23lb

why the hell dont they test a c350????? that isnt even fair comparison that they test a c300... i drove a c300 andd just the performance difference alon gave me a more negative perception of the w204... funny how they can test a 335i and not a 328 i but they can only test a c300

Stiggs

I get them just to look at the pictures. Words suck.

Stiggs

Again I don't know how Car and Driver does it. They get 6.5sec for the 0-60 time for the C300 when Mercedes clearly states 7.0sec. Its like they are always 0.5sec faster....always! I don't get it?

peabers

I believe C/D tested the 328i against the C300... I'd say those are natural competitors (with a slightly different focus, of course). The C350 would have been more expensive than the price of the other competitors.

Possibly due to conditions... such as weather, altitude, driver, tyres... etc..

Jorg

These reports are very subjective and sometimes ridiculous. I did own a BMW 745i and everybody ridiculed the iDrive. I learned the system and never had a problem.

I can let you in on a secret. I owned BMW's and MB cars and it takes me, on average, 12 minutes to drive from my home to my office and it doesn't matter which car I take, it takes 12 minutes, C-Class or S550, 12 minutes.

The car purchase decision is very complex and varies from client to client. No car is best in every category. Then again for me "one Car ownership" means, buying, maintaining and selling the car, makes one deal, economically speaking.

Yes MB dropped the ball under the last chairman. The new S-Class is flawless. The local dealership has had no deficiencies to speak off. BMW bought many 745i back, because the never were able to fix them.

I have had no problems with BMW and no problems with MB, but I admit the driving experience is very different and I agree, it is unusual, if you like the MB or BMW very much that you will switch brands. They are different.

The local dealership plays a big role in the decision making process. Audi just does not have the trade in facilities in place to be a real contender. The cars are nice, trade in is lousy. Trade a Benz on an Audi is even worst.

I don't drive my cars on race tracks and I obey the traffic laws on the road and the C350 gives me all the speed I ever need.

Then in the end, price plays a role too and in this area the difference was huge and then some options like key less go, panorama roof etc. were not even available at any price on a BMW.

I like both brands very much and yet when it came to writing a cheque, MB had the inside track and I am very happy with my decision and that is all that is important in my decision making process.

Jorg

peabers

Great nuggets of truth in Jorg's post.

RLE

<<Flipped through the new issue of Car and Driver at O'Hare just before I flew out of there tonight. There is a comparison test of the C300 vs. A4, BMW3 series and Cadillac CTS ... The C comes in dead last, Caddy is 3rd, A4 is 2nd and the BMW which - as always - they rated first. You will be surprised to read how poorly designed and built our cars are; poor handling (partly due to lousy tires); overly aggressive stability control; cheap interior materials; flat uncomfortable seats; smaller inside than a Civic, etc.. I think I will trade for a Kia, they usually seem to like them......>>

Well, now, wait a minute. Look at the car MBUSA gave them. A plain-*** C300 Sport (silver/gray, ooo how exciting) with the 17" wheels which means crap Conti tires which is a BIG handicap. You may not have noticed that the BMW and Infiniti both had Bridgestone RE-050A tires as stock and since I chose those for my own C300 with 18s, I know how good they are. That probably explains the poor braking and cornering. And since the test car did NOT have the P2 package (observe, no Xenon headlights) , MBUSA could have furnished a C350 Saks edition whose interior is far nicer with 40 more HP and has bigger wheels and better tires perhaps.

C&D said that the C350 would have not exceeded their price ceiling.

Just another knuckleheaded decision by MBUSA which has come back to bite them in the butt.

Stiggs

Sure but they always get 0.5sec quicker than Mercedes claims. For example the C63, the W209 CLK55 and now the W204 C300.........all 0.5sec quicker than what MB says they do. Can we blame conditions for all these tests?

chilledbenz

I've been waiting for my issue to come in the mail before I commented on this thread and it finally came yesterday. Just wanted to make some quick points, the first being the major one.

The poor C class never had a chance in a manual transmission head to head. Yeah I know those three guys on here that actually bought the manual transmission will jump on here and yell at me, but MB does not know how to produce a good manual transmission. I think they know that all too well themselves and don't even bother to offer one on any car except the C300. Do I have facts to back it up? Well a short stint, I test drove a W203 with the six speed and felt it to be real rubbery, slippery almost, never felt like it was in gear and gave me no feed back. I've driven many Honda's, which I feel have a great grasp on what a manual transmission should feel like, but thats for another forum. My point being is that if the review were of automatic transmission cars the C might have faired a bit better than what it did.

Their gripe about tires is a moot point to me. The C was at a disadvantage on this, because the others had more agressive tires installed. Even so, to be fair to the Benz, it might have had a bad set of tires. I haven't heard many complaints from users on here complaining that their tires are making them slide around.

Like the others mentioned here already, this is all opinon. Take for instance the chart where they add up the total points. BMW gets 1 point for rebates/extras, the others none, sounds like BMW's aren't selling as nicely as they would like. The price as tested catagory is really skewed, the Benz under shot the BMW by $1415 on the as tested prices and was easily the cheapest base price in the bunch and scored a perfect 20, but the BMW got a 19 being close to the most expensive missing only by $40 bucks?

Where the Benz ends up losing this contest, or at lest the reason it comes in last is in the final two catagories. Gotta have it and fun to drive. Those two catagories are the opinons of the people driving that certain car on that certain day. Give them a different car with the exact same set up on the same exact day and they might change their numbers. Same could be said about the same car on a different day ect. The numbers for this catagory read like this: Gotta have it, 25 being the best, the winner the BMW scored 23 the Benz a 18? 18 being the lowest of the four tested, I would think just from a consumer stand point, that a newer model would rank higher in the gotta have it catagory just because its new, everyone wants the latest and greatest, for this the Benz should have scored a 22-25 easily.

The fun to drive catagory is worse. I can sit here and think of lots of cars that were fun to drive for me, but others probably think would suck. Lol drove a school bus once, that was pretty fun to drive, but I wouldn't want to put it up against a Ferrari, you get my point. I will cut the reviewers some slack for the reason they had a C300 with a crappy manual transmission, and in their case some bad tires, but I still don't see how they rate it two points lower than the caddy, who they also mention has a bad tranny.

After all this complaining because I love my Benz my final numbers would have only moved it up one position in their test ha ha. Well least its not last, and for the record I think its the best.

Brad G

Chilled Benz:

You make some excellent points here!

However, please don't take this as a defensive reply but I previously had the 2004 manual and agree with you completely that the W203's stick was a bit on the cheesy side. It didn't feel rubbery but more like it belonged to a compact economy car. I understood this was re-worked on later W203 models but evidently not reworked enough?

The new W204 Manual shifts as smooth as well oiled watch.

If you get the opportunity, drive one. I know you'll be quite surprised and impressed. In my honest opinion, the BMW shifted rubbery and the throws were much too long. The new W204 stick is an awesome improvement over my previous 2004's. Too bad there are so few C300 manuals available in the North American market.

Regarding the tires, the 17" Contis make the W204 ride super smooth and quiet. It's got to be the reason MB chose them (plus they are cheap helping to keep the MSRP's lower).

My C300 has the 18" AMG's. This does make the handling feel just as sharp and tight as the BMW w/ their 17" run flats in my own test drive comparison. (I'm not driving my car on a slalom test or on a track).

I love the 18" AMG's appearance and I was already pretty well committed to the car but when I first test drove mine, the first thing I noticed was the increased steering response yet harsher ride of the 18" Contis my car came with. They do pick up the bumps and let you know you are driving on more sport oriented tires and wheels.

My biggest compliant might be that the steering, though super fast, feels too light or "easy" to turn.

lx Raven xl

BMW is way to common here. plus i drove BMW 3 series as well for almost a year on some what regular basis as my bro had it. 318 to be more precise.
now i drive 180K

BMW 318 engine was slower than 180K
BMW was rough ride
BMW had a very firm steering and more road feedback
MB on the other hand is smooth
MB feels more luxurious from inside and out
MB steering is soft. and i got the extra para-steering which actually is more smother only at slow speeds.
MB fuel average is better

Please note I am comparing 2006 3 serires with 2008 MB C-class

Still for my bro BMW is better and hes now again getting the new 3 series in march 2008

for me MB is better


My bro drives like a maniac
I drive sober

I will never buy BMW
My bro will never buy a MB


We both are different drivers.
we both like different attributes


These reviews you read are pointless unless they point out a real defect in the car.

Have fun driving MB

spotless

I think Jeremy Clarkson put it the best.
"In Mercedes, your heart beat drops."

As far as leather is concerned, I actually like the rubber seat. It looks like leather, and I rarely get to seat in my car butt naked, so my bum won't feel the difference between MB rubber and Napa Leather. I do agree with the cheap feel of Stereo control area tho.

tanktube67

Look how much the W204 cost and compared it to the other cars so who’s winning now I'm by the way I own a 2007 Honda Civic and is my mileage car

JimPap

ChilledBenz,

Just out of curiosity, does that edition of Car and Driver have more ads on BMW than MB?

chilledbenz

Car mags always rate the BMW better. I subscribe to three different magazines and there was only one time that the BMW lost in a match up. That came when the introduction of the Infiniti G35 came out and they blamed it on a bad BMW test car if I remember right. It was shortly after the launch of the new 330i engine and they had all sorts of problems, in the end a faulty oil pump sent the Bimmer to the garage.

webada

Editors will always rate BMW above all others. No editors in their right mind would risk their reputation if they had picked any other car and dethrone BMW. BMW is always a safe choice.

That being said, I did have an opportunity to drive a lexus, merc, audi and bmw side by side at a lexus event. I came out there a bmw believer (handleing and fun to drive) and drive one now. However, as I read most of the mag. review and its all praises to bmw, that's unrealistic. BMW by far has the ugliest and cheapest interior out of all four. Their iDRIVE should be call iNSANE... Today's driving experience isn't all about the road and how much the car can hug it.... it is unrealistic view of their subscribers... c'mon, how many times are you going to salom through orange cones and do 0-60 in fastest time possible??

oblu

Maybe it's because the BMWFS lease rates are fantastic?

I know I bought an e90 this same time of year right after they got introduced in July-ish. And even then, I got it for $1500 over invoice, which was right around $1800 off msrp.

MB dealers around here wouldn't give me $1 off msrp. I'm sure it's more a sales philosphy though. BMW wants as many of theirs cars on the road as possible.

chilledbenz

I don't know if thats the exact case or not. MB is offering winter savings event lease pricing on their 4matic cars, not sure exact what the numbers are because I wasn't interested in leasing. As for the money off bit, for a 40k C class you can easily get $1.5k - $2k off m.s.r.p. just don't expect to pay invoice.

Like to also add that I read the magazines for entertainment purposes only. I like to see the cars and drive them myself in person to make up my own mind. Although I will admit that I can see Lambos and Ferraris, but they aren't going to let me drive them, so I have to trust the guys in the mags on that occasion ha ha.

webada

+1

I read those mag just like I read comics when I was little.... wishing I would have that power, just like wishing I could be driving a ferraris or porsche gts...

I recently stopped subscriptions to those mags. To me, internet gives me the latest news in auto industry and more general public view of the vehicles. I don't trust those so call "experts" Test driving is the only way you can see how the car feels to YOU.

chilledbenz

I don't have a lap top so I can't take the internet with me when I go visit the throne.

CE EXO

When all comes to an end.
What made me go for the c.
1.Audi is out of the picture for me just beacause of the front wheel drive.
2.Bmw (i owned one in the past) is a really great car but had some disantvantages against the c.
The suspension and the chassi is made having in mind the sport driving aspect,but when it comes in comfort riding the merc is an absolut winner.
(The roads where i leave (Greece) are like Grand Canyon)
The looks of the 4door bmw in comparison with the c looks less sportier and a little bit boring.(This tail lights in the bmw are looking ...... bad to me)
If i went for the coupe bmw witch i like i must say i would loose carrying 1person since is a straight 4 seater.
Also in the 320 series the c200k performs also in numbers a little bit better than the bmw.
So the c is a better all round solution than the 320 for me but again is a matter of choise and what somebody wants from his car during the period of time his is buying the car.