Totally agree. I can't believe how slow our C350s are.
Overall, the w204 are very well packaged other than the fact that it lacks power compared to BMW and Audi or even Lexus.

 

better wind noise control, smoother engine while accelerating, higher quality interior plastics

 

IPOD INTERFACE IS WACKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKKK, having a 7'' screen and have to navigate through the steering wheel and the dash board.. wsup with that?

 

All you complainers just get the c63.

 

Send me a check for the $24,000 difference and I would be happy to...

Nick

 

So just complaining will get you what you want for free then? What a joke!

 

I want a high revving 9000rpm redline engine with no torque.

 

I was simply pointing out that since we all drive either the c300 or c350, we obviously can't afford the c63. If it is so easy to "just buy the AMG instead", how about ponying up the cash to make up the difference ?

What are you doing slumming in this section of the forum anyway ?

 

It's fun to troll the w204 section, since the c63 section gets trolled enough by it's own members anyways.

also

 

I think the w204 is fine the way it is, but a little more speed won't hurt.

 

I don't think you guys give your w204 engines enough credit. Despite its "low numbers on paper" i'm told otherwise on the roadways. Don't they pull like a motherf**ker from rolling starts?

How about the torque? C350 Torque: 258 ft-lbs. @ 2400 rpm. TWENTY FOUR HUNDRED RPM! G35: 270 lb.ft. of torque at 4,800 rpm. You guys get to unleash your $h1t storm of pull far faster and longer than them, and only at that high rpm do they barely get 12 ft-lbs of torque more than you.

And i'm also quite positive on a rolling start that the c300 will destroy a 328. Your w204s are quite amazing, you don't need a c63.

Besides, if you compare your w204s to my w202, you guys have rocket ships.

 

For simple changes, I would love to have a real hand brake, a bigger glove box, scissor style trunk hinges and maybe they could at least massage the engines just a little for a few more ponies under the hood.

 

Torque wins races, Horsepower is for *******.

Discuss

 

Dou you really have to sound like such a dumb *** to try to make a point? I think we all know torque gets you off the line and up to speed but you can't have one without the other...

 

How am I trolling? I do own a w204... Just a C63 W204...

 

Why complain then if you can't afford the extra hp or tq? Nothing is free in this world. There are no handouts either. Either pony it up yourself or suck it up. The last I know, my car is a w204 too. So that makes me a member of this forum too.

 

If you go back and read the thread, I never complained about the the hp and tq of my 350, I am happy with my car. This thread was opened for owners to simply express things they wish they could change about the non-AMG w204. I just don't see the point of you posting "All you complainers just get the c63".

Given that the competition for the C class has more hp ( the 335 with 300 and the G37 with 328 ) asking for more power is a legitimate complaint. I think many of us would like to see at least 300 hp in the C class to put us on par with the competition, but we probably don't need another 200+ hp ( at a $24k premium ) to make us happy.

Nick

 

Add a kompressor 300 and 350 to the lineup. I would like to see 350+ hp in the C350 and 300 in the C300. Mitsubishi has a 2.0 liter 4 cylinder engine with nearly identical max output to the Mercedes 3.5 Liter V-6. I'm sure the Mercedes engine will run an extra 250,000 miles beyond the Mitsubishi, but there seems to be substantial room for improvement on the engine.

 

An automotive journalist once asked how fast people would drive if they had no speedometer. similarly, I ask how W204 owners would feel about their cars if no cars had hp ratings?

I went to the MB dealer with expectations as to how the W204 should drive. First, I drove a C300 and found it unaccpetable, for me. A few days later I drove a C350 and ordered one for European delivery.

In Europe, we dutifully went through the factory break-in period (and then some) before we stretched our car's legs on the Autobahn. At 130 mph (215 kph) nobody was keeping up with us. Also, I later realized that at 4200 rpm 130 mph would NOT exceed the factory break-in recommendations. Try reaching 130 mph in other cars straight off the factory floor and see what happens to your engine warranty!

An issue I have with the standard equipment of the W204 is the lack of leather. I envisioned people asking, "You don't have leather and you paid how much for this car?" I ordered leather.

I would have liked a 6-speed manual, but decided I didn't want to spend time stuck in traffic with a clutch and a gear-shift lever.

The one thing I miss not having on my C350 is 4matic. Maybe when it becomes available in the US we will go get one. Otherwise, I'm keeping what I have.

As a final comment, we had some relatives in the car who asked what we paid for our C350. "Gee, for $3,000 more than our Infinity, we could have had this."

 

Your post is very awkward, you make a lot of good points and you sound like a reasonable individual but when you say you drove a c300 and it was unacceptable and then drove a c350 and decided to get european delivery right away makes zero sense. To go from unacceptable to instant ordering on the difference between a c300 and c350 is a bit sketchy in the way you experience cars.

 

It's true you can't have one without the other because output is one thing only, and hp or torque are simply ways of measuring this one thing only.


I think it's yooker's suggestion that we use torque values, published or discovered by the dyno, or whatever, as the practical measurement for "power". I think it's a good suggestion, because it's at least as meaningful at hp, and because any of the engine/performance gurus use it too. Nobody tunes to hp per se (unless they're trying to sell you something), they tune for a flat torque band within a particular rev range, depending on the application (street, strip, road course, wading pool, etc).

 

You obviously have not examined an F1 engine. They produce very little torque - All screaming high RPM horsepower. They will stall if you try & pull away at under 6 to 8000RPM.

 

The V6 engines in the C-class have a much flatter and usable torque curve than all it's major competitors. The only other ones that triumph that are F/I engines. Find me a competitor car that produces a flatter torque curve than the C-class.

The engine in the G37 has high horsepower, but it is also very peaky and very tiresome to drive. The C-class on the otherhand has more than enough torque to toodle around town, which it was designed to do. This isn't a drag car, it's a sport compact/autobahn cruiser.

 

You're comparing apple to oranges here, F1 engines have no torque because their displacement is tiny. They make up for the lack of torque by revving to astronomical numbers such as 19,000 rpm.

HP = (Torque x RPM)/5252

Having an engine with very little torque but high horsepower output makes it extremely peaky and tiresome to drive on a dialy basis. A very good example would be the Honda S2000, 150ft lb of torque with 240bhp from a 2.0L N/A engine. Max torque kicks in at 7,500rpm and horsepower at 8,300rpm. Unless you drive around eveywhere near the redline, peaky high horsepower engines don't work.

The V6 motor in the C-class is very capable, it was designed to be a cruiser with a flat torque curve for smooth rides. It was never meant to be a high horsepower peaky engine where you need to redline it every single gear.

All I am saying here is that there is more to the story than just "OMFG NEED MOAR HORSEPOWER" Horsepower is merely an abstract number measured from torque.

 

Absolutely, for a road car - which makes your comment "Torque wins races, Horsepower is for *******." real dumb. Horsepower wins races but we are not running race cars on the road with anti stall for crap drivers.

However - having lived in America, most Americans are used to large capacity, long stroke American clunkers with stump pulling torque & very little else positive to be said for them.

Europeans & many of us in ROW like revving cars. Nobody in South Africa, Europe, Australia etc. would complain at having to rev Honda's i-VTEC. It's fun.

The C Class - especially in American form, is a partly stripped down affordable entry level Benz that is a comfortable interstate cruiser. They are stripped of many of the standard niceties like leather fitted in ROW because of sticker price - the cheapest in the world apart from Saudi Arabia where cars attract zero tax.

Benz make cars to fit broad tastes - If you want a more potent C then buy a C63 - wonderful engine & car! But not a car for inexperienced boy racers - the uninitiated can get into trouble very quicky in a C63 - you really need an advanced driving course under your belt for a 63 if you intent exploring it's capabilities.

Benz also make cars with their traditional purchasing base taken into consideration i.e. cars that will do huge mileage trouble free. They too could build an M3 or similar but then the car would be fragile as M3's are. Always breaking that stupid electronic diff, propshafts etc. It's horses for courses.

Our local automotive press have standardised testing that all cars under evaluation are put through. Every performance BMW in recent years has suffered failure of one or another component when put through their test regime.

I find our C350 Elegance adequate in most respects. If I'd wanted more I would have paid more.