I had my C350 in for a minor repair, and I had a brand new C250 as a loaner for 2 days. Now, since it wasn't my car I might have been a little more "aggresive" with my driving, but nothing too crazy as I was just running around town.

Just a few things to note:

My initial thoughts after driving it were that it's very peppy. I could stomp on the gas and when the turbo kicks in, there is a very nice boost. I've never driven a turbo before, and this was a nice surprise.

While it was very nice when it kicked in, the turbo delay was very bad. I am surprised that MB let that go to market like that. In time I probably would have gotten use to it, but if you were in and out of traffic that lag would be a problem. It actually felt like the car slowed down first before it kicked it. When it kicked in though - look out.

Gas mileage was around 24 which I thought was pretty darn good.

I had a lot of fun driving this car these past few days. I hope I made the right decision going with the C350 and the bigger motor.

 

It's hard to reduce/eliminate the lag when you don't have much displacement to begin with

 

Now that I'm used to the lag, it doesn't bother me much. It's pretty predictable, so you learn to compensate a bit.

It is a bit unsettling to hit full boost in the middle of a turn if you aren't expecting it - the tail wants to step out. A couple of times I have given it the boot leaving my office turning across traffic and had it try to go sideways on me making the ESP go psycho.

 

I agree with the above posts ^^^^

You learn to anticipate the lag more and compensate for it. When I first got the car it was weird how long it took to take the turbo to spool so I can safely pass on the highway, it made for some unsafe passing lol.

 

I understand the desire to rationalize, but is it only me who feels one should not have to compensate/compromise to this degree on a car of this brand and price? This isn't just a less-than-perfect sound system...powertrain is the heart of the car!!

 

Not just you. It would even be different if this level of compromise and compensation led to great fuel efficiency gains, but it just doesn't.

 

I disagree whole heartily, there is nothing wrong with the C250 power plant in fact I enjoy it. Its a very refined engine for what it is. For me there was no compromise thats the engine I wanted.

 

I don't really think of it as a compromise. I enjoy how it drives - it's a very tractable powertrain that is quite content with loafing along at low RPM while keeping with traffic or pulling down the highway at 100 MPH.

Mercedes Benz makes an amazing car, but they aren't miracle workers. Every car from the C250 to the S65 are going to have compromises or quirks. If I wanted something dull and without personality, I would not drive a German car.

 

Of course it's not you. There are always compromises to be made and it's up to the buyer to decide which ones are worth it or not. I was itching for a C63 or Boss 302/Shelby GT500 and had to compromise on the slow (comparitively speaking) C350. It's all in what you deem important. Your emphasis on "to this degree" calls out how important this aspect is; and therefore is certainly not compromise-worthy.

 

I had a C250 loaner a while back and kind of felt the same as the OP. Once you learn where it kicks in it's actually a pretty fun car to drive. I wish it came with a manual trans though. Then it would've been a little more controllable.

 

Haven't driven a C250 but I drove an SLK250 and thought it was a blast.

 

I agree with the above posts

 

I had a B200 Turbo before I bought my C350, and I never noticed any turbo lag at all. Perhaps the CVT helps?

 

Is it just the turbo lag, though? That's what I originally thought it was, too, but putting the transmission into "S" mode makes the engine seem FAR more linear.... I wonder if the "E" mode simply frustrates all attempts at aggressive acceleration in the name fuel economy....

 

It is a 1.8L turbo after all... I think the C250 CDI is a far better drive for similar money if you can get over the fact it's a... *gasp*.. diesel.

 

Ah but the better mpg will help.

 

Apparently BMW does it better, but costs more. Not sure what other Lux class Turbo I4 to compare it with.

.

 

 

Audi I4 is very good ad fun to drive.

 

...and comes with a first-name relationship with your service advisor!

 

Like any other German car LOL! I thought MB was more reliable than Audi/BMW but with some experience and going through these forums they seem to be in the same territory.

 

Actually, years of data shows Audi to be the most challenged of the three, although, as in any population, there will be a distribution. Whatever you're experiencing with MB or BMW, on average, an Audi customer will be worse off. With their design and performance, if they ever achieved quality (and there is some evidence that may be happening for them and for some sister VW models), they could challenge leadership in the market. But, sooo many folks have had experience with Audis falling apart after too short a lifetime...yours truly included.

 

GF had a 1998 A4 Quattro V6 manual (1st year for that engine upgrade). Except for some fuel injector stinky leaky issues when new, it was outstanding. Back then BMW and Audi were using 16" x 7" wheels, with about 205-55-16 tires, making the ride smoother and the winter traction great (Audi had a simple torsen center diff).

Car was not the I4-T ( they had oil issues back then), but I did drive 1.8L engine in a Passat and 2.0 in VW Golf AWD-DSG . It was great in the Passat manual.

.

 

Still have my '98 A4 1.8T Quattro. It's been a great car for me. Pretty rugged machine withstood two weekend long track sessions with the Porsche club, my girlfriend and my son when he was in high school. Can't believe I've never had to replace the clutch.

While it doesn't have as much power as the C250. The power delivery is far superior. Much more even torque delivery throughout the rpm range.