Took my c300 in for service and was given a 2013 c250 with 6k.

My thoughts: good amount of torque and a bit more than the 300. Good handling but not really any better than the 300. Engine noise was bothersome. I did not like the sound of the engine at all. The 300 has a nice little sound in my opinion and is smoother on acceleration. Transmission did hunt a little but it seemed that there was no significant improvement over the 2011 300.

Verdict: I prefer the 6 banger and would not be interested in the 250.

Just my opinion. I will respect yours so please do likewise.

 

Nice summary. I own a 250 but drove a few 300s and I will say the 300 is smoother. I hate how the 250s pedal is like an on/off switch. But I do feel the C250 feels the slightest bit quicker in the corners. I'm assuming the engine weight but no major difference. Overall I'm a 250 guy just cause of the facelift but wouldn't mind a 300/350 facelift.

 

I really enjoy my 250. I would have happily considered a 300 but they only come with 4MATIC in the U.S. if you want the version with the nice interior (important to me).

I too notice the soft throttle in the 250. I just put it in Sport if I want a bit more urgency. It's not actually faster...just feels that way because of shift points.

I definitely think the little 1.8T is a great engine, almost remarkable. The BMW N20 is bigger and has waaay more power but can't outgun the 250 in certain passing maneuvers according to C&D comparison tests.

Hoping MB offers the W205 with all engines and 4MATIC optional across all lines.

 

It's certainly a different sound - I personally have found that I prefer the 4 to the 6. The 6 has a growl to it whenever you hear it - and the 4 seems to have more of a range of sounds. The sound of the turbo when driving with the windows down and roof open is awesome - between the whirring and wooshing of the diverter valve, it's surprisingly loud to me for a stock car.

I had a 6 cylinder BMW 328i xDrive rental for 2 weeks last month, and I found the sound of it to be bothersome (and this is supposed to be an amazing sounding engine)- it was always audible, harsh when heard and didn't really have that pleasing of a sound to my ear when wound out.

Good observation though!

 

I almost bought a black 2010 c300 with pano and these cool black 18" amg wheels for around $24k. I was hesitant as it was almost out of warranty, so I ended up leasing a 2012 c250 in magnetite black at a pretty great price. The interior is far superior in the 2012-2013 cars. I honestly felt that the older C interior was a joke.

The 4 cyl is slow to react in some situations around town but is fantastic on the freeway and in passing situations. I usually put it in Sport mode everytime I start up and it seems to help a bit.

I do prefer the noise of the v6 most of the time, but honestly the 4 cyl doesn't sound too bad to my ears. The extra mpg on the free way is nice too.

I adore my tail lights and DRLs. Wish I had ordered a c250 with the lighting package but I nabbed a 2012 with about 6k in options for the price of a stripped down base model. I had to have a few dash rattles and a loose parking brake fixed by the dealer, but I look forward to driving it every day.

 

Sorry 250 guys but have to say I like my 2010 C350 over the newer 250. The dealership gave me a new 250 as a loaner and I was not impressed with exception of the newer COMAND that instantly paired with my iPhone and able to view my address book without downloading. Performance wise I didn't like the tinny sound of the 4. Acceleration seemed much rougher going through the gears. The interior came across as feeling cheaper to me. I actually like the pop-up COMAND screen better.

Just my opinion for what it's worth.

 

A bit if apples and oranges here. The C350's base price is about $6000 more (16% higher) vs the C250's. If they sold for the same price, the dealers would not sell many C250's.

.

 

Understand. I did not mean to make a comparison of the two vehicles but to establish the basis of my opinion. I should have just left it as "this one time I had a C250 as a loaner..." All is good.

 

Just out of curiosity, what seemed cheaper about the newer interior to you?

 

Interesting thread...I've had my 2013 C250 two weeks, and when I was checking out the Class, I drove both the C250 Sport and the C350. I found the C350's throttle tip in way too sensitive for city driving. The C250 was much smoother and easier to drive IMHO. Also kept a C250 Luxury over night- didn't like the handling on it. The Sport's ride seems about perfect.

Keep in mind I was coming from a 2010 GTI with stage 1 tune and stiffer rear sway bar. Lot's of turbo delay in that otherwise excellent ride.

 

*Posted one earlier but am simply restating/adding on to that

I agree still with everyone. I still think personally that there is a little too much turbo lags from a standstill. But other than that I think the car is great! Great gas mileage still and great handling. Plus I love the interior and exterior are killer. Overall it's a great car and for me a phenomalnal 1st car.

 

I got to drive a C250 Luxury Loaner as well. Really enjoyed it. But I would really love it if they had a 2.5L v6 instead of the I4 turbo. It is quite an on/off experience. Other than that, it is the best luxury sport I have driven so far viz. Car is Luxury but does not drive like a boat. Interior is really nice, not fancy like a Lexus, but more of form follows function, done neatly. And it is solid and quiet like a monastery.

 

+1. I'd like to know a well. From what i know, the newer C class all share the same interior, except with the C63 AMG which has come CF.

I personally love my interior.

 

No one was comparing a 350 to 250...of course I wouldnt mind a 350... The old interior is wayyyyy cheaper looking. It looks and feels like the texture of an old, worn out basketball.

 

Everything is up for interpretation. I still see some of those basketball textures in the facelift ones. The lighter color interiors I don't get with these cars because I think the materials look even cheaper than the black. Those odd textures stand out more.

I greatly prefer the look of my interior (2008 C Class) to the new interiors. I also prefer the interior look of my R171 SLK compared to the new SLK R172. 99 percent of people will call me crazy for those two comments.

However, many components in the new interiors feel cheaper to "me." The row of silver buttons like that the heated seats go in, that just looks cheap to me compared to the beautiful matte black buttons before. Same with all that cheap silvery plastic bits on the steering wheel, just too much for me.

The old interiors were more sporty to me, and now they have went more flashy to appeal more on first glance. Again, 99 percent of people will like that.

I prefer a simpler, sporty interior. Out of subject here, but those silver plastic bits on the roll bars of the new SLK drive me crazy, it's just such a cheap looking material.

The engines are probably a bit of a draw on performance overall, some benefits here or there to either one in terms of performance. For the careful foot driver, the 4 cylinder driver will benefit from better fuel economy. The sound I prefer in the 6 cylinder, but honestly I have had the 250 loaners several times and the sound is *NOT* as bad as some have made it sound here. It's actually pretty smooth for a 4 cylinder. However, I'm pretty happy with my engine since it's old tech, no turbo and no direct injection.

I find the facelift cars to be that much more quiet though. This adds more to the enhanced flash/luxury feel compared to the more sport feel of the earlier models (besides the exteriors that did get a more sporty look with the facelift). Overall, that is the biggest feeling I get between the old 300s and new 250s. Take the engine factor out, and the overall impression is a more luxury/flash feeling compared to the old 300s which were more sporty/simple (again not factoring in engine or exterior appearance, just interior and ride).

What's always most striking about the loaner cars, at least at my dealer, is the torture the other customers put them through. How do people get cars THAT dirty? I mean, sit in it and drive, how do you scratch up the door sills and how do you spill liquids all over the floors?

 

Mac--your comments are spot on and couldn't agree with you more--you are spot on with how I feel about the interior comparison.

 

I completely agree as well, preferring the first generation interior to the mid-cycle action. The new interior seems an attempt at a lower cost E Class lookalike, and is a bit tacky and frilly, and "older"-looking. The original W204 interior was sportier, more purposeful, and nicely more simple and direct. Some who like the heavier design of the facelift regard the first version as "cheap", but it was really just more genuinely Teutonic. The new one is an attempt to dress it up for more mainstream tastes.

I do not agree about dark vs. light interiors. The dark ones feel more cramped and closed-in, and get noticeably hotter in the summer. I think the black and ash two tone is their best rendition, which is why I selected it (and not the other way around!).

 

Before my C Class, I hated black interiors with a passion. I think our interpretations on our likes can change over time.

Just my opinion.

I have seen black with ash like you have, and I like it because the dash is still black, which I prefer next to the black radio.

Nevertheless, just my personal preference.

 

Good review, I test drove one a few weeks ago and I really liked the torque and turbo. Its not as smooth as my C300 nor does it pull as hard at the top end but its mid range has good power. Overall, I really enjoyed it. I would rock one any day.

 

It's funny that the center stack comes up as a point of contention for the new cars. I think that is one of the things I disliked the most about the pre-facelift interior. I found the matte buttons to be cheaper looking to my eyes. The texture and pop up screen also turn me off.

I do like the fact that the pre-facelift dash does not have blanks for where buttons should be, however. I don't have parktronic, the rear sunshade or adaptive suspension, so my buttons are only for heated seats with a few blanks. At least they are symmetrical though...

 

I, too, had a c250 loaner recently and agree with Mac's statements. However, I do prefer the leather in the new car vs mine. I loved the feel of the new steering wheel, but prefer the true 3-spoke of my c300.
I hated the blind spot assist, though, which goes back my stand of "Give me fewer bells and whistles, please." The navigation was a PITA to use, too.
Lastly, the combo of an automatic w/ the turbo was, for me, a ticking bomb, i.e. pause pause pause... bam! rocket forward. Granted, I only had the car for the day/evening, so I'm sure if I owned the car I'd adapt to it throttle-wise.

 

You have a true gem though with the manual. Keep enjoying it! That is a big difference between pre and post facelift availability!

 

This is the first true automatic I have owned. I really wanted a C300 6 speed, but in the end the 4 cylinder and newer interior won me over more.

I definitely wish MB had not gotten rid of it here.

 

Based on my experience, it's much easier to drive a well designed turbo with a manual trans. Having the C250 as your first drive is a bit of a challenge. You have 3 separate automatic control systems for the engine, the trans, and the boost pressure, and they must be kept in sync.

That said, I think your lag issue taking off from a standstill, is easy to eliminate in most cases.

If you are talking about stop signs, it's the old power-brake method to pre-spool your turbo. With left foot on brake, get the revs up to roughly 1200 rpm, then when it's your turn to go, push the gas pedal and release the brake pedal at the same time. You need to practice this at remote stop signs, to get the rpm right. Expect to burn some rubber in development of your style.

If you are at traffic lights, hopefully they are common lights you often hit, to get the feel of the light timing. Sometimes you can see where the "go lane" is changing from green to yellow & red. Then as your turn approaches, your well practiced power-braking skill comes into play.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

One benefit of having a turbo is how easy it is to bump up the low to midrange engine torque, in this case going from 229 ft-lbs to 280 ft-lbs, which is a bit more than a new C350. The plug-in box from Burger Tuning, for about $280.

BurgerTuning_C250_Juice Box


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


One question about the actual C250 Highway MPG's. The DOT dyno test has an average speed of 58 mph. Does it get better or worse on a long drive at higher speed. Our C300, after switchig to the approved Castrol 0W-30, got close to 30 mpg's on a 400 mile trip.

And since these turbos use full floating bronze bushings for bearings, the combination of 0W-40 or 5W-40 oil, and cold weather will make the C250 response from cold starts in cold (Canada, Minnesota, Wisconsin) weather extra laggy.

.