Leetom

Since you are only going to have the car 3 years, and your company is paying for it, both cost and longevity are irrelevant. The air suspension is superior in ride and handling quality. I have it on my US spec ML, and is great. Definitely a step above steel setups on the ML, I compared. Bit spendy when combined with off road package, but cost asside, good choice. You will later regret not having it. Just do it and pull the trigger.

floridadriver

I'm thinking something was wrong with your loaner...tire pressure? A fluke? Who knows. Especially if you were able to tell the difference between the sport and standard steel. I've driven the 4 variations a fair amount and the 3 steel suspensions were spot on in percentage of differences apart, in other words the difference of standard pretty much half way between sport and comfort, and the air mimicked the differences strikingly similar...but with a bit more smoothness and isolation in all 3 modes than their steel counterparts. If it was widely available and free, the air is unbeatable on any normal roads IMO, but can see how enthusiasts on track like conditions would get the most out of the steel sport, but again, the C class is not a sports car by any stretch of the imagination.

c21bill

I appreciate all the input on this interesting discussion. Before ordering my C300 I had driven all 3 steel spring versions and hated the Sport Suspension. (I'm a comfort kind of guy). I did however want some of the features that were only available with sport so I went ahead and sprang for the Airmatic although I never got to test a C300 so equipped. I also like the way Mercedes has most options as "stand alone" so you can skip things like a sunroof or AirBalance if you don't want them. This will be a 6 or 7 year car so I will purchase an extended warranty. My car is supposedly 6 weeks out.

alsyli

Did you have a chance to drive the Luxury model over very bumpy pavement? I find my W204 Sport model rides fine... until I hit any type of bump. =P

Also, did you notice any differences in steering btw Luxury and standard suspension? (I ask b/c the Consumer Reports test of Luxury vs. Sport W204 indicated that the steering btw the two)

Diesel Benz

You should have two or three hours with the Airmatic car because it is a different car at different settings (which in my opinion is the real point with Airmatic).

gfmohn

I did. Twice, I asked to be directed to the bumpiest roads nearby. In one case that was a broken-up city street, with tar strips. In the second case, it was raised expansion joints at 40 mph. Both cars were without Airmatic. (The Agility control has no effect on steel suspensions.) Both cars had standard 16" wheels.

In both cases, the ride was better than my W203 C2804matic (62,000 miles at the time, also with standard wheels). This means they rode pretty well. The first C300 ate up the broken-up city street and tar strips like they weren't there. It is a main street, with which I am very familiar in my C280.

On the second C300, the impact of the expansion joints was about the same as the impact of such bumps on my C280. The car barely moved in pitch, but one felt the impact in the seat (but not the steering wheel). However, in the C300, the sound of impact was more muffled than in the W203 C2804matic, so the total impression of the impacts was less.

I did not challenge any curves, but handling around street corners was good. There was no lean or wallowing. Steering was faster and more direct than on my C280, but also lighter. Road feel was about the same, meaning just a little. I consider this a good thing. Turn-in (initial response to steering input) could not have been better. Even though I have no interest in sport driving, I consider myself sensitive to delayed response to steering input. I very much noticed this delay in my W203 C2804matic. When I replaced the tires, I prioritized good handling. I did notice the resulting improved turn-in (meaning no delayed response).

floridadriver

gfmohn's post is a good account, you have to test drive them EXTENSIVELY for yourself. Everyone's perception is different.

I mean, I took a friend and compared side by side the W204 and W205 at dealer, and he said, "The 2 look basically the exact same inside, Mercedes just added a bigger screen and stuck it up higher in a 2015 model". Hmmm..ok. Most note the differences, but not all.

Some can appreciate the difference between a 2000 and 2001 Ch. Margaux, some can't. If you can't, buy the less expensive one.

With this car unfortunately, if you want Luxury suspension or airmatic, you're going to have to be patient enough order one, or search hard and maybe compromise on other options.

Glyn M Ruck

Valid point DB

I had a W203 C240 Elegance. I agree the W205 Exclusive rides broken surfaces better than the 203 and by some margin. The W203 had all it's suspension bushings softened at facelift in 2005. Mine was pre facelift.

The 203 turn in was not great although much improved by the fitment of Michelin PS2's or Pilot Exalto PE2's. 205 is in a different league.

Eilers

--

coladin

So far I am thoroughly impressed by the Airmatic.

gfmohn

My 2007 W203 was obviously post-facelift, with the softer bushings. My OE tires were Michelin Primacy MXM4 91H (as I remember, with my memory refreshed from a list of Michelin tires). I switched to Michelin "Pilot Exalto A/S tires 91H". (No mention of "PE2" or "Sport" on the Tire Rack invoice.)
As I said, delay on turn-in was reduced from something I noticed every time down to zero delay upon steering input. The impact of small road defects such as tar strips was very slightly, if at all, greater. All in all, I was very satisfied.

Roger Bill

Hi all

Just like to add my test drive experiences comparing the steel and Airmatic suspensions. The bottom line is that I was impressed with the comfort and handling advantages of Airmatic and have ordered a C200 petrol Sport with Airmatic and the expected delivery date is late May 2015. Based on my test drives and from the many owners reports I've read online I’m confident it’ll be worth the wait.

Some background: I'm based in the UK where we have the choice of three steel suspension setups: SE has comfort suspension with 16" 205/60 tyres, Sport has comfort suspension lowered by 15mm on 17" 225/50 tyres and AMG Line which has sports suspension on 18" 225/45 and 245/40 run-flat tyres. Airmatic is an option on the Sport and AMG Line but I'm not sure whether the setup is the same or not. While I'm not a fast driver we do have a lot of twisty roads and I don't like a car that wallows through bends. Also our roads have an increasing number of pot-holes and speed bumps which cause me some problems as I have occasional back problems and therefore ride comfort is a high priority.

Unfortunately my test drives weren't directly comparable because they were in a Sport with steel suspension and an AMG Line with Airmatic. I found the steel suspension car wallowed a little too much for my liking whereas the Airmatic seemed ideal in this regard. Also, even on the lower profile run-flat tyres, the Airmatic seemed better able to absorb bumps. My only criticism of the Airmatic was that on gently undulating road surfaces at certain higher speeds there was a little pitching motion but this could be dialled out by switching from the comfort to sport setting. One operators manual states that in comfort setting the ride height is automatically lowered when the speed exceeds 80mph and it's raised back to the comfort height when the speed drops below 50mph. According to earlier posts in this thread it seems these change points might vary in different markets. The ability to switch settings was the other key reason that caused me to opt for Airmatic.

Having said all that, ride/comfort is clearly a matter of personal preference and, as mentioned in an earlier post, I think you certainly need at least a couple of hours trying the various Airmatic settings on familiar roads to make a reasonable assessment and to decide whether it's likely to suit your particular needs.

My only other reservation with regard to comfort was that after a couple of hours the AMG Line seats seemed uncomfortably hard. Although I spent less time driving the Sport version I didn’t find the same problem. I was told the two types of seat differ in shape but not firmness. Does anyone know whether this is the case or whether perhaps the seats become a little softer after some use (the Sport demonstrator had a higher mileage)? Alternatively I wonder if there is a specialist who can modify the seats by fitting slightly softer padding or something?

Eilers

--

StanNH

I had the W205 Luxury C300 for three days, and drove it quite a bit over both smooth and rough roads. The Luxury had 17" tires, my car has 18" tires.

The Luxury may have felt slightly more damped, but the difference was very slight and I really had to concentrate on it to feel that difference. That's not a bad thing, since I'm pleased with how my standard C300 performs. There is some slap over pavement breaks and pot holes, with both cars, but that is more likely a byproduct of the RFT tires than the suspensions.I could not detect any pluses or minuses regarding handling.

The steering felt the same on both cars ... light and precise with a very direct feel. I left Agility in Comfort mode, and did not make any comparisons between the two cars in other modes.

So, based on my three days with a Luxury model, I really couldn't feel any great advantage or disadvantage to this particular suspension calibration.

oachim

face the difficult choice as well ...

situation:
- no airmatic available to test
- drove AMG Line (with sport suspension) that impressed me
- very concerned by the low ground clearance of AMG line w205 being the car to use all 4 seasons (winter - snow included )

questions I would appreciate your inputs on:
1/ absolute ground clearance for AMG line 18" tires; I would expect 4.7 inches; is it less or more ?

2/ your experience with air suspension in curves as I don't like my w204 comfort suspension ( bends a lot ) and love w205 sport suspension from this perspective. how much I will miss using air suspension even in sport+ mode (10%, 20%, more) ?


thanks,
amo

A Odman

I can't drive that much unfortunately beacuse the car I will test is a brand new car with 0 miles on it. The manufacturer MB only allows 60 miles on it for it to be sold as a new car. That includes driving the car in ports for loading and driving it of the truck and in to the dealers shop.

So I will only be able to drive around for about an hour and I will compare the two cars in comfort mode only and with the same kind of tires I hope, I am not sure about this yet.

If I'm not pleased after this I will either have to wait until they get a new test car with airmatic or go to another dealer in another city.

vic viper

Odman, where do you live?, if you are close to me you could always try mine.

Glyn M Ruck

The Exalto PE2 is a Summer only tyre.

Glyn M Ruck

The seat design is basically identical as is the foam density used. The seats will soften up a little with use.

Benz has always used firm seats that force good posture. On a really long drive this rewards you with far less fatigue.

Roger Bill

Thanks for the info Glyn. I think the seats in my current Lexus softened a little after the first few thousand miles. Also because during the test drive I was mostly concentrating on the Airmatic suspension I didn't spend much time trying to find the best settings for all the various seating and steering wheel adjustments.

ddeliber

From what you are saying here I suspect that Airmatic is the right choice for you. You get the sport feel when you want it and the ride height is adjustable. This is the only setup that allows this, everything else is either higher and softer or lower and firmer always.

From my experience (note this is mostly with e550s with Airmatic but I believe the setup in the w205 is similar) the Airmatic setup can be both firmer AND smoother than steel sport as it will adjust based on driving conditions. Plus you have the option to set it to comfort and cruise. The best of all worlds IMO.

Having said all of this there is one condition that people should be aware of. Someone touched on this earlier, but I believe it is important to bring up in a bit more detail. Because of the way the system automatically adjusts, impacts on a loaded suspension are significantly amplified. This means if you are braking, the suspension firms up and often to the max. If you hit a pot hole or bump in this state the impact is worse than it would be on a non-adjustable suspension. This is not an uncommon situation because most people brake when they see the bumps, and if you don't slow down enough well, boom is what you'll hear and feel. Combine this with run-flat tires (they are not as bad as many make them out to be but the sidewalls are stiffer than conventional tires) and the potential for damage to both the tire and the wheel is increased. Now I don't know how bad this will be as the w205 is pretty new and MB may have addressed it in some way. However, e550s with Airmatic have been known to bubble sidewalls at a pretty high rate. This may sound worse than it really is so keep things in perspective. I am just describing a situation where a car with Airmatic will be firmer than the other setups. You are not going to blow a tire every time you hit a bump. It is just something that people should be aware of.

Is it worth the risk? Only time will tell for sure here, but in my opinion yes. Airmatic is awesome period. It is just more expensive to buy and maintain as it is more complex and at least in past iterations prone to leaks after a few years if not properly taken care of. If you do get it and you have 18" wheels or larger, I do recommend the tire and wheel package.

ddeliber

+100!

I couldn't have said it better myself. Plus I couldn't have said it at all in just 2 sentences.

Glyn M Ruck

Thank you for your kind words.

oachim

ddeliber, really appreciate your input.

dealer has provided me more input on ground clearance after seeing me in their showroom measuring the car with a roulette :
- MB provides it @ maximum load;
- W205 AMG Line 4 MATIC (spring sport suspension) is 84 mm - however it seems to be higher than m y current w204 Avantgarde 4 MATIC which is just 83 mm.

BUT, I've been warred the leasing rate will increase if I'll buy a car with AIRMATIC. Strange, isn't it ?

reason is, as per dealer explanation, in case of incident, AIRMATIC costs are much higher (3-4x) than standard suspension and they'll have to offer that information to the leasing company together with an estimated maintenance fee for the car that will finally increase my per monthly service costs. in my case, contact is for 48 months, 80.000 km, so I do assume there is a service check under that km limit that might advice for suspension replacement in certain condition.

your inputs are appreciated. have you faced a similar situation ?
regards,
amo

ddeliber

Wow, no we do not have those issues here. Airmatic is a $1300 option, just add that to the price and calculate the lease the same as without. To be honest I am surprised at what you describe. I only have experience here in the US so I really don't know what leases are like other countries. It seems to me that they just don't want people ordering airmatic for some reason. You would think that they would have everything worked out to the penny for every option available. I have heard of car makes that won't allow leases with really obscure builds because they would be too difficult to sell after turn in, but I am talking about odd colors and very uncommon configurations. Airmatic seems at least to me to be something that MB wants to sell. It is surprisingly inexpensive over here if you ask me. I don't see where they come up with that 3-4x baloney.

But then again, I live in a country that must seem like Ozz to the rest of the world