Own a C55, test drove a C32
05-29-2010, 11:39 AM
#1
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
Own a C55, test drove a C32
A coworker/friend of mine who owns an E36, has a brother who owns a silver C32. I own a C55, and last night we went out for some comparisons.
Both cars are stock and running well. His C32 was fully loaded with the navigation option which made the pre-facelift dash still look modern. Of course, my almost-fully loaded C55 doesn't have navi....a thorn in my side, but that's a side story. First thing they also said was "whoa, your front end looks so much longer!" due to CLK front clip.
When driving, you can tell the strengths of the C32 engine. While the supercharger takes a second to wind up and get going, it just continues to pull all the way to redline, and you can feel it. With the C55, the large difference in torque definitely hauls the car so much harder and faster in the lower rpm's, but trails off as you reach redline. They liked to describe it as "the 55 feels so much more violent, but it flatlines".
Another scenario to this was when we would make turns into curved roads and I'd hit it; the E36 passenger later told me he thought I was going to wrap it around a tree. He said the hard torque added with the initial curves was more than he expected. I told him that I felt pretty well in control, but that's only because ESP was on, and I try to keep it that way during spirited backroad driving. ESP off with the V8 torque and turns is definitely much more dangerous......
So in case any potential buyers are debating the "feel" differences between STOCK 32 and 55 engines, here's another post in your research, from one C55 owner/passenger, one C32 owner/passenger, and one M3 passenger.
Drive on.
Both cars are stock and running well. His C32 was fully loaded with the navigation option which made the pre-facelift dash still look modern. Of course, my almost-fully loaded C55 doesn't have navi....a thorn in my side, but that's a side story. First thing they also said was "whoa, your front end looks so much longer!" due to CLK front clip.
When driving, you can tell the strengths of the C32 engine. While the supercharger takes a second to wind up and get going, it just continues to pull all the way to redline, and you can feel it. With the C55, the large difference in torque definitely hauls the car so much harder and faster in the lower rpm's, but trails off as you reach redline. They liked to describe it as "the 55 feels so much more violent, but it flatlines".
Another scenario to this was when we would make turns into curved roads and I'd hit it; the E36 passenger later told me he thought I was going to wrap it around a tree. He said the hard torque added with the initial curves was more than he expected. I told him that I felt pretty well in control, but that's only because ESP was on, and I try to keep it that way during spirited backroad driving. ESP off with the V8 torque and turns is definitely much more dangerous......
So in case any potential buyers are debating the "feel" differences between STOCK 32 and 55 engines, here's another post in your research, from one C55 owner/passenger, one C32 owner/passenger, and one M3 passenger.
Drive on.
05-29-2010, 05:05 PM
#2
Super Member
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Sherman Oaks, California
Posts: 570
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
09 C63 AMG, 05 C55 AMG
I owned an e36 m3, and now a c32. driven 05 e55 amg (supercharged) , and 04 clk55 (na).
Would say c32 far surpassed the e36 m3, prefer the c32 over clk55 and c55 due to tuning and mods although I wished dynamic seating was offered in the c32
e55 is a different story
Would say c32 far surpassed the e36 m3, prefer the c32 over clk55 and c55 due to tuning and mods although I wished dynamic seating was offered in the c32
e55 is a different story
05-30-2010, 01:07 AM
#3
MBWorld Fanatic!
I find that in the dry, the torque from the c55 is completely manageable in the turns even with the ESP off. To get my back end to kick out at the track all I had to do was give it more gas or come in with a lot of understeer and then just lift off.
Not once did I spin out...I think its the weight of the car + the wide tires that kept it in line so well. Now in the rain is a different story...
Not once did I spin out...I think its the weight of the car + the wide tires that kept it in line so well. Now in the rain is a different story...
05-30-2010, 02:10 AM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: San Diego
Posts: 1,645
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes
on
2 Posts
2002 C32 Black/Charcoal
A coworker/friend of mine who owns an E36, has a brother who owns a silver C32. I own a C55, and last night we went out for some comparisons.
Both cars are stock and running well. His C32 was fully loaded with the navigation option which made the pre-facelift dash still look modern. Of course, my almost-fully loaded C55 doesn't have navi....a thorn in my side, but that's a side story. First thing they also said was "whoa, your front end looks so much longer!" due to CLK front clip.
When driving, you can tell the strengths of the C32 engine. While the supercharger takes a second to wind up and get going, it just continues to pull all the way to redline, and you can feel it. With the C55, the large difference in torque definitely hauls the car so much harder and faster in the lower rpm's, but trails off as you reach redline. They liked to describe it as "the 55 feels so much more violent, but it flatlines".
Another scenario to this was when we would make turns into curved roads and I'd hit it; the E36 passenger later told me he thought I was going to wrap it around a tree. He said the hard torque added with the initial curves was more than he expected. I told him that I felt pretty well in control, but that's only because ESP was on, and I try to keep it that way during spirited backroad driving. ESP off with the V8 torque and turns is definitely much more dangerous......
So in case any potential buyers are debating the "feel" differences between STOCK 32 and 55 engines, here's another post in your research, from one C55 owner/passenger, one C32 owner/passenger, and one M3 passenger.
Drive on.
Both cars are stock and running well. His C32 was fully loaded with the navigation option which made the pre-facelift dash still look modern. Of course, my almost-fully loaded C55 doesn't have navi....a thorn in my side, but that's a side story. First thing they also said was "whoa, your front end looks so much longer!" due to CLK front clip.
When driving, you can tell the strengths of the C32 engine. While the supercharger takes a second to wind up and get going, it just continues to pull all the way to redline, and you can feel it. With the C55, the large difference in torque definitely hauls the car so much harder and faster in the lower rpm's, but trails off as you reach redline. They liked to describe it as "the 55 feels so much more violent, but it flatlines".
Another scenario to this was when we would make turns into curved roads and I'd hit it; the E36 passenger later told me he thought I was going to wrap it around a tree. He said the hard torque added with the initial curves was more than he expected. I told him that I felt pretty well in control, but that's only because ESP was on, and I try to keep it that way during spirited backroad driving. ESP off with the V8 torque and turns is definitely much more dangerous......
So in case any potential buyers are debating the "feel" differences between STOCK 32 and 55 engines, here's another post in your research, from one C55 owner/passenger, one C32 owner/passenger, and one M3 passenger.
Drive on.
05-30-2010, 03:35 AM
#6
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Indiana
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Silver 02 C32 & White 05 CLK500
.
05-30-2010, 04:59 AM
#7
MBWorld Fanatic!
I would if i could. I don't personally know anyone with a c32. Most of my car friends have m3's and 335's. More bimmers being tuned in the greater seattle area than MB's.
Trending Topics
05-30-2010, 05:23 AM
#8
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
05-30-2010, 08:48 AM
#9
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
like i've always said. stock vs stock...C55 is a better car period. drives better, handles better, and better seats. the only thing i don't like about the C55 is the steering wheel on how it grips at 9&3.
Last edited by FrankW; 05-30-2010 at 08:52 AM.
05-30-2010, 09:05 AM
#10
MBWorld Fanatic!
Thread Starter
05-30-2010, 09:36 AM
#11
Newbie
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Racine, WI
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'06 C55
My brother has a stock '04 C32, I have a stock '06 C55. They are a dead heat till about 75-85 (it's spooky how identical they are actually). After that the 55 will slowly (real slowly) pull ahead. About a car length every 20-25 or so MPH.
05-30-2010, 12:16 PM
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
18 Posts
2013 C63 AMG P31, 2014 GMC Sierra (6.2)
I went from a C32 to a C55. There are things I like and dislike about both. For example, I'm not sure I'm sold on the "longer" CLK front end that the C55 has but that's just my opinion. On the other hand, the interior and seats in the C55 are definitely top notch. I absolutely hated the gauge cluster in my C32...
05-30-2010, 11:13 PM
#13
MBWorld Fanatic!
05-31-2010, 02:49 AM
#15
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
well, just compare side profile of the C32 and C55. you'll see why he said it. longer nose seems a little odd on the s/w203. it wasn't like they needed it to fit the V8, but still a great upgrade regardless to differentiate the C55 from the rest. personal opinions anyway.
Last edited by FrankW; 05-31-2010 at 02:53 AM.
05-31-2010, 01:12 PM
#16
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: san jose, ca
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2002 C32 1987 190E 2.3 334K miles and going
The front facade on the C55 was slightly stretched out not for cosmetics nor to differentiate it from the C32 but to be able to fit the V8 and its components.
Larger engine needed more engine bay room at fore.
Larger engine needed more engine bay room at fore.
05-31-2010, 03:36 PM
#17
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
lol...that's what they want u to believe. you can go ahead and measure the distance from the firewall to the front top rail where the hood latch is to see if they're any different. The only thing different are the sheet metal and engine mount for the v8 instead of the v6. The added length is all front rail forward which is why the C55 has a longer front overhang. you can compare the Brabus C V8 vs the C55 engine bay photos if you still don't believe me. C V8 does not have a CLK front end.
Last edited by FrankW; 05-31-2010 at 03:40 PM.
06-01-2010, 02:31 AM
#18
Newbie
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
c32 amg
lol...that's what they want u to believe. you can go ahead and measure the distance from the firewall to the front top rail where the hood latch is to see if they're any different. The only thing different are the sheet metal and engine mount for the v8 instead of the v6. The added length is all front rail forward which is why the C55 has a longer front overhang. you can compare the Brabus C V8 vs the C55 engine bay photos if you still don't believe me. C V8 does not have a CLK front end.
06-01-2010, 12:24 PM
#19
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: san jose, ca
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2002 C32 1987 190E 2.3 334K miles and going
Just a couple of facts:
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
Last edited by 60n5pt1; 06-01-2010 at 12:33 PM. Reason: edited added test
06-01-2010, 03:23 PM
#20
Member
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ML
i actually love the front of the C55. Makes it different from the rest of the w203's. I just like the CLK front on a C class. It was a cool idea and i think it looks great. Reminds me of the 240sx guys that swap front ends and mismatch models. A lot of regular w203's seem like they have poor fitment on the front end as well.
Good comparison of the C55 vs. C32. If i had to choose.. i'd pick a c55. Seems like since i've looked for a c32/c55.. the prices on the c55 h
Good comparison of the C55 vs. C32. If i had to choose.. i'd pick a c55. Seems like since i've looked for a c32/c55.. the prices on the c55 h
06-01-2010, 04:06 PM
#21
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 1,064
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
C55 AMG, 135i, 911 GT3, GLE43 AMG
Just a couple of facts:
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
To be honest, I get most of my information from official MB press releases.I think FrankW's point is that Brabus could fit a V8 into the standard W203 front end. This cannot be disputed. However, what we don't know is whether Mercedes/AMG have other internal design requirements for the amount of space around the engine for their production cars (in addition to simply having enough space to fit the engine).
For example, perhaps MB/AMG mandates a certain "space" between the engine and the front bumper for safety/crumple zone or cooling purposes (I don't know this....I'm just making up a possible example). Even though the 5.4.L V8 may have fit in a standard W203 front end, the longer engine would have meant compromising the space they ideally require when they design their engine bays. The W209 CLK was designed from the beginning to accept a V8, while the W203 C-class was never originally planned to have a V8.
Regardless, the front end of the C55 does make it unique in the hierarchy of the W203 C-class. Whether you like it or not is purely subjective. I personally think it looks fantastic, but I'm biased......
06-01-2010, 04:45 PM
#22
MBworld Guru
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Diamond Bar, CA
Posts: 22,007
Likes: 0
Received 6 Likes
on
6 Posts
white and whiter
Just a couple of facts:
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
From Automotive.com:
The C55 AMG sedan is another beast altogether. Its body work from the windshield pillars forward was borrowed from Mercedes' larger CLK coupe in order to widen the front track and make room for a big V8 engine.
From PC Valkyrie:
To fit the 5.4L V8, the C55's uses the bonnet, inner wings, and headlamps from the W209 CLK, which means the C55 is the only W203 C-class whose front grille remains with the bodywork when you open the hood, and it is 80mm (3.15 in) longer than the C32.
From: MotorTrend:
Use of the slightly larger CLK coupe's front-fender innards help provide a 0.3-inch-longer nose on the C55 to make room for the handbuilt 5.4-liter V-8, which replaces the previous C32's supercharged V-6.
I stand by my statement 'To FIT a V8'.
as for widening the front track they're done by the 18" wheel's offset. The slightly wider fender just allows to have a little better clearance. same way the C63 is done vs the W204.
Last edited by FrankW; 06-01-2010 at 04:49 PM.
06-01-2010, 05:08 PM
#23
Super Member
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: san jose, ca
Posts: 510
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
3 Posts
2002 C32 1987 190E 2.3 334K miles and going
I'm sure one could CUSTOMIZE a C32 with drop a V8 just as Brabus did, question is did they have to modify at great length and at what cost to make it fit?
How many did they build?
BTW I do like the front end of the C55 so much more than the C32.
How many did they build?
BTW I do like the front end of the C55 so much more than the C32.
06-01-2010, 05:35 PM
#24
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Western Canada
Posts: 1,683
Likes: 0
Received 26 Likes
on
18 Posts
2013 C63 AMG P31, 2014 GMC Sierra (6.2)
Wow, it's an honour to be quoted! To be honest, I get most of my information from official MB press releases.
I think FrankW's point is that Brabus could fit a V8 into the standard W203 front end. This cannot be disputed. However, what we don't know is whether Mercedes/AMG have other internal design requirements for the amount of space around the engine for their production cars (in addition to simply having enough space to fit the engine).
For example, perhaps MB/AMG mandates a certain "space" between the engine and the front bumper for safety/crumple zone or cooling purposes (I don't know this....I'm just making up a possible example). Even though the 5.4.L V8 may have fit in a standard W203 front end, the longer engine would have meant compromising the space they ideally require when they design their engine bays. The W209 CLK was designed from the beginning to accept a V8, while the W203 C-class was never originally planned to have a V8.
Regardless, the front end of the C55 does make it unique in the hierarchy of the W203 C-class. Whether you like it or not is purely subjective. I personally think it looks fantastic, but I'm biased......
To be honest, I get most of my information from official MB press releases.I think FrankW's point is that Brabus could fit a V8 into the standard W203 front end. This cannot be disputed. However, what we don't know is whether Mercedes/AMG have other internal design requirements for the amount of space around the engine for their production cars (in addition to simply having enough space to fit the engine).
For example, perhaps MB/AMG mandates a certain "space" between the engine and the front bumper for safety/crumple zone or cooling purposes (I don't know this....I'm just making up a possible example). Even though the 5.4.L V8 may have fit in a standard W203 front end, the longer engine would have meant compromising the space they ideally require when they design their engine bays. The W209 CLK was designed from the beginning to accept a V8, while the W203 C-class was never originally planned to have a V8.
Regardless, the front end of the C55 does make it unique in the hierarchy of the W203 C-class. Whether you like it or not is purely subjective. I personally think it looks fantastic, but I'm biased......
On an unrelated note, I just love those CLK63 AMG rims on your car (I think I've said that before).
06-01-2010, 05:57 PM
#25
It could be for pedestrians. There are laws in place that dictate how much crumple zone a car should have up front so that pedestrians don't get killed if hit. This was something I learned when talking to AMG staff about the SLS at one of their events. I don't know if the same laws that apply to the SLS having a massive crumple zone applied to when the C55 was designed, but my guess is its probably for that.
If that was the case, then fitting the V8 engine without modification would have probably violated these laws. Therefore saying that the extra front end was necessary to fit the engine would be a correct statement, implying that "fitting" accounts for more than just geometry.
With the CLK being offered with a V8, the homework was done there already, so it's a no brainer to reuse the same design. Accentuating the actual design of the C55 was an added bonus. Win-win-win.
If that was the case, then fitting the V8 engine without modification would have probably violated these laws. Therefore saying that the extra front end was necessary to fit the engine would be a correct statement, implying that "fitting" accounts for more than just geometry.
With the CLK being offered with a V8, the homework was done there already, so it's a no brainer to reuse the same design. Accentuating the actual design of the C55 was an added bonus. Win-win-win.
