CynCarvin32

If my Boat like E55k can take out a S4 (with an avg driver) on my local canyon roads (some of the finest in the world) I think the C55 would be more than able. I will say however stock W203's all understeer poorly (Have had 4 W203's since 2001).

As for that stereo, I must say my C230k sounds good but no where near as clear clean and quality as the E55k. The C has more bass but I think this was done to appeal to younger buyers who value thump over clarity.

Now chasing people like a scared rabbit... not me. The scared rabbit is what the car I was chasing turns into when I glue my self to his rear view mirror. But I tend to save this for track days for STI's and Evo's just love it when MB makes them give the old point by. Oh im so sorry.

Side note:

Just got the article in the mail. WOW Flint Grey looks great on that car (if that is the color...looks like it.... to dark to be granite grey). Second, that C55 is fast. Really fast. But I am shocked that a 50 lb lighter car did not do better in the chassis department. And they say the car had brake fade at the track. This I can vouch for being that my brakes (stock) went to the floor several times after 5 miles of canyon driving. The C55 should have the brakes off the CLK55 and the SLK55. Not sure why they went cheap on the brakes being that they are kind of important.

04E500

Same rotors and I believe calipers that are affixed to your C230.

CynCarvin32

Yes it is the same rotor and some C230k's have the same caliper too (up front -- later production went to a 2 bolt 2 piston caliper on the C230 and C320 SS's). I was talking about my C32 when I spoke of the brake issue but I no longer have that car.

For a C230k and a C55 to use the same rotor and caliper is 100% wrong.

And yes the C230k brakes also fade. Have some photos of the the C230k rotors glowing red after a down hill section. It should be said that the C230k lasts longer given its virtual lack of power. 189 hp does not cause much trouble but 367 sure could for they failed with 349.

CynCarvin32

Does your E500 have solid or vented rear rotors? My E500 has solid rotors in the back but all the literiture says it should have vented discs. I have never looked at another car so I was wondering if you had ever noticed this. EPC has a vented and non vented rotor for the rear of the E500 but MB has stated that only the E320 has a solid rear disc. Thanks.

MK899

CynCarvin,

Would you mind giving some directions to those fine local canyon roads? Thanks.

04E500

The car was totalled last month and we're now driving a 745Li. I do not know if they were vented or not, sorry.

CynCarvin32

Very sorry to hear the car wast totaled. Hope everyone was ok. It is always terrible to hear about forum usres being involved in wrecks.

Enjoy the 745. Its a great car. I would be interested in what you think of it in comparison to the E500. I thought about a745i sport but went with the E500. Best of luck. Any major reason you are getting the 7 over another mb or just looking for a change of pace?

Thank you

Nickerz

I was actually surprised to see that the C55 was only 13.3 in the 1/4 mile. I thought for sure it would be the quickest of the 3 in the 1/4 and maybe 1/10th of a second slower than the CTS-V in 0-60. So C&D's official time for the C55 was 4.7 then? Again, I just think the C55 is faster as it picks up speed, especially after 60mph.

C&D said the C32 "was a fraction behind the others (i.e., M3 @ 4.8sec, S4) to 60mph" and all 3 cars tied the 1/4 which was 13.6 (even the S4), now they got 5.1 to 60mph & 13.7 for 1/4 on the S4. ??? 0-60 seems way off. Hmm?

Nick

Psychoburn

MT had 0-60 for C55 at 4.9 and 1/4 mile at 13.2, so I think Nickerz may be right about the 0-60 times being off. How does C&D et a faster 0-60 but slower 1/4mile? Strange indeed...

cntlaw

C&D magazine has been with reputation a crappy one among all US car mags .
Since they also published the weightings table, it does tell us one thing:
" yes the C55 is a great car in all key aspects , but it does not mean one should pay the big bucks for it if they can bear with something 'similar'. "

Another thought, the C&D writer gave C55 a 3 because he knew he would draw 'attention'. Making use of the public media and write something difference than others does not mean that would make him a smart guy. He is just so foolish , childish and naive. C&D should fire this guy immediately.

I say that not because I just paid a fortune for a C55 and did not get the S4. I knew what I wanted to get. I did not even have a chance to do a test drives on a C55 or a S4 like most of you can do. Does this mean I made my big bucks decision by just reading a mag ?

C&D thinks everyone who reads their mag is stupid.

I have a Z3 and used to have a 325i, I know what BMW steering is like.
I owned a W210 once and I know what does it mean by a back seats with more space.
I have had the worse brake I ever experienced on the Z3 , so I know what is 'brake feel'.

Honestly, on the C55, the supension feel, the brake, the steering wheel, are the best things you could ever find on just one car.
If someone believes what the C&D says , he would miss a life.

To many of us here, there is no better 'feel' than to have a S500 class + engine on the 'light' C class. I would give the smooth bass exhaust note a 9 rating. The steering comfort and feel a 8.

And, the best thing I like about the C55, is I wil not feel that I am on a M3. And , the C55 comes with almost all the M3 performance aspects I can get.


cnt