C36 vs. C43
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Jul 2007
Posts: 488
Likes: 0
From: San Mateo, CA
In search of W222
C36 vs. C43
Iw as looking to buy a C43 yet I cant find any for 10k or under. That arnt in crap condition
I dont think i want to settle for a C36 because i think the Matenince after 140k will be really Difficult to deal with.
Also i dont know what gets betetr milage...
C36 i would guess. But its working harder compared to the C43
anyone know?
also opinions on this car?
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/car/741783427.html
~THANKS
Adam
I dont think i want to settle for a C36 because i think the Matenince after 140k will be really Difficult to deal with.
Also i dont know what gets betetr milage...
C36 i would guess. But its working harder compared to the C43
anyone know?
also opinions on this car?
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/car/741783427.html
~THANKS
Adam
Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
2007 R320 CDI, 2010 FJ Cruiser, CTS-V
That car has a salvage title. I would stay away from it.
As far as C36 vs C43. I bought a C36 because I like I6 engines.
I think you would be happy with either.
My C36 is a 95 so it has the 4 speed auto and less electronics than the C43 including the older style climate control.
I love the sounds that the I6 makes especially under full throttle.
As far as mileage is concerned, I am getting 18-20 mpg commuting in traffic. I haven't checked highway mileage yet.
The 95s use some very specific AMG parts for brakes etc and they are more expensive.
As far as aftermarket support is concerned, there is a lot more aftermarket for BMW (heck even Saab) than the C36. I am guessing that's probably because there are so few here.
Having said this, if I find one as good as mine (and in white this time since I already have a red) I would buy it again.
I see you are in SF Bay Area, there are few of us W202 AMG owners here, keep in touch.
As far as C36 vs C43. I bought a C36 because I like I6 engines.
I think you would be happy with either.
My C36 is a 95 so it has the 4 speed auto and less electronics than the C43 including the older style climate control.
I love the sounds that the I6 makes especially under full throttle.
As far as mileage is concerned, I am getting 18-20 mpg commuting in traffic. I haven't checked highway mileage yet.
The 95s use some very specific AMG parts for brakes etc and they are more expensive.
As far as aftermarket support is concerned, there is a lot more aftermarket for BMW (heck even Saab) than the C36. I am guessing that's probably because there are so few here.
Having said this, if I find one as good as mine (and in white this time since I already have a red) I would buy it again.
I see you are in SF Bay Area, there are few of us W202 AMG owners here, keep in touch.
Iw as looking to buy a C43 yet I cant find any for 10k or under. That arnt in crap condition
I dont think i want to settle for a C36 because i think the Matenince after 140k will be really Difficult to deal with.
Also i dont know what gets betetr milage...
C36 i would guess. But its working harder compared to the C43
anyone know?
also opinions on this car?
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/car/741783427.html
~THANKS
Adam
I dont think i want to settle for a C36 because i think the Matenince after 140k will be really Difficult to deal with.
Also i dont know what gets betetr milage...
C36 i would guess. But its working harder compared to the C43
anyone know?
also opinions on this car?
http://sfbay.craigslist.org/eby/car/741783427.html
~THANKS
Adam
Last edited by fstshrk; Jul 3, 2008 at 10:39 PM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
I think there is already a long thread about this if you use the search function but, my personal impressions after driving both cars back to back:
C36 - Very nice handling, taught suspension, cornering is good with decent road feedback and steering feel....a little bit wandering at times, but overall fairly connected. Engine was not as impressive as I had hoped. Came alive above 3k rpm or so, but took work to get there. Definitely needs to be in its sweet spot for spirited driving. I drove a '97 w/ the extra few HP and the 5 spd auto trans (vs the older 4 spd). Interior was pretty spartan, and pretty much on par w/ a 190e 2.3-16v in terms of appearance.
C43 - Great handling (I drove on w/ modified suspension, so this may not hold true for a stock C43), seemed a bit more refined than the C36 but in a more commuter, standard MB sort of way....so maybe a little bit less "sporty". Tons of torque throughout the power band, and no matter what gear you are in, the car is not lacking. Auto trans does tend to have a mind of its own, and will cause a momentary delay during hard downshifts. Once it gets in gear, the car throws you back in your seat hard. Interior is noticeably nicer than the C36, as it is basically from a new generation of MB's.
This isn't the most exhaustive comparison ever, but I ended up ponying up the extra cash and throwing down for the C43 since I was so impressed w/ it. Either way, I don't think you can go wrong. Pay close attention to climate control quirks and service history. These cars have a lot of electrical problems, and they manifest themselves in weird ways.
C36 - Very nice handling, taught suspension, cornering is good with decent road feedback and steering feel....a little bit wandering at times, but overall fairly connected. Engine was not as impressive as I had hoped. Came alive above 3k rpm or so, but took work to get there. Definitely needs to be in its sweet spot for spirited driving. I drove a '97 w/ the extra few HP and the 5 spd auto trans (vs the older 4 spd). Interior was pretty spartan, and pretty much on par w/ a 190e 2.3-16v in terms of appearance.
C43 - Great handling (I drove on w/ modified suspension, so this may not hold true for a stock C43), seemed a bit more refined than the C36 but in a more commuter, standard MB sort of way....so maybe a little bit less "sporty". Tons of torque throughout the power band, and no matter what gear you are in, the car is not lacking. Auto trans does tend to have a mind of its own, and will cause a momentary delay during hard downshifts. Once it gets in gear, the car throws you back in your seat hard. Interior is noticeably nicer than the C36, as it is basically from a new generation of MB's.
This isn't the most exhaustive comparison ever, but I ended up ponying up the extra cash and throwing down for the C43 since I was so impressed w/ it. Either way, I don't think you can go wrong. Pay close attention to climate control quirks and service history. These cars have a lot of electrical problems, and they manifest themselves in weird ways.
Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
2007 R320 CDI, 2010 FJ Cruiser, CTS-V
Forgot to add. The 4 speed in the 95-96 feels like it needs an extra cog on the freeway since it remains above 3K RPM in most freeway cruising.
I never felt like it needs extra torque, feels pretty quick. The 4 speed is eager and very very quick to downshift and it shifts down the gears (watch the tach) as you come to a stop.
However, it may not be as fast as the C43 ;-)
I never felt like it needs extra torque, feels pretty quick. The 4 speed is eager and very very quick to downshift and it shifts down the gears (watch the tach) as you come to a stop.
However, it may not be as fast as the C43 ;-)
Last edited by fstshrk; Jul 3, 2008 at 11:27 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 329
Likes: 1
e55
i disagree 100%, I loved the 4spd on hwy, it stayed in the power range more. And 3k is HARDLY high, my M3 would spin 4k at the same mph.
4 speed is much more reliable, breaks down less and is easier/cheaper to repair.
4 speed is much more reliable, breaks down less and is easier/cheaper to repair.
Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
2007 R320 CDI, 2010 FJ Cruiser, CTS-V
Hi E55 PWR, I did not say I did not like the 4 speed. In fact I LOVE IT. It is the quickest shifting auto that I have ever owned.
Some people don't like cars that rev high on the freeway. I was just pointing this out.
I had 2 other cars that used the very same 4 speed from MB (except inside a Porsche designed housing in a 928
Some people don't like cars that rev high on the freeway. I was just pointing this out.
I had 2 other cars that used the very same 4 speed from MB (except inside a Porsche designed housing in a 928
Trending Topics
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
For gas economy, I prefer the 5 speed, but you both are right that 4-spd is probably more fun for hard driving. Not to mention the reliability problems that a lot of C43's have had w/ the newer gen electronic 5-spds.
Last edited by FLYNAVY; Jul 4, 2008 at 12:33 AM.
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Senior Member
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 329
Likes: 1
e55
ya but in the old 4speeds you can run royal purple which drastically improves shifting speed and etc. Did it in my old early W140, it was a whole new tranny after that. Newer 5spds are more sensitive to which fluid you use.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
There have been a number of good deals in that price range (both cars) in the past 6-8 months. If you search around and keep up the search, I'm sure you will find something. It's not like these cars are going to appreciate any time soon....
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 2
From: Desert
02 CLK 55 AMG,09 C63 loaded with P30
As long as the car has been maintained the C36 is dead reliable. I had mine for over 2yrs put almost 20k miles now has over 101k miles. Car is smooth as butter and is just as fast as the C43 which has been proven. I would stay away from the C43 because of the tranny issues.
Member
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
2007 R320 CDI, 2010 FJ Cruiser, CTS-V
There is a C36 for sale in Sacramento (check autotrader). It is the 1997 model year.
There are also few for sale in Los Angeles.
Again, Autotrader has been a good resource for me.
There are also few for sale in Los Angeles.
Again, Autotrader has been a good resource for me.
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
'98 C43 AMG. Obsidian Blk w/2 tone slvr/blk interior
not all c43's have faulty tranny's. ive had the MB 4 spd auto in my 96 c280. didnt like it, 1st gear was really tall... not very sporty IMO. my 97 c280 whooped my 96 c280's ***. mainly in part to the 5spd auto.
the pre 97 c36's are CONSIDERABLY slower than a c43. the 97 comes close, but still not as fast.
i had my 96 c280 from 75k miles to 178k. the 4spd was still operating within specifications. car needed all new ignition coils (3 of em, 1 per 2 plugs) and required a head gasket job at 130k.
same with the 97 c280. head gasket at 120k, tranny was still ok but was clunky at times. had that car till 152k miles.
i compare the c280 to the c36 liberally because theyre pretty much the same motor, just rebuilt by amg with alot of extra ponies, so wheras the performance is uncomparable, the reliability is identical.
go for the C43, if for any other reason, the styling is much much better. the interior is the **** with the adjustable seats and the fact that youre rolling around in a v8 tickles your senses when you punch it.
the pre 97 c36's are CONSIDERABLY slower than a c43. the 97 comes close, but still not as fast.
i had my 96 c280 from 75k miles to 178k. the 4spd was still operating within specifications. car needed all new ignition coils (3 of em, 1 per 2 plugs) and required a head gasket job at 130k.
same with the 97 c280. head gasket at 120k, tranny was still ok but was clunky at times. had that car till 152k miles.
i compare the c280 to the c36 liberally because theyre pretty much the same motor, just rebuilt by amg with alot of extra ponies, so wheras the performance is uncomparable, the reliability is identical.
go for the C43, if for any other reason, the styling is much much better. the interior is the **** with the adjustable seats and the fact that youre rolling around in a v8 tickles your senses when you punch it.
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
'98 C43 AMG. Obsidian Blk w/2 tone slvr/blk interior
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...e=&cardist=738
this one is in NY, but due to the very low price, i would be suspicious so check the carfax.. also the seller could have helped the situation by washing the car before taking pics... whatever, just a suggestion
i would buy this one... probably the cleanest c43 ive ever seen for sale
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...e=&cardist=208
this one is in NY, but due to the very low price, i would be suspicious so check the carfax.. also the seller could have helped the situation by washing the car before taking pics... whatever, just a suggestion
i would buy this one... probably the cleanest c43 ive ever seen for sale
http://www.autotrader.com/fyc/vdp.js...e=&cardist=208
Last edited by SeeKlasse; Jul 4, 2008 at 11:48 AM.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2007
Posts: 3,443
Likes: 2
From: Desert
02 CLK 55 AMG,09 C63 loaded with P30
The C43s tranny gives you no warning until it fails. So better watch out for those high mileage ones. Also My 4spd C36 vs the C43 runs the C43 edged my C36. So its only a little quicker. Not impressed with the 302hp C43. The CLK55 is a different story.
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
With a crank pulley C36 will be faster than the stock 43. Now both with pulleys that would be a pretty dead even race b/c they would be much closer to each other than they are stock. Either way both are almost equally as fast. The C43 does have weight advantage so if weight reduction is done on C36 that would even the playing field even more.
Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 193
Likes: 1
c43
But than when I saw a white c43 near my home I decided to go check it out, NOT to go buy it. I drove it and it was a different car from the black c43 2 years ago. Whats odd is that the black c43 had lower miles and the white c43 which I now own has 30,000 miles more. Anyway, I didn't even had to floor the white c43 and the car just pulled,it was a monster. I bought it the next day. Got it home and changed fluids and went for a ride, flored it and man it was fun and pulled very hard.
Now with a mod I did which still needs to be fiberglassed the car pulls harder than ever. Can't wait to royal purple the whole car one of these days.
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
'98 C43 AMG. Obsidian Blk w/2 tone slvr/blk interior
+1000000
they DEF tested a weak c43. when i purchased my 2nd c43 it was SO *******g slow compared to my 1st one. they both had about the same miles (around 78k) the latter needed a new MAF and O2 sensor, and the CEL wouldnt come on until the O2 got really bad.
in addition to all that, my motor was filled with gunk, i had it inspected with a boroscope and it was disgusting! got my motor cleaned and i replaced the 80k mile old plugs and wires and it is MUCH faster now, i think even faster than my last one was running, and that car was totalled while it was still pretty cold out plus it had the lighter AMG 170 5-spoke wheels.
its not really fair to compare a well maintained and refreshed c36 vs a weathered and in-need of revision C43 and vise versa.
a kid in my area had a white '96 c36 which got thoroughly whipped by my 1st c43, which didnt have a fresh air filter (dirty stock one vs a k&n new one) or fresh plugs 'n wires so it was probably a fair fight. the gap was substantial. granted his car had less HP and the slower 4spd auto.
they DEF tested a weak c43. when i purchased my 2nd c43 it was SO *******g slow compared to my 1st one. they both had about the same miles (around 78k) the latter needed a new MAF and O2 sensor, and the CEL wouldnt come on until the O2 got really bad.
in addition to all that, my motor was filled with gunk, i had it inspected with a boroscope and it was disgusting! got my motor cleaned and i replaced the 80k mile old plugs and wires and it is MUCH faster now, i think even faster than my last one was running, and that car was totalled while it was still pretty cold out plus it had the lighter AMG 170 5-spoke wheels.
its not really fair to compare a well maintained and refreshed c36 vs a weathered and in-need of revision C43 and vise versa.
a kid in my area had a white '96 c36 which got thoroughly whipped by my 1st c43, which didnt have a fresh air filter (dirty stock one vs a k&n new one) or fresh plugs 'n wires so it was probably a fair fight. the gap was substantial. granted his car had less HP and the slower 4spd auto.
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
I think Overall for two equal condition C36 & C43s they are pretty close, C36 a few tenths slower to 60mph and in the 1/4 but its not drastic.
I can't wait until I finish my Long tube headers for the C36, decided to take a different route. Those should seriously boost the midrange & top end on the C36. I think 325 is a realistic goal for a modded NA C36 with the right mods but it will take extra mods to get it there, headers & crank pulley will get it close but not enough, you will probably need chip upgrade + intake + RP + a few other little things.
either way the M104 3.6L should not be underestimated, its an animal.
I can't wait until I finish my Long tube headers for the C36, decided to take a different route. Those should seriously boost the midrange & top end on the C36. I think 325 is a realistic goal for a modded NA C36 with the right mods but it will take extra mods to get it there, headers & crank pulley will get it close but not enough, you will probably need chip upgrade + intake + RP + a few other little things.
either way the M104 3.6L should not be underestimated, its an animal.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
You guys can't really use 1/4 mile or 0-60 as a good comparison. Throughout the powerband, and more importantly in everyday driving, the C43 just pulls a lot harder all the time. Yes, it is only like a tenth or two quicker 0-60, but that is not really a very relevant "test" IMHO. Either way, yes, they are pretty close, and of course a modded C36 will further close that gap, at least in terms of the 0-60 numbers.
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
Theres alot more power to extract out of the C36 (as I've already proven). It all depends on each invididual car I guess, we could go back and forth all day long. I think the C36 has serious stupid potential NA but nobody has even begun to tap into it. the C43 does have potental NA as well but not nearly as much as the C36 simply b/c of the design of the engines. Either way, I think its safe to say both are badass in their own way 
.
.
Super Member
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 757
Likes: 0
'98 C43 AMG. Obsidian Blk w/2 tone slvr/blk interior
im so sick of people and the mod card.
ok so you mod the c36, then you mod the c43... ultimately the car with the biggest motor wins because you end up with twin turbos on the c43 and its game over for the twin turbo c36...
c43 + chip, intake, pulley, and exhaust would also be very fast...
ok so you mod the c36, then you mod the c43... ultimately the car with the biggest motor wins because you end up with twin turbos on the c43 and its game over for the twin turbo c36...
c43 + chip, intake, pulley, and exhaust would also be very fast...
Banned
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 426
Likes: 1
1996 C36 AMG
im so sick of people and the mod card.
ok so you mod the c36, then you mod the c43... ultimately the car with the biggest motor wins because you end up with twin turbos on the c43 and its game over for the twin turbo c36...
c43 + chip, intake, pulley, and exhaust would also be very fast...
ok so you mod the c36, then you mod the c43... ultimately the car with the biggest motor wins because you end up with twin turbos on the c43 and its game over for the twin turbo c36...
c43 + chip, intake, pulley, and exhaust would also be very fast...
either way... looks like i'll just have to prove it the old fashion way as I always do
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 1,248
Likes: 3
From: Fallon, NV
BMW and Mercedes
Theres alot more power to extract out of the C36 (as I've already proven). It all depends on each invididual car I guess, we could go back and forth all day long. I think the C36 has serious stupid potential NA but nobody has even begun to tap into it. the C43 does have potental NA as well but not nearly as much as the C36 simply b/c of the design of the engines. Either way, I think its safe to say both are badass in their own way .
.
