XxGoppyxX

hey man its more than just an expensive version of those cars...

J Lucas

What more is it?

Patz

What more is an M3 over a modded Civic??? Um how about better interior, better engine, tighter suspension, and an overall better car on the track.

ldangeli

Well said. It's a finely tuned german vehicle. Comparing it to a stupid rice rocket with NOS is like compaing a GSX1000R against anything for that matter, and saying you'll beat one of the fastest bikes on the road with your CLK. C'mon, apples to oranges. German performace against a two dollar vehicle.

Peeps on this forum are out of their melons. You guys are crazy... Seriously, you can't compare german engineering to japanese, at all... Silly wabbits, tricks are for kids..

SoCalCLK

Fine tuned is an opinion.
The low Torque numbers on the M3 are disappointing.
The high compression ratio (11.5 to 1) puts the reliability of the M3 into question.

The Rice Rocket is not as stupid as you think, when compared to the M3. The interior of the M3 does not scream luxury or comfort to me and is closer to the newer Honda interiors than it is to the CLK interior.
The outside looks like a Civic, especially from the rear, and even side by side.
Both Honda and BMW rely on high compression ratios to generate horsepower, and Both engines produce a lower amount of Torque than they should!
As far as better on the track, BMW is knowned for their suspension and handling and so is Honda.
BMW and Honda are closer in characteristics to one another than they are apart. The M3 (BMW Civic Coupe) is not worth what these So Cal dealers want for it.

ldangeli

And the new CLK 209 looks like a Honda Accord, so what's your point. Your comparing a rice rocket with NOS, which unless you know how to strip down an engine and rebuild it, will undoubtedly destroy the engine a hell of a lot faster than any high compression BMW engine, PERIOD. Oh wait I forgot, I guess I should just shut my mouth, this is a MBZ forum, not a BMW forum, but then again, it wouldn't matter..

MBZ makes a nice crusing, semi-reliable, overly priced, and in general overly rated vehicle. Yeah, prestige and class are nice, but If I wanted to throw my money away, I would buy a Jag, at least I know I am getting crap.

BMW make a nice cruising, very aggressive, overly priced, semi high class / prestige vehicle that will run circles around the MBZ or your favorite honda racer. We aren't talking street racing here either. Lest you forget "The Fast and the Furious, or is sequel, Too Fast, Too Furious", are only movies. I am sure, with enough cash, you can make any POS the fastest vehicle on the market. *****, look what they do in White Sands NM..

The people on this forum need to broaden their horizons a little. There is absolutely nothing wrong with having an opinion on another vehicle, or thinking kind thoughts of another manufacturer, other than the famed Benz.

Azeteg

I was a bit intimidated on the road a week ago. I was cruising at normal highway speed (about 90mph) and slowly cruised past a little blue Fiat Coupe. The coupe obviously wanted to race, floored it a and flew past me a minute later.

I wanted to show the little car what a real car should be like - and floored mine. Whatever I did I couldn't get my car to drive faster than his. For about 40 miles we keep on racing - in speeds between 125 and 155 mph. I hit the limiter several times (156,2mph) when his car seemed to be totally limitless.

Race ends when we both see a police car cruising in the right lane, we both hit the brakes hard. Phew!

I later looked up the specs on this little coupe - this was a 20V Turbo Plus with 220hp and 310Nm torque. Weighing in at 1310kg this should give him 5,95kg/hp while my 430 only has 5.59kg/hp.

He had a passenger (normal size) in his car, I had my girlfriend beside me (skinny) Is there something wrong with my car - or do you think I met some kind of engine modder dude?

Killed by a Fiat! Duh!

So what does this has to do with this thread - well, I'm just curious to hear other CLK430 experiences on the road. Does it feel like it's capable, considering the 279HP V8? Once you've driven any car for an amount of time you never really "feel" the acceleration...

CLK55 next?

Perhaps Idangeli has some good tips for me? You seem to fancy Hondas? Or perhaps Daewoo?


/Martin

SoCalCLK

Martin, you do feel the acceleration. This engine breathes really well especially at the top end, aorund 80-100mph. Put on an exhaust, filter and powerchip for some max non-inducted hp gains.

I had a twin-turbo V6 Audi S4 and it would really lose steam at the top end, mainly due to the small turbos (K3).

varainstructor

I spend a good part of my time either driving race cars or teaching others how to. I find it both amusing and deadly inaccurate how many people equate speed with performance. You can drive anything fast in a staight line but stopping and steering are a true measure of performance. I won't even get into the issue with who's sitting behind the wheel.

Now days, auto manufacturers are all about pumping horse power out of everything they produce including mini vans. It used to be you had to dig to find info about horsepower and torque, transmission, brake and suspension configurations. Now it's plastered throughout both print and television media advertisement. Very important for that timed run to the grocery store.

That being said, to say the M3 is part of this trend is just this side of ridiculous. I have test driven both the current versions of the M3 and M5 on the street and on race tracks. For outright performance, there is not a production car even close in price range, that compares with the M3 in terms of racing capability. It's power to weight ratio and braking and suspension characteristics put it in a class that may include perhaps 6 other cars in the world. Over extended track time the M3 actually compares on paper to many of the currently run trans-am class race cars. That plus, they have cup holders and navigation systems...performance in the lap of luxury.

This is so vastly different from my CLK430, there is no point in putting them in the same class. But my CLK is an everyday driver. It moves when I want or need it to. It looks awesome. And it's a comfortable drive. But the reality is the stock brake, suspension, transmission packages are crap. That's why we all dump a ton of money into them to change them. On the other hand the M3, though street legal, only allows you maybe 60% of it's true capability for everyday use. (Unless you're the Road Warrior). So do you truly get your money's worth out of a car like that? Maybe...maybe not.

These are the issues you should take into account if you are going to chose between them. It certainly is not a "flip of the coin" decision.

seealkay

how u get over 135mph in your 430??

on the other hand, u can buy a 30g tt supra and call it a rice rocket mean while boosting to 20+psi on stock internals and run 700rwhp all motor no stupid nos. u can disrespect any car on stop light with some 315/18/40 on the back. when i say any thing, i mean anything! so why don't everyone get that??

DIFFERENT CARS ARE MADE FOR DIFFERENT PPL! BUY WHATEVER YOU LIKE AND STICK WITH IT!!!

Azeteg

I live in Sweden - all cars come with a 250kmh limit here (156,25mph). The 430 behaves rather well at that speed as well :-) You just gotta make sure you have enough pressure in your wheels.

I like my car anyway, there is no other model (well - within reasonable $-limit) that compares. It was just that I got a bit amazed by that little Fiat :-)

Are there any performance mods one can make to the 430 which doesn't shorten engine life-span considerably? I heard about underdrive pulleys being good, but "performance" air filters scare me - my MB repair guy told me to stay away from those...

/Martin

Ahmed

Thats right, my CLK 320 would hit 250 km/h and stop! The RPM would stop at 5000 !

J Lucas

The clk 430 and m3 are not in the same category, However, The clk55 and m3 are a much better comparison...

Ahmed

i agree...

CLK200 = 323ci
CLK240 = 325ci
CLK320 = 330ci
CLK430 = n/a
CLK55 = M3

SoCalCLK

That being said (and price not withstanding) the CLK 55 and M3 are exact competitors to each other.

I would say that the CLK55 blows the doors off the M3 with its better engine and more luxurious appointments. The CLK55 AMG is a rare and more unique piece than the M3, and is an over all more complete package.

The M3's achilles heel is its WEAK TORQUE and high rev points for Max Hp. You don't even see the 333 hp until around 8,000 RPM.

It is not realistic to drive around at 8,000 RPM around town for pro-long periods of time. Even if you did, the abuse would cut engine life dramatically....

XxGoppyxX

although the 55 and the m3 are equals.. the prices arnet

Ahmed

which justifies this statement by SoCalCLK..

"I would say that the CLK55 blows the doors off the M3 with its better engine and more luxurious appointments."

XxGoppyxX

yes

nickv

That statement is completely inaccurate. Have you driven either? If you have, then you would know that you are absolutely incorrect. The CLK55 is very powerful, but handles like crap compared to an M3. One is a race car, hence the 6 speed, the other a powerful touring car with an automatic transmission.

Straight line acceleration is only one factor in determing which cars compete with others. The C32 is more closely matched with the M3, but still not a direct competitor.

SoCalCLK

"That statement is completely inaccurate. Have you driven either?"

You are wrong. The statement is completely accurate! Let me explain.

For example, if I asked you to build me a car that had to be 2 doors, have more horsepower than standard, and a more aggressive body kit than your current offerings, and you built this independently from myself (who is building a version in my own definition) we would probably conclude with 2 cars that were COMPETITORS to one another, in essence, one the way I SAW IT and the other the way YOU SAW IT.

Kind of like having a baking contest and the subject is Apple Pie. We would be bake our OWN DEFINITIONS of WHAT AN APPLE PIE SHOULD BE. Each would be different, and one would taste better to different people, but they are essentioally both apple pies, just baked from different manufacterers. Put on your upper level management hat here.

In addition, I have owned a 1995 E36 M3. I disagree with your comments that it handles like crap compared to the CLK. I dare you to drive one on a wet asphalt surface street (like Culver or Jamboree in the O.C.), take a left turn from standstill and GUN IT.

That is, when the brake lights, fuel gauge and host of other electronic items on the car were not malfunctioning.

the E36 M3 suspension is not as heralded as you may think. Which begs, the question. HAVE YOU EVER OWNED ONE?

Not that it really matters, though.

XxGoppyxX

ok no more

Ahmed

Thats not what he said!

nickv

SoCal,
Let's compare E46 vs W208 55....and yes, my brother had an E36, so I have driven it well enough to know the car. He currently has an E46, the car is a world apart from an E36. I can obviously tell why you are so biased; you had issues with your 95 M3, therefore are applying all your problems to all other M3s.

Fair enough, I will agree to disagree, but encourage you and everyone else here to drive both, and not just in a straight line. Whether you admit it or not, you will realize the M3 is a superior vehicle in terms of acceleration, handling, and braking. The 55 is more luxurious, and perhaps more exclusive, but the thrill of driving an M3 is just awesome!

varainstructor

Nickv, you are completely right on this. Comparing the E36 and the E46 makes SoCals arguement fall flat. These two versions of the M3 are about as close as a Pinto and a Porsche. The E36 was a fine car for it's time (now a decade ago). However, not one aspect of the engineering design was carried over to the E46. And I applaud BMW for this. Apparently SoCal skipped right over my previous post comparing and contrasting the M3 (late model E46) and the CLK (208) under conditions other than racing between signal lights.

Each car has been designed and manufactured for two very different reasons. Each performs well under their specific design criteria. Neither performs well should the criteria be swapped. Apples to Apples? I think not.

Lastly, the utimate measure of performance of any car cannot be gauged within the uncontrolled evironment of suburban surface streets.

SoCalCLK

I agree. My mistake. I thought that when we were discussing the M3 vs. CLK55, we were referring to E36 M3 vs. W208 CLK 55.

The E46, that is a different story. However, I would pit the W209 CLK 55 AMG against it and that would be a better battle.

They are both two different versions of the same idea. Based on my personal experience, the CLK55 (W208 or W209) win in my book.