Fisherman

I am debating clk320 and the BMW 330ci. What you all think?

Pound for pound I think the 330 is a better deal. Supposedly it handles better, faster, and really a driver's car. However, I have driven my girlfriend's E36 before, and I was really unimpressed by it. Although no major problem, the car constantly has little glitches, which the mechanics dont have a clue either. For examplem, the break light wouldnt lit up and the computer would start to go freaking out about it and give all kinds of warning. I am a very tall guy, 6'3, and I felt so cramped in the E36. And I dont like the rear view mirrors. They just seem weird and I cant see through them. Feel like they are too small or something.

On other hand, my c320 has performed beautifully. Aside the lack of power and sucky gear shift, I really feel like I am part of the car when driving it.

I also like the CLK's more sophisticated look and more mature crowd....no punk *** kid here.

****, I even think a new MB smells better than the Bimmer.

I know Ill like the CLK better, but does the 330ci has more to offer me and get more bang for my buck? Or is the dark side just trying to lore me over??? Thanks in advance

bonte

why are u comparing your C320to a E36? That car is old! Have u driven the E46 330Ci? My uncle has one, damn! that's a nice car! it has teh SMG thingy, cool!

anyways, have anyone of u ever driven the 330Cd? Not much slower tan the Ci, but costs a lot less to drive, but the fuel prices are not a real problem in the USA huh, are they?

J P

The E46 M3 actually costs the same as the CLK320, in which case the M3 wins hands down. Why don't you buy the M3 for the same price as the CLK320?

Luxury - CLK320
Performance - 330Ci

BTW, the newer E46 is much more comfortable than the older E36.

Interior - tie*
Exterior - subjective

Reliability - tie
Safety - tie

*Even though members here will say the 330Ci interior is not as nice, every editorial (Consumers Report, Edmunds, Car & Driver, etc) gives the 330 interior excellent marks. They are pros, while people here are naturally biased (just like BMW owners are biased).

Overall, the 330Ci & M3 seem like a lot better bang for the buck IMHO.

Paul Le Corre

Even if I'm a big MB fanboy, I must recognize that the 330 ci is better than the clk 320....sad but true.

bonte

Paul, don't worry about it... truth hurts huh?

Nopw recognize that a M3 is 'better' than an C32AMG and you're and the right track!

Frisco

I can't speak for either one of the two, because I used to have a 2000 323Ci and now have the CLK500. There's no comparison IMO. The only thing that I didn't like about the benz was the stock suspension because the ride was too cushy for me, but after swapping it out for the Brabus kit, I am loving it. Again, no comparison from where I'm sitting.

bonte

frisco, you're right that's no comparison...

a 323 ci vs a CLK500? c'mon...

J P

I still don't get why you won't get an M3 instead. Since you're comparing the CLK320, I assume anything above that is out of your price range (ie CLK500, CLK55 AMG). However, the M3 costs the same as the CLK320, so why not just get it? - way better deal than the CLK320 at that price.

vivianlove

330ci or CLK320 without a doubt - 330ci (manual please)


I hear M3 and I second that to J P

Fisherman

Reason why I will not get M3:

1) I get a hook up in the MB dealership. So maybe not as low as the MSRP of a 330ci, but fairly close to it with all the options I want. I dont know anyone working for BMW. I dont think those cars can be bargained below MSRP. Someone correct me if I am wrong.

2) I dont want a stick in San Francisco:o HAHA, sorry yall.

The main thing I am concerned with BMW is its reliability issue, especially its electrical/computer system. I know its a great car, but its reliability is holding me back.

J P

How much is the discount? Just wondering, cause the 330Ci is some $10 K less (base & fully loaded) than the CLK320.

The 3-Series can be & often are discounted but not the M3.

The M3 also comes in SMG (there is an auto mode, no clutch & no shifting - like an auto).

BMW as a brand actually has significantly better reliability than Mercedes-Benz in all current studies/surveys. Besides, warranty will take care of any reliability defects.

It depends on the price difference, but I'd only take the CLK320 if the price difference is $5 K or less.

Fisherman

1 1/2 yr ago when I order the CLK320, no package, metal paint, and navigation system, he says he can let me have it below 45k. But i chicken out and got the c320 instead. The 330ci with all the options I want probably would cost me about 42-43k.

There is an auto on M3? I never know that.

It's very reassuring to hear that BMW has good reliability, JP. But I read a couple negative consumer feedback about the reliability of the BMW 3-series.

MARK335

fisherman,
i had a 2001 330ci and currently own a clk500.
the bmw handled very well. thought it was one of the best handling stock cars made. i put a brabus suspension on the clk, and still believe that the bmw handled better. hence my point, the two cars are worlds apart.

bmw is a nice car. i think it's one of the best looking cars on the road, not to mention how it handles. only problem is that there are too many of them out there.

the clk is a more luxurious car. interior is nicer, with much more room. there's alot more power with the 500, but i havent tried the 320, so i could not tell you how much of a difference there is. that's not to say that the 330 has no power. i thought it had decent power.

overall, the 330 is fun to drive. it's a small well handling car (nuff said). But i bought the clk for a reason. its a benz that looks good, has power, and handles good enough. i think the clk is a different step above the bmw, but thats just my opinion. i think you should just test drive them, and decide for yourself.

Fisherman

Thanks for the post Mark335. It was really helpful. I know that the E46 is a lot bigger than the 36. Because of my height, I hope the E46 is a lot mor comfortable than the E36.

AMG4life

i had a clk430 b4 then traded it for a s430 and then got a 330ci. i have to say the 330ci wins hands down...yes i would pick a 330ci over a clk430 again.

bonte

look here for more impressions and info, although this is the SMGII for the M3. My uincle has a 330CI, there it's called simply SMG... that's an auto. the SMG II is not, that's an autiomated manual gearbox: Sequential Manual Gearbox I believe, don't know the german expression anymore...

http://www.leo.nutz.de/m3smgopinions.php3
http://www.leo.nutz.de/bmw/leo/smg2review8.htm
http://www.leo.nutz.de/m3smgfaq_view.php3

have fun...

Fisherman

Thanks for the info bonte. Do you know if the SMG's auto is the same as the normal auto, or its more like the touch-shift? Thanks in advance

bonte

it's actually quite complicated the 3-series transmission...
in the 3 Coupe, you can order a 6manual an auto or an SMG gearbox.

the auto is a 5 speed with tiptronic (not 100% sure.. about 95). the SMG is also an auto but more advanced, BUT not a manual with aautomatic mode as the SMGII....

the weird thing: a stock 3 sries coupe costs in Belgium:
330Ci 6M: €39.400
330CiA 5spd: €41.450
330Ci SMG 6l: €40.580

why? don't ask me? IO wouild think the SMG costs more...

sorowka

A 3-series just can't be compared to a CLK. The former is common, the latter is rare.

MB doesn't appear to have a rival for the legendary M3. The fact that the prices come close, doesn't make them rivals either.

CLK buyers aren't usually after direct value for money. They're after distinction. Old vs. new money or something...

MBcoupe forever

I was choosing between the 330CI and 320CLK and went for the CLK for following reasons

The interior of the CLK is gorgeous !!!! Especially in stone. The curved wood and thin chrome next to the wood looks fantastic. The pillar-less windows gives a great airy feeling, both when up or down. The 330C has great ergonomics (so has the CLK), but nothing more.

The CLK is roomier, and the seats are more comfortable whilst giving OK lateral support. The BMW seats are too shaped. (If you’re an aggressive driver, you might prefer the opposite).

The CLK, especially when you put 18” wheels and lower it, looks smashing. The BMW has great proportions, but look quite ordinary looking even when given the same after market treatment as the CLK. No comparison. Just look at some of the pictures on this forum.

The 330 handles superbly but the CLK also handles well and rides more comfortable. A wash for me or small plus for the CLK.

The only area where the 330C wins is in the smoothness of the engine. Nothing beats a straight six. When comparing both with auto (my choice), I didn’t feel any huge difference in quickness though.

Equally equipped, the 320CLK is ~$4-5K more expensive, but you likely get that back when you sell it. Perhaps the trade in difference is even bigger.

I don’t think the 330Ci and 320CLK are comparable. The CLK is one size bigger and one class up. When the BMW 6-series comes, BMW will have a true CLK competitor. The 6-series will come with the 3L six, and a 4.4L V8. Very comparable to the 320 or 500.

Cheers

MBToGoNow

MARK 335 says...

"there's alot more power with the 500,... that's not to say that the 330 has no power. i thought it had decent power."

The CLK500 may have much more hp but that doesn't translate to it having "a lot more power" (i.e., faster). According to Car and Driver:

CLK500: 0-60=5.7s
BMW330Ci: 0-60=6.1

The 330xi has been tested as 5.8s, so the difference in acceleration isn't that great.

There was a comparison made between the W208 CLK55 AMG and the E46 M3 in Car and Driver a couple of years ago. The M3 won.

Bottom line, if you want prestige/status and luxury, get MB. If you want performance/handling and balance, get BMW.

bonte

i also think taht's the right way to end this topic....

although... driving a BMW doesn't hutr your status/prestige either I think...

Fisherman

Thanks MB ToGoNow, I dont really care for prestige, name, status and all that. I am not really a speed freak racer or anything like that. All in all, I just want something that is solid and can manuver the way I want it so that I can get around from point to point confidently and safely. After driving a couple of cars, I am a firm believer in German automobile engineering. No one comes close, not the Japanese nor the Italians, IMO.

Fisherman

By the way Bonte, Thanks for the thread you give me about the M3 SMG. They are awesome. I like the SMG. But as i said before, I am not really a speed freak. So maybe Ill hold off on that right now. But damn they are nice. Ill still keep M3 under consideration.

500AMG

The 330xi's 0-60 times are:

Acceleration 0-60 mph sec 6.9 (7.5)

The 330ci's 0-60 times are:

Acceleration 0-60 mph sec 6.4 (7.0)

The M3's 0-60 times are:

Acceleration 0-60 mph sec 4.8 (! )

All times taken straight from BMWUSA.com; () Times are with automatic. The Xi & Ci don't come close to the CLK500...but the are much cheaper. A more fair comparison would be against the M3...which is about a full second faster.

This I agree with totally. Depends on what you value.