I was in the dealer today.. Tell me what you think.

I need another car for my wife and kids. I took a look at a 2001 (In service June 2001) C240.

These are the options:
Bose Sound,CD Changer,Split/Fold Rear Seat,Glass Sunroof,Heated Seats,Headlight Washer,Automatic Climate Control,Rain Sensor,Xenon Headlights, Sport Style Alloys. Balance of MBX3 extended warranty until June 2008

It has 26,000km and the price is around $30,000 Canadian..

What do you guys think? Is this car worth that amount?

rather have a Honda Accord V6 and some cash left over, plus faster and no electronic BS to go wrong. And that's coming from a Benz lover.

There are several Starmarked 2001 C240s available in the US for $23-25k usd. You might use them as a reference.

Jim

keep this in mind on the Honda... it's the size of an W211 and weighs less than a W209.... That tells me all I need to know about Honda's build quality.

Using weight as a gauge for build quality, that is a COMPLETE misrepresentation.

W211 E500 - 3812lb
Accord Ex V6 - 3437lb

So, the difference is 375lb and one fell swop, you have deemed the Accord to be substandard in terms of quality

Please do not forget, the E500 has a 4966cc SOHC 24valve V8
while the Accord Ex V6 has a 2997 SOHC 24valve V6.

The engine difference will account for a big part of the 375lb difference. There are many other examples whereby Honda is able to deliver with lighter and smaller packages such as suspension, transmission and so on.

At the end of the day, the E500 is a MSRP $60K vehicle whereas the Accord Ex V6 is $27K. Two completely different class of vehicles and I will definitely not use the 375lb difference as any indicator to say Honda's "build quality" is substandard.

p.s I recently read in either MT or CD on the difference between the new ML500 and the RangeRover Sport. The ML500 is 700 lbs lighter. I wonder whether the ML500's built quality is lower than the Range ?

When I purchased my mom's E350, we traded in (due to time constraint) a near new condition C240 (2001) with 7700 miles on it (oil changed every year). With no major options however, except Sunroof and got $18500 for it... US.. so that tells you roughly the wholesale value of a 2001 C with very low miles.

First off, the Accord is mostly steel body panels, the E class is mostly aluminum, and E350 weighs 3700lbs... and that is with a 3.5L V6...

Secondly, the E makes extensive use of light weight allow suspension parts compared to steel on the Honda.

And yet with all of those weight savings on the E due to extensive aluminum, it's still 270+ heavier.. that is in the safety cage, boron steel re-inforcement, and interior build quality/materials.

The Quality I refer to isn't what JD measures in terms of reliability... it's the safety and engineering that goes into an MB that.

To say anything else, seems to be denying a fact that's self evident.

And my point wasn't to state that the Honda isn't a good value. it is.. but in absolute terms a MB is superior.


To answer your question on the MB ML v. LC RR... the RR is a REAL 4WD with transfer case permanent 4WD and A solid I-beem frame.. not a unibody SUV.. so YES.. it is better built for it's purpose.

CE750,

You might be surprised to learn that the 2004 Accord has a better frontal crash rating than the 2004 E class. In the other two categories they are about equal.

Having owned and driven many MB's and Accords over the years, I wouldn't be too critical of Honda. I currently own a 2004 Accord EX V6 and have a new E350 4 Matic on order. Honda makes a great car!

Regards,

Steve

I love my 98 Accord. Over 80K miles and nothing but $29.95 oil changes at Jiffy lube. Oh, I did put a set of tires on it once.

With all my years of participating in various forums, I normally don't engage in exchanges that lead to no where. But since you had made a general comment regarding lower weight equates to lower built-quality, I felt I had to speak up with regards to the misleading comments.

First of all, I grant you that the Accord does use steel body panels, the W211 does use alloy panels but it is less than 1/2 the external panels (per MB publications)

Secondly, the Accord uses a lightweight compact Multi-Link Double Wishbone Suspensions (front and rear). When comparing to the W211, the suspension specs are very comparable.

Any weight savings technology applied was to accomodate the addition weight of the passenger luxury items, bells and whistles we come to expect from a MB --- the wood trims, multi-zone climatic ammenities, the gizmos such as SBC and so on.

No one is doubting that MB has great engineering. In fact, I believe in it so much that I bought 2 MBs in recent years. I have every intent to keep them for a long time. BUT, I have notice that many of us who are fortunate to acquire the status of driving a MB, decide to put down other makes.

Your point on "absolute terms a MB is superior" in build quality, I wish you the very best and hope that you will not run into problems with your W211 CDI. My E500 had its share of dealer visits (though most are minor but irritating other than the SBC failure I encountered during the 1st month of ownership), my 6 months old SLK350 has gone through BAS, ESP malfunction and now, it is appears to be burning engine oil. My SLK only has 2800+ miles and it required a complete top up of engine oil. When I brought it in to the dealership to perform an oil consumption test, MBUSA indicates that it is considered normal for the engine to burn 1 quart of oil for every 800 miles. (I wonder whether this statement only applies to the new 350 engine)

I have owned quite a few Hondas, BMWs, and I have NEVER heard that it is NORMAL to burn 1 quart of oil for every 800 miles.

Therefore, based upon my experiences, IMHO, I will not be so quick to say the build quality "absolute terms a MB is superior"

Let me stress again, the Honda Accord is a different class of vehicle when compared to the W211. It is like saying that Cross Pen is the same league of a MontBlanc. Both serves the same function but one cost many times more than the other. In any case, I will not say the Cross is lesser quality.

Not saying the Accord is made poorly with regards to it's mechanical engineering or electrical engineering, I would argue it's better than the MB in those areas.. I may have been misunderstood in my intent.

I am saying completely how ever that the safety of the E is due to a lot more re-inforcement which is evident in it's safety cage re-inforcements that the accord just doesn't have. I've seen the CAD drawings of the Accord and it's not using double layer B pillars, nor is it using boron steel cross members.

The frontal crash tests are about as useful as any theoretical test at telling you which car is safe and which isn't. the real world data shows the E to be safer, and since its designed to drive at 150mph and get into accidents (that are survivable) at speeds above 100, you'll find it safer at higher speed.. which isn't tested on these frontal tests. IIHS has data thru 2003 that confirms the W210 to be the safest car in real world accidents in the world.

discounting the 200+ lbs of savings on body panels and the 300 or so in additional weight (500 total) from the safety equation is simply impossible.

and this is where you and I see the word quality differently.

For example which car do you consider of a higher "quality" the Benley Azure or the Honda Accord? For me the answer is clearly the Azure, even if the Accord is "more reliable".

Same can be said of a Timex vs a Patek Philippe.. and so on..

original thread was considering the purchase of a used C class. (c240).

For the money, you are in the same price as a 1-2 year old, very low miles, very well loaded Accord.

If you want to stay strictly in-class, rear-wheel drive, compare versus maybe a BMW 330, maybe a little more $ for a 2001, but much stronger car.

The C is just too damn gutless and torqueless to justify any real $.

$17,000 or so for the '01 C and it would get a little more interesting as a purchase, but still a dread to operate and MB prices to repair.



KB

and for what it's worth... my mom (who ironically came from a 1998 Accord) loved her C.. except the Accord had more interior room.. and that she did miss. The C however drove 100% nicer (RWD being a major reason why).

We own both a 06 E350 and a 02 C240. While I now drive the E-class, which is a fantastic car (and is well equiped with appearance, sunroof, entertainment, command nav), I still think the 02 C240 is a tremendous car. It is true the C240 engine is not the fastest, but it very happily revs high (without getting too noisy) and actually has pretty decent acceleration compared to most other traffic around.

On the C-class forum you notice many owners drive the C230k, but admit when driving against the C240 (with less horse power on paper) to be not any faster. In addition, my experience is that the 2.6 ltr V6 is especially good at high way speeds (60 to 90 mph) and has at those speeds a pretty strong ability to accelerate for overtaking.

Some mention the very nice but extremely boring and common Honda Accord. Well, it just does not have the driving feel and road handling capability of a C-class. Just the typical difference between German Autobahn Build Automobiles and run of the mill Japanese vehicles.

For those BMW fans trying to talk you into a 330i, the comparable Mercedes is ofcourse the C320. On a like for like bases (the 325i and the C240) I found in 2002 the build feel and looks of the C-class (both outside and inside) above that of the 3 series beemer. And the difference between BMW and Mercedes has only grown with th years. When we recently bought the E-class, we drove the BMW 5-series. What a joke that car. The outside is ugly, the inside is even worse. Where the previous 5 series had a very nice dashboard, with fluent lines running into the doors, with the center console slightly angles towards you, the red backlit instruments etc., the new one is just like a piece of modern art, only to be watched in a museum and typically walked by without taking much notcie. For me BMW has completly lost it (I used to like them), while Mercedes is at an all time high.

Success with your choice, I would say go for it

I guess you are right here. Your view of quality is different with mine.

We can go on forever on this but my response was to your original post

Thank you for listening.

Hi atssystems.com

Sorry, cannot be of assistance in terms of the value of the C240 especially within the Canadian market.

Years ago, when the W203 first came out, I used to think they commanded a real balance of luxury and value. Did contemplated one but ultimately bought something else.

During the past 18 months, I have driven alot of C230K and C240 (loaners due to my other MBs needed to spend time at the shop), and my experience has been mixed.

I think the W203 can be great cars but you need to go with your instinct. As for myself, if I am in the market for an entry level luxury car, will I get a W203? Maybe.

GL in your decision.