Last post on Dec 04, 2010 at 4:10 AM
You are in the Mercedes-Benz CLK
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class, Coupe, Convertible
Mar 15, 2001 (8:33 pm)
Stay far far away from the 93 RX7s. They were a nightmare reliability wise! It was the first year for the redesign and they ran into all sorts of problems. A lot of people in the forum suggest getting a low mileage 95 as that was the best year. As for the acceleration of the 626, what I was referring to there was the lack of low-end torque. The 2.5 V-6 only has 161 lb feet at a high 5000 rpm, less than some four bangers (by the way, the V-6 is back down to 165 hp). As such, it is slow to accelerate until you get to around 5000 rpms. In comparison, the 626 four cylinder achieves its max torque at a low 3000. That meaty low-end torque is what made it feel peppier than the V-6 in around town driving even though it is actually much slower overall. If you push the car to the high redline, I'm sure it will have respectable acceleration. But driven how most people drive it, it is lacking. It just doesn't give the impression of having good pull unless you rev the hell out of it. A low-end high torque engine is always more enjoyable than a top-end high horsepower one, and it will outlast a high revving engine as well because you don't have to push it to get the power you need. In the case of the Mercedes, the supercharged four is rated at 200 lb feet from 2500-4800 rpms. That long-lasting meaty low-end torque span will give this car strong off-the-line and mid-range acceleration (I think it will be faster than what Edmunds stated anyway). I guarantee you would not be disappointed. Anyway, don't think I am dissing your car. The 626 is a good family sedan. The leather and wood is nice, the 2000 and newer models look elegant, and the rear seat is spacious and comfortable. They just need to give the car a more powerful V-6 and four cylinder that will allow it to compete better with others in the class.
#18 of 1636 Hi everyone- Some great info here!
Mar 15, 2001 (8:46 pm)
Just one small suggestion: if you have a long message, it will be easier for people to read if you break it up into smaller paragraphs.
Participants will be more likely to read your entire post if it's easy on the eyes. And now back to the subject of the 2002 Mercedes-Benz C230. Talk later.
Hatchbacks Message Board
#19 of 1636 supercharger
Mar 16, 2001 (6:48 am)
The supercharger is definitely a nice addition to any car. The readiness of the power is apparent. Pretty much the reason I've always been skeptical of turbos (the main reason I didn't buy the Rx7 and why I'm hesitant about the WRX). I've often thought that I would be much happier with the supercharged 2.2 from the Millenia, but that's a different story.
The supercharger is why I'm looking forward to the Mini as well. I hope both of these vehicles turn out with higher numbers than advertised at this point. I don't see why they shouldn't.
By the way, I definitely do rev the hell out of my 626. Its does well from around 3500 to redline (a respectable 7000). Probably explains your lack of enjoyment when not taking it past 4500. But, I do want something sportier. Probably if I had gotten the leather power seat, I'd be keeping the 626 and adding a lot of mods to it (not that there are many available).
#20 of 1636 supercharger
Mar 16, 2001 (6:42 pm)
I been trying to pull up some numbers for SLK230, since C230 will use the same engine. The SLK230 weight 3055 lb and C230 weight 3300 lb. I can't find any tested 0-60 numbers for SLK230. I think Mercedes said 7.2 secs for the manual.
I like the number on the low end of torque of this engine. The WRX is 217 4000 RPM. But that just the torque, the WRX has more hp and it's 4WD. I can't wait to test drive both cars. BTW, the WRX weights 3085 lb and gets 0-60 around 6 secs area.
I think I will check up on the reliability of the supercharged engines of SLK230 and the late model C230 Kompressor.
#21 of 1636 my only problem
Mar 17, 2001 (6:25 am)
The WRX is definitely a nice car and I was considering it, but after reading more and more about Turbos, I think I'd rather get a car without one.
Mar 18, 2001 (3:03 pm)
What about turbo? Reliablilty? Or do me mean the turbo lag?
#23 of 1636 reliability
Mar 18, 2001 (7:06 pm)
I'm just unsure of their reliability. I mean, I know that certain manufacturers, like Volvo for instance, have been using them for decades and they have become very reliable. But I've just read so many horror stories here on the boards from owners of other turbo vehicles. I've never owned one, so I guess it just makes me a bit nervous.
#24 of 1636 reliability
Mar 18, 2001 (9:45 pm)
Well it really depend on the engine. The WRX's engine has been turbocharged for couple of years before coming here. Ofcourse, I don't know what it's track record has been.
Supercharging an engine is pretty demanding too, not as demanding as turbocharging. But MB has been supercharging their engines for years. Going get a chance to drive a supercharged E320. Wonder how the smaller C230 compares.
Was at the local book store and saw that UK car magazines now have articles on the C230. BBC Car has a short preview piece. I agree with them on that if you are getting the car with the sun roof, you should get the car in a darker colour. The top of the car, from the windshield to below the spoiler, is black. But I really like silver. The second chose is complete black. Well I guess I will have see them in person.
I bought CAR magazine, but I won't read it yet. Will read it on the 14 hours plane ride to the land of Mercedes-Benz. No, not Germany, but Hong Kong. Hong Kong, where more people own more MB per capita than anywhere in the world.
I also bought Road & Track and Sport Compact Car. R&T has a review on the WRX. SCC is going to be long read for me. 8 cars shoot out and preview of Z and SE-R plus an article on the new SE-R's QR25DE engine.
Oh, it going to be a lot of compact sport cars to choose from in the coming years. I am still very happy with my 95 200SX SE-R. Going to move up for my next car. I am looking at the C230, CL Type-S or the hinted IS Coupe.
Mar 19, 2001 (7:00 am)
Yes, I would trust a Mercedes supercharger about as much as a volvo turbocharger. Like you said, we really don't have much data yet as to the reliability of Subaru turbocharging.
I'm planning on moving up, as well, but I'm thinking that $30K is a little beyond practical reach. I'll probably be waiting until a couple of the recent vehicles are a little more in my range (i.e. Volvo T5, Licoln LS, CL-S (doubtful that will drop enough for me in a year, but definitely my favorite of the bunch)). Or, I will be looking at the new pocket rockets, although they will probably not be comfortable enough for me to drive 100 miles a day in.
Mar 19, 2001 (4:13 pm)
I myself will give it sometime before buying my next car. But the C230 is currently on the top of my list. I will wait a year on the C230. There been report of built quality on some of the newer models of MB. Also I will see how the well the car will sell. I don't like driving a car that everyone else is driving. That's why the new Integra/RSX was never on my list.
Will have to see how much all of the options going to cost. Like the other C-class, a CD player is not even standard. Hope there is a package that include the CD, leather, and sun roof. If not, adding up everything and this car could cost over $30K.
The more I look at the rear C pilar, the more it look like the one on the 318ti. I will dig up the spec on the 318ti. The 318ti is just too tall for it's length.