Last post on Aug 04, 2003 at 5:59 PM
You are in the Hatchbacks - Archived Discussions
This discussion is ARCHIVED. To reactivate the discussion, post a request in the Lost? Ask the Hatchbacks Host for directions! discussion.
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Acura RSX, Coupe, Hatchback
Sep 30, 2001 (7:27 pm)
The Mini has a couple of service bullitins out - everything is fine now. That's to be expected of any totally new car. I'm not sure I want a Mini Cooper, they are small, if I get one I'll hold on to my 2000 Passat. Other options I'm considering are trading the Passat on a redesigned A4 1.8t Quattro or the C230. I'm looking at used Mercedes E Class 96> or BMW 5 Series 97>. In the new A4 or used 5 Series I'm leaning toward a wagon. If I found a 97 or 98 528i wagon (low mileage cream puff) with a stick in silver/ charcoal leather and premium sport package I'd be sold. The chances of finding a car like that are extremely remote (been looking). I wouldn't get an E class wagon - too oooogly. Low mileage, as new 96 or 97 E320's are really easy to find in my area in the low to high $20K's. A nice used E320 sedan is by far the best deal out there in a used Euro premium luxury car IMO, LOTS of bang for the buck.
Kind of an odd comparison list Mini Cooper S (with Passat), A4, 5 Series C230 and E Class but all priced about the same. Actually the Cooper S would be the most expensive since I'd keep the Passat.
Luckily I'm in no hurry at all, the Passat has been great, just like trading every 3 years or so.
#56 of 96 so many honda haters
Oct 02, 2001 (11:08 pm)
It seems to me that theirs a lot of honda hate on this board. What a pity.
To get to the point I think the RSX type S is the overall better buy, being that I have actually driven both cars and not just read the specs on both.
If you want the attention of a bunch of chicks and you are worried about being killed in an accident if one of your 8 airbags dont deploy then take you 30k (after adding all of your options and get a MB)
But if you want a drivers dream for under 25k rush to your nearest ACURA dealer.
The RSX in my opinion after driving both cars back to back in the same day has more power and is just funnier to drive. While driving the C CLASS I reved it high close to the red line. My sales associated was timid and didnt like me reving the car so high. While the RSX is made to rev high I reved the hell out of that car and it was not phased a bit by my torture of it. The handling of the two cars is a toss up on normal streets and highways, they both handle extremly well.
I give the nod to the RSX for power, features, 6 speed, future aftermarket, resale value, and overall price. How can you go wrong with the RSX. Although the C CLASS COUPE is a very respectable car, I think it is a bit over priced. The base price should be in the 22-23k range. Just my 2 cents
#57 of 96 "Honda-haters"
Oct 03, 2001 (7:42 pm)
If you want to see "Honda-haters," visit the "Why are American cars unappealing" (in News & Views).
I think I speak for everyone here when I say that we are merely expressing our opinions of either cars.
#58 of 96 mistaman opinion
Oct 04, 2001 (4:20 am)
They are both fine cars in their own way. The basic difference is FWD vs RWD. If you don't mind/like FWD, get the Honda (oops) Acura ( IMnotsoHO that much power and wide tires pretty much negates the advantage some people think FWD has in the snow). If you like the handling and control RWD give you then get the Benz.
I voted with my pocketbook and am happily driving a silver C230 that consistantly turns in 25 MPG on spirited short runs over twisty roads.
Oct 05, 2001 (3:59 am)
"Drivers dream for under 25K"--??
I'd drive right by the Acura shop on my way to the WRX store.
The RSX is just a marketing agency's dream.
Neither one of these cars (C-hatch or RSX) really appeals to me. The C-hatch has a wheezy motor, and the RSX drives and looks like a Civic on juice.
Oct 05, 2001 (4:21 am)
Drive the WRX extensively b4 you plunk your money down. It is a fantastic car at half to full throttle, but tooling around town the turbo is a non-factor, and may be dangerous. The turbo lag is really bad. Pulling out into traffic is a real adventure: first there is nothing and you're sure that you will be run over, then all hello breaks loose. That all or nothing feature is really disconcerting.
I was really hot for the car until I drove it. Its really just a boy-racer; horsepower looks good on the spec sheet, but more importantly is the torque figures and even more critical is when in the rev range the torque is there. Great gobs of torque at 3500 RPM is not a lot of help when you're going to use the 1500 to 3000 part of the rev range more often.
#61 of 96 other stuff about WRX
Oct 05, 2001 (6:34 am)
Sedan's backseat doesn't fold down; sunroof isn't available; no leather; cheap interior treatment.
They do have some really cool accessories that you can add on (factory short shift kit amongst them).
All three cars have their benefits, but once you look at them and figure out what you want, I really think that each has its own separate audience. If anyone can't decide amongst them, they should use more seat time.
Oct 05, 2001 (8:26 am)
My friend has an Audi TT with 225HP of turbo muscle, and like the WRX, its all or nothing. It is a powerful dose of neck snapping fury when it comes on, but better hope for clear sailing before you dip into it. The 230K on the other hand has usable power from idle on up, no lag, no guided missle experience. Much more useful for everyday cruising and if you need to dip into it, the back gets pressed into the back of the seat nicely thank you.
#63 of 96 Non-Turbo Lag
Oct 05, 2001 (12:29 pm)
Doesn't the Honda S2000 suffer something similar to this? It's either all or nothing. I really like this passive-aggressive setup, especially the neck snapping feature.
#64 of 96 That turbo Rush of power -You get used to it
Oct 07, 2001 (11:04 am)
I have a modified 1.8T Passat - I've tweaked it to 225 HP, it's essentially the same engine as the 225 HP TT . All I did was put an APR chip in it and install a low restriction intake (K&N) and cat back exhaust (Neuspeed) and a couple of other minor tweaks. I wouldn't decribe it as turbo lag necissarily, the engine delivers linear power, it's just that once it hits about 3000 RPM it hits the sweet spot of the torque and HP curve. From 3000 to 5500 RPM it takes off - you get used to it. I am totally used to the way this car delivers power, it can be disconcerting until you get used to it though. A lot of normally aspirated sports cars are like this, BMW M cars and non-turbo Porsche 911's have similar power delivery hit that sweet spot and hang on.
Classic turbo lag is when you give it gas and nothing happens (at all) then all hell breaks loose literally like an on/ off switch. Early Saab and Porsche turbos were like that, newer turbos like the VW/ Audi and Subaru's have tuned out a lot of the classic turbo lag, very easy to drive smoothly IMO. About the only new generation turbo I've driven lately that has what I would call turbo lag are the new Saabs, nothing like the old ones though.
I like the power delivery of the Benz, even it has that sweet spot where it develops most of it's torque and HP too. I'll bet we'll see some inexpensive upgrades will give the C230 some excellent HP gains. Low restriction intake and an underpully for the supercharger and an ECU upgrade and possibly a low restriction exhaust would probably add 50+ HP to the C230 for around $1k. These late generation force fed engines are easy to extract a lot of extra HP from and still keep dependability intact.