Im strongly considering switching from my 300e to a C320... was wondering what some of the strong and weak points are of the C320, and also compared to the 300E what type of car it is..

__________________
2001 Mercedes-Benz C320 3.2
1991 Mercedes-Benz 300E 3.0

I have a 124 car and a 203 car. I am a stick shift enthusiast and both of these cars are sticks.

Sitting in the drivers seat there is just absolutely no comparison between the two. The 124 is a great driving car for its time, but when I get out of my 203 car and into the 124 it's like I got into a pickup truck.

I love both the cars, but if I could only have one it would clearly be the 203 car. It is smooth, fast and extremely predictable when you drive it hard. The C320 is even faster than the 240, of course. I would have bought a 320 except at the time I couldn't get one with a stick shift.

I only have 31,000 miles on the 203, but so far it has proven reliable.

There will be many naysayers who will tell you that the new MB's aren't as good as the old ones. That's exactly what they told me when I bought my first MB in 1977 and those cars turned out to be some of the best and most reliable ever built. Usually the person telling you that does not own a new MB.

Good luck with your decision,

Never buy new, always buy used. There is more to go wrong with the W203, I'm sure.

A 2001 is usually in better shape than a 1991. If you ever drove a W124 brand new, it was not like a pickup truck in any respect. That's a real joke!

A C-Class, is a C-Class. The W124 sold for much more money new than a C-Class and no matter what age the W124 is, the value is built into the car.

Condition....everything is condition. The W203 is a nice looker, but pretty small.

Naysayer #1. An E, is an E, and a C, is a C.

Get a W210 instead.

DslBenz,

You obviously have NOT driven a 203 car and I obviously was not very articulate in what I said.

I was not saying that a 124 car drives like a pickup. I was saying that RELATIVE to a 203 it drives like a pickup.

I have also owned a 210 car that I bought new in '96. It was a great driving car, but only a SLIGHT improvement over a 124. Five years of further development past the 210 car gave us the 203. It is a radical change in many ways from a 210 car.

The fact that the 203 is smaller is something that you can either live with or not. Since 95% or more of my driving is with only me in the car, it doesn't bother me. In fact a car with less Mass makes for a more nimbler handling car.

I agree that we are comparing oranges to apples by comparing an E class car of one period to a C class car of another, but IMHO the C class is head and shoulders above my E Class.

BTW, I do know what a 300E drives like when new, and mine STILL drives that way.

As I said there would be plenty of naysayers, but I expected the naysayers to be saying that the new MB's were no good because they were new MB's, not because they happened to be smaller and less expensive. I guess I wasn't expecting class warfare.

Also, the original poster is talking about a 2001 model that I assume is used. I doubt that it is still setting on a lot unsold. But, I think whether to buy new or used is a persons own choice. I agree that if you do buy used condition is everything. It drives me crazy to see people selecting a used car based on its color.

Lastly, you might want to rethink the use of saying that others statements are "a real joke." This is very disrespectful and alienating.

Have a great day,

go larry!

i could not agree with you more.

I think Larry hit the nail right on the head.

I have driven both stick and auto W203s and they are fine driving cars. I also do not think that it has as poor of a build quality as many people would have you believe.

Also look at the number of posts that Larry has. You would be hard pressed to find many other people that have as much experience with MBs as Larry.

__________________
Ali Al-Chalabi

2001 CLK55
1999 Dodge Ram 2500 Cummins Diesel
2002 Harley-Davidson Fatboy
Merlin Extralight w/ Campy Record

The W203 chassis is much more complex than the W124. With the introduction of multiple SRS systems, more sensors, etc. there are more things to go wrong. Unfortunately, some owners of later cars have been frustrated with CEL's and other maladies.

I think overall, though, the W203 is shaping up to be a fine car. Canadian reliability ratings have really improved for the W203 and MB seems to be sorting out the early cars and making on-going improvements to production.

Now, let's talk about the driving experience. I'm not a fan of the W203's gauge cluster as the speedo does not have a full needle and I find it difficult to glance at. The tach is small. Some of the switch gear feels a little "plastickier" than previous MB models.

But, the handling! It's dynamic in a way no W124 could ever be. Turn in response from both the suspension and the steering is light years ahead of the W124. At first the W203 seems overboosted in town, but after a couple miles you realize how intuitive the new rack and pinion really is.

The ACC/AC system is also light years ahead of the W124. I had a C320 loaner with the dual zone digital system and it was amazing in it's responsiveness and accuracy. I thought the dual zone system in the W210 was good, but the W203 is better yet.

A W203 makes better use of it's dimensions, offering more interior space for the size of the exterior.

Safety. Stop thinking "old is better" and "giant steel bumpers are good." The W203 is so much better in passive safety than the W124 it's startling. Mercedes is still a leader in this regard, and every year they do nothing but improve.

With respect to newer models, I would pick the W203 over any cars perhaps with the exception of the W211 E-Class. The W203 is a superb driving automobile.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

I've got to go with DslBnz on this one: there is something unique about the ride/feel of the w210 over the w203. Sure the w203 is peppier (500+ lbs lighter, two wheel drive), but the space and ride of the w210 is unbeatable!

They are both nice cars, but the C is not an E.

__________________
2001 e320 wagon
2004 F350
2006 Crown Vic

I had not even thought of the difference in safety features untile blackmercedes mentioned this in his very thoughtful and objective post.

The ESP, all the airbags and their sophisticated controls, etc, make this a VERY safe car. I recently experienced the ESP taking over when on a winding, dark road and seeing deer as I was speeding around a sharp turn. Even though I was in the turn, when I showered the brakes and the car started yawing the ESP took over and amazingly came to a controlled halt and almost a complete stop before bumping the deer lightly. Even though I consider myself a competent driver with experience driving cars in an "out of shape" state, the ESP did an amazing job.

What turned out well for the both the deer and my car may not have been so fortunate otherwise.

Anothe comment about safety. I saw a Ford Freestar commercial this morning in which they showed side airbags deploying. Their claim was that this was a new level of safety introduced by the Freestar. EXCUSE ME! My '96 E300D had side airbags and for all I know this may not have been the first car from MB equipped with them.

Have a great day,

Larry i couldnt agree with you more.. Tonight i picked up my C320,, and let me tell you, your description was extremely accurate.. the C320 was super predictable and super smooth. Dont get me wrong i will miss my 300E very much, its wierd how someone can actually get an emotional attachment to a car. However, the new car somehow makes it easy to forget... Im extremely happy with my choice.

__________________
2001 Mercedes-Benz C320 3.2
1991 Mercedes-Benz 300E 3.0

Sorry if I sounded offensive Larry, but that's the way I took your post about the 300E.

You weren't being very articulate before, and you're not being it now. How is your 203 sedan superior to the 124? Is it handling, ride, build quality, visibility, what? Please elaborate.

You can't just make a brazen statement like that and leave us to draw our own conclusions.
In an indirect way, its like saying "My car's better than yours,"

I have not driven a 203, but my mother owned a 202 which I was able to drive often enough.

I have driven a 202, and the 203 really is quite a substantial improvment, i didnt think that it would be but it really is

__________________
2001 Mercedes-Benz C320 3.2
1991 Mercedes-Benz 300E 3.0

Driving a 202 gives you no idea about the 203, they are totally different animals. The 202 is so much like the 124 that I'm surprised that MB even built it. What was the point?

Okay I will try to be more specific and cover all your categories as best I can, but this is sort of like trying to diagnose a vibration or a noise over the internet. You just have to have your hands on it to really know for yourself and make up your own mind.

Handling:

Although the 203 has a very supple ride, especially considering its small size, it has incredibly predictable and precise handling characteristics. The steering is absolute precision with great road feel and silky smooth with no vibration being felt through the steering wheel. It feels as controllable and precise at 130 MPH as it does at 70 (yes I've been there.) It has enough tire and suspension control to handle winding roads absolutely effortlessly, even though you would think that the supple suspension would give a more pronounced feeling of roll. Even though there might be as much roll as a 124 car, you just don't notice it because it has no noticable effect on handling feel.

My 124 car has sportline sway bars so it doesn't have as much body roll as most 124's, but you still notice it when driving spiritedly on the winding, hilly roads that I frequent. The 124 is a car that sits very high. Look at it from the back or front while it is parked next to almost any other Benz made since the fifties. I would expect that a true sportline suspension with the shorter springs and shocks makes an improvement in this area. The 124 also has reasonably predictable handling, but with a feeling of road vibration more pronounced through the steering wheel. This is one of the things that makes me comment that it feels like a pickup RELATIVE TO a 203 car. The steering wheel is relatively large which is another thing that makes it feel like a truck RELATIVE TO the 203.

Ride:

The 203 has an incredibly quiet, smooth and supple ride for such a small, lightweight car. I'm probably not a good person to comment on ride because that category has never meant much to me, handling and feel is much more important to me. We all have are wants and needs.

The 124 has a decent ride too, but you feel and hear the road vibration much more. There again, RELATIVE TO the 203, making it feel like a truck.

Build Quality:

To me any time you try to define "quality" you've got a tough job ahead of you. This means so many different things to different people. I think that this is a wash between the two cars. There are some things that seem a little lacking in the 203 but they are only perception things. Example the 203 door when slammed feels a little lighter than earlier models. At first I really disliked it because I thought it rattled when I shut it. A little later I discovered that it was the grip exerciser that I always keep in the drivers side door pocket.

The 124 is well built, but it too had a "door close feel" that IMHO was inferior to earlier models. The 124 was an overly complex car IMHO. I mean that from a repair standpoint. It is very difficult to take things apart RELATIVE TO other MB's. To those who don't do all or any of their own work, this obviously doesn't mean anything. The 124 construction methods were different than the 203. The 203 has some sort of solid foam structure in the floor pan that I think might be responsible, at least partially, for the "quality" feeling of the car. This kind of technology just didn't exist in 1986.

Visibility:

This is a category where I just don't notice any difference with any MB. I've been able to see well from every MB I've ever driven with the slight exception of the SLK. That roll bar kind of bothered me.

My Own Categories:

Vibration and Harshness:

The 203 is incredibly smooth and quiet. Not only is the driving and road impression smooth, but the engine feels like an electric motor instead of a gasoline engine. To me it is ABSOLUTELY AMAZING just how smooth this engine is. The six speed manual gear box is so slick I can't even begin to compare it to anything.

The 124 car, for its era, was a smooth and quiet car. That technology is ancient history RELATIVE TO the 203. The 103 and 104 engines both are difficult to make idle smoothly and they are noisy (relatively speaking) as they rev up. RELATIVE TO the 203 car road vibration just comes right through the steering wheel. Road vibration also comes through the five speed shifter which is odd since this shifter is mounted to the body, not the transmission as most American cars are. Again Vibration and Harshness is not bad on a 124 car when compared to most any other car of its class and in its era, but RELATIVE TO a 203 car, it's a pickup truck IMHO.

Power:

I have a C4 Corvette that is very quick. A guy that I worked with when I bought my C240 has a Corvette similar to mine. After I bought my C240, he was in the car at lunch time and this was with himself and another guy. Both of these guys are pretty heavy. In spite of the added weight, every time he rode in it he asked if it was faster than my Vette. Some cars just feel faster than other cars even though the performance numbers might be the same. The C240 is just one of those cars that FEELS faster than it really is. It is just amazing when you think that it is only 2.6 liters.

You are just dealing with technology in the 203 engine that they hadn't even dreamed of when building the 124 car. I could write a very long post, and I think I already have, about the technology in these V6 engines. These engines are an absolute masterpiece IMHO. If you want I will do a search for my post of about three years ago after seeing one torn apart. The technology in these engines is probably Formula One technology of ten or fifteen years earlier.

The 124 car with a 103 or 104 engine has a great engine FOR ITS TIME. They had their achilles heels, but they were really nice, but making seat of the pants power was not their forte'.(sp?) Smoothness and quietness RELATIVE TO the V6 is not their forte' either.

Various Technology:

To go into all the technology put into the 203 car RELATIVE TO the 124 would be sort of pointless. The 124 was loaded with the latest technology of the time but it was nothing compared to what is found fifteen years later. The 124 had SRS, ABS and afterthought electronic engine management(the KE was an electronic add on to the K fuel injection.)
The 203 technology short list includes; TeleAid, ESP, Air bag management including side curtains and side airbags, ABS as part of the ESP, fiber optic signal distribution as weight savings, far advanced engine management advancements, intake resonance, roller cam followers, cold cracked rods, cross bolted mains, alloy liners with open deck configuration, on and on.

Summary:

These are both FABULOUS automobiles IMHO, FOR THEIR TIME. Technology marches forward. When the 124 was introduced, there were only a very few people in the civilized world that had a mobile phone or even knew what one was. Upon the introduction of the 203 virtually EVERYONE had a handheld mobile phone. Technology changes and the articles that are built with and influenced by technology change.

As far as I'm concerned the 203 and other MB products of the 21st. Century reflect this in a big way.

One last thing. I've said it before and I'll say it again. In 1977 when I bought my first 240D several people told me that the new MB's just aren't as good as the old ones. I bought it anyway and as far as I'm concerned the 123 was the best car ever built for its era. People still say this about new MB's but they continue to be fabulous automobiles. Have they changed? Of course, what hasn't changed over the years. Some of the change might be considered bad, but the vast majority of this change is fabulous.

DslBnz,

If you would like for me to elaborate, let me know.

Have a great day,

fwiw- I have put significant months of drive time and thousands of miles behind '01' 02 '03 '04 C-Classes within the range of motors offered

>>though not pertinent to the original poster's comparo/ interests, I tastes would favor a W124.036 (without exception) vs an '01-'04 C-Class, including AMG version C

-fad

Oh for crying out loud...just go to your local dealer, drive there in your W124 and test drive a W203. By safety and transmission alone it is in another cosmos. Not only is it a different car its a different car company. Its almost like comparing Honda to VW thats how much things have changed at mercedes.

Only thing I really despise about the new cars is the CEL light. I think a lot of money has been made by dealers on the basis of this little orange light (Hopefully that will change when/if the government forces manufactures to publish their codes.) I also don't like the blandness of the car but hey thats subjective.

One thing I have found out is that everybody loves their current mercedes (they'll argue and fight you to understand their love) and you will too regardless of which one you pick, thats one thing they haven't stopped engineering into them

Reading this thread I am beginning to understand the premise of that new set of commercials