After having owned the car for the two weeks and about 1200km /750 miles, I decided to given everyone my opinion on the car.

First, the aerodynamic of the car has really paid off when it comes to highway driving. It is very quiet. In fact, I hear more of the tires noise than the engine or wind noise. Speaking of tires, for those of you thinking of buying a new Mercedes, make sure that you insist that they install any other brands but Continental tires. The Continental tires are really horrible when it comes to ride and quietness. The Continental tires are tremendously noisy and, in my opinion, do not have good ride quality.

Because the engine has yet to be broken in, I am averaging about 24 mpg. I expect this figure to better once the ehgine has broken in. Acceleration is not the strongest point of the car. The 2.6L V6 is smooth and quiet, but lacks low end torque. The ride is good.

However, solid Mercedes are, it seems, a thing of the past. The centre console tend to emit some creaking noise when the car goes thorough uneven road surfaces. Also, you can hear lots of thumps and jolting from the suspension when the car goes through uneven surfaces. In addition, every time when I close the door, there is a very subtle rattling noise comes from somewhere from the door when it shuts.

I have not regretted buying the car. I still feel that it is the best car I have owned so far. It is not a perfect car. But I am sure I will keep the car for a long time.

Johf
2001 C240 Classic
Desert Silver/Java

johf,

thanks for sharing your feedback on the new C class.

i am a bit concerned about the general trend of the perceived "solidity" of the cars being a thing of the past. This is notoriously apparent on the first MLs, but is even apparent on the first-gen C-Class and the round-eyed E-Class, compared with the W201 and W124, respectively (at least that is what i feel when i slam their doors, which is a limited gauge of this).

the bank-vault feel is reassuring, but we have to place our faith in those engineers and their finite-element-analysis tools that ultimately create a high strength-to-weight-ratio car. That is, the car is structurally stiff where it matters. And hopefully we will not find this out the hard way (i.e., the strength of the passenger cell).

probably another contributor is the more extensive use of recyclable plastics, and most large companies are more concerned than ever of being known as a good environmental citizen.

i just hope that the direction of technology infusion is from Daimler to Chrysler, and not the other way around.

for me, the new C has a lot going for it - better engineering and efficiency althroughout, better handling, and very good looks. But what would really be a compelling reason for me is if they bring back the inline-6.

I'm embarassed that I was posting new car stuff on the Tech Help forum. I didn't even notice this forum. My apologies to Bill and everyone.

I picked up my C240 Six Speed today. I put about 145 miles on it getting home. A bunch of it was stop light to stop light and a bunch was cruising and passing on wide 70 MPH speed limit two lane.

I did not hear any noises whatsoever while I was driving the car, it is very quiet, and my console did not rattle as the above report. I am sharing the experience about the sound when slamming the door. I think it came off of a '72 Plymouth. It's strange, the feel is solid when closing, but I can hear something move inside the door, I began conscienclously closing it easier and it helped my peace of mind. If you barely push it to, it will latch in place okay.

Yes, it began with my '96 E Class, a little loss of the "cast from one piece" feeling of the 123 and 124 cars.

I have been a straight six MB fan for a long time also, but I think this engine is far superior in every way to the old sixes except for the lack of low end torque. However, that is not a function of straight rather than V. There are a zillion other factors that effect the shape and range of the torque curve. The technology in the engine is amzing, and these engines have been out long enough that any acchilles heel would have been discovered by now.

I did not mention that my drive also consisted of about 20 miles of good old winding and hilly country paved two lane. The car was much more fun to drive on this section than I expected.

In spite of posts I've read here on Mercedesshop which said that the magazines were condemning the six speed, I think it's nothing short of fabulous. There are a few little things you have to get used to with it. It takes more than a quick drive around the block to really get the hang of it. because you now have three vertical gates with gears both top and bottom, there are some fine points that you have to get accustomed to. The match of the engine and transmission, I think, is very good.

I was disappointed when I saw that my car had Goodyear Eagles. My '96 came with Goodyears that were trash in 15,000 miles, and it was a diesel, not as if I was spending time at the dragway. I ultimately put Continentals on the '96 and they were great. Maybe this time it's the other way around. Oh well, whatever happens with the equipment tires, they'll get replaced with Michelins at some point.

I ran the car up to almost 100 MPH and it was very nice at that speed. Using the transmission properly, you can get to that speed, and once there, the car feels fabulous.

Another small complaint I have, it doesn't come with a dipstick. I complained about my '96 not having an oil pressure guage, but at least it had a dipstick! The tube is there but capped. I think you can purchase a dipstick for it. If the automated oil level indication system indicated what the oil level is, it wouldn't bother me much. But the system only lets you know if it's low, at least they put in the tube, and apparently you CAN get a dipstick for it.

The radio volume automatic adjustment according to vehicle speed seems to work on this car. It didn't seem to do much on my '96.

In reality, I think that the only thing from Chrysler that is working it's way into these cars is the GPS and COMAND technology. It seems like I heard somewhere, or read somewhere, that one of the attractive things to DB about the Chrysler purchase was getting this technology. Of course, it's still not available on the C Class, they're not even taking orders yet.

If either of you have owned a 124 car in the past, maybe the following comment will make sense, or maybe not. The C reminds me of my stick shift 300E in some ways, and some ways not. I love my manual transmission 300E, but it's just not the same. I can't explain it, it's like it's the same car, but more... I can't come up with the right word. The cars are so much alike that on the one hand, I feel like what's the point of getting a different car, but on the other hand, the C just feels more.... full of technology. Actually I think my 300E handles better, but I have different sway bars, shocks, etc than the original 300E pieces, so the car is more stable and predictable.

All in all, so far, I'm thrilled with the car, and if the above complaints are all that I ever have, I'll be a very happy camper.

Let's keep sharing our '01 C Class experiences and discoveries here, it's fun. Has anyone learned much about the display system yet? I have the 1 inch thick book, and I'm about to go start reading it. It's hard to drive, negotiate traffic and learn the system all at the same time, but with a little pre study, I expect to learn the system fast.

Thanks and have a great day,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, 523K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

Everything different in someway seems less perfect when you've grown to love a car. I don't know if Mercedes is building cars less solid than before or not. But one thing is sure - they are building them differently. There is a major emphasis on lowering the weight, including more recyclable components, etc. Back in the day - Mercedes could easily afford to build cars from lots of heavy steel. That's what made a car strong and safe. Now adays there are metals that are stronger than steel and weigh less that have found their way into the auto making process. Design also plays a greater role in safety.

I guess what I'm trying to say is, I'm sure Mercedes are just as solid as they used to be, they may not feel like it because we are used to really big, really heavy cars. My 1986 420SEL feels as safe as a tank. I'm sure however that if I crawled inside a Benz from the 60s or 70s it might feel even heavier and stronger.

Just a thought



------------------
Jason Priest
1986 420SEL

A couple more points.

I didn't get a chance to read the display instructions last night, but had more time to tinker this morning. There's really nothing to it. There is not as much information available in the display as I thought there would be.

Also, does anyone know if these are the same lights that are used in the Euro cars? I was amazed this morning when I pulled out of the driveway onto the road. These are better lights than the Euro lights that I have in my 240D. I drive about 20 miles of winding and hilly Farm to Market two lane road, just to get to the highway. I have to dodge deer and escaped livestock. For this reason, I go to all lengths to have good lights. I don't have a clue what I could do to improve the new C Class lights.

The car got 26.7 MPG on my trip to work this morning, if you believe the display. It is probably right. Assuming that this is correct, this is impressive. It's a 90 mile drive, 20 miles winding through the country to the highway, then about fifty miles of wide two lane, then 20 miles of freeway with no traffic at that time of the morning. There are nine turns or stop sighns that require stopping or slowing down and reaccelerating. My acceleration was very spirited. Given that the EPA highway estimate is 27, this was good fuel economy. I will be checking this computation with a few fillups and calculations of my own. I'll report back here on the accuracy of the instrument display gadget.

Have a great day,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, 523K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

Larry,

How does the C240 compare with the E320? The used E320's are about the same price as the new C240. I drove the C240's yesterday 6 spd and auto. I think the suto matches the engine better. I used to have a 2.6 5 spd 190E. I got better with the 6 spd with time but if the 240 6 spd was as good of match as my current A4 I wouldn't have to "learn" it. Trust me I really want to like it. A stick suits me better and I don't want to have to pay the additional 1300 for the auto but it just seemed to work better with the engine's lack of low end torque.

[This message has been edited by MBlovr (edited 10-17-2000).]

MBlovr,

I drove the C320 also, the power was impressive. The six speed after just a day or two became part of me. I think it's great. The ideal would be th 6 speed behind the 320 engine. The torque is lower in the rpm range. But I'm admittedly a manual transmission fanatic. I take my cars to high mileage, and have never had to pay a four figure repair bill on a manual.

I love the six speed and wouldn't have bought any of the Benz cars with an automatic.

This is totally my own preference, and I'm not trying to push my thoughts and likes on anyone else. It's obvious that I'm in the extreme minority, or I would have been able to buy an E Class with a manual.

If I were an automatic lover, I believe I would look for a low mileage E320, if I could get a really well cared for one, for the same money as an automatic C. But that's only my own opinion.

Good luck,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, 533K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

[This message has been edited by LarryBible (edited 10-17-2000).]

larry,

you are not the only one. I myself am a DIY-shifter diehard. Although my 5spd 190e2.6 does not have the smoothest shifter (hondas are more progressive, for example), and the gear ratio spacings are wide, it has endeared itself to me. Something like getting to know a person with all its quirks.

And like you, if i can help it, i won't get a benz auto; the 400e/E420 however, might make up for it with its V8.

but aside from the tranny, i am also an inline-6 fanatic. The 90-degree benz V6 needs counterbalancers to offset those unwanted moments. The "perfect" car for a purist like me would have: rear-wheel drive, a manual tranny and an inline-six. That makes the bimmer 3- and 5-series cars the only contenders (i only considered german cars, and the manual 300Es are too old).

maybe i'll just won't look under the hood of the C240 ... of if benz sticks a supercharger in there to distract me ...

but all these are academic until my bankbook allows me to indulge ...

i look forward though to your continued feedback on the C240 ...

bobbyv,

Before I go further, I enjoyed your music very much in the fifties.

Yes I like inline sixes fine, but the technology in the new V6 is absolutely awesome. Probably the downside is if they ever do need attention, I feel that the inline is probably more rebuildable. My uncle was a watchmaker and used to use the term "made like a dollar watch". This meant that it was difficult or impossible to rebuild. I hope it's many years before I find out if that's true with the new V6. From everything I've heard and read, I believe that the new V will be an extremely long lived engine. They've been out long enough to see their service history. The pros comment that they have not seen any achilles heels with these engines. I have decided to feed mine a fresh load of Mobil One often, and go for it.

Good luck,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, manual, 533K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

Larry,

Thanks for the feedback. I'll give the six speed one more try. I love my 5 spd A4 and Jetta. I have to admit other than the tall fifth gear in my 2.6 190e I thought the 5 spd was pretty poor and I drove it for six years. I didn't find the quirks endearing at all and thought the later model automatics better.

So are you saying that you would recommend a low mileage E320 over a auto C240. Like BobbyV I still like the inline sixes so 97 is the last year I am looking at. To me it seems like a lot more car for the money but I'm open to other opinions. I would like to hear what kind of mileage you are getting. It might sway me to the 240.

Thanks again.

Funny that you ask about fuel mileage. I just drove in from Gatlinburgh, Tennessee yesterday, my first Interstate higway trip.

The EPA estimate of 27 MPG on this car is very conservative. My drive to work is a combination of stop signs, traffic lights and a lot of two lane highway cruising involving some passing. There is also some freeway driving. The car tops 28 mpg on these trips.

On the Interstate, the car delivered over 30 MPG. I'm talking about the accurately calculated figure. The computer gives you fuel mileage calculation but it is typically optimistic by about 3%. On the highway it seems to much more accurate for some reason.

I got 31.5 twice during my cruise control operated 75 MPH extended cruising. These cruise numbers came with a few quick exits and entrances to get coffee and such.

I also took a tour through the Smokies and through Pigeon Forge. This was extreme stop light to stop light and stop and go driving and also climbing. On this leg it got 20.5 or so. I thought this to be excellent considering that there were three adults aboard and the EPA city rating is 18. Again, this is calculated, not what the computer says.

To clarify my statement about the 210 vs. 203 car, yes if I were not a manual transmission addict, and was looking at an automatic only, I would look hard and find a well cared for, used 210 car.

Good luck,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, manual, 533K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles

Larry,

Out of curiosity, do you know anything about the lower mileage numbers for the manual vs. automatic transmissions? I don't know if it's a misprint or what (it sort of defies logic), but MB lists the estimates as being a couple mpg less for the manual, in each of the models that carry the stick tranny.

anthony

Larry,

Thanks for the continued feedback. Just watched quicktime clips on the new C crash tests (on Edmunds.com) and it is outstanding. It looks to me as though they have applied all the lessons learned from the W210 and W202. The car looks super strong. Big selling point with me. Add the great gas mileage you are getting, handling, ride, and quietness and it seems hard to beat. I'm definitely going to revisit the stick.

[This message has been edited by MBlovr (edited 10-24-2000).]

Anthony,

The average EPA estimate is better for the 320, the highway estimate is better for the 240.

I expect this is because of the driver adaptive automatic versus an average driver with the stick shift.

The reason for the highway mileage being better for the stick shift car is obvious.

Thanks for the reply,

------------------
Larry Bible
'01 C Class, Six Speed
'84 Euro 240D, manual, 533K miles
'88 300E 5 Speed
'81 300D Daughter's Car
Over 800,000 miles in
Mercedes automobiles