2003 Mercedes Benz CLK [Archive] - Beyond.ca - Car Forums

Angisio

08-02-2002, 02:52 AM

Originally posted by Fat Dave

A CLK320 is $59,900. The M3 base price is $73,500, and you'll NEVER get one that cheap.
M3 is about $82k with tax CDN

if you go to mbusa.com they list the CLK 320 at $43kUSD
maybe a couple thousand cheaper for quite a bit less performance. And the M3 wait is only about 4 months now, so i dont know why you think you would have to pay more? that doesnt make a lot of sense

the engine blowing is a concern though, but its all warranty so who cares. Who knows what those people were doing. For the risk i'd still take the M3.

max_boost

08-02-2002, 02:57 AM

Originally posted by Angisio

the engine blowing is a concern though, but its all warranty so who cares. Who knows what those people were doing. For the risk i'd still take the M3.

If the M3 was problem free, sure, hell I would take the M3 since it is the better car. But you have got to be crazy! I don't think that many people are doing the same thing to blow up the motor on their cause.

Fat Dave

08-02-2002, 03:04 AM

$15,000 less is not "a couple thousand cheaper". For the price of the M3, I could have an AMG SLK32. Oh, wait...

"It's all warranty so who cares" - that'll be comforting as your $80,000 depreciating asset sits in the service department awaiting a rebuild.

James

08-02-2002, 03:09 AM

Originally posted by Fat Dave
$15,000 less is not "a couple thousand cheaper". For the price of the M3, I could have an AMG SLK32. Oh, wait...

.

ohhhhhhhh, look at me, im a high roller!:rolleyes: j/k:thumbsup:

Fat Dave

08-02-2002, 03:10 AM

:bigpimp:

Angisio

08-02-2002, 03:16 AM

Originally posted by Fat Dave
$15,000 less is not "a couple thousand cheaper". For the price of the M3, I could have an AMG SLK32. Oh, wait...

"It's all warranty so who cares" - that'll be comforting as your $80,000 depreciating asset sits in the service department awaiting a rebuild.

Um, $45000USD = 71,492.19 CAD
plus tax = approximately $81k
So its maybe $1k cheaper. Thats interesting math you did there though...
For twice the car. I'd take the risk, or wait 6 months until the problem is sorted out.

boi-alien

08-02-2002, 03:32 AM

for that price, i'd much rather have an slk 32 AMG

lammer

08-02-2002, 03:35 AM

i'd buy a house, with some money from the bank.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 06:50 AM

Originally posted by Angisio

Um, $45000USD = 71,492.19 CAD
plus tax = approximately $81k
So its maybe $1k cheaper. Thats interesting math you did there though...
For twice the car. I'd take the risk, or wait 6 months until the problem is sorted out.

No, YOUR math is the problem. The tax does not even come CLOSE to $10k

$71,492.19 x 1.07 = $76,496.64

Thats over $5k cheaper than an M3.

HOK

08-02-2002, 07:14 AM

i see this benz everyday here in hong kong... its SWEEET... its better then M3.... who gives two shits about price when your talking about cars this expensive...

mischief

08-02-2002, 07:42 AM

Originally posted by Angisio

Um, $45000USD = 71,492.19 CAD
plus tax = approximately $81k
So its maybe $1k cheaper. Thats interesting math you did there though...
For twice the car. I'd take the risk, or wait 6 months until the problem is sorted out.

You can't convert the american price to canadian and say that's how much the car is gonna cost you. Majority of the cars are cheaper here in canada than they are in the US.

08-02-2002, 09:08 AM

Originally posted by Angisio

Um, $45000USD = 71,492.19 CAD
plus tax = approximately $81k
So its maybe $1k cheaper. Thats interesting math you did there though...
For twice the car. I'd take the risk, or wait 6 months until the problem is sorted out.

http://www.bmw.ca/configurator/config/index.asp?acode=CAB20BMC111A0&lang=EN

http://www.mercedes.ca/site/Home.cfm?PID=348&NavPID1=136&NavPID2=188&NavPID3=235&LNG=E

Angisio

08-02-2002, 10:41 AM

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift

No, YOUR math is the problem. The tax does not even come CLOSE to $10k

$71,492.19 x 1.07 = $76,496.64

Thats over $5k cheaper than an M3.
well i added in a couple options there as well. I assume youre not buying it bone stock. I guess some people do.

You guys are right, the 320 is a lot cheaper. I was thinking of the 430. The CLK 430 costs the same as an M3. But if you were gonna buy the clk 320 you could just save yourself $10 and buy a 330i and have better performance?

Man, mercedes sure makes a crappy car for the money, SLK 32AMG excluded.

08-02-2002, 10:44 AM

To some people it's about name recognition.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 10:44 AM

Originally posted by HOK
i see this benz everyday here in hong kong... its SWEEET... its better then M3.... who gives two shits about price when your talking about cars this expensive...

you make a convincing point there HOK good job.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 10:52 AM

ya i know, but i'd rather be like you and get the better car with less name attached to it. I mean the G20 is in the same class and is basically as good as the 330i but a lot cheaper. I would never even bother with the benz because of its horrible horrible price.

Redlyne_mr2

08-02-2002, 11:01 AM

the clk looks liek somethign my mom woudl drive..I prefer the classic more square lines of the m3 the fact that it has a manula tranny is also a huge selling point..the clk 320 woudl be a sweet daily driver that and an extremely comfortabel travelling car but if I was spending that much money it woudl be for something that performed as good on the track as it would on the streets

kenny

08-02-2002, 11:17 AM

Originally posted by Angisio

the engine blowing is a concern though, but its all warranty so who cares. Who knows what those people were doing. For the risk i'd still take the M3.

Tell that to the people who were forced to cough up $17k USD to have their engine replaced because BMW refused to replace it under warranty!

08-02-2002, 11:18 AM

Originally posted by Angisio
ya i know, but i'd rather be like you and get the better car with less name attached to it. I mean the G20 is in the same class and is basically as good as the 330i but a lot cheaper. I would never even bother with the benz because of its horrible horrible price.

G20 is not in the same class as the 330i. I think you meant the G35. The G20 is a car that should've been it was out dated before it even came out. I am happy with the G35 plenty of torque and power.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 12:15 PM

Originally posted by kenny

Tell that to the people who were forced to cough up $17k USD to have their engine replaced because BMW refused to replace it under warranty!

Ya. I will. What are you gonna tell the guy who paid the same price for half the car. Obvoiusly BMW can fix the problem. Its not like they designed an engine that will never ever work. Its 66 out of about 10,000 cars. I bet 66 /10,000 CLK 320s /430s break down too, just not all because of the same problem.

I think people are crazy to buy a mercedes like that. The only one worth buying is the SLK 32AMG and it doesnt even have the fun of a manual transmission. And that car may be faster then the M3 but its two seater and more exspensive.

And by the way Kenny, Fat dave already mentioned the cost of fixing the motor. I would still rather pay the extra money, it would still be less then the CLK55 AMG which is slower then the M3 as well.

Oh ya, and Gspot i meant to put G35 and I guess more like 328i or 325i. But i would still take either of those over the CLK anything.

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 12:31 PM

Yeah, I'd definatly take an M3 over clk320, performance won't even compare, looks are close though, but still M3 is very impressive, one of my favorite cars, CLKAMG maybe is more of a comparison, but I'd still take the M3, and the slk I love but I'm not sure about taking one over an M3, the option of a standard would sway me towards the M3. I love both cars though.

HOK

08-02-2002, 02:20 PM

Originally posted by Angisio

you make a convincing point there HOK good job.

your sarcasm is as good as your taste... you lack refinement, why would you buy a shotty car... ? have even seen this car in person... its not all about horsepower and numbers...

D'z Nutz

08-02-2002, 03:02 PM

Originally posted by kenny

Tell that to the people who were forced to cough up $17k USD to have their engine replaced because BMW refused to replace it under warranty!

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there problems with the M3's clutch as well?? A lot of people were really fucking up their clutches before the proper break in period. Some even as early the first day of driving :dunno:

rage2

08-02-2002, 03:08 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
Ya. I will. What are you gonna tell the guy who paid the same price for half the car. Obvoiusly BMW can fix the problem. Its not like they designed an engine that will never ever work. Its 66 out of about 10,000 cars. I bet 66 /10,000 CLK 320s /430s break down too, just not all because of the same problem.

That's what all the hardcore BMW guys say... do remember that only about 500 M3 owners are active on roadfly. I know of 2 M3 blown engines in Calgary and they're not on roadfly. Fact is, there are a lot of blown engines on the M3's, mostly (but not all) in the Nov and Dec 01 production run.

Originally posted by Angisio
I think people are crazy to buy a mercedes like that. The only one worth buying is the SLK 32AMG and it doesnt even have the fun of a manual transmission. And that car may be faster then the M3 but its two seater and more exspensive.

Why are we even comparing the CLK class to the 3 series? The CLK is a high end luxo coupe. The 3 series compares to the C class. The C32 AMG out runs the M3's (only from a roll, the C32 is a bit slow off the line so it loses in 0-60 and is tied to the 1/4 mile) and costs $65k cdn fully loaded.

Originally posted by Angisio
And by the way Kenny, Fat dave already mentioned the cost of fixing the motor. I would still rather pay the extra money, it would still be less then the CLK55 AMG which is slower then the M3 as well.

Or you can buy a 03 Mustang Cobra, whole lot cheaper, outruns both cars.

Originally posted by D'z Nutz
Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there problems with the M3's clutch as well?? A lot of people were really fucking up their clutches before the proper break in period. Some even as early the first day of driving :dunno:

The clutch is an M5 issue. The M3 had issues with the differentials blowing up. A service bulletin went out for the 12,000 mile service prompting a differential oil for the diff oil change.

dj_honda

08-02-2002, 03:09 PM

Originally posted by lammer
i'd buy a house, with some money from the bank.

so would I

max_boost

08-02-2002, 03:10 PM

What I don't understand is why BMW would not replace the engine under warranty? It seriously doesn't make much sense! What do they say to their high rolling customers? Sorry pal, tough luck?!?! LOL

That is bad service, results in bad customer relations and BMW can forget about these folks ever coming back.

D'z Nutz

08-02-2002, 03:20 PM

Originally posted by rage2

The clutch is an M5 issue. The M3 had issues with the differentials blowing up. A service bulletin went out for the 12,000 mile service prompting a differential oil for the diff oil change.

Jeez, the M5 clutch problem is new to me! BMW seriously needs to get their act together. I know there some problems with the X5 catching on fire as well. Can't remember exactly what the problem was though. IIRC, it had something to do with the radiator fan? Whatever it was, I think it was electrical. There were some pics of some X5's with melted fronts floating around on the net somewhere. When I first heard about that, I don't think BMW was covering the damages for those either, regardless of the recall.

2000impreza

08-02-2002, 03:20 PM

sometimes the manufacture will blame the owner for the cause of the blown engine. abuse or some other :bullshit: if they don't want to replace the engine.

max_boost

08-02-2002, 03:25 PM

Originally posted by 2000impreza
sometimes the manufacture will blame the owner for the cause of the blown engine. abuse or some other :bullshit: if they don't want to replace the engine.

So many people are having the same problem too! If that ever happened to me, I'm calling my lawyer!!!

Angisio

08-02-2002, 03:29 PM

Originally posted by rage2

Why are we even comparing the CLK class to the 3 series? The CLK is a high end luxo coupe. The 3 series compares to the C class. The C32 AMG out runs the M3's (only from a roll, the C32 is a bit slow off the line so it loses in 0-60 and is tied to the 1/4 mile) and costs $65k cdn fully loaded.

What the hell are you talking about? The C32 AMG stock cost $53 000 USD base price, since when did that convert into $65 000 Canadian? Oh thats right, it doesn't. It converts into $84 000 Canadian, and thats without tax. You can get a BMW M3 with options and tax for $83 000. And its way slower than the M3 on a track. Unlike Rice cars BMW makes their cars for more than just a 1/4 mile time.

08-02-2002, 03:44 PM

Originally posted by Angisio

What the hell are you talking about? The C32 AMG stock cost $53 000 USD base price, since when did that convert into $65 000 Canadian? Oh thats right, it doesn't. It converts into $84 000 Canadian, and thats without tax. You can get a BMW M3 with options and tax for $83 000. And its way slower than the M3 on a track. Unlike Rice cars BMW makes their cars for more than just a 1/4 mile time.

Canadian C32AMG (http://www.mercedes.ca/site/Home.cfm?PID=327&NavPID1=136&NavPID2=185&NavPID3=194&LNG=E)

USA C32AMG (http://www.mbusa.com/byo/colors.jsp?trackingApplication=mainsite&trackingModel=C32)

Do a little research before you get all upset...If you had the exact same car it will always be cheaper in Canada. Not many people would ask Rage what the hell he is talking about when it comes to MBs girls maybe but definately not MBs.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 04:03 PM

Man, sorry about that, why is it so much cheaper here? I guess there must not be as much demand for them. I must admit I was completely wrong.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 04:18 PM

Having said that I still say that the M3 is faster. If you want me to post some facts just ask.

08-02-2002, 04:26 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
Having said that I still say that the M3 is faster. If you want me to post some facts just ask.

They are both great cars it's a matter of choice. If you are in that kind of a market I think it really depends on personal preference.

Cars are more expensive in the USA because they can get away with it. Their market is 10 times bigger than Canada.

The car I bought for 46K is fully loaded here. In the state the base is 28K USD but Xenon, Leather, Sun Roof, Heated Seats, Upgraded Audio, .... are all options. By the time you add all the stuff I have in my car the car cost around 35K USD.

jonny

08-02-2002, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by HOK

your sarcasm is as good as your taste... you lack refinement, why would you buy a shotty car... ? have even seen this car in person... its not all about horsepower and numbers...
are you saying angisio has bad taste because he likes a much cheaper faster car then the one you like? thats pretty idiotic.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 05:52 PM

Originally posted by Angisio

Unlike Rice cars BMW makes their cars for more than just a 1/4 mile time. Yeah, and when it came to put up or shut up time, BMW threatened to pull M5 owners warranties if they participated in a track day to prove what the fastest sedan in the world was. They really stand behind their lofty claims :confused:

jonny

08-02-2002, 05:54 PM

Originally posted by rage2

Why are we even comparing the CLK class to the 3 series? The CLK is a high end luxo coupe. The 3 series compares to the C class. The C32 AMG out runs the M3's (only from a roll, the C32 is a bit slow off the line so it loses in 0-60 and is tied to the 1/4 mile) and costs $65k cdn fully loaded.

Or you can buy a 03 Mustang Cobra, whole lot cheaper, outruns both cars.

He's probably comparing them due to the fact they price quite similarily. You call it a high end luxo coupe but what the hell does that mean? seriously what makes it so much more luxurious then the 3 series? I'm not being sarcastic i ACTUALLY want to know. And i dont think the C32 AMG is really that close a competitor. I mean, the C32 AMG competes probably more in between the M3 and 330ci.
Well obviously the cobra is faster, but you dont exactly get the same quality car. No offense to ford.

jonny

08-02-2002, 05:57 PM

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
Yeah, and when it came to put up or shut up time, BMW threatened to pull M5 owners warranties if they participated in a track day to prove what the fastest sedan in the world was. They really stand behind their lofty claims :confused:

I cant understand why they wouldnt want to take repairs for a car that has been pushed to its utmost limit by amatuer drivers. That makes no sense! But you did really burn Angsio. He said a couple dumb things but you didnt pick them out, you picked out that he actually knew that BMW makes an all round car.
Also, i think they just claim its the fastest naturally aspirated production car, which i'm pretty sure is true.

kenny

08-02-2002, 06:12 PM

Originally posted by max_boost
What I don't understand is why BMW would not replace the engine under warranty? It seriously doesn't make much sense! What do they say to their high rolling customers? Sorry pal, tough luck?!?! LOL

They said it was driver error because the DME (?) diagnostics report an over rev on the engine. However, SMG came out and engines were still blowing left and right and the same diagnostics show over rev on those cars too (which shouldn't be possible with SMG). BMW then started to replace the engines under warranty and SOME of the owners that paid the $17k USD replacement fee got a refund.

There is all this talk about what car will be faster on the track, but seriously how many people buy these cars and actually drive them 10/10ths on a track? Gimme a break. People buy cars for MANY different reasons, and the first criteria is usually nothing to do with how fast it'll take to do a lap around nurburgring.

I don't see why people have to be so brand defensive, some people will love BMWs and some people love Mercedes. Nobody cares if they can save $10 grand and have a faster car!

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 06:23 PM

"Why are we even comparing the CLK class to the 3 series? The CLK is a high end luxo coupe. The 3 series compares to the C class. The C32 AMG out runs the M3's (only from a roll, the C32 is a bit slow off the line so it loses in 0-60 and is tied to the 1/4 mile) and costs $65k cdn fully loaded. "

CLK is based on the c class which compete's with 3 series, personally I'd rather have a 3 series then a C class benz. I do like the CLK's but I like the 3er's a bit better, except I've seen one really hot Lorinser CLK that I'd take over almost any 3er, but stock I'd take an M3, but we'll see what happens with the performance of the new CLK, if it get's as good as the New E and SL and other models I'll like the CLK much better.

CLK is much more luxurious I'll agree, BMW is a bit sportier, the interiors of a BMW and MB are quite different, the MB is classier.

The prices are dropped in Canada so that the cars will actually sell, you should see the huge price differences from nation to nation, people from the states actually try to buy their cars in Canada and ship them down but this was made illegal or an agreement of some sort was made, and the dollar isn't the only reason for this.

Some people love Bmw, some love Mercedes, why can't people love them both for what they both offer, they compete, but they're different cars, different feels, but both great.

jonny

08-02-2002, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by kenny

Nobody cares if they can save $10 grand and have a faster car!
Where have you been living?

jonny

08-02-2002, 06:47 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
"Why are we even comparing the CLK class to the 3 series? The CLK is a high end luxo coupe. The 3 series compares to the C class. The C32 AMG out runs the M3's (only from a roll, the C32 is a bit slow off the line so it loses in 0-60 and is tied to the 1/4 mile) and costs $65k cdn fully loaded. "

CLK is based on the c class which compete's with 3 series, personally I'd rather have a 3 series then a C class benz. I do like the CLK's but I like the 3er's a bit better, except I've seen one really hot Lorinser CLK that I'd take over almost any 3er, but stock I'd take an M3, but we'll see what happens with the performance of the new CLK, if it get's as good as the New E and SL and other models I'll like the CLK much better.

CLK is much more luxurious I'll agree, BMW is a bit sportier, the interiors of a BMW and MB are quite different, the MB is classier.

The prices are dropped in Canada so that the cars will actually sell, you should see the huge price differences from nation to nation, people from the states actually try to buy their cars in Canada and ship them down but this was made illegal or an agreement of some sort was made, and the dollar isn't the only reason for this.

Some people love Bmw, some love Mercedes, why can't people love them both for what they both offer, they compete, but they're different cars, different feels, but both great.

What makes the CLK so luxurious? Can anyone answer this?

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 06:56 PM

The interior, the ride, the options, the technology, the looks, the list goes on. Actually I'll agree that CLK is one of the less luxurious in the Mercedes line-up, it is supposed to have a bit more of a sporty image.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 07:02 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
The interior, the ride, the options, the technology, the looks, the list goes on. Actually I'll agree that CLK is one of the less luxurious in the Mercedes line-up, it is supposed to have a bit more of a sporty image.

I just have a question? How can it you rate something by how it looks more luxurious? Does it not hurt your eyes as much to look at? By the way, luxury is all an opinion, as well as looks, speed is not an opinion, its a fact.

jonny

08-02-2002, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
The interior, the ride, the options, the technology, the looks, the list goes on. Actually I'll agree that CLK is one of the less luxurious in the Mercedes line-up, it is supposed to have a bit more of a sporty image.
Thats not anything. The interior? what about the interior? The ride? What do you mean the ride? That doesnt mean anything. What technology makes it more luxurious? And the looks? How do the looks make it more luxurious?
First you say its more of a high end luxo coupe, then you say its more sporty. pick one

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 07:04 PM

Originally posted by kenny

There is all this talk about what car will be faster on the track, but seriously how many people buy these cars and actually drive them 10/10ths on a track? Gimme a break. People buy cars for MANY different reasons, and the first criteria is usually nothing to do with how fast it'll take to do a lap around nurburgring.

The fact of the matter is though, BMW claims the M5 is the fastest saloon in the world. If you want to make a claim like that, you had damn well better be willing to back it up on the track, since that is the only place you can really wring the car out safely, and BMW isn't.

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 07:08 PM

You're right it is an opinion. I'm saying Mercedes is more luxurious than sporty, they're starting to change this image a bit, they try to make the CLK a bit more sportier. You are right it is opinion. By technology I mean what they use to make the ride soft and the car easy to drive among other things. Ride has a lot to do with luxury. You are right though, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, when I think about luxury I think what's classy, what leather is used, how expensive the interior looks. I never once said it was a high-luxo coupe, that was someone else.

jonny

08-02-2002, 07:09 PM

Letting amatuer drivers test their skills wouldnt prove anything anyway. Plus i bet theres liability issues if BMW condoned things like that. Unless you simply have one actual proffesional driver test and compare theres no point.

So besides hakola's wishy washy explanation can anybody tell me what makes the CLK series so luxurious? I mean seriously, leather quality? Im pretty sure theres next to no difference between the BMWs and Mercedes. Softer suspension maybe.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 07:24 PM

Originally posted by jonny
Letting amatuer drivers test their skills wouldnt prove anything anyway. Plus i bet theres liability issues if BMW condoned things like that. Unless you simply have one actual proffesional driver test and compare theres no point.

BMW could have shown up with a factory driver and a bone stock M5 and proved they did in fact own the title. Hell, they could have borrowed one of their F1 drivers for a day if they really wanted to. Why didn't they? I fail to see how liability could enter into this. BMW markets some of their vehicles as performance cars, and they claim they have the fastest sedan on the market yet they won't actually prove it? BMW sponsored marque clubs hold track days all the time for their owners. If BMW was that worried about liability, I don't think they would be devoting quite so much time to establishing themselves as a luxury mark building performance cars.

jonny

08-02-2002, 07:28 PM

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift

BMW could have shown up with a factory driver and a bone stock M5 and proved they did in fact own the title. Hell, they could have borrowed one of their F1 drivers for a day if they really wanted to. Why didn't they? I fail to see how liability could enter into this. BMW markets some of their vehicles as performance cars, and they claim they have the fastest sedan on the market yet they won't actually prove it? BMW sponsored marque clubs hold track days all the time for their owners. If BMW was that worried about liability, I don't think they would be devoting quite so much time to establishing themselves as a luxury mark building performance cars.

They're going to get montoya or schumacher out for a day? Come on. I'm pretty sure that BMW must have done some sort of testing to prove they had the fastest sedan, just because you cant find it doesnt mean it didnt happen.
Track time is mostly about improving yourself, proving your car is the fastest sedan on the planet is a lot different task and i'm sure youd get a lot of nutcases going and trying to do it all the while injuring and killing themself.
And if there is another sedan out there thats faster why hasnt anyone heard of it? You would think it would be pretty well advertised.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 07:44 PM

Originally posted by jonny

They're going to get montoya or schumacher out for a day? Come on. I'm pretty sure that BMW must have done some sort of testing to prove they had the fastest sedan, just because you cant find it doesnt mean it didnt happen.
Track time is mostly about improving yourself, proving your car is the fastest sedan on the planet is a lot different task and i'm sure youd get a lot of nutcases going and trying to do it all the while injuring and killing themself.
And if there is another sedan out there thats faster why hasnt anyone heard of it? You would think it would be pretty well advertised.

Its BMW. When you have drivers for a factory sponsored team, they dance to your tune because its in their contract. Subaru flew Petter Solberg over to north america to do promotional work for them at the Rim Of The World Rally this year. Honda had Paul Tracy drive the American Si Challenge cars for them. BMW would have no difficulty getting JPM or Ralf into an M5 for a track day if that was what they wanted.

And, if you look at the stats published by BMW, they say the E39 M5 does 0-60mph in 4.8 seconds. There's more than a couple of production sedans that do 0-60 faster than that. The top speed on the M5 is computer limited to 250kph anyways. You can hardly claim to have the fastest saloon in the world when you can't get it to its top speed, and you've got sedans like Lancer Evo, Impreza STi and Holden Commodore out there.

Its all a moot point anyways, because mercedes has some interesting hardware coming in the next couple years thats going to steal BMWs self granted title away anyways.

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 07:48 PM

Doesn't ferrari make a four-door? I saw pictures of it on supercars.net and heard about it about a year ago, could just be rumour and photoshop though. And you're right, the New e55 will destroy the M5, but I believe bmw is making a new M5 in a couple years and they'll be back on par with each other.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 07:49 PM

Hey 4wheel, BMW really have barely any rights to Jaun Pablo or Ralf, BMW is just a sponser of the Williams team. They are the Major sponser so they get their name incorperated.

Also you mention that Mercedes is coming out with some crap. Probably the new E55 I assume, well BMW is making a new M5 as well, did you think they were never going to revise it? The Current E39 M5 is practically a 97 model. The new M5 might have a 500hp V-10, so it'll probably be a little faster as well.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 07:51 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
Doesn't ferrari make a four-door? I saw pictures of it on supercars.net and heard about it about a year ago, could just be rumour and photoshop though. And you're right, the New e55 will destroy the M5, but I believe bmw is making a new M5 in a couple years and they'll be back on par with each other.

Yeah actually they tried at a sedan. Its called the 400i. Theres one in Pumphill actually. It was made in the mid 80's. Of course, it failed miserably.

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 07:52 PM

Exactly, that's why I say M5 and e55 will be on par again, E55 has 469 or 479 hp, and can't remember torque but I think it's above 500, the E55 in testing was faster then SL55 so they added some Hp to the SL, I'd expect similar numbers from the two cars. It probably wouldn't be at all difficult to bump of the e55's hp to 500 either.

Is that 4-door at the top of pumphill, I always see an old ferrari sitting in the guys garage when I drive by, looks like the guy is always working on it. The pictures I saw on supercars was actually of a newer looking Ferrari though.

mischief

08-02-2002, 07:54 PM

Originally posted by jonny

They're going to get montoya or schumacher out for a day? Come on.

Hey there's a picture on the BMW driver training website of Schumacher in a M3 convertable pulling donuts. This was taken the week of the air canada grand prix. I guess Schumacher and his team made a surprise visit at one of the classes.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 07:55 PM

Hey, I saw that episode of Motoring 2002! he was talking about how North American drivers go too slow, and as a result aren't paying enough attention.

rage2

08-02-2002, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
What the hell are you talking about? The C32 AMG stock cost $53 000 USD base price, since when did that convert into $65 000 Canadian? Oh thats right, it doesn't. It converts into $84 000 Canadian, and thats without tax. You can get a BMW M3 with options and tax for $83 000. And its way slower than the M3 on a track. Unlike Rice cars BMW makes their cars for more than just a 1/4 mile time.

Have you bought a car before? Learn not to use the US currency exchange, and try hitting the manufacturer's Canadian web sites. Try www.bmw.ca and www.mercedes-benz.ca to dig up your numbers. Did you not know that we buy cars in Canada a lot cheaper than in the US (this is why we sign those non-export agreements when we buy these high end cars).

C32 MSRP - $65,900CDN
SLK32 MSRP - $76,900CDN
M3 MSRP - $73,500CDN

When the M3's first came out, they were selling for about $10K over MSRP. Mercedes dealerships aren't allowed to do that, they lose their dealership (well, license to sell MB's) if they do that.

Before you knock the MB's handling "on the track", try driving one. You'll be surprised at how the MB cars handle. The SLK 32 and C 32 are DEFINATELY not 1/4 mile only cars.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 07:56 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
Exactly, that's why I say M5 and e55 will be on par again, E55 has 469 or 479 hp, and can't remember torque but I think it's above 500, the E55 in testing was faster then SL55 so they added some Hp to the SL, I'd expect similar numbers from the two cars. It probably wouldn't be at all difficult to bump of the e55's hp to 500 either.

Is that 4-door at the top of pumphill, I always see an old ferrari sitting in the guys garage when I drive by, looks like the guy is always working on it. The pictures I saw on supercars was actually of a newer looking Ferrari though.

Yeah, its the one right at the top of the hill.

mischief

08-02-2002, 07:57 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
The Current E39 M5 is practically a 97 model. The new M5 might have a 500hp V-10, so it'll probably be a little faster as well.

Umm the current M5 came out as a 2000 model. The E55 came out as a 1998 model. I think BMW had a couple of years to scope out its competition.

The new E55 is gonna get the SL 55 engine (supercharged 5.5L V8 550 hp).

Angisio

08-02-2002, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by rage2

Have you bought a car before? Learn not to use the US currency exchange, and try hitting the manufacturer's Canadian web sites. Try www.bmw.ca and www.mercedes-benz.ca to dig up your numbers. Did you not know that we buy cars in Canada a lot cheaper than in the US (this is why we sign those non-export agreements when we buy these high end cars).

C32 MSRP - $65,900CDN
SLK32 MSRP - $76,900CDN
M3 MSRP - $73,500CDN

When the M3's first came out, they were selling for about $10K over MSRP. Mercedes dealerships aren't allowed to do that, they lose their dealership (well, license to sell MB's) if they do that.

Before you knock the MB's handling "on the track", try driving one. You'll be surprised at how the MB cars handle. The SLK 32 and C 32 are DEFINATELY not 1/4 mile only cars.

Yeah, read all the posts, moron. We already discussed all this. Actually I think my exact words were, "I was completely wrong". Try to pay attention.

Of course they aren't only 1/4 mile cars, but they don't handle as well as their BMW counterparts. The SLK 32 AMG is definetly faster than the M Roadster, but the C32 AMG is much slower than the M3.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:01 PM

Originally posted by rage2

C32 MSRP - $65,900CDN
SLK32 MSRP - $76,900CDN
M3 MSRP - $73,500CDN

When the M3's first came out, they were selling for about $10K over MSRP. Mercedes dealerships aren't allowed to do that, they lose their dealership (well, license to sell MB's) if they do that.

Before you knock the MB's handling "on the track", try driving one. You'll be surprised at how the MB cars handle. The SLK 32 and C 32 are DEFINATELY not 1/4 mile only cars.

Ya, we kinda went over that before. And i dont think he was knocking MB's handling, it looks like he was saying that becasue you were comparing 0-60 and 1/4 mile times which dont always add up to stellar track times.

mischief

08-02-2002, 08:02 PM

Originally posted by jonny

What makes the CLK so luxurious? Can anyone answer this?

It bigger than the 3 series and the c class. There is an option to get a V8. It shares much of its parts with the E class.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 08:05 PM

Originally posted by mischief

It bigger than the 3 series and the c class. There is an option to get a V8. It shares much of its parts with the E class.

Thats how its more luxurious? What kind of an explanation is that?! A Ford F-150 is much bigger than a 3 series and C class! And if you want a bigger engine you can get one! By your explanation a Ford F-150 must be 100 times more luxurious than the CLK.

rage2

08-02-2002, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
Yeah, read all the posts, moron. We already discussed all this. Actually I think my exact words were, "I was completely wrong". Try to pay attention.

I didn't get to page 2 yet.

Originally posted by Angisio
Of course they aren't only 1/4 mile cars, but they don't handle as well as their BMW counterparts. The SLK 32 AMG is definetly faster than the M Roadster, but the C32 AMG is much slower than the M3.

Much slower? The C32's beating the M3's on the track at both DE's and AutoX's. Check out the C32 forums (http://members5.boardhost.com/MBC32/) there are quite a few owners who track their cars regularly. Oh, I guess you can argue that the C32 driver's better than the M3 drivers.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:06 PM

Originally posted by Angisio
Hey 4wheel, BMW really have barely any rights to Jaun Pablo or Ralf, BMW is just a sponser of the Williams team. They are the Major sponser so they get their name incorperated.

BMW is not just a sponsor, BMW is a a partner in the team. BMW is supplying the motors for the williams team, in addition to desigining and optimizing the motor mounts and location inside the chassis. I'd hardly call that "Just a sponsor".

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 08:07 PM

Actually I don't think it's much bigger then the c class as it's based on the old c class platform, but I could be wrong.
"Of course they aren't only 1/4 mile cars, but they don't handle as well as their BMW counterparts. The SLK 32 AMG is definetly faster than the M Roadster, but the C32 AMG is much slower than the M3." I agree with this except the part saying C32 is much slower, depends on what we're talking about, around a track, true, but it still holds it's own. Straight line not true. Basically everything else there I agree with.

Also I don't know where the SL55 550 hp came from, I believe it's only 500, then again I'm under the understanding that mb usually underrates it's hp #'s. I think the SL600 with have 550Hp but not the sl55. But remember, torque is very important, someone should check the numbers, I believe most mb have more torque then hp though.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by mischief

Umm the current M5 came out as a 2000 model. The E55 came out as a 1998 model. I think BMW had a couple of years to scope out its competition.

I'm pretty sure the current M5 came out in 97 big guy. thats actually a year before the newest E55 came out.

Does big mean luxurious? But the M5 is bigger and faster, so is it more luxurious or less. i dont understand

rage2

08-02-2002, 08:09 PM

Originally posted by jonny
What makes the CLK so luxurious? Can anyone answer this?

Drive a M3, then drive the CLK 55 (I've driven both). You will see what I mean. The M3 is definately more geared towards sportiness, stiff suspension, ass hugging seats, etc. The CLK55 is a dot com techy luxo cruiser with big balls.

mischief

08-02-2002, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Angisio

Of course they aren't only 1/4 mile cars, but they don't handle as well as their BMW counterparts. The SLK 32 AMG is definetly faster than the M Roadster, but the C32 AMG is much slower than the M3.

I don't think that the M3 is much faster than the C 32 AMG. The same can be said for SLK 32 and the M roadster. The 2001 M roadster models got more power than the previous ones (a toned down version of the new M3 motor). When you look at times in car mags, majority of the M and AMG car have comperable performance.

From what I have noticed however, the AMG cars are better daily drivers than the M cars. For example, the M roadsters seats a very uncomfortable. I no big person by all mean ( 5' 11" 160 lbs.) and I barely fit into the seat. The SLK 32 seats are much more comfortable and have gotten alot of praise. The new M3 has a very very stiff suspension. If you drive it down deerfoot, you'll be shaking for weeks after you get out of the car.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by rage2

Much slower? The C32's beating the M3's on the track at both DE's and AutoX's. Check out the C32 forums (http://members5.boardhost.com/MBC32/) there are quite a few owners who track their cars regularly. Oh, I guess you can argue that the C32 driver's better than the M3 drivers.
Or you could argue that autocrosses dont take full advantage of car's abilities...

5.9 R/T

08-02-2002, 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Angisio

I just have a question? How can it you rate something by how it looks more luxurious? Does it not hurt your eyes as much to look at? By the way, luxury is all an opinion, as well as looks, speed is not an opinion, its a fact.

Your answer: Compare any new Rolls Royce to, lets say any new BMW. OBVIOUSLY the Rolls looks much more LUXURIOUS then the BMW because of it's soft lines, gentle curves, and elegant fixtures, while most BMW's have a much more muscular look to them with crisp lines, hard edges, and almost total lack of fixtures. So yes you can tell between sport and luxury. It doesn't help either that BMW has always been known as a sporty car and the MB's as luxury tourers/cruisers. Evidence? BMW offers a manual in almost all their cars while MB offers one in very few. Luxury is not an opinion, a honda civic cloth interior can never be considered more luxurious then a BMW leather (or for that matter cloth) interior.

rage2

08-02-2002, 08:13 PM

Originally posted by jonny
Or you could argue that autocrosses dont take full advantage of car's abilities...

That's why I mentioned Driving Events too (track days). 4wheeldrift's gonna have a field day with that comment, but it's true, AutoX's don't bring out a car's high speed cornering capabilities =).

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by jonny

Or you could argue that autocrosses dont take full advantage of car's abilities...

If you are just trying to measure lateral g's, you can get that figure as easily from an autocross as you can doing laps of a race course.

mischief

08-02-2002, 08:15 PM

Originally posted by jonny

I'm pretty sure the current M5 came out in 97 big guy. thats actually a year before the newest E55 came out.

The M5 came out late 1999 as a 2000 model. I positive about this. I was very interested in buying one. However the waiting list was too long.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:17 PM

Originally posted by rage2

Drive a M3, then drive the CLK 55 (I've driven both). You will see what I mean. The M3 is definately more geared towards sportiness, stiff suspension, ass hugging seats, etc. The CLK55 is a dot com techy luxo cruiser with big balls.

Yes, we know the m3 is sporty, we've established that. Whats the difference between a 328ci and a CLK 430? Softer suspension? I mean, are cadillacs more luxurious than mb because they make their cars for seniors. Very comfy seats and a soft suspension.

Ya, i mean, AutoX is great and all, but youre kidding yourself if you think its the same as a track day.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:19 PM

Originally posted by rage2

That's why I mentioned Driving Events too (track days). 4wheeldrift's gonna have a field day with that comment, but it's true, AutoX's don't bring out a car's high speed cornering capabilities =).
Cornering ability in a tight corner at 60 and cornering ability in an open corner at 160 show you the same thing, just the corners come up a whole hell of a lot faster at 160 :D

mischief

08-02-2002, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by jonny

Yes, we know the m3 is sporty, we've established that. Whats the difference between a 328ci and a CLK 430? Softer suspension? I mean, are cadillacs more luxurious than mb because they make their cars for seniors. Very comfy seats and a soft suspension.

First of all, the 328 is only a six cylinder and the CLK is a V8.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:20 PM

Originally posted by jonny

Ya, i mean, AutoX is great and all, but youre kidding yourself if you think its the same as a track day.

Yeah, its not the same as a track day. It isn't the same 14 corners every time :D

5.9 R/T

08-02-2002, 08:22 PM

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift

If you are just trying to measure lateral g's, you can get that figure as easily from an autocross as you can doing laps of a race course.

Unfortunitly he's right. Since in AC you never get above 3rd gear your only testing the low-mid speed handling cababilites of these cars. Whereas on a 'trackday' you get the low-mid-high speeds and the cars capabilites are further probed. Splitting hairs really tho, not to many people try to test their cars limits at such high speeds.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by rage2

I didn't get to page 2 yet.

Much slower? The C32's beating the M3's on the track at both DE's and AutoX's. Check out the C32 forums (http://members5.boardhost.com/MBC32/) there are quite a few owners who track their cars regularly. Oh, I guess you can argue that the C32 driver's better than the M3 drivers.

http://www.supercars.net/Pic?s=6&y=2001&m=Mercedes-Benz&o=C%2032%20AMG&t=9&msg=0&pn=a.jpg

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:25 PM

Originally posted by 5.9 R/T

Unfortunitly he's right. Since in AC you never get above 3rd gear your only testing the low-mid speed handling cababilites of these cars. Whereas on a 'trackday' you get the low-mid-high speeds and the cars capabilites are further probed. Splitting hairs really tho, not to many people try to test their cars limits at such high speeds.

All depends on what you are driving :D Something like the zola makes every corner into a high speed test :drool:

High speed is purely relative. Most road courses only have a couple of corners that can be taken at really high speed, and those are generally the most gentle of corners. I consider the 100 to 140 range quite quick for a corner, and there's only a couple of corners at race city that are taken outside of that range (at least in my car, YMMV). If I had something faster, it might be a different story :D

Angisio

08-02-2002, 08:27 PM

By the way, for the link that I posted, it was the same driver for both.

Hakkola

08-02-2002, 08:29 PM

Angisio, if you think about it after 8 minutes a 15 second difference isn't very much. Given the choice of a C32 and M3 I agree with you I would rather have an M3, in my opinion the m3 is a better looking and better performing car, I only wonder about reliability and blown engines, still shopping for m3 or c32 I'd take the m3 in a heartbeat.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:31 PM

Originally posted by mischief

First of all, the 328 is only a six cylinder and the CLK is a V8.

Yes and there are V8 Cadillacs. And wouldnt the V8 make a car less luxurious because of the extra noise? I'll take your word on the M5 by the way. its entirely possible youre right on that.

jonny

08-02-2002, 08:32 PM

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift

All depends on what you are driving :D Something like the zola makes every corner into a high speed test :drool:

High speed is purely relative. Most road courses only have a couple of corners that can be taken at really high speed, and those are generally the most gentle of corners. I consider the 100 to 140 range quite quick for a corner, and there's only a couple of corners at race city that are taken outside of that range (at least in my car, YMMV). If I had something faster, it might be a different story :D
AutoX tests the driver, not the car.

Angisio

08-02-2002, 08:32 PM

Here the pic if you're too lazy to check the link.

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:33 PM

Originally posted by Hakkola
Angisio, if you think about it after 8 minutes a 15 second difference isn't very muchOver 22km at high speed 15 seconds is an eternity. If your goal was to buy the faster of the two cars around the nurburgring the choice is obvious, unfortunately we don't all get to drive the nurburgring every day (although if I lived in germany I would sure as hell try :D )

4wheeldrift

08-02-2002, 08:35 PM

Originally posted by jonny

AutoX tests the driver, not the car.

:bullshit: solo 2 tests both, just not at high speed. If autocross only tested the driver you would see subarus spanking corvettes, and that just isn't the case. Yes, it is a lot more driver dependent, but driver isn't 100% of the picture.

Good drivers in good cars will always beat good drivers in bad cars. The question when you get spanked at a solo 2 is, Was that the car or me that just got 0wned? In my case, 90% of the time its me ;)

rage2

08-02-2002, 08:38 PM

Originally posted by jonny
Yes, we know the m3 is sporty, we've established that. Whats the difference between a 328ci and a CLK 430?

I've never driven either, but the CLK55 was a hell of a lot more quieter than the M3. It didn't follow every bump in the road. The auto tranny shifted buttery smooth when driven easy, shifted with authority when driven hard (I've never driven an auto BMW, should've drove bol's 330 when I had the chance). There was more headroom, the seats were more comfortable. It really can't be described with words, drive both, and you'll understand.