2003 Mercedes Benz CLK

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Angisio


Saying the name of the magazine and the month. Then we could find it on the internet, and see if you're lying or not.

I'd lay odds you could hunt down 10 different magazines and get 10 different answers.

[Angisio]

Originally posted by 4wheeldrift
I'd lay odds you could hunt down 10 different magazines and get 10 different answers.

Well so far all the answers point to the M3 being better.

[4wheeldrift]

Originally posted by Angisio


Well so far all the answers point to the M3 being better.

Which answer would that be? The one derived from 3 hours of bench racing and arguing? Drive the damn cars yourself and find out which one you like more. You seem to have at least a semi-functional brain, use it and make up your mind for yourself. What if you buy the M3 without driving the other car and hate it, but bought it anyway because "all the answers point to the M3 being better"? Are you going to come back here and freak out because we "lied" or something?

[gpomp]

Originally posted by Angisio


Saying the name of the magazine and the month. Then we could find it on the internet, and see if you're lying or not.

If I find it, will you shut up?

[gpomp]

Warming up the scanner...

[Fat Dave]

Originally posted by Angisio


Saying the name of the magazine and the month. Then we could find it on the internet, and see if you're lying or not.

Why don't you do a search yourself of all the M3 comparisons - see which car it's most commonly reviewed against.

Autoweek, May 2001
Autoworld, August 2000
CAR magazine, May 2001

If that's not enough, well, I barely care...

Autoracing1 compares the CLK55 to the M5 in December 2000, strangely. Case in point that comparo's aren't often of equals.

Jonny, the review you're quoting from doesn't even compare the new CLK, it's a comparison of the old model against the brand new (at the time) M3. Just an FYI... (Car and Driver, June 2001)

[gpomp]

.

[gpomp]

Page 2.

[gpomp]

Page 3.

[jonny]

Originally posted by Fat Dave


Why don't you pull your thumb out of wherever you store it and do a search yourself of all the M3 comparisons - see which car it's most commonly reviewed against.

Autoweek, May 2001
Autoworld, August 2000
CAR magazine, May 2001

If that's not enough, well, I barely care...

Autoracing1 compares the CLK55 to the M5 in December 2000, strangely. Case in point that comparo's aren't often of equals.

Jonny, the review you're quoting from doesn't even compare the new CLK, it's a comparison of the old model against the brand new (at the time) M3. Just an FYI... (Car and Driver, June 2001)

The new CLK55 isnt even out yet. what did you think i was comparing it to? I mean seriously, did you think i was just comparing it to some prototype? These two cars are about as close as you can get in almost every comparision so why wouldnt you compare them? You asked why these two cars would be compared they're so different. Obviously they arent, and i proved it. Sometimes magazines dont compare from the same class, i agree, but this is as close as youre gonna get. These two cars are completely comparible, and in my opinion the M3 outclasses the CLK which is what this whole thread started as. Man, i cant believe how dense you must be, seriously, its not like i didnt explain it well. You just dont get it

[gpomp]

Page 4.

[gpomp]

Page 5.

[Fat Dave]

Originally posted by Angisio


Well so far all the answers point to the M3 being better.

Faster than the old CLK55 and the C32 does not mean "better". "Better" is a term that each driver must determine for themselves based upon their own criteria. If your criteria are "faster and cheaper" and you're comparing it to the old CLK55, then you could say it's better. If you use those same criteria and compare it to the corvette Z06, then it's definitely not better.

Do "all the answers" include the 66+ blown engines? And those are just the one's we know of.

[Angisio]

So what did that prove? I have that magazine at my house, I new the results. The M3 won.

[Fat Dave]

Originally posted by jonny
...These two cars are about as close as you can get in almost every comparision so why wouldnt you compare them? You asked why these two cars would be compared they're so different. Obviously they arent, and i proved it. Sometimes magazines dont compare from the same class, i agree, but this is as close as youre gonna get...

So the myriad other magazines that compared the C32 to the M3 must be super-stupid, and only Car and Driver got it right? All of the other publications must feel ridiculous for feeling that a sports coupe derived from a sports sedan would be compared to a sports sedan, when in effect it should be compared to a GT car. There isn't really a direct comparison in the BMW lineup for the CLK. You'll also see many reviews that include the Audi (OH MY GOD ANOTHER FOUR DOOR), since it is ALSO a sports sedan.

You also conveniently forgot that this thread is about the 2003 CLK in your comparo, so quoting an article stating that the old model is similar in some respects to the M3 is completely irrelevant.

I'll just ignore the fact that you still can't tell a GT car from a sports coupe...

That's two geniuses now I have to bow down to.

[Ben]

Originally posted by Angisio
So what did that prove? I have that magazine at my house, I new the results. The M3 won.

Dude, dont even try to sound like you know what you are talking about. There is so much more to cars than what ever your dainty fingers can pull out of a magazine...

In THAT PARTICULAR review the BMW came out as the preferred by that Publisher...but that does not say jack shit about the publics consensus nore does it say jack shit about driver consensus over a large group...

I love BMW's, everyone knows that and I like mercedes, everyone knows that as well, so its a matter of what car suits YOUR style.

They are both well engineered vehicles and magazines dont mean shit when your the one driving it...we'll see what they have to say a few years from now after people have actually had a chance to drive them for themselves...

[jonny]

Originally posted by Fat Dave


So the myriad other magazines that compared the C32 to the M3 must be super-stupid, and only Car and Driver got it right? All of the other publications must feel ridiculous for feeling that a sports coupe derived from a sports sedan would be compared to a sports sedan, when in effect it should be compared to a GT car. There isn't really a direct comparison in the BMW lineup for the CLK. You'll also see many reviews that include the Audi (OH MY GOD ANOTHER FOUR DOOR), since it is ALSO a sports sedan.

You also conveniently forgot that this thread is about the 2003 CLK in your comparo, so quoting an article stating that the old model is similar in some respects to the M3 is completely irrelevant.

I'll just ignore the fact that you still can't tell a GT car from a sports coupe...

That's two geniuses now I have to bow down to.

Wow youre right just because one comparison happens in majority means the other comparison is impossible. I mean, improbable really. It would never happen. And, i mean, the majority is ALWAYS right, thats why democracy works SO well. Good thinking. Bravo fats!

[jonny]

Originally posted by Benny



Dude, dont even try to sound like you know what you are talking about. There is so much more to cars than what ever your dainty fingers can pull out of a magazine...

In THAT PARTICULAR review the BMW came out as the preferred by that Publisher...but that does not say jack shit about the publics consensus nore does it say jack shit about driver consensus over a large group...

I love BMW's, everyone knows that and I like mercedes, everyone knows that as well, so its a matter of what car suits YOUR style.

They are both well engineered vehicles and magazines dont mean shit when your the one driving it...we'll see what they have to say a few years from now after people have actually had a chance to drive them for themselves...

thanks for the valuble cotribution to the conversation. Youre hard work will be noted

[Fat Dave]

Originally posted by jonny


Wow youre right just because one comparison happens in majority means the other comparison is impossible. I mean, improbable really. It would never happen. And, i mean, the majority is ALWAYS right, thats why democracy works SO well. Good thinking. Bravo fats!

Thank you for finally realizing that the comparison to the CLK was not the best comparison, since buyers of the CLK are looking for different things than buyers of the M3.

And thank you for the "bravo". Much appreciated.

[jonny]

Originally posted by Fat Dave


Thank you for finally realizing that the comparison to the CLK was not the best comparison, since buyers of the CLK are looking for different things than buyers of the M3.

And thank you for the "bravo". Much appreciated.

Thanks for realizing democracy ALWAYS works!
And dont worry your pretty head, no one in the world will ever compare the two again, because its such a terrible idea to compare such similar cars.