Well the 2004 compressor there are none of those left on the road compared to the other vehicle because of quality and craftsmanship issues. Less than 2% of all the sales have survived to this point. Now the C-Class was a different ball game.
@@interiorcarstarts .... All the versions of Mercedes vehicles that were compressor or have a k in the lettering sequence are entry level or budget style so they have cut corner material and craftsmanship involved to keep costs low Mercedes now says it was a mistake that they started 26 years ago.
I have the 2004 mercedes c230 kompressor se avant-garde. It was given to me after the timing chain failed. (Common problem with these engines) I have it running again now, and to be honest, to drive, they are a nice car. They are quite nippy and do sound sweet enough, and I can't complain about the gearbox. The car stood for 13 months as I did the car on a weekend. Once fired up and let run for a while, it didn't even have a rough gear change, to my surprise. There are loads of common fualts that could have been solved if they didn't cut costs, and it would have been a really good car overall. But this is the cause when you let the finance department make the budget on a so-called luxury car. Considering the car was based of the s class it is a disappointment
I don't believe this is completely accurate imho. A stock c320 is faster than a stock 1.8 c230k. Of course with modifications a c230k could get to similar levels or slightly faster than a stock c320. Though from factory the c320 has more torque and +29bhp. Despite the fact it is heavier, it has an extra 1.4l of displacement over the 1.8 and 2 extra cylinders, the supercharger does not make up for all of that. Don't get me wrong the c230k is responsive and very nippy so the performance isn't far off at all, it's still a quick car but the c320 is a few paces faster.
I’m actually not sure if the c230 was modified. It’s possible that it is the 2.3L version with more power and torque (not as much power as the v6) so maybe that’s why? Also road conditions is a big factor for these types of accelerations so the c320 could’ve been in worse road conditions.
The c230 engine is a m271 engine code also used in the mercedes evo back in the late 90s the same engine had being used and tuned for the early 2000s f3 racing, that's why the car is so nippy the only difference was it was bored out to a 2.0 litre. Yes, the c320 has more pistons and a bigger litre, but it doesn't rev as high, plus the engine will be heavier. It only revs to 5500 just before recline where the c230 will rev to 7000, which gives is the edge in each gear. Plus, the c230 gearbox seems to me more responsive and has a quicker change, and that is without modifications. Which I must admit I do find strange that the c230 is quicker bit it also depends on the conditions each car was driven in the video one might be we and the other dry what tyres ect.
From my understanding the C230k achieves peak power @5800rpm and the C320 @5700rpm which is a minor difference, again with the 3.2 achieving higher values in torque and bhp. I do also think the C320 has better pull off the line, sometimes even too much in coupe form as it will often wheel spin. In terms of the gearbox I also cannot see how the C230k would shift any differently to the rest of the standard w203 line, they're all using the exact same transmission unless it is any V6 engine after 2005 which used the 7 speed. Of course amg cars use amg speed shift so they use the 5 speed but shift faster than cars with a standard trans. I don't think the c230k (at least one that's automatic) will willingly rev to 7000rpm. The autobox kicks in, even in manual mode, to prevent revving the engine to the maximum and causing damage. In my experience and watching various UA-cam examples, all Autos seem to peak at the same amount which is perhaps around 6200rpm, I haven't seen one that revs to the full range, maybe a manual could though. I also feel like to me, that the C320 has more pull at higher speeds and in the upper rev limits the engine feels less strained. The 320 definately feels a bit less nimble and perhaps doesn't handle quite as well due to the increased weight. Unless the two cars were side by side and had a race then there's no way of telling why the c230k seemed faster in this comparison but on paper the c320 is faster. Not necessarily by crazy amounts but it still is.
The C230k is most likely the 2.3 version of the M111k engine.
now do a 2002 C230 with the iron block....
Well the 2004 compressor there are none of those left on the road compared to the other vehicle because of quality and craftsmanship issues. Less than 2% of all the sales have survived to this point. Now the C-Class was a different ball game.
Wow i didn’t know that
@@interiorcarstarts .... All the versions of Mercedes vehicles that were compressor or have a k in the lettering sequence are entry level or budget style so they have cut corner material and craftsmanship involved to keep costs low Mercedes now says it was a mistake that they started 26 years ago.
I have the 2004 mercedes c230 kompressor se avant-garde. It was given to me after the timing chain failed. (Common problem with these engines) I have it running again now, and to be honest, to drive, they are a nice car. They are quite nippy and do sound sweet enough, and I can't complain about the gearbox. The car stood for 13 months as I did the car on a weekend. Once fired up and let run for a while, it didn't even have a rough gear change, to my surprise. There are loads of common fualts that could have been solved if they didn't cut costs, and it would have been a really good car overall. But this is the cause when you let the finance department make the budget on a so-called luxury car. Considering the car was based of the s class it is a disappointment
@@declancarter5384 I don’t have mine anymore…….
Feels good to own one that is in 100% condition
I don't believe this is completely accurate imho. A stock c320 is faster than a stock 1.8 c230k. Of course with modifications a c230k could get to similar levels or slightly faster than a stock c320. Though from factory the c320 has more torque and +29bhp. Despite the fact it is heavier, it has an extra 1.4l of displacement over the 1.8 and 2 extra cylinders, the supercharger does not make up for all of that. Don't get me wrong the c230k is responsive and very nippy so the performance isn't far off at all, it's still a quick car but the c320 is a few paces faster.
I’m actually not sure if the c230 was modified. It’s possible that it is the 2.3L version with more power and torque (not as much power as the v6) so maybe that’s why? Also road conditions is a big factor for these types of accelerations so the c320 could’ve been in worse road conditions.
You have a good point though
And I did guess on the engine so that would be my bad if it actually had the 2.3
The c230 engine is a m271 engine code also used in the mercedes evo back in the late 90s the same engine had being used and tuned for the early 2000s f3 racing, that's why the car is so nippy the only difference was it was bored out to a 2.0 litre. Yes, the c320 has more pistons and a bigger litre, but it doesn't rev as high, plus the engine will be heavier. It only revs to 5500 just before recline where the c230 will rev to 7000, which gives is the edge in each gear. Plus, the c230 gearbox seems to me more responsive and has a quicker change, and that is without modifications. Which I must admit I do find strange that the c230 is quicker bit it also depends on the conditions each car was driven in the video one might be we and the other dry what tyres ect.
From my understanding the C230k achieves peak power @5800rpm and the C320 @5700rpm which is a minor difference, again with the 3.2 achieving higher values in torque and bhp. I do also think the C320 has better pull off the line, sometimes even too much in coupe form as it will often wheel spin. In terms of the gearbox I also cannot see how the C230k would shift any differently to the rest of the standard w203 line, they're all using the exact same transmission unless it is any V6 engine after 2005 which used the 7 speed. Of course amg cars use amg speed shift so they use the 5 speed but shift faster than cars with a standard trans. I don't think the c230k (at least one that's automatic) will willingly rev to 7000rpm. The autobox kicks in, even in manual mode, to prevent revving the engine to the maximum and causing damage. In my experience and watching various UA-cam examples, all Autos seem to peak at the same amount which is perhaps around 6200rpm, I haven't seen one that revs to the full range, maybe a manual could though. I also feel like to me, that the C320 has more pull at higher speeds and in the upper rev limits the engine feels less strained. The 320 definately feels a bit less nimble and perhaps doesn't handle quite as well due to the increased weight. Unless the two cars were side by side and had a race then there's no way of telling why the c230k seemed faster in this comparison but on paper the c320 is faster. Not necessarily by crazy amounts but it still is.