Mercedes-Benz Forum banner
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
G

·
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
By no strech of the imagination can you compair a CLK 55 with the M3. First of all the prices of a 55 is 20k more, and its in a different class of its own. Compare the M3 to the c32 thats coming out. Who cares if the M3 is faster then the clk Its not like they know how to drive one.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #3 ·
Just read automobile mag. S4, M3, AMG 55 comparison.

No car is better than the other really.<br> just depends on your needs and desires.<br>
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #5 ·
Re: They didn't test a 55...C32

n the benz. I dont know how i wound up with a 430 actually.<br> *scratch*<br>
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
saf

Its funny how safrole pops his little head up anytime someone mentions the M3 negatively. <br> <br> The stick comment is dumb.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
Hmmm.... Let's see...

My guess is because they have similar size, weight, interior room, performance, and body styles. Except for the price, they are very good for comparative purposes.<br> <br> I don't understand why everybody thinks the C32 is the M3's true competition. When BMW introduces an M3 sedan, it will be. At least the M3 and CLK55 fit in the same category of 'coupe.' The CLK nothing more than the coupe version of the W202 C-class, so it's just as valid of a comparison as the E36 M3 Sedan was to the W202 C43. It just happens that the CLK55 is priced much higher.<br>
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #10 ·
SLK

A guess a fair comparison for the SLK would be against a honda elite 80 scooter and a lawn mower since they are all similar in size
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #12 ·
So is a Civic Si and 325Ci comparable?

Heck, they've got 2 doors and similar performance, right? What is soooo hard to understand. The CLK55 has a 5.5L V8 and the M3 has a 3.2L I6...the CLK has an auto tranny and the M3 does not...the CLK was built for daily drivability/luxury and the M3 was built to be a daily driver/track car...the CLK has a price tag of over $70K and the M3 has a price tag of $50K...how can you compare such distinctly different cars? Doesn't competition mean that someone can take a certain budget and choose from several different cars? Obviously someone with a $50K budget cannot go and purchase a CLK55, therefore labeling it as 'competition' is absolutely ridiculous. Again, Car & Driver never ceases to amaze me with their stupidity. They along with Motor Trend should be put on the same rack as the National Enquirer and other BS tabloids...absolute junk. Automobile had it right when they compared the S4, C32 and M3.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #13 ·
Nice try, again.

First of all, there's a huge weight difference between a Civic and 325. Second, there's a huge difference in standard and optional features. Third, the Civic Si isn't even in production right now and when the '02 comes out it will be hatchback only.<br> <br> Sorry, but the M3 and CLK55 are not excluded from comparison just because one costs more and one has a manual and the other an automatic.<br> <br> Of course someone with a $50K budget could not afford a CLK55, but on the other hand, someone with a $70K budget could save $20K and buy the M3 _IF_ he saw that it met his purchase criteria.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #14 ·
Logic

By that same logic then someone with $300,000 could buy a new Ferrari Modena or save $240,000 (sorry M3s are being jacked uo to $60k by dealers so they are not all that cheap) and get an M3 if it met their criteria. Now wait, you could save $280,000 and buy a Civic SI or save $299,000 and buy a lawnmower...
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Putting your "logic" into practice...

So weight makes a car a direct competitor? I thought your argument was about performance? The Si and 325 are similiar in performance, who cares about the weight. Taking weight as the only determinant in making two cars competitors means that the S500 and M5 are competitors.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #17 ·
You guys are kidding yourselves...

if you think that the CLK55 is somehow above the class of the M3 just because it costs more. You're paying for exclusivity and nothing more. I'm not saying that exclusivity is not worth the extra money, but it doesn't somehow magically make the car outclass everything cheaper.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #18 ·
Re: Logic

I'm talking about what meets the criteria of buyers of either car, and you know that a hell-of-alot of CLK55 buyers shop the M3 and vice versa. Some switch and some don't.<br> <br> By your 'logic,' the SLK32 AMG would not be competition for the M Roadster because the SLK32 will cost $12,000 more.
 
G

·
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
Whos kidding who?

I am not saying that at all. I consider the 3 series to be a baby bmw for those who can't afford a real one (5 or 7 series), way too common and a car for teenagers, 20 somethings and asians who want to trick out a car. I think the CLK55 is a better car in countless ways and don't consider price to be the reason that it is better. <br> <br> What I am saying is that your logic is flawed.
 
1 - 20 of 21 Posts
Top