| Company Info | Back to new car index |
|
| Related models : derived from C-class | |
| Picture Gallery: C-class Sports Coupe | Related topics: Nil |
| Versions
included
here: General, CLC-class |
|
After
watching BMW 3-series Compact for so many years, Mercedes decided to
build
a hatchback version of the C-class. However, instead of making it a
cheaper
alternative, Mercedes shaped it like a coupe - which means it looks far
more handsome than its rival - and gave it an up-market name: C-class
Sports
Coupe. After seeing it recently in showroom, I swear that the car is
really
attractive to eyes.
What separate it from the sedan ? firstly, most apparent is the 3-door body with 180 mm boot chopped and replaced that by a liftback. Additional strengthening required for the tail’s big opening makes it just 10 to 15kg lighter than the saloon. With rear seats down, it provides a 1100-litre luggage space, exactly the same as the 3 Compact. Despite of 20 mm lower roofline and a fastback tailgate, rear seats are still roomy enough to swallow a couple of 6-footers. Optional electric glass roof eats into headroom but it makes the cabin feels light and airy. The second change is stiffer springs and dampers. The standard setup is roughly between the saloon’s standard setup and sports setup, while the sports setup is another 10% stiffer. This results in a ride slightly firmer than the saloon while providing marginally better control and agility. Considering the high achievement of the saloon, you might think the Sports Coupe must beat the new Compact in handling ? wrong, because the new Compact has been tuned even sportier, overshadowing the Mercedes in every dynamic aspects (including steering feel) while matching its ride. The Sports Coupe is taut and grippy, steers accurately and feels agile, but being a coupe it faces some rivals offering greater feedback and quicker response. It works best at 80% rather than at limit.
While
the saloon and CLK have 3.2 V6 to choose from, Mercedes decided to
limit
the Sports Coupe to four-pots only to avoid internal competition. This
is of course a big mistake, because the V6 would have made the Sports
Coupe
a really desirable car. It beats the Compact easily in beauty contest.
It offers more room. It doesn’t handle as well but still good enough.
What
it desperately need is a decent engine. Listen, Stuttgart, give it a V6
as soon as possible ! |
| The above report was last updated on 19 May 2001. All Rights Reserved. |
C-class Sports Coupe with new enginesC-class Sports Coupe used to be an example of how an excellent car ruined by a poor engine. At its launch, it was offered with either an under-powered 2.0-litre four or a pair of noisy and vibrating supercharged four (2.0 or 2.3 Kompressor). We questioned why Mercedes didn't supply it with a V6. Anyway, in mid-2002, Mercedes finally added the 218hp 3.2 V6 into the sales menu, primarily for the US market. Then, a new four-cylinder model consisting of 4 engines replaced the old four-cylinders.The 4-cylinder series included C180 Kompressor (143hp / 162 lbft), C200 Kompressor (163hp / 177 lbft), C200 CGI (170hp / 184 lbft) and C230 Kompressor (192hp / 192 lbft). The entry-level unit is considerably more torquey than the old C180 Sports Coupe, thanks to supercharger, thus real-world performance suffers little from the old car's sluggish response. In fact, its performance is easily more accessible at low and mid-rev than BMW 318ti Compact, while good refinement should put smile on your face. At the upper end,
the C230
Kompressor loses a bit power and torque from its predecessor, as engine
displacement has been reduced from 2.3 to 1.8 litres. Inevitably,
performance
eased back a little (0-60mph is now 8.1 sec), but the smooth and
quieter
power delivery is more than enough to compensate. In the past, the more
you ask from the engine, the more unhappy it becomes. In contrast, the
new engine adds to driving fun. |
| The above report was last updated on 8 July 2003. All Rights Reserved. |
CLC-class
Although Mercedes has renewed its C-class for one year, it has no intention to renew the 7-year-old C-class Sports Coupe in the same way. What the latter gets is just a facelift accompany with a new name, CLC-class, which is necessary to distinguish with the new C-class. Does this mean Stuttgart plan to discontinue the line in a few years time ? Probably. In order to restore your confidence in the aging model, Mercedes claimed the CLC has got 1100 new parts. Many of them are used at the new nose which resembles the new C-class Avantgarde. Unfortunately the facelift does not make it any prettier. You will find the new nose design too angular to work in harmony with the sleek body. The front overhang is also too long for a compact hatchback. At the other end, the new tailgate has discarded the lower glass section, which results in poorer visibility. More disappointing is the interior, which needs a quality upgrade desperately but unfortunately it remains unchanged. The old car was born at a time when quality was no longer the first priority at Mercedes-Benz. Today you could find a Ford Mondeo or Honda Accord employs classier materials in their cabins. Even though the CLC gets a better steering wheel, seats and some equipment upgrade, it is difficult to persuade people to spend so much money on it. In the mechanical side, the new CLC gets very limited improvements too - the suspensions has sportier setup, while the steering gets a variable-ratio rack for more responsive steer in tight corners. They make the CLC more fun to drive, but the old C-class chassis cannot hide its age and this prevent it from matching its rivals in handling. There are some minor changes to the engines, but none of them are exactly new to Mercedes. Sadly, the range-topping 3.5-liter V6 still produces 272 horsepower, i.e. without the 305hp upgrade that we have found in SLK recently. Overall speaking, the CLC is a facelift that came too late and too little. It is no longer as likable as a few years back. |
||
| The above report was last updated on 2 May 2008. All Rights Reserved. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
var intake, bal shaft. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
||