Comparison tests AMuS - New C200 vs A4 1.8 TFSI vs 320i Automatic vs S60 T4


Comparisons between vehicles, features, performance, pricing, ownership, and real-world differences.

Your choice?

  • Audi A4 TFSI

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • Volvo S60 T4

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    56
Ag fanks Rolf!

Not so expensive - BMW 320d is R 440K and C220 BlueTec is R 459K. Not too much of a difference considering that the Merc will feel substantially more premium to prospective buyers comparing both.
 
Ag fanks Rolf!

Not so expensive - BMW 320d is R 440K and C220 BlueTec is R 459K. Not too much of a difference considering that the Merc will feel substantially more premium to prospective buyers comparing both.

Aggg its mai plesier!!! Lekker like a cracker!!

Ok then its not too bad I haven't looked at the prices of cars lately in SA so didn't check how it compares to the BM or Audi. I would probably go for a C200 or C220 BlueTec, but its got tough rivals as the 320d is a great car, it has a fantastic engine and gearbox. I drove one the last time I was in SA. Now that car is going to probably be upgraded with the new X4 engine with 140kW/400nm very soon and will give the C220 a hiding for sure!!!
 
Quite interestingly when you select the C220 Bluetec on the SA configurator the price automatically jumps to R 474K. Odd.

The C-Class beats the BMW on certain standard features like electrically adjustable seats (limited functionality), Agility Control (driver-selectable damper settings) and Collision Prevent Assist. 7G-Tronic (with steering paddleshift as standard) is cheaper than BMW's Sports Automatic transmission.

It's difficult to see what equipment in total is available as standard (leather for example - isn't) vs optional. I will have to go see a dealer.

As for F30 320d LCI - no doubt it will get the new-generation diesel engine but I wonder if BMW will offer selectable damper settings as standard. Doubt it.

Anyhow, with a few necessity options added my thusly configured C-Class came out at just over 500K. Eish, that's not messing about. Can anyone shed any light on whether Xenons are still offered elsewhere on the C-Class? On both the SA and UK websites the only light upgrade option is to LEDs with Xenons being mentioned nowhere.
 
Not too much of a difference considering that the Merc will feel substantially more premium to prospective buyers comparing both.

I think it's more a matter of taste. Quality is similar if not the same imo. I like the sporty modern approach of the 3er more personally. The C class interior design looks to be driven in, not to drive yourself.

Lekker like a cracker!!

Sig worthy
 
Anyhow, with a few necessity options added my thusly configured C-Class came out at just over 500K. Eish, that's not messing about. Can anyone shed any light on whether Xenons are still offered elsewhere on the C-Class? On both the SA and UK websites the only light upgrade option is to LEDs with Xenons being mentioned nowhere.

The UK site states that 'Headlamps – high performance LED with integral LED daytime running lights' are standard on Sport and AMG Line models.
 
As you can see it's the Merc offering a load more standard kit which more than counters the additional £290 being asked.

No. Standard equipment is no excuse to go compare the cars at different levels. If the BMW doesn't have same standard equipment vs rivals, deduct points for that. But you don't go loading up a fundamentally lower car and then compare it. It is like if you compare a S600 to a loaded 730i cause 760 doesn't have same equipment as S600. It would be a stupid and meaningless comparison. Instead you just deduct points from 760 for not being as well equipped as S600.

Second, two cars are never going to be the same. Take the transmission, BMW offers a world class 8 speed transmission vs the old 7 speed in C. What is that worth in cost to someone? Trying to equalize the cars in equipment is pointless. They will never be.
 
^I'm seriously struggling to see your point here. People buy cars based on lots of things... looks, price, performance, ride, economy, etc but right up there is the standard equipment on offer. A car which comes standard with leather trim is more desirable than another with an extra gear but cloth trim.

In any case the two examples I posted were both 6 sp manuals.
 
My post was a not critique about how people buy cars, it was about this magazine comparison. But I understand why you "seriously struggle".
 
Let's not forget, what comes standard or not is very different from country to country. The pricing might be good in one country and different in another.
 
Let's not forget, what comes standard or not is very different from country to country. The pricing might be good in one country and different in another.

Of course things will differ from country to country but I reckon its important to check kit between models you are making reference to differences it price because more often than not standard kit can justify the price difference.

These brands are direct competitors and its in their best interest to price competitively against each other regardless of markets.
 
Maybe you shouldn't have quoted my post.
I made an original post critiquing this comparison here. Which you quoted here and raised some point about standard equipment to which I replied that it is not how magazine comparisons should be made. At which point (not before) you reply going off on a tangent about how people buy cars. At which point, I clarify my original post was not about how people buy cars, but this magazine comparison.

WTF should I have done different that would have helped you comprehend this better? Please explain to me how I can simplify this even more to your level so you can indeed understand.
 
I made an original post critiquing this comparison here. Which you quoted here and raised some point about standard equipment to which I replied that it is not how magazine comparisons should be made. At which point (not before) you reply going off on a tangent about how people buy cars. At which point, I clarify my original post was not about how people buy cars, but this magazine comparison.

WTF should I have done different that would have helped you comprehend this better? Please explain to me how I can simplify this even more to your level so you can indeed understand.

Well you started with the point about magazine comparison and then moved on to the price of these cars in Germany

Furthermore 320i doesn't even cost as much as a similarly powerful C200 but is as cheap as a C180.

Base German prices as given by respective German MB and BMW websites.

C180 156HP 33,558 Euros
C200 184HP 36,414 Euros
C250 211HP 40,936 Euros

320i 184HP 33,650 Euros
328i 245HP 38,000 Euros (40,150 for auto)

This was what I was referring to, not going off on a tangent as you liked to put it. You simply can't look at base price comparisons unless standard spec is the exact same and I showed UK spec of each as an example.
 
Well you started with the point about magazine comparison and then moved on to the price of these cars in Germany
.

Where did I move on? I showed the prices of these cars in Germany to to make this point about how lopsided the comparison is -
Can someone explain why would a German magazine compare C250 to BMW 320i when a C250 is even more expensive than a 328i in Germany?

To back that argument, I stated the prices in Germany. It is a very simple concept.

Edit: Removed the unnecessary stuff.
 
Of course things will differ from country to country but I reckon its important to check kit between models you are making reference to differences it price because more often than not standard kit can justify the price difference.
Not in the case with 320i vs C250. Like I wrote earlier, a C200 cost the same as 328i in Sweden which mean 320i is a lot cheaper than both 328i and C250 which mean you can add a lot of extra options for 320i until it get the same price you get from base 328i/C250. So yes I'm with Sunny and the others here.

Base price Germany,
C200 - 36,414 euro
C250 - 40.936 euro

320i - 35.800 euro (automatic gearbox)
328i - 40.150 euro (automatic gearbox)


I don't understand why Autozeitung compare 320i with C250 in this test posted here when 320i and C200 is within the same price range..AMus did a better comparison.

Oh well, no need to discuss this further.
 
The situation wasn't ideal, but things happen, as per Just_Me.

In reviews you test what you have. Its not BMW's fault for having all the extra goodies which MB doenst have. And reviews will never be fair, persons behind the tests already have their biases.
Who knows, the person behind the review might prefer MB over BMW , thats why he had excuses.


I must say. People should stop taking the victories literally. Majority of the buyers have already decided which car to buy and doesnt need a test from a paper to decide which car to choose.
 
The situation wasn't ideal, but things happen, as per Just_Me.

LOL. Yes it does indeed happen but we were talking about price/engine. The price difference is too big to ignore when there is another version available.
 
Yip agree with you guys the AZ test was an odd comparison, do think the AMS test was better
 

Trending content


Back
Top