LexFather

Well basically the 328 beat the G35 last year and does it again. The CTS has 304 hp but no one can tell. The C-class seems to have placed last in EVERY comparo, even though its the new model. Takeaways:
BMW-perfect
G35-still rough around the edges, best value
CTS-holds its own in the twisties, manaul sucks
C-class-Small version of the ES 350

Lincoln not considered, no manual. IS 250 seen as too slow, not included.

Scary then, the 335 would DESTROY them in a comparo.

LexFather

I hate C&D and I only subscribe b/c I got a year for $2. They had a GREAT article on the IS-F and the car was not even mentioned on the front page.

They mentioned tons of other car though, and even had a small pic of the new Hyundai coupe.

I use C&D to start the fireplace.......

Tekknikal

cant wait till the 328 beats the gt-r and lf-a

LexFather

Other takeaways.
They simply LOVE BMWs WITHOUT I(Cannot)-Drive. Another reason the 328 finished so high. THey say it drives better than many sport coupes. The 3 sedan looks good to me.
The G35 was loaded to the tilt for 38k, NAV, Hardrive, everything. IMO, it looked by far the worst, like a jellybean with chrome.
The CTS interior was nice with the silver trim. They got the CTS ordered exactly how they wanted, basically the sportiest trim level outside the V. Manual and 304hp is wasted.
C 300, interior is smaller than the Civic. Looks nice, though with this competition around, not sure why it exists.

gengar

What was so bad about the C-class? I heard they upgraded the interior to better compete with the IS luxury and also paid attention to quality/reliability issues. Those were my main complaints with the W203, and to some extent, the W202 (at least the quality/reliability part).

DASHOCKER

iTrader: (2)

Car & Driver could not be more precise with their assessment of these vehicles. A balance between performance & driving dynamics are what most auto enthusiasts crave. Not taking anything away from the other cars ( I like them), but the winner of the bunch (328) exhibits a balance superb driving enjoyment due to its amazing chassis and feedback more so than the others. You can put 400hp in a car, but that will not make said car a complete package..

MoLexus

ROFL........

MoLexus

The C300 is not bad at all, I have driven it three times already and can't find a damn thing wrong other than the back legroom. Majority of the time C&D test a Mercedes they never throw in a few good words. New name for C&D is "BC&D" Biased Car and Driver.

RON430

I just went to the SF auto show and did some very quick comparisons between Lexus, BMW, Audi, and MB. I have to agree with CD about MB interiors, they are off my list now for a prospective buy. If the latest C is improved, I hate to think what the last generation was like. The S is not quite competitive IMO and the E is downright awful. Obviously my wife and I did not drive them at the show, we have previously for most of the models we are interested in, but being able to get in and out of the equivalent models in a matter of minutes was illuminating. All the high end cars were in one hall with the exception of Cadillac and Jag which were in different halls. I can't come close to justifying MBs price premium after this simple comparison.

RON430

It is also worth noting that they hated the manual transmission in the CTS they tested. They also remarked that the CTS with the stick was slower than the pre production CTS they had that they justified their opinion, including making it one of the ten best of the year, upon. Not to detract from the CTS, it is the best US car in a while, but they aren't there yet when compared heads up to the competition. At least they didn't finish last where the US cars typically are.

RON430

One point about I-drive, and I can't believe I am saying this, but the drive-by auto enthusiast who spends anywhere from two minutes to two weeks in a car, will hate I-drive because you can't just hop in and drive. If you are the kind of person to lay out money for the thing and were going to spend years with the car, it doesn't take that long to get the basics down. I still don't like it but I have to point that out after spending several weeks with a 7 it isn't quite like being waterboarded every day.

As long as you bring it up, I am baffled by the trend in luxury cars. As CD pointed out, the Civic sedan has more room than the C. After car to car interior comparing at the SF auto show, it is amazing. Less expensive cars are growing larger while the luxury cars seem to be getting more cramped. My second GS is about as roomy as the SWB LS, 7, S, and A8 in the front. I really don't care about the LWB versions as they only increase room in the back seat, hard to drive from back there. The GS, 5, E, and A6 are noticeably smaller to my wife and I than our second gen GS's. And as for the Jag, you couldn't sit in it but the press reports, mainly from the highly biased British press about how roomy it is seem to me to be pure balderdash. I couldn't see inside the trunk, the only place where the new models bash the second gen GS, but it looks to be barely competitive for interior size. And the new mileage figures lead me to believe that everything I am interested in, with the exception of the E Bluetec and maybe the GSh, will be in the high teens to maybe 20 or 22 miles per gallon overall. Hard to see seven years of automotive advance over my 2k1 GS430 which has the same mileage and is roomier to boot. About the only place the new models get it right is the trunk which are pretty much better than the second gen GS.

gengar

You don't even want to know. My friend's sister had a W203 C240, and not only is the interior cheap with plastics everywhere, but it was cheaply made too. Two of the door handles broke (which apparently is a common problem with the C-class from that gen).

I haven't gotten a chance to see the updated interior - I'd just heard it had improved. I guess I really wouldn't be surprised if it hadn't.

cal_alum98

I thought it was just me when I got into the C-class, closed the door, and thought "My God, it's even more cramped than the IS." Overall, the C interior was unimpressive. Didn't get to drive it though, as I was at the SF auto show.

As for the 328, I had a lot of fun driving it around while the 335 was in for repairs. The transmission was a lot smoother and it had decent acceleration, though I missed the "pushed back into the seat" feeling when stomping on the gas pedal that I get with the 335.

AzNMpower

The C class has less room than a Civic? Geez........and I already thought headroom (esp. in the rear) was scarce in the latter.

My parents have a 325i sport.........dynamically there's little to criticize about it. I want to complain about Active Steering, but it works in the bends. Throttle response could be sharper but Valvetronic gives great fuel consumption. The only real issue I have is the engine note is too muted.

GFerg

Not surprised the Civic is larger. The sedan IMO looks and feels HUGE compared to other cars in the same class.

I like the new C-class....somewhat. Outside of its cheap interior materials, I think its a good car with a great exterior design (IMO). Its Command rotary **** is very easy to get used to and the screen is at a great eye level position. Its just that even the Sport model really isnt that sporty except for its MASSIVE stopping power. I really think the 2IS drives better than the C-class. The C being a great alternative to the ES350. But as this test points out, I really couldnt find a compelling reason to buy it over other cars in its class.

As for the other three, pretty much a textbook ranking from C&D.