When you think about it, the new C-class and the RL aren't that different:

- They're both in the low-to-mid $40's actual selling price
- They're not that different in interior dimensions or trunk space
- They both come equipped similarly (if you option up the C)
- They both have some cache (although naysayers will say the RL doesn't )
- They both have some sporting blood and some luxury blood in them
- They're both nice cars and capable cars

Of course, the RL trumps the C in that it has SH-AWD, it comes more fully optioned out of the box, and it can be had to less, but I know I could see myself in a C-class under the right circumstances.

Anyway, I went to the "C Drive" this morning (the M-B driving event to introduce the new '08 C-class), and it was interesting to compare it to my RL. Here's some things I noted for anyone who cares:

1. The RL just seems "warmer" and cozier inside to me. M-B can't get away from that somewhat terse German styling, even though this is probably the best interior I've seen in a Mercedes.

2. The RL feels bigger than the difference in dimensions would suggest. That's partly because the base of the C's windshield is so close to the driver. That little shalllow dashboard top and lower cowl makes it feel kinda like it's closing in on you ... VERY much like my IS350 felt. And getting into the back seat is just like my buddy's E320 was - no foot room at the B-pillar area. I had to turn my 10-1/2's in an unnatural way to squeeze them in.

3. The RL just feels like "more car" to me. That's partly because it's 500 lbs. heavier, and partly just because it IS a little bigger. Point is, no matter how much bigger the C has grown, it still feels small compared even to the RL, which is no gigantomobile itself.

On the flipside, I was impressed with the following:

1. The C handles very nicely, has great steering feel, and good acceleration. I have to say even the lowly 300 scooted out FAR better than I would have expected for 228 hp, thanks in part to the 7spd auto trans. The 350 (with 268 hp) felt downright quick.

2. The 350 Sport (with the great grille) rode unexpectedly rough. We were on some cratered city streets at times, and it was slinging us around pretty energetically. Sharp bumps were returning some real jolts. That hurt my feelings, because I favored the Sport for its grille and aero bodywork. The Luxury model rode much better, without seeming to give up much in the handling department.

Interesting point, though - There is a grille kit available that transplants the big star grile from the Sport onto the Luxury model, so you can still have that great front end AND get a good ride.

3. Seat comfort was excellent for the fairly short time we spent in the cars. Interior quality seemed better than usual for M-B, with the exception of the "wood" trim on the Luxury model ... it seemed for all the world like plastic to me, and that's very un-Mercedes-like.

4. The Nav is apparently much improved over previous M-B versions. I set a destination clear over in Florida just for kicks, and it calculated it in seconds. I also tried the voice recognition, and it was virtually flawless. BTW, it doesn't require you to push a button for each command entry ... after the initial command, all you do is answer the prompts by speaking. On top of that, it shows on-screen what the available responses are to a given prompt. That's kinda nice, since VR commands vary from make to make.

On the down side, the display is still that almost monochrome style M-B seems to like - a light blue background with grey streets. Harder to discern at a glance than our color scheme.

Also, the voice lady is kinda stern-sounding. I think I'd name her "Hilda" if I owned one of these cars. I figure she wears leather jackboots and carries a whip.

I don't know about the POI situation, nor how well the Nav handles other normal chores, but it seemed to have a quick response time and was accurate. Nav is very important to me, so I was paying attention to that.

In that vein, Bluetooth is now standard on all C-classes.

5. The sound system is a 450-watt, 12-speaker affair and sounded good to me. I don't like that M-B is paired up with Sirius for satellite radio, but if the two providers ever finish merging, that won't matter much.

___________________________________________

If you get the chance to drive a new C-class, it's worth the effort. It's not the little compact car it used to be, and it has a lot going for it. unfortunately, it also has M-B pricing going for it, so I don't think it's a screamin' deal by any means.

Would I consider one? Yeah, given a good deal and a grille change-out, I might take a Luxury model. Too bad it doesn't come with the 350's engine, though.

.
.

 

"We promised you a Mercedes-Benz". What a strong statement in their ads.

Sounds like Mercedes has a winner. I'd compare it more with the TL, myself, but can understand why one might compare at the price level.

 

IMHO, I simply wouldn't cross shop the two. I understand they may be of somewhat similar size and that the price difference is not huge, but the RL is a different class of car.

All luxury cars are starting to be contented similarly and even the entry models have features of more expensive models now. Further, with each new iteration, the entry luxury segment is growing more and more in size; kind of a mixed blessing in my opinion. The lines between each segment are really starting to blur, and I'm hoping we'll see some sort of "reformation" soon that will provide clear differentiation.

With that said, there is still a clear line between these various models. The quality in materials is still very much different (it has to be) between each segment, and the design philosophy is very much different. Where the C-class is more of a trendy, sporty design, the E-class is far more elegant and "cottling", though with a bit of sport (much like the RL). Interior space is practically a dead ringer, and there is an overall more "airy" feel. It's because of this, that I don't find the C-class very comparable to the RL.

But again, I understand your point. Thanks for the great comparison. It's interesting to see the movement made in each segment. Before you know it, the C-class will be the size of an S with just as many gadgets and gizmos; which I'm not sure is a good thing.

 

LOL

Great review.

I think C-class is good and it looks great from the front and the side. But the rear looks just ugly imo. That's a big turn-off for me. I think among the Germans, bimmer wins that segment...especially if you get the 335i. But in terms of design, nothing comes close to the new A4 (A5 also looks gorgeous).

But I'll take the IS350 out of all the cars in that compact luxury sedan segment.

 

Awd?

Ll

 

Agreed on the TL comparison, except for the price point and the luxury-car pretensions. Whereas the TL seems to be targeting the hip-hop generation, the C-class is trying to be a small S-class with attitude. IOW, I think it's luxury first with the C and sport first with the TL.

And, yes, we heard the "After all, we promised you a Mercedes" theme several times during the event. I personally think it's a brilliant advertising slogan. A little brash, but they look you right in the eye when they say it. (Come on, Acura, come up with something like that for YOUR ads!)

.
.

 

Agree. Except that I don't know if it's bad that the models farther down the lineup are getting some good equipment - at least as options. Technology is getting cheaper, and to withhold it from lower-rung models just to push people up to more expensive cars kinda sucks.

.
.

 

Not available on the C.

.
.

 

I agree on the tails. They just look a little "Sentra" for me. Looks better on dark-colored cars, but still a little cheesy for my tastes.

As a former owner of an IS350, I can't agree with your last statement, though!

.
.

 

I have seen a lot of new "C" class sedans on the road in NJ. The sport version looks nice but I must agree that the rear of the car is totally ugly.

Benz has a big winner on their hands, since they are showing ads in NY/NJ that it starts at $31,970 or something. I am sure that only comes equipped with seats, steering wheel and windshield.

I hope the new TL design smokes this car inside and out...but we will have to wait...

 

I have not driven a new C but I have driven several cars with the 7 speed, both 6's & 8's. That is a sweet tranny that is definitely superior to the acura unit. Acura will need to upgrade trannys on the next gen.

 

I totally agree. While the Acura 5spd AT is a very capable unit, and gearing is optimal for economy, 6 gears is just about perfect for an AT IMO. That allows the ratios between 1st and 6th to be spread out so there's always the right gear available for any situation, with no big gaps in between.

Get more than 6 speeds, though, and the transmission seems to be "hunting" for the right gear too much, and there's too much downshifting going on. The M-B 7-spd is slick, but I still think it's one gear too many. The Lexus 8-spd is absolutely excessive, and I don't think it adds anything to the car's driveability.

Just my opinion.

.
.

 

Mike_TX - great analysis of both cars.

FWIW, I am the former owner of an 1998 E320 and have had a 2006 RL for about a year. Everytime I dropped my MB off for service I absolutely hated the C-class loaners they provided. Under powered, horrible driver ergonomics, handled like a squirrel.......I could go on. My former boss bought a 2005 C and I think she regretted it the first time she sat in my 1998 E320 (w/ 130K miles!).

I'm sure MB will sell a ton of the new Cs as they look nice and MB does alot of things right. Unfortunately for Acura I'm guessing alot of the C buyers primarly compare to 3-BMWs, A4s, etc. Sad.

 

It's called 4matic and yes, it's available, though not with the large or supersized engines.

 

My mistake. I didn't see anything about it on the'08's and assumed it wasn't available yet.

.
.

 

It is available on the C300.

Comparing the C to the RL is not the same. Maybe price wise but not really anyway else. It does have just as good as a stereo, nav, and safety technology. It has better multimedia options than the RL with the PC card interface and iPod cable, but it ain't the same car. It needs more horsepower because at 268 it doesn't keep up with the competition. It does have a 7 speed automatic, which is nice.

 

The new C class does have the option for a 300+ HP engine. I recently drove the C class at a MB drive event. I was not told which engine was in my test model. I still preferred the RL. The engine was not as refined as the RL and was more noisy at WOT. You seemingly sit very low in the c, and I had the feeling I was sitting in my 06 Miata. In a luxury car, I prefer a more command view of the road. While the sound of the C class audio system was on par or better than the RL, I still enjoy the DVD- A sound in the RL. The new C class is leaning much more sport then Luxury. Certainly is was a LOT better then my TSX. For the interior appearance the nod goes to the RL. While the new C class is very nice car, there is STILL the issue of reliability with MB. Keep in mind all this is nit picking. As I said many time, once you test drive the upscale cars, they are very close and it all come down to personal preference. They are all good in their own right. If I am going to gamble with Reliability issues, then my heart is with the new Caddy CTS.

 

My mistake the CL does not have a 300hp option. There are two 200+ engine options.

 

The CL or the C Class? The C Class is 228hp or 268hp with a 6.3 liter V8 on the board for next year in the form of the C63.

I like the C350 but I would have the plastics of an Acura on the dash, etc. and a little more power.

The CL comes in an 8, a supercharged 8, or a 12.

 

Sorry, I meant the C class

 

You'll have a 6.3 liter supercharged V8 in there next Spring.

See this is what Acura needs to do... stuff a massive engine in there and sell the car as a special edition. Should have done it for the RL, MDX, and RDX.

This is one way to be a player.

 

Except that it does not work too well with a sidewinder configuration. Does that mean they go back to the 2G Legend longitudinal configuration?

This all speaks for a new platform(s) specific for Acura, but I think the cost is an unthinkable risk for Honda, although they did do the S2000 and the NSX...

 

The NSX has a longitudinally mounted engine so what does that have to do with it?

 

I think 5 speeds are plenty. I actually only use 4 in my RL. I always start-out in 2nd gear so I'd be just as happy with 4 speeds.

 

I believe another intention of the 5 speed and tuning of the RL's tranny is for smooth launches, no abrupt tip in and and linear, progressive acceleration. This is likely the intended feel some of us appreciate, while other find it lackadaisical and not 'sporty'. I find the trannies tuned for more sport to be a bit too herky jerky in stop and go traffic and hunting a space in a parking lot. My TL exhibited this. The RL can glide without abrupt shifts.

A 6 speed may offer the additional gears to create more sporty feel, and likely more economy on cruising (although the 5 speed is very relaxed on the highway). My concern from the 6 speed trannies in the family Toyotas is they have jerky shifting and seem to hold rpms at odd levels when 'coasting'. I would hope Honda / Acura is looking to do it right, since they are not 1st.

 

The (new) NSX does not yet exist.

LL

 

Agree. The Acura 5-spd does a really good job, with smooth operation and low rpms at highway cruising speeds.

I think the only place it's lacking is at lower speeds (in-town driving), where you sometimes need to drop down a gear or two and hook 'em. In those situations, it sometimes comes up a little short, as if a one-gear downshift isn't enough and two gears delivers too harsh a jolt. A good 6-spd spreads out the ratios so downshifts are gentle and yet still effective, by better managing engine revs.

The Toyota 6-spd's have been all over the forums for having problems, and I know the one in my IS350 was too hyper. Hopefully, Acura can get hold of one that behaves better.

.
.

 

Acura couldn't do any worse than the Odyssey, Accord, CL, and TL automatic debacle. The MB 7 speed is nice I think. Your top gear may not change but the first 4 or 5 are closer together. Once the transmission gets over its learning curve it is very smooth.

I once read that there is a decent fuel economy improvement from 5 to 6 speeds but from 6 to 7 and on it drops off sharply. Still, a luxury car should have 6 speeds. I think even the VW Jettas have those.

The smooth shifting you are talking about is called Grade Logic Control.

 

This would be my only gripe with the RL tranny. The few times I stomped the throttle I could count of a 'Mississippi' or two before the downshift.

And I was already annoyed that the person driving in the left lane, below the speed limit, yakking on the cell phone, with nobody in front of them,,,,forced me to pass on the right!

 

Grade logic control is specifically to eliminate gear hunting when going up or down hill. It doesn't come into play in normal around town driving unless you're going up or down a hill.

 

In all honesty, it is not really the transmission in this case, it is the electrical systems in new acuras. The Drive by wire already reduces throttle response, add that to all of the components that need to be checked before going into VTEC (AKA the downshift power) resulting in that delay. A TL-S, TL, and My MDX all have that issue

 

That is a very good point. The characteristics of tranny response is really a combination of input via the DBW (software), tranny logic (software) and tranny design (hardware). I would think that 'Mississppi' could & should be addressed in the software. Although I expect there are various algorythymns to be processed, let's get a bigger faster processor! Heck, Dylithium Crystals worked back in the 60s!

 

I'd buy an accord over a C class pretty much any day of the week, and a TL every day plus Sunday, comparing it to the RL is preposterous. Not even european cabbies run C class, they use the E class (another overpriced piece of mercedes benz junk). The fact that they offer a high zoot motor doesn't transform it into a better car either, simply faster junk. I wouldn't buy an MB in a million years, they happen to be the most expensive cars and at the same time have the worst reliability in the market, is there any other way to stamp stupid on your own forehead?????/

 

Wow - how do you REALLY feel?

I knew from the start that the comparison is a little flawed, but I gave reasons why they could be considered in the same breath. And when you try to compare it to the TL, keep in mind the C-class is rear-wheel drive, so it's another animal.

I'm surprised to see so much hate for M-B. I've never actually owned one, but I've been around lots of them (family, friends, etc.) and they've been good cars.

On the other hand, I HAVE owned an '06 TL, and I think I'd probably go for the C-class before I'd get another one of those. Can you say "Rattles", and "Torque Steer" and "Rough Idle" and "Noisy" and "Chintzy Leather" and "Unrefined"? That's the TL.

No, I don't think the C is a preposterous idea or a crummy car. The earlier models have been a little lacking, for sure, but this newly-designed '08 is a nice car IMO. Overpriced? Yeah, it's expensive. Junk? I think not.

(Oh, BTW, I've ridden in C-class cabs in Europe. Germany and Austria both, actually. Most run the E because it's roomier.)

.
.

 

Anybody who's that violent about anything has issues.

 

Issues are many, probably enough for a best seller.

 

Family members have owned a variety of MB, everyone had their mechanic on speed dial. I learned better........
I don't care what anyone says, if the car cannot perform the fundamental duty of any car, to get you here to there with the least amount of inconvinience, it is a piece of crap. The more expensive it is and the worse it fulfills the the basic tenet of "transport" the bigger piece of crap it is. Through the years I have owned about ten different honda's of all prices and driven them a total of 100's of thousands of miles, through some of the most frigid winters (minnesota) and some of the hottest summers (el paso). Ive driven them in the US, europe and caribbean. Not a single one has ever left me stranded anywhere due to mechanical failure. I don't think you will find a single mercedes owner that can boast that. Ergo MB in my book rate as doodoo

 

I agree on the Hondas being reliable, unless you own a CL, TL, MDX, Accord, or Odyssey that came with the bad transmissions. On the CL and TL boards you read about people on their 3rd transmissions or people who drive 17 miles and their tranny goes out after just having been replaced. I have even sold quite a few of those models that have later had their transmissions go out.

I have only read about 1 or 2 RLs with tranny problems so maybe it never made it to that model.

So, I guess it depends on what model, etc...

 

As a whole, Acura\Honda are consistently the most reliable or one of the most reliable marques in recent memory. Even with some bad gearboxes, overall you can't go wrong with a Honda/Acura....I'm guessing the tranny problem was covered by a recall or warranty?

 

+1!