Ok - 230 Or 320 ???

Bobo125 · 02-21-2007

Hello once again.

Apart from the obvious which would you go for, the 230 or 320?
Insurance isn't an issue, I'd just like to know the pros and cons of either.

Thanks

Banned · 02-21-2007

230

+ easy to upgrade by ECU
+ lower fuel consumption
- standard sound
- 4 cyl.

320

+ good sound
+ 6 cyl.
- more weight on the front axis
- difficult and expensive to upgrade

Both have the same high speed and speed-up.

Bobo125 · 02-21-2007

Thanks, I'm not really into upgrades, so may go for the 320.

page62 · 02-22-2007

The 320 is a smoother machine than the 230. And if you're not into upgrades, you're making the right decision by going with the 320.

SLK320AMG · 03-03-2007

320 all the way:

1. nicer interior
2. bigger and better engine
3. sound is wayyyyy better

i have an 01' 320 sport and i love it, plan on getting clear side markers and might debadge the sport, but don't regret not getting a 230 at all.

BikerDrew · 03-04-2007

My out of pocket costs operating a 320 have been very low. I get 23-29mpg with a K&N air filter and no other upgrades. I am very happy I purchased this model.

02-21-2007	#1 (permalink)
Bobo125 SLK World Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 7 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Ok - 230 Or 320 ??? Hello once again. Apart from the obvious which would you go for, the 230 or 320? Insurance isn't an issue, I'd just like to know the pros and cons of either. Thanks

03-03-2007	#5 (permalink)
SLK320AMG SLK World Member Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 21 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 4 Times in 2 Posts	320 320 all the way: 1. nicer interior 2. bigger and better engine 3. sound is wayyyyy better i have an 01' 320 sport and i love it, plan on getting clear side markers and might debadge the sport, but don't regret not getting a 230 at all.

03-04-2007	#6 (permalink)
BikerDrew SLK World Junior Member Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Longview, WA Vehicle: Stock 2001 SLK320 Posts: 9 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	320 all the way My out of pocket costs operating a 320 have been very low. I get 23-29mpg with a K&N air filter and no other upgrades. I am very happy I purchased this model.

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Manual 320 AMG?	jonathan	Mercedes Benz Posers	2	08-23-2008 09:08 AM
320 vs. 330ci	SLK320AMG	Driving Stories	1	02-03-2008 01:09 AM
2001 slk 320	PJohn54	Ask DansSLK	1	08-25-2007 12:24 AM
Slk 320	myslk230	Where to get R170 SLK Items	2	01-25-2007 11:48 PM
230/320?	myslk230	SLK R170 General Discussion	2	06-29-2006 12:02 PM

02-21-2007	#2 (permalink)
Banned Banned Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 1,167 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	230 + easy to upgrade by ECU + lower fuel consumption - standard sound - 4 cyl. 320 + good sound + 6 cyl. - more weight on the front axis - difficult and expensive to upgrade Both have the same high speed and speed-up.

02-21-2007	#3 (permalink)
Bobo125 SLK World Junior Member Join Date: Feb 2007 Posts: 7 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	Thanks, I'm not really into upgrades, so may go for the 320.

02-22-2007	#4 (permalink)
page62 SLK World Member Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Luckenbach (suburb of San Antonio), Texas Vehicle: '01 SLK320, '79 450SL, '01 C320 Posts: 43 Country: Thanks: 0 Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts	The 320 is a smoother machine than the 230. And if you're not into upgrades, you're making the right decision by going with the 320.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)