ลองอ่านบทความของบางกอกโพสท์ดูครับ
ผมเซฟไว้ เพราะลิงค์เค้าเก็บเข้าคลังแล้ว เลยต้องแปะตัวอ่านเอานะครับ ลองดู
สรุปก็คือ ฟันธงว่าถ้าไม่ชอบเบนซ์แบบสุดๆ แล้ว ไป 320d เลยครับ คุ้มกว่าในเกือบทุกด้าน
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Oily match
For the first time, the two leading luxury brands in Thailand engage in a diesel fight in the junior executive car category. Who is the winner?
Diesel engines are proving more logical options these days compared to petrol counterparts due to their superior fuel economy and performance tractability in real-world driving conditions.
Such oil-burning motors even make more sense in mass-market, price-sensitive cars because buyers in general are concerned with issues such as terms of payment and long-term usage.
But such a rationale can't be necessarily applied to luxury cars like BMW or Mercedes-Benz, especially in Thailand where high taxes mean high retail prices for such premium movers.
You may wonder: would the average premium car customer really care about fuel costs in a four-wheeler costing nearly B3m?
Or would that particular buyer really want be driven in car whose powerplant can be associated with a commercial vehicle like a pickup, the Thai auto industry's incumbent product champion?
That's why both German brands insist that petrol engines are here to stay, and they still are the preferred choice of Thai motorists compared to diesel runners which, however are slowing making in-roads in this country.
Bare the figures on a table and you'll see why models like the 320d and C220 CDI are compelling options in their respective line-ups.
With more than 300Nm of torque available on tap courtesy of turbos, these specific four-pot versions have more punch than the six-cylinder, normally aspirated petrol heads of the 325i and C230 2.5.
Better too is that the 320d and C220 don't cost over B3m like those petrol-sippers. As compared here this week, the Bimmer and Merc are priced nearly the same at some B2.8m.
But delve into details and you'll note BMW's advantage in specification. In SE form, the 320d comes with outstanding features like navigation system and others.
In Mercedes speak, SE would have meant either Elegance or Avantgarde which this C220 ain't. Instead, it's the one with basic trim, so you'll need to be good with directions.
The non-SE 320d would have been the more appropriate match for this particular C220 - and a good B200k cheaper. Why, you may ask, is there such a price disparity when these two are the most obvious archrivals?
That's because the C220's bigger engine is subject to 35% excise tax; the 320d's smaller unit attracts 30%. That said, end-users weighed down by cash constraints - if they really have one - will find the 320d better value for money.
Is the C220 compensated by bigger performance on the move, especially when you note its fatter torque of 400Nm? Yes you can say that because once the turbo kicks in, the car drives away so effortlessly.
But that doesn't mean that the 320d is outdone by its lesser 350Nm of shunt. In the BMW, there is hardly the turbo lag largely evident in the Mercedes, thanks to the maximum coming at an earlier 1,750rpm.
You can genuinely feel this advantage in the 320d. Better too is the longer breathing range which extends to 4,000rpm against the C220's 3,800rpm.
In other words, the 320d is keener at low speeds and sees more action in each gear. In the C220, you have to get into the right powerband to experience fluid performance matching the 320d. If you take other aspects into consideration, the 320d shines again. The 177hp engine is smoother and quieter than the C220's 170hp variation.
Also, fuel economy is better in the BMW. On a drive to Kanchanaburi, the 320d proved more frugal by nearly two notches (14.2kpl againist the Merc's 12.5kpl), which means that the differences in manufacturer's claims seem highly credible (14.9kpl for C220 and 16.7kpl for 320d).
Having said that, the 320d's diesel engine betters the C220's in all aspects, be it performance, economy or refinement. And combine that with the value for money factor, the BMW has yet to concede anything to the Merc.
If there really is a good reason to go for the Mercedes, it would probably have to be for its more comfort-oriented driving characteristics - which is quite an important agenda for potential buyers of luxury cars in this part of the world.
The C220's steering, for instance, is lighter at city speeds in contrast to the 320d's significantly heavier rack. The ride in the C220 is not as firm as in the 320d too.
Even so, that doesn't make the C220 thoroughly accomplished. The secondary ride is not any better than the 320d on rutted road surfaces where you can feel and hear the tyres, which is a little surprising because the Bimmer is shod with sportier rubbers.
And just because the C220 turns easier doesn't necessarily mean that it handles intuitively elsewhere. The 320d's meatier steering pays dividends at medium to high speeds with good weight and turning precision, unlike in the C220 where its version becomes too light and vague, especially after you've just driven the BMW.
Generally speaking, the chassis of the two cars have been tailored in the typical fashion of their brands' values: comfy Merc and sporty BMW, although it must be noted that both cars still do a fairly good job overall.
The same goes for their basic packages. Sitting on identical wheelbase length, the two have very similar levels of interior space. Neither car feels inferior to the other in this area.
The way the cars have been designed, well it on depends how you look at them! Both have well-built interiors that ooze adequate levels of opulence, although the BMW seems neater once you go down to the smallest perceptive details.
