Mercedes-Benz, a name synonymous with automotive luxury and quality, has faced scrutiny in recent years as its model range expanded. Concerns about declining quality, particularly in entry-level models, became a talking point. In 2008, Mercedes-Benz sought to address these issues head-on with a revamped C-Class lineup. To assess the effectiveness of these improvements and to understand the real-world ownership experience, we acquired a 2008 Mercedes-Benz C300 for a comprehensive long-term evaluation. Our aim was to determine if this new generation could restore the C-Class to its former glory and reassure buyers about Mercedes-Benz’s commitment to quality. Beyond the vehicle itself, our test also unexpectedly highlighted the critical role of dealership service in the overall ownership satisfaction – a factor that can significantly enhance or detract from the Mercedes-Benz experience. Owning a Mercedes-Benz C300 is about more than just the badge; a positive dealership relationship is paramount. Unfortunately, our chosen service center presented challenges that nearly overshadowed the merits of the vehicle itself.
Why We Chose the 2008 C 300 for Long-Term Testing
The 2008 Mercedes-Benz C-Class marked a significant refresh, representing Mercedes-Benz’s proactive step to refine its image in the entry-level luxury segment. The C300, in particular, was positioned as a response to criticisms surrounding the reliability of previous C-Class generations and broader concerns about Mercedes-Benz quality.
While comparisons with the more powerful C350 and competitors like the Infiniti G35 (reviewed in our previous comparison) suggested the C-Class might be slightly underpowered in its class, the C300 offered the same level of interior refinement, advanced multimedia system, and overall sophistication as its more expensive sibling. Our long-term test aimed to delve into practical aspects of daily ownership: Could the MB Tex faux leather withstand the rigors of family use? How user-friendly was the iPod integration? Would features like the pop-up radio display prove durable over time? These were just some of the initial questions we sought to answer.
Adding further context, our fleet was also about to welcome a long-term Cadillac CTS (Cadillac CTS 2008 Long-Term Road Test). This presented a perfect opportunity for a direct comparison between two key players in the entry-level luxury sedan market. With a check signed and the keys to a C300 Sport in hand, our long-term test officially commenced.
Long-Term Durability and Real-World Reliability of the 2008 C 300
Inside view of the 2008 Mercedes Benz C 300 dashboard highlighting the car’s interior design.
Drawing on the insights from Inside Line Executive Editor Michael Jordan, who aptly described the inherent quality of Mercedes-Benz vehicles in long-distance driving (long-term blog pages), we anticipated a vehicle built for enduring comfort and composed performance. This inherent Mercedes-Benz DNA, characterized by meticulous engineering and refined driving dynamics, was expected to extend to the C300, despite its entry-level positioning.
Inside the C300’s cabin, the dark interior proved remarkably resilient. The MB Tex synthetic leather exhibited exceptional durability, showing minimal wear even after 22,000 miles. Apart from a minor tear on the driver’s side door grab handle, the interior belied its mileage, suggesting a robustness absent in some prior generation concerns. Our initial fears regarding quality issues seemed unfounded.
Senior Editor Erin Riches highlighted the C300’s purposeful and no-nonsense character. “It’s not trying to coddle me or make me feel something about the C300 that I shouldn’t really be feeling. All it does is put me in the right position to drive and manage the controls. And while this isn’t a car that inspires me to take in any really interesting roads, I know wherever we go, it will be an orderly affair.” This understated competence and focus on driving functionality became a defining characteristic of the C300 experience.
However, the C300 was not without its usability quirks. Lead Senior Editor Ed Hellwig encountered frustration with the dedicated iPod connector. “Once connected, I got a three-pointed star on my iPod, but nothing on the car’s main audio screen. I was expecting a full menu of my music rather than the ‘auxiliary’ message it gave me. Switching songs isn’t done with dashboard controls either. You have to use the steering wheel buttons. And even then you don’t have full control, merely the ability to scroll from one song to the next. I expected more functionality from a dedicated connector.” This initial confusion underscored a lack of intuitive design in certain areas.
The iPod connector puzzle was eventually solved by Director of Vehicle Testing Dan Edmunds, who discovered the somewhat obscure solution: “Press the telephone icon button on the steering wheel and the Merc goes from ‘this sucks’ to ‘wow, this is great’ in 5.1 seconds.” The absence of a readily accessible owner’s manual initially hindered usability, but once deciphered, the iPod integration significantly enhanced the C300’s appeal.
Road Test Editor Brian Moody pointed out a practical drawback for families. “Sadly, there is a problem with the C300. The rear seats are sculpted too narrow, making it very difficult to install my kid’s booster seat. It’s near impossible to clip the seatbelt in. My 6-year-old usually does it himself, but not in the C-Class. Maybe my Graco booster is too wide? Regardless, it is a hassle. Buying a new $40 booster seat that fits isn’t the end of the world, but I’d sure like to know this before I bought the car.” This highlighted a potential issue for buyers with young children requiring booster seats, a crucial consideration for family-oriented buyers.
While long-term durability was a primary focus, our ownership experience revealed a significant lesson extending beyond the vehicle’s inherent build quality: the crucial role of dealership service. Despite no recalls during our test period, we encountered a series of issues that underscored the importance of a reliable and competent service center.
At 3,500 miles, the panorama roof’s rear sunshade malfunctioned, accompanied by rattling noises, and the sunroof switch broke. We opted for Mercedes-Benz of Long Beach due to its convenient location, despite past experiences suggesting inconsistent service quality. This decision led to a series of frustrating service visits.
Brian Moody’s experience at the dealership exemplifies the challenges. Miscommunication regarding the sunroof shade led to no action being taken. Parts for the sunroof repair were then back-ordered from Germany, resulting in weeks of waiting and the unappealing choice between a partially broken C300 and a rental Toyota Camry. This situation was far from the expected Mercedes-Benz ownership experience.
Further complicating matters, a subsequent service visit for the sunroof repair uncovered the need for additional parts, extending the repair timeline even further. By the time the sunroof was finally fixed, dissatisfaction with the dealership was mounting. Then, the engine light illuminated at 11,000 miles.
Returning to Mercedes-Benz of Long Beach, a camshaft position sensor issue was diagnosed and resolved relatively quickly thanks to an existing service bulletin. A missing door lock plunger was also replaced, suggesting a potential improvement in service efficiency, at least temporarily.
We returned for the scheduled 13,000-mile Service A, priced at $230. While seemingly reasonable after the free initial service, this marked the only routine maintenance cost incurred during our 22,000-mile test.
Front three quarter view of the 2008 Mercedes Benz C 300 showcasing its exterior styling.
Prior to concluding our test at 19,000 miles, we addressed a few minor issues: a recurring roof rattle, a cracked fog lamp, front-end misalignment, and a loose parking brake pedal molding. The fog lamp replacement and alignment cost $385, while the rattle and molding were covered under warranty. Despite the added expense, this final service visit instilled a newfound respect for Mercedes-Benz of Long Beach, suggesting a potential turnaround in their service quality.
Tires were the only other significant expense. Two tire replacements due to a nail and a sidewall bubble totaled just over $575.
Summary of Ownership Costs and Issues:
Total Body Repair Costs: None
Total Routine Maintenance Costs (over 18 months): $231.91
Additional Maintenance Costs: $386.12 (alignment and fog lamp), $576.27 (tires)
Warranty Repairs: Broken sunroof switch, roof rattles, camshaft solenoid
Non-Warranty Repairs: Fog lamp replacement
Scheduled Dealer Visits: 2
Unscheduled Dealer Visits: 3
Days Out of Service: 2
Breakdowns Stranding Driver: None
2008 C 300 Performance and Fuel Economy: A Balanced Approach
The 2008 Mercedes-Benz C300 maintained consistent performance throughout our 22,000-mile test. Performance metrics recorded at the beginning and end of the test were remarkably similar, indicating sustained mechanical integrity.
In performance testing, the C300 accelerated from 0 to 60 mph in 6.9 seconds, and completed the quarter-mile in 15.3 seconds at 91.5 mph. Braking from 60 mph required only 114 feet, a commendable figure in its class, demonstrating strong braking performance.
Chief Road Test Editor Chris Walton praised the C300’s handling characteristics after its 0.89g skidpad run: “It is amazingly easy to maintain an arc all the way around with zero steering input, only throttle. It has gobs of grip and talkative steering.” This highlighted the C300’s balanced chassis and communicative steering, contributing to an engaging driving experience.
Fuel economy varied considerably depending on driving conditions. Track testing resulted in a low of 8 mpg, while efficient highway driving achieved a maximum of 30 mpg. However, the overall average fuel economy over the test period was 20.1 mpg.
Fuel Economy Breakdown:
Best Fuel Economy: 30.0 mpg
Worst Fuel Economy: 7.8 mpg
Average Fuel Economy: 20.1 mpg
Retained Value of the 2008 Mercedes-Benz C 300
Our plan was to sell the 2008 Mercedes-Benz C300 Sport shortly after the conclusion of the long-term test. Utilizing various channels including Carmax, auto brokers, Craigslist, and Auto Trader, we sought the best possible offer. Ultimately, Carmax provided the most competitive bid, and we sold the C300 for $26,000.
According to Edmunds’ TMV® calculator (Edmunds TMV® calculator), this sale price represented a 34% depreciation from the original purchase price of $39,450.
Depreciation and Resale Value:
True Market Value at service end: $28,199
What it sold for: $26,000
Depreciation: $13,450 or 34% of original paid price
Final Odometer Reading: 21,962
Summing Up the 2008 Mercedes-Benz C 300 Ownership Experience
Mercedes-Benz aimed to address growing concerns about quality control, particularly in models like the C-Class, with the introduction of the 2008 generation. Our 18-month test of the 2008 C300 revealed that while improvements were evident, quality assurance remained an ongoing endeavor. Our C300 experienced a number of minor issues, none of which were major enough to cause breakdowns, but collectively they highlighted areas for potential improvement.
Crucially, our experience underscored the paramount importance of a trustworthy and competent dealership for service and maintenance. Our initial dealership choice based on proximity proved to be a near misstep. Inconsistent service quality, ranging from miscommunication to incorrect parts orders, detracted significantly from the ownership experience. While service quality appeared to improve towards the end of our test, the initial challenges were a stark reminder that dealership selection should be a carefully considered aspect of Mercedes-Benz ownership.
Choosing a Mercedes-Benz dealer and service advisor with diligence is essential. Sometimes, the most convenient option may not be the best in terms of service quality and customer care. Potential buyers should prioritize dealership reputation and customer feedback alongside location when making their purchase and service decisions.
Edmunds purchased this vehicle for the purposes of evaluation.
