190E (W201) 1982-1993: 190E 2.3, 190E 2.6, 190E 2.3-16, 190E 2.5-16, 190 D 2.2, 190 D 2.5, 190 D 2.5 TURBO, 190E 2.5-16 Evolution I, 190E 2.5-16 Evolution II

190e??

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Rate Thread
 
Old Mar 30, 2011 | 09:55 AM
  #1  
fefo25's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: Bergen County,NJ
2010 C300 Sport 6 speed Steel Gray
190e??

Whats up, I own a 2010 C300 but ive always liked the 190's. Im interested in buying one as an extra toy but dont know much about them. Should i get one or are they headaches?
Reply
Old Mar 31, 2011 | 09:04 AM
  #2  
fefo25's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: Bergen County,NJ
2010 C300 Sport 6 speed Steel Gray
Anyone have anything to say about this car??
Reply
Old Apr 2, 2011 | 12:57 AM
  #3  
silverfox99's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
1986 190e 2.3 16v, 1995 BMW M5, 2000 G500
I just bought a 190e 2.3 16v as a project car, it has a laundry list of problems, but the engine is awesome, so I am excited. Just make sure you know what you are getting into is all I have to say
Reply
Old Apr 4, 2011 | 03:27 AM
  #4  
Gullwing's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 624
Likes: 7
From: Las Vegas
1987 190E 2.3
Originally Posted by fefo25
Im interested in buying one as an extra toy but dont know much about them. Should i get one or are they headaches?
Go for it. They are fun, fairly simple, with a few more complex parts. If you get one that is in poor condition it might be/probably will be a pain, but a decent shape one shouldn't be an issue.
Reply
Old Apr 4, 2011 | 10:29 AM
  #5  
fefo25's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: Bergen County,NJ
2010 C300 Sport 6 speed Steel Gray
Ok thanx! What the better engine, 2.3 or 2.6?
Reply
Old Apr 4, 2011 | 10:32 AM
  #6  
silverfox99's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
1986 190e 2.3 16v, 1995 BMW M5, 2000 G500
Originally Posted by fefo25
Ok thanx! What the better engine, 2.3 or 2.6?
2.6 is a great engine, true mercedes engine, the 2.3 is all forged internals, so it just depends on what you are going for? 2.6 is probably more reliable in the long run and will have a lower cost if you come across any issues.
Reply
Old Apr 4, 2011 | 10:57 AM
  #7  
fefo25's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: Bergen County,NJ
2010 C300 Sport 6 speed Steel Gray
Originally Posted by silverfox99
2.6 is a great engine, true mercedes engine, the 2.3 is all forged internals, so it just depends on what you are going for? 2.6 is probably more reliable in the long run and will have a lower cost if you come across any issues.
What would I get out of having forged internals? Sorry I dont know what that is..
Reply
Old Apr 4, 2011 | 12:08 PM
  #8  
silverfox99's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
1986 190e 2.3 16v, 1995 BMW M5, 2000 G500
Originally Posted by fefo25
What would I get out of having forged internals? Sorry I dont know what that is..
Well you could do a turbo or supercharged application, without any internal modifications. The cosworth engine is built for power and performance and is capable of producing well over 350hp with minimal modification.
Reply
Old Apr 5, 2011 | 01:09 PM
  #9  
fefo25's Avatar
Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
Joined: Sep 2010
Posts: 293
Likes: 0
From: Bergen County,NJ
2010 C300 Sport 6 speed Steel Gray
Thanx for the info..
Reply
Old Apr 5, 2011 | 05:03 PM
  #10  
insame1's Avatar
MBWorld Fanatic!
10 Year Member
Liked
Loved
Community Favorite
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,562
Likes: 194
From: Austin, TX
2006 E55, 2012 GLK350 & 1992 190e sportline
just to clarify there are 2 2.3 models. the cosworth is a 2.3 with 16 valves. this motor is nothing like the 2.3 in most 190e's you see. I have the 2.6 and like it very much. If you want a lot of info check out 190rev. I hope no one mids the 190 shout out but this site is kinda slow for 190 stuff.
Reply
Old Apr 7, 2011 | 02:20 AM
  #11  
Gullwing's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 624
Likes: 7
From: Las Vegas
1987 190E 2.3
2.6 has a little more power, but then has more weight.
I am happy with my 2.3, revs great and can move the car pretty well.
Reply
Old Aug 17, 2011 | 12:03 AM
  #12  
TheZagorski's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Aug 2011
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
From: Cleveland, Ohio
1995 E320 Special Edition
I'm sorry, I know this thread is old. But I must put in my $.02.
When I was 18 I purchased a 1987 190E 2.3 with 143,000 miles. I owned that car for 4 years and it was the best car I've ever owned.It was a little under-powered, 3,800 pounds with a four-banger. But it gave me no problems! I changed the tires, the fluids and the brakes- that's it. It was a blast. Over the years, every car I've driven was compared to my old 190E- and they never compared! They are wonderful motor-vehicles!
Reply
Old Aug 19, 2011 | 01:31 PM
  #13  
kostas86's Avatar
Super Member
 
Joined: Feb 2005
Posts: 903
Likes: 3
From: Chicago
V8, Flat 6, V6, & Turbo flat 4
Had a 1990 and 1991 2.6.
The 1990 had a tough time passing emissions (120k miles), the 1991 (45k miles) kept having radiator issues.
But other than that they were great cars.
Reply
Old Sep 8, 2011 | 06:35 AM
  #14  
patd's Avatar
Newbie
 
Joined: Sep 2011
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
From: NJ
1990 190e
2.6

I have a 1990 190e 2.6 straight v6 with 200k miles. I think it is a much stronger and reliable engine. Bought car 11 years ago and basically had no problems. My first problem I am working on now. Stuck in park, I thin is the brake interlock cable. cable.
Reply

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


You have already rated this thread Rating: Thread Rating: 0 votes,  average.


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 02:10 PM.