Loss/Profit?
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
From: New Castle, IN
C230Kompressor
Loss/Profit?
Just curious about this since I just saw a C230 sedan (without the 10 little letters that make it fun): Does anyone know what the loss & profit is from the s/c on the 2.3 engine? I thought about just looking up the hp on a non-s/c 230, but I know that MB tends to tune the same engine different for different years/models, so I didn't think that would be accurate.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,211
Likes: 2
From: Laguna Niguel, CA
Don't really understand your question but if you are looking at HP difference the 97-98 C230's were 148 HP and the 99-00 C230K's were 185 HP. If the other question is what's the difference in value, it doesn't appear as though there's a sharp value drop between a 98 and a 99 so the 99 with the extra 10 letters is a better buy, if not for the badge alone.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
From: New Castle, IN
C230Kompressor
clarification...
Buell,
Okay, it takes enginge power to drive a s/c (loss), but by driving a s/c, you get more hp (profit). I was curious how much power it took to drive the s/c (i.e. how much hp would a non-s/c 2.3 make), and that would give us how much we actually get from the s/c. Make sense now?
Okay, it takes enginge power to drive a s/c (loss), but by driving a s/c, you get more hp (profit). I was curious how much power it took to drive the s/c (i.e. how much hp would a non-s/c 2.3 make), and that would give us how much we actually get from the s/c. Make sense now?
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 6,211
Likes: 2
From: Laguna Niguel, CA
What difference does it make, you are netting 37HP more by having the motor with the Kompressor. How much power does it take to drive the s/c is part of only getting 37HP more. Besides, they probably had to cut back on compression on the normally aspirated motor so you can't even compare the two. For example if I remove everything associated with my s/c I would likely not even get the 148HP. Then the question would be if you put a turbo instead of a s/c with the same exact boost and flow how much more HP would you make. Who knows, obvioulsy more but if you went do that trouble you would do it for more boost anyway. Or you can do what Kleemann is working on and put in a different type of s/c that has lower losses and he claims a 25HP difference between the two types assuming same boost.
Thread Starter
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 355
Likes: 0
From: New Castle, IN
C230Kompressor
That's what I'm trying to figure out: Is the size of the current s/c the most desirable. It would be easy to put a bigger s/c on it, but it would eat up your profit trying to drive it. Law of diminishing returns and all of that...Maybe Kleemann has the answer by going to a more 'efficient' s/c?
