$11,800 for an 05 C230K 6MT with 72k? My 100,060 mile 05 230K must be worthless. Pardon me while I go cry myself to sleep. Still the most reliable car I've owned, though.

 

great buy!

but i will argue
I got 33 all day on the highway in my old 06 c230

just dont want anyone mislead.
in fact, the m272 is the motor still found in the current c-class (6 years later), despite the 2.5L being discontinued through at least 2011. (is the 2012 c250 a revival?)
anyway
again, amazing buy. you paid what it is worth according to ANY bank.
I bought my 06 c350 w/60k mi for $13,500. It was a steal to me, but bank looked at it as a "marginal" deal. these cars definitely are NOT holding their value vs their perceived worth in the US market.

 

Average cost at the time on comparable cars on autotrader were around the $14-17k area. Truth is that it was a friend of the family's car, and he just paid it off (original owner) and was looking to liquidate because his business was not doing well. Turned out as really good timing for my wife and I to get it. Funny thing is, he also sold his wifes 09 335i, his wife made him buy a Red 2005 C230k automatic...

I recommend the MB aux upgrade ($50 for part, 20 minutes to install) Makes the stock deck that much better. I went ahead and through an amp and couple subs in the back and ran a scosche hi-low frequency convertor off the stock rear door speakers for the signal (5 hour install). Surprising that with the subs I found that I don't need any sound dampening or rattle control dynomating...MB makes a solid car that doesn't rattle like a chinsey honda... go figure!

 

come on man, you knew that was true. there's a reason why I haven't gotten rid of mine even though I've had so much trouble with it... it's worthless! $11k will get me what? a down payment. the car still looks great, is pretty reliable so I might as well use the car until the wheels fall off.

 

+1

 

just dont want anyone mislead.
in fact, the m272 is the motor still found in the current c-class (6 years later), despite the 2.5L being discontinued through at least 2011. (is the 2012 c250 a revival?)


I doubt it. The jury is still out on the W204 and M272. My mother in law has a 2009 C300 sport and its frankly a dog compared to my C230K (only my opinion). But I will admit that it having the auto is a big part of it... IMHO u cant put "Sport" on a auto... that and the weight distribution is off, it feels sluggish. But I will admit that none of that has much to do with the engine so you could be right about the M272

 

Phil, yeah, I knew.. I plan to keep mine until the wheels fall off, too. Judging by how well it has aged that could be quite a long time.

The 2.5L M272 is much less efficient in a mixed driving cycle than the 1.8L M271.. both are capable of 30s on the highway. A C300 Sport shouldn't feel like a dog compared to a C230K, though.. it has a significant amount more power. I agree with you on the need for 3 pedals before it feels properly sporty, though. I wish my 230K was a 6MT.

 

im at 146k and going strong

 

I'm kind of in the same boat as the original poster. I have a couple of older Bmw e30's, and I like the size, handling, rwd and fuel economy that the 2005 w203 brings. I fear that I would be at the mercy of the dealership for expensive parts and repairs. The e30s have a ton of cheap parts lying around and they are relatively simple to work on...
So the most common items to need replacement are:
AC compressor
Alternator
Front control arm bushings

 

I wouldn't buy anything older than a 2006 right now, and would actually gladly cough up the extra cash for a 2007 if I was in the market. You're going to bury yourself in maintenance costs and repairs, take heed. Most ideal thing to do would be to buy a CPO and purchase the extended warranty. The Benz's that are sold in the US are cheaply made and designed to break down sooner rather than later.

If you have the money, get yourself one imported from Deutschland and live happily ever after.

 

I got my 04 230 sedan with 67k for 12.5k this past October. Was that a good deal?

 

the M271 engine has lived on throughout the world since its demise in the North American market after the 2005 model year. The M271 comes back to North America again for 2012 as the base engine in the C250 sedan and coupe with Turbo power as opposed to Supercharging.
It has been a hardy motor except for the cam solenoid issues and the base engine powers Formula 3 teams in Europe (naturally aspired and bored out to 2L).

4 bangers can last a long life and the majority of cars throughout the world are 4 cyl. Funny no one seems to bash Audi by using a 2.0T engine in many of their cars. 4cly are the mainstay of the tuners with their Civics not too mention the WRX and Mitsu Evo. The first gen M3 was a 4 banger and we forget the MB 2.3-16. 944 were all 4 bangers and put out great power (for the time) and live a long life.

While an inline 6 is super smooth and has an awesome exhaust note, 4cyl can be powerful, compact and lighter allowing for better weight distribution and cheaper to maintain.

 

I personally really like the idea of a 4 cyl paired with turbo or supercharged on rwd safe car. I am not a fan of v6's. Aren't there other reliability concerns though besides the engine with this 203 besides the engine?

 

Awesome! That is great news. Looks like it will only be paired with an auto transmission which is a bummer, but good to see that the 4cyl is being brought back.

 

Once again, wrong. The 2005-2007 facelift cars are safe choices.

 

Four cylinder engines cannot be perfectly balanced but if they are under about 2.4L, they are usually smooth enough. The M271 is fine.

Six cylinder engines can be perfectly balanced if they are straight 6s or 60 degree V6. 90 degree V6s, which is what the M272 is, cannot be balanced - remember the V6s Chevy made from chopping off the last two cylinders of a V8 back in the late '70s? However the M272 has a balance shaft that evens out the imbalance. MB did a great job on it, too. My wife's 2006 C230 is silky smooth!

For the record, I like both of my C230s (my 2005 C230K and my wife's 2006 C230)!

 

I have never heard that. That's crazy if true. Do you know the mechanical reasoning behind that?

By balance, I assume you mean the rotating assembly - pre build? Or are you implying balance during operation (combustion)

Anyway that's interesting

Rob

 

I mean dynamic balance - as in balancing the the rotating weight and force on the pistons from fuel ignition. I don't remember all the issues. I still have the book I got it from (The Design and Tuning of Competition Engines by Philip H. Smith) but I haven't read it in a long time.

The four bangers have a secondary balance issue that, as I said, isn't felt significantly till they get bigger. Some larger four bangers had balance shafts to smooth them out. The sixes are a little bit easier to understand. Almost always two adjacent connecting rods share a crank throw for strength and easier manufacturing. If the V is 90, one cylinder will fire at 0 deg. and the other at 90. The next two connecting rods share a common throw so they will fire at say 180 and 270. That means the next will have to fire at 360 (or 0) and 90. Because of this overlap, there is a primary imbalance. As I say, MB was very successful at smoothing that out with a balance shaft. I've driven the old 70s era (error) Chevy Monza with a 90 deg. V6 and my wife's 2006 C230 and they are polar opposites. If the V is 60 deg., they fire at 0, 60, 120, 180, 240, and 300 starting over 30 deg. later at 360 (or 0) which is the reason that V6s are usually 60 deg. Vs.

I took the opportunity to review the book while writing this post and it turns out that there are a LOT of other details involved that I have left out and it looks like they approached it from other angles (the book discusses several other engine configurations and many other aspects of achieving balance that takes up the majority of a fairly meaty chapter). I likely way over simplified - for example, I remember back in the 70s, there was at least a thought to redesigning the crank so that each connecting rod had its own throw. I THINK (not so much that it would make my head hurt ) that this could solve the problem of a 90 deg. V6 but crank strength would suffer.

I can't find the discussion on straight 6s so I might have confused that with the straight 8...

I believe my general premise is correct - at least with respect to straight fours and V6s though I could be missing some - maybe even most - of the reasoning. As I say, the chapter is pretty long and complicated and I really don't have time to pour through it (hell, I feel good that I could put my hand on the book!)

Maybe somebody can check/correct me and/or fill in some finer points.

 

Yah, that makes sense. Youre probably right about the straight six if each rod has it's own crank lobe. Im curious if some of those effects can be countered by some crazy spark timing scheme. Very interesting stuff btw,

Real quick back to 90 deg v6, can't it be a few options for firing spacing between Two adjacent rods (on the same crank lobe). Because it takes two revolutions per 1 cycle ... you could have cyl 1 fire at 0deg and cyl two fire at 90deg or 450deg (depending on compression or exhaust stroke), which in the latter case gives 270deg after cyl 2 is fired to the next cyl 1 fire.

I guess if you look at it in terms of a 720deg sequence it's easier to grasp...?

Anyway good info I need to get a good engine design book.
Rob

 

You're right, if I understand what you're getting at. While I was brushing my teeth last night I realized that I over simplified a bit too much, but the analysis is basically unchanged. I had plugs firing sequentially in cylinders on the same crank throw when in actuality one would fire and the other would be in exhaust stroke. It all comes down to the same thing but just half as fast .

The book came out long before the end of distributors so today's ignition systems (or computers for that matter) weren't even considered. I think given the geometry of the 90 deg. V6 and the fact that your cylinder must fire every other revolution, your only chance is with the balance shaft.

 

Just hit 150000 no major problems aside from AC compressor and battery

 

Back from the dead, but now at 243K miles and counting.

 

Polar, is it still on original timing chain?
Any noise on cold startup?

Pretty cool, mine is 100k behind Hoping for a 155k high mileage award next year sometime...

 

Yeah, original timing chain, engine mounts, & A/C. I've gone trough two alternators, two batteries, two trans mounts, two belt tensioners, the trust arm bushings, struts, shocks, and numerous sets of brakes and tires.... No really unusual noise at startup that hasn't been there since I bought it in 2005. I read all the bad stuff about these cars for the past 9 years, and I have to say this has been the best car I have ever owned. I'm less that 60K away from getting my second mileage award, even if my engine does grenade tomorrow, I think I got my moneies worth out of it.

 

My car just got to 112k miles. So far no timing chain rattle. I hear the cam gears adjusting when its cold but thats not a rattle sound. I have changed the alternator, expansion tank, and the top coolant pipe above the exhaust manifold. A pair of Akebono brake pads, one set of spark plugs, air filters and a serpentine belt nothing more.

I really have been thinking about changing the timing chain lately, mostly because I see people post here of there horror story. However, when I read these post of people that have over 150k miles without noise and not changing it make it seem like these cases of stretched chains are isolated and are only a few compared to the two millions w203s sold in total. Granted not all of them had the m271.