MB-JIM

I'm considering on buying a C230 K for my wife. Some people have told me I should get the 3.2 since the Kompressor isn't reliable. I'm concerned since will plan to keep the Coupe for more than 50,000 miles. What advice do you have for me? I really hate to spend over $2K for the 3.2 since we don't need more performance. Thanks for any help.

steffen

I think reliability of the 1.8l engine has yet to be determined (new engine for 2003). But if you're worried you can always spring for the extended warranty from MBUSA - between 1-2k depending on the number of miles you go for.

--Steffen

Harris

IMO, reliability is all about "LUCK". If you are lucky enough, you will have a trouble free car for 50K miles or even 100K. Maybe 10 out of 10 people in here will tell you the C230K is a very reliable car, but if you are unlucky enough, you may still end up buying a Lemon. I really think it all comes down to Luck. Personally, I dont trust those customer survey.

jpb5151

Our salesperson told us the 1.8L engine should last ~ 300k before needing the rings replaced while the 3.2 would go to 1 million miles.

I got the impression that supercharging itself has been around long enough that it's fairly reliable now.

Get the 3.2. This isn't for performance, but for comfort. Bigger engine, softer ride, and probably quieter. What's more, you'll be able to get up to speed without having the engine sound like a blender on steroids. Don't even think twice, just get the 320.

... just my opinion, although i love our 230k ... ... anyone wanna buy it so i can get a 320?

nukblazi

I've grown to love the sound of my c230...

raspy sorta blender sound

jpb5151

Nuk, you got the 2.3 or 1.8? Ours is the 1.8, and has more of a whirry-choppy blender sound.

Mike T.

Your sales person is a moron.

jpb5151

Thanks for the tip. Do you know what the rated miles would be? I know that in the real world, things don't work like that despite what internal test results may be.

tberry

I got a solution. Buy my 02 C230k coupe. Its the good ol reliable 2.3L thats been around for like a decade now :-) u'll save money and if it helps use that money towards an extended warranty for that peace of mind

MB-JIM

Thanks for all the help. I drove the C230 K Coupe today. It is really a very nice car. The engine was very quiet at least in city driving. The seats seemed more comfortable than those in my 02 C320. There was one problem and that was
the rear visibility. My wife is only 5' 1" and there is just too much stuff in the
way for good visibility. I have an 04 E Class ordered so I should probably keep
the C320 for her. Thanks again.

Mike T.

Heh heh, that sounds sarcastic, I love it!

No idea officially, and I doubt those who know the true design standards would actually reveal them. However, talking to people who service cars and trucks is most revealing. For example, a Mercedes Unimog dealer mechanic (a 4x4 on/off road vehicle) told me that in his experience a Mercedes Diesel engine tends to be good for 10,000 to 15,000 hours of operation between overhauls. In a car, that might represent 400,000 to 600,000 km (say 250K to 350K miles). That's an industrial Diesel, BTW.

My guess would be that you could squeeze up to 400,000 to 500,000 km (250,000 to 300,000 miles) out of a Mercedes gas engine if you were really kind to it. There's no guarantee the rings would go first either; bearings are at least as wear-prone, especially if you do a lot of cold starts as a proportion of total mileage covered. And if you drive a lot in the city, the km/mile lifespan will go down, due to all the idling (which still wears the engine components).

I doubt there's a significant difference between the M271 and M112 engines in terms of quality. The cylinder block technology is the same and I doubt Mercedes scrimps on metallurgy in the 4 cylinder engine. All other things being equal, the 1.8 might even outlast the V6 if it was designed properly, as this engine in ALL its variations was designed to have a high specific power output through supercharging. Generally, two otherwise identical engines that have different power outputs will see the more powerful one (the one with the higher specific power output (HP/L)) being more short-lived. It's simply down to combustion pressures, heat and related stresses being higher.

Your salesman, in saying the V6 would last 1.6 million km, was in effect stating that this is the mean design standard or life expectancy. Would such an engine last well over 30,000 hours? It is possible in certain circumstances (such as prolonged highway driving with relatively few cold starts), but highly unlikely. And every other component in the car would have likely been replaced a few times over such a distance. You should go back to him and ask if the million miles is the technical design standard or the mean actual lifespan of engines actually in use. Also ask him to explain why the poor little M271 only lasts 1/3 as long.

I once had a stupid salesman too. When I test drove my 405, the Peugeot salesman said that the car would last 250,000 km. At the time I thought he was an idiot. Now I have proven it. I'm at 300,000 km and climbing, on the original engine, gearbox and clutch.

jpb5151

I'm pretty sure he said the lifespan numbers were the in-house figures, not real-life. In terms of the 1.8, I'll have to go back and ask for details. The gist of our conversation was that the 1.8 is simply working harder so it'll wear down faster. Intuitively, this made sense to me.

Your paragraph about specific power kinda confused me. The 1.8 has a higher specific power output and so should be more short-lived, yet might outlast the 3.2 NA engine?

Good to read about your Peugeot. Hope it keeps going.

Mike T.

What I meant is that Mercedes may have compensated for the higher stress inherent in the M271 by improving the metallurgical properties of the engine materials, tightening the engineering tolerances during assembly and so on. Whether M-B has done that or not is an open question.

I was merely speculating that they might (should) have built some additional engineering redundancy into the M271 at the design stage since they knew it would have a high specific power output in all its versions. Even the weakest version of the M271 develops well over 80 HP/L, which is about 11 HP/L over what the 3.2 develops. The C 230 with the M271 is at 105 HP/L.

Considering that the new 4 cylinder engine is their bread-and-butter power unit - in Europe and most other non-US/CDN markets, I'd be surprised if it's under-engineered, and therefore also surprised also if it's not designed to last as long as the 3.2 or any other Mercedes non-Diesel engine, for that matter.

Thanks for cheering on my 300K km 405. So far so good. I still think the 404 is the best car they ever made, but the 405 is beginning to impress me

JeT

Yeah, I thought the rear vision was quite restricted when I first drove mine. But you get used to it and it helps if you have the Euro side mirrors. The seat can be adjusted upwards as well.