C230 K - How reliable?
--Steffen
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?
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.
Trending Topics
Your sales person is a moron.
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
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.
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.
Thanks for the tip. Do you know what the rated miles would be?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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
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.



