. . . about the new 4 cyl engines are as follows:

-----------

Coarse. Noisy. Crude. Hardly words you'd expect to hear applied to a car bearing the famous Mercedes badge. Yet, when describing the company's four-cylinder petrol engines – the 180, 200 and 230 Kompressor – all are entirely accurate.

But that's about to change. Making its debut in the new CLK coupé is a clever solution to the company's four-cylinder problems: Twinpulse technology. From 2003, the abovementioned units found in the C-Class, E-Class, SLK, CLK and Sports Coupé will be replaced by two new supercharged 2.0-litre powerplants. These are based on the existing four-pots, but feature a number of important advances.

The upgrades include a mechanical (rather than belt-driven) supercharger, variable valve timing, twin balancer shafts and lightweight aluminium cylinder heads. So for the entry-level 200 Kompressor, all this translates into an identical output of 163bhp, but an extra 10Nm of torque and an eight per cent gain in fuel efficiency. The engine we're really interested in, though, is the new direct-injection unit called the CGI.

With 170bhp and a meaty 250Nm of torque on tap between 3,000 and 4,500rpm, the CLK 200 CGI offers an on-paper advantage over its cousin. The 0-60mph dash takes 9.2 seconds but, more importantly, the new powerplant is extremely refined. It spins clean- ly and smoothly, without a hint of the grating noise that blighted the previous four-cylinder offerings. BMW's smooth six-pots might have more refinement, but the CGI is as smooth and responsive as they come. As you sit in the driver's seat, only the faint whine of the supercharger above 4,000rpm lets you know the unit is hard at work.

In Germany, the direct-injection CLK 200 commands a £770 premium over its Kompressor sibling, which should be offset by fuel consumption that's 16 per cent better than its predecessor's.

But the downside is that this engine needs sulphur-free fuel, not yet widely available in the UK, so the firm is waiting until next year to bring the units here. However, tax breaks for this petrol were announced in last week's Budget to encourage wider supply – and for Mercedes that's news worth celebrating. Euan Sey

----------

Well, my big take home point was the 0 to 60 time stated as 9.2 seconds with the new engine. Who here would trade their current 2.3 litre that goes 0 to 60 in 7 and a half for the new engine? Not me.

Best regards,

CP

 

I will take more power over less noise any day!!

peace...

 

I'll take more HP please...

 

Bear in mind that the CGI is the 170 DIN HP direct-injection variant of the new M271 engine series. It cannot be sold in North America because it requires sulphur-free fuel.

The 1.8 L engine that's going to power the 2003 C230K Sportcoupé will have 192 DIN HP, about 5 HP less than the current one. The torque is going to be about 7% less. It should be slower than the present model, but not THAT much slower.

 

What do they mean by mechanical? Gears instead of pulleys? I always thought pulleys and belts were pretty much "mechanical".

Does the 230 have variable valve timing and/or aluminum heads?

 

Hi MikeT,

Do you happen to know if the 1.8 litre engine actually has 192hp or if this is simply theorized by places like mbspy? I have not seen anything official in any publication which I know is the norm. However, it does strike me as odd that the 2.0 litre engine is listed out as 170hp officially in the UK press while the 1.8 litre is "allegedly" listed as 192hp on the unofficial internet sources which ironically is the exact same hp listed in US publications for the current 2.3 litre kompressor. I simply suspect that the initial rumours might not be entirely accurate about 192hp being produced in the "new" 1.8 litre engine despite what floats around places like mbspy. I guess time will tell but I will not believe it until I see an official release. As I mentioned, what would be the rationale for the new 1.8 litre getting 192hp while the new 2.0 litre getting 170hp with the cgi upgrade?

Best regards,

CP

 

The likely reason is that the 2liter is not supercharged and the 1.8liter is. The 1.8 with its balance shifts can spin at a much higher rpm than our 2.3s can to get the same max output. Just a guess from what I have read.

 

Well, the M271 engine info at the MBSpy site is simply a copy of a DaimlerChrysler press release, so I don't believe any of that is "speculative".

The British site (Auto Express) that published the article quoted above is wrong - there is no 2 litre version of the new engine. All four variants of the M271 engine are 1.8 L displacement according to DaimlerChrysler.

The one mentioned in the article (except it is a 1.8 L) is the CGI direct injection version; there are three other versions apparently, one of which is a 192 HP (DIN) supercharged 1.8 for the C 230 K Sportcoupé. Go to MBSpy to check it out for yourself. The press release is not the most clear, but the info is all there if you read it carefully.

 

Hi mdp c230k,

Actually, the article states the 2.0 litre engine is supercharged. So, if Mike T is correct, the UK Press (Auto Express) is wrong and mbspy is accurate. I guess we will have a waiting game to find out. It is easy to say that the mbspy material is an official DaimlerChrysler release, however, that seems a little counterintuitive to me. If it is an official release by DC, why do we not have anything mentioned in any of the main publications? Also, doesn't it strike you as mathematically bizarre that the exact same hp would be produced by the 1.8 and 2.3 litre engines? I am not saying that a 1.8 litre engine could not conceivably have even more hp, however, the new engine is derivative from the current selection. The whole thing strikes me as odd. I actually hope you are right that the new 1.8 litre engines truly get 192hp in the 2003 C230K. It would be a wonderful accomplishment and make my more prone to buy another a few years down the road. Nevertheless, I simply will wait until I hear a true release by DC before counting my proverbial chickens before they are hatched.

Best regards,

CP

 

Hi,

Another thing that strikes me odd about the alleged press release shown in MBSPY is the constant reference to the engines being 1.8 litre although the listed displacement is 1998cc. I find it hard to believe that a true DC release would include the information in that way without an explanation. It almost lends more credibility to the UK information which seems to say the two new engines are 2.0 litres. Also, have you ever heard four completely different sets of performance characteristics for a new engine like MBSPY seems to be saying? If they are all 1.8 litre supercharged engines, why does there seem to be such a large spread in hp? Again, I am surprised more people have not questioned the legitimacy of the MBSPY material. Maybe it is true. Maybe it is not.

Best regards,

CP

P.S. Any thoughts on how they get such a big spread in hp according to MBSPY? I cannot fathom it is chip related as such one could simply reprogram to get more hp which would defeat the point of different priced sports coupes.

 

By the way, my prediction is that there are really only two versions of the new 4cyl. The C200 and C200cgi as listed in the UK material. The US will get the C200 because of the sulfur related issue (which I do not know anything about). If the sulfur issue does not apply to US gas, then we will get the C200cgi. The stats will be as in MBSPY for the C200 with 163hp and the 0 to 60 time being a little over 9 seconds. Just a predicition but as valid as anybody elses for now!

Best regards,

CP

 

CP,

I'll bet you $10 that the new 1.8 is as described in the MB Spy article!

I agree that the article is poorly worded and difficult to understand but if you persevere you will be rewarded!

Read the article again; you are misunderstanding the 1998 cc displacement figure - that is from a table comparing the present C 200 K model (with M111 engine) to the equivalent "new" model C 200 CGI with the direct injection 1.8 M 271 engine. The latter's table is on the left and displacement is listed as 1.8 L; the present C 200 K model table is on the right and its displacement is listed as 1998 cc.

Similarly, above these side-by side tables (created by MB Spy, not part of the D-C Press Release - read the heading), there is another side-by-side comparison of the C 240 and the C 200 CGI. New vs. old, new vs. old. The same comparison is made with the other models.

The only major gap in the data is for the new C 200 - no power, torque or fuel consumption figures are given in the D-C press release. This is the "fourth" version of the new 1.8. In summary, here is the new M 271 engine lineup:

- C 180, 1.8 L supercharged, replaces C 180, with 2 L naturally aspirated engine

- C 200, 1.8 L supercharged, replaces C 200 K, with 2 L supercharged engine

- C 230 K, 1.8 L supercharged, replaces C 230 K, with 2.3 L supercharged engine

- C 200 CGI, 1.8 L direct injection supercharged engine, new model, not directly replacing any existing model.

Note that all of the new engines are 1.8 L and supercharged, with quite different power outputs (except the C 200 and C 200 CGI will likely have similar power outputs) making these four engines more economical alternative for Mercedes than the two different four cylinder engine blocks they presently use in the C. The now 1.8 will likely see duty in the A-Class too, not to mention the CLK and E. Check out the international M-B site; there is info on two of these engine variations that already are offered in the CLK.

The different power outputs will be down to light pressure superchargers in the less powerful versions and different engine software. I imagine that the internal engine parts are similar, to save on cost.

Cheers