Guys,

what do you all think of the new 4 cylinder turbo on the C250? I drove it and was pleasantly surprised with it. My wife and I test drove the 350 and the 250. My wife preferred the 250 because she said it felt more quick and agile, whereas the 350 felt more powerful probably on the top end. I'm curious what the rest of you all think?

Anyone own the car and can give some feeback?

 

I don't own it, but have read a variety of road tests. It is adequate, not great. Best once under way as compared to pulling away from a red light. Your wife may be responding to the reduced weight over the front axle, which enhances agility and "quickness" of steering response. For a comparison, read and/or drive the new 2.0 liter 4 cylinder twin turbo in the comparable 328i. Try to block out perceptions about the rest of the car if you are just comparing the engines, which can be hard for some folks to do. You will still likely want the overall Mercedes Benz for a variety of reasons, but the engine won't be the main attraction.

Manufacturer websites' posted specs for 0-60 times:

328i: 5.7 manual/5.9 automatic
C250: 7.1 automatic
C350: 5.9 automatic

 

Most magazines are getting mid 6 second 0-60 times from the 4 cylinder.

It's more than adequate power in pretty much any situation I have ran into with it so far. It runs out of breath at the top end of the rev range - I've found that driving in Economy mode and letting its torque do the work works best for me. There is some turbo lag, and combined with the 2nd gear starts in E it feels a bit lazy around town - I actually like this for a relaxing drive. I have had it hit full boost a few times in the middle of a turn and had the back end get squirrely (the ESP came on) - it's got plenty of oomph.

On occasion the transmission seems to be out of step with the engine and will be more delayed and then aggressive at downshifting than I would like, but it's only happened a couple of times.

It's very quiet out on the highway, and loafing around town it is audible but makes nice noises. I rode in a new 328 earlier this week - it was quiet, but when the engine was audible it sounded somewhat whiny to me.

 

Motor Trend = 7.2
Edmunds.com = 7.3
Road&Track = 6.4
MotorWeek = 7.9
Car and Driver = 6.8

It seems it helps to torque brake the launch, to get rpms and turbo up and spinning, before releasing the brake pedal, as R&T/CD do...otherwise, it's 7s. It's not so much the stopwatch time, as the feel. If the OP and his wife like it, by definition, it's enough...but he asked!

 

I own a c350 2009 and I recently drove a c250 as a rental.. i was impressed with the power it delivers for a four cylinder, but after driving it for a day i felt that the car lacks the power.. it doesn't seem to give the constant smooth power as if i was driving the c350... But i have to say the gas mileage is nice... 28-29mpg in rush hour's traffic!

 

As sportstick says, the Mercedes engine shouldn't be the main attraction to the vehicle because they're known more for comfort/luxury compared to BMW, but it seems that you narrowed your choice to MB and are deciding on the different power trains.

I own the C300 and I feel that the only 4 cylinder engine I would downgrade to, in terms of luxury cars, is the BMW's 4 cylinder. The dang thing is pretty impressive in terms of responsiveness, power, and fuel economy.

It's really a matter of priority when choosing between the 250 and 350. Power, fuel economy, options, price

 

I test drove this engine, not once, but three times for an extended time. It is impressive, but only in its high range.... It's sweet when pushing it all the way to redline... but for everyday use, putt-putting around, it sounds like a 4 banger... even a bit wimpy.



Now my sons MkVI GTI has a winner engine. VW/Audi's 2.0Tsi is a mind-blower throughout its entire range!

 

With a little tuning most of the 4 cyl problems go away. It has a very unimpressive tune from the factory there was a lot of room for improvement.

 

Hi Guys,

This is my first post, sorry it has to be so negative. I've had my C250 for about a month now and I have to say I hate this engine. The turbo lag is downright awful with this motor and the transmission does little to cooperate, even in S mode. Unfortunately for me, the sluggish dynamics of the motor and transmission completely ruin the overall driving experience of this car, which could be quite good.

Off the line, there is a good 2 second lag when you punch it before the boost kicks in at a rather lofty 3,000 RPM. Once the motor is spooled up, the power is acceptable, but it's extremely frustrating trying to drive this car in traffic when there a hole I want to sneak into. You hit it and wait, one thousand one.... one thousand two.. BOOST. By then it's a little too late and the open spot in traffic is now gone.

Even worse, the transmission refuses to cooperate at all in E mode. You need to give it at least 50-75% throttle before it will kick down, and then you need to again wait for the turbo if you're below 3,000 RPM. In S mode, it is admittedly better as it is more willing to kick down, but the transmission never really seems to be in the right gear.

I test drove the car of course, but a test drive can never really replicate real-world driving situations. At the moment I'm having buyer's remorse and am not particularly looking forward to driving it through the end of the lease. I honestly don't think this motor befits a $40,000 car. My 2002 Subaru WRX had a similar amount of lag but 10 years ago that was acceptable. It was also a $25,000 car.

Beyond the motor and transmission combo, the car is very enjoyable to drive however I quite regret not getting the C350 now, but I was foolishly trying to save a few pennies.

 

I agree, the lighter 4 banger sits more rearward under the hood, for a close to 50/50 weight ratio, and a lower rotating inertia factor, vs the heavier C350.


First I think the BMW has a single, twin scroll (exhaust inlet) turbo. And, I think the BMW will have much better pull away from a stop. Both cars weigh about the same, but the BMW starts with a 2.0L engine, vs the MB 1.8L. This helps generate 260 ft-lbs for the BMW from 1250-4800 rpms, vs the MB's 229 ft-lbs from 2200 to to 4300 rpm. I suspect BMW is pushing a relatively smaller turbo, for that low end torque.[/QUOTE]

 

Droves of 250 buyers (leasers?) will now turn red, swell up and burst.

 

As I've said before, trying to control the engine, the automatic trans, and a turbo that wants to spin up to destruction, is no small task. I saw this when I test drove a similar type VW set-up. Even without a turbo on the C300, it helps to help those ecu's, rather than sitting back and waiting for perfection.

It's a small matter to do braked starts when you want to shoot off a stop light. When in traffic and you want to "sneak into a hole", be sure to be in manual mode, with rpms up around 3K for lower gears. In short practice in manual mode.

Of course the dealer may allow a good trade in upgrade.

.

 

You're right I think I will have to drive the car more in manual mode. I'll be chatting with the dealer shortly, but it's a lease and I'm not expecting they're going to offer me much of a deal.

 

Correct. I used (or mis-used) their marketing nomenclature which I have seen as "Twin Turbo" or "Twin Power Turbo", but that does relate to the dual scroll, not two turbos, as you wrote.

 

This is what I am confused about several salesmen I talked to, when refering to the MB as a twinscroll turbo. I have not heard anything about this from anybody else. I took a quick look at the turbo on my car and it seems to be a borg EFR. Which should behave as a twin scroll setup. As I said before everything points to a crappy factory tune. From what I understand the Juice box does not eliminate the problems but does improve the symptoms.

 

A quick search puts the twin-scroll as unlikely for the OEM C250. I agree there is a lot in the tune. I had turned a laggy 2.0L Saab 83 turbo into a 3.0 V6 -like power plant, by allowing more advance at idle and as the turbo boost built up.

But in this case, I suspect BMW went with a proportionally smaller turbo, and the twin scroll helps.

.

 

And then you have the old sequential turbos of the late Rx7: A -> A + B

Not easy to control back in early 1990's. Note every solenoid valve and hose are related to control of the 2 turbos.





.

 

I agree with most that has been submitted above! This is my first MB a C-250 sport sedan RWD. My first experience with a higher boost Turbo was my 1994 Volvo 850 Turbo Sport Wagon (It suffered with the same degree of Turbo Lag) and didn't have a 7 speed tranny! I believe that a re-mapping of the ECU could solve some of the issues but probably at the expense of fuel economy. Overall I am very pleased with my new MB (I have owned Volvos since 1982) But if I had to do/or when I do, methinks I will go for a C350 J

 

I know OE tuning is working on a tune. Talked to them, should have one out very soon, I guess lag has been eliminated with some nice power gains. I wonder if they could also have some type of transmission tuning like they do in the VW DSG transmissions.

 

Sweet Jesus

 

Do tell. OE Tuning in California? I would be most interested.

 

Thats all the info I have, first I sent a PM and they said they have been working on it. Than I called and had a short conversation. Guess there not happy with the tune as of yet or they are having problems making the tune stick. Well anyways give them a call and express your interest in a tune and maybe with enough customer input they will expedite a solid tune to the market.

On the transmission tuning that was just a Idea I came up with, there has been no company to my knowledge working on transmission tuning.

 

Thanks. I will give them a call as they are local to me.

 

The C-Class auto's are a great evolution of the basic automatic with planatary gears and Torque Converters. I have never seen a TCU upgrade, but the conventional valve bady mechanical tweeks for crisper shifts may be available.

The DSG is totally different, basically a manual box with electronic shifting. I've driven one and it's rough as an automatic, but great as a quick shift manual.

.

 

The more I drive this car, the less I like it I should have stuck with my instincts and gotten a used 335, M3 or something equally sporting. I was misguided in my notion that my daily driver could not be a sports car. The transmission and motor are SOOO sluggish together. In manual mode the transmission shifts about 1,500 - 2,000 after I shift.