Best Smoker Barges 1-5 large [Vol 4]
Discussion
Output Flange said:
Except the diesel will have far more torque than the 6 pot, so won't need its neck wringing to get it to move along. In big, modern luxobarges the noise of the engine rarely enters the cabin without the window down, so that doesn't need to be a consideration.
I was collected from the station in an E220 CDI on Friday night. 08 plate. Nice car. Liked it. But the noise of the engine entered the cabin constantly and it was very obviously an unrefined 4 cylinder diesel, especially when waiting at lights etc.SpeckledJim said:
Pappa Lurve said:
Quick question - Merc C240, I think about 97ish. Good condition but some scratches on body, new tyres all round, pads up front, MOT and tax are both only a few weeks old. One owner from new (well, one company) in a burgundy colour with a tan-ish interior. 120k on the clock. Amazingly, FSH, 90% with MB.
Fits the bill for what I need right now and although I accept they are not the most thrilling cars, I need a smoker to get me through the winter (live in london so heavy snow and ice are really not a huge deal). Owned loads of barges but know little about the early C class but seems to be pretty bullet proof.
Based on description, what would you lot think the thing is worth and are they ok cars?
Cheers!
Worst engine in the range, but nice cars. £600. Fits the bill for what I need right now and although I accept they are not the most thrilling cars, I need a smoker to get me through the winter (live in london so heavy snow and ice are really not a huge deal). Owned loads of barges but know little about the early C class but seems to be pretty bullet proof.
Based on description, what would you lot think the thing is worth and are they ok cars?
Cheers!
Mark-C said:
r129sl said:
Brand new and from the UK importer, yes, diesel only.
Seriously? There are certainly some V8 and W12 cars in the classifieds. Were these not dealer supplied? Example -> http://classifieds.pistonheads.com/classifieds/use...
Not picking a fight ... just curious
SpeckledJim said:
Worst engine in the range, but nice cars. £600.
Ok, so 400 is a decent deal? And why is that the worst engine? Anything I need to worry about? A neighbour is using the car now until his new company car comes and once that turns up the the next 2 weeks, the company was going to just shove it in an auction to get shot of it so an offer of £400 seemed to be fair.Thanks for the feedback :-)
Pappa Lurve said:
SpeckledJim said:
Worst engine in the range, but nice cars. £600.
Ok, so 400 is a decent deal? And why is that the worst engine? Anything I need to worry about? A neighbour is using the car now until his new company car comes and once that turns up the the next 2 weeks, the company was going to just shove it in an auction to get shot of it so an offer of £400 seemed to be fair.Thanks for the feedback :-)
It also has a crazy oil capacity of something like 10 litres.
SpeckledJim said:
Pappa Lurve said:
SpeckledJim said:
Worst engine in the range, but nice cars. £600.
Ok, so 400 is a decent deal? And why is that the worst engine? Anything I need to worry about? A neighbour is using the car now until his new company car comes and once that turns up the the next 2 weeks, the company was going to just shove it in an auction to get shot of it so an offer of £400 seemed to be fair.Thanks for the feedback :-)
It also has a crazy oil capacity of something like 10 litres.
Do any of you know if it has and OBDC connector? Makes no actual difference other than letting me play with some apps on my phone so would be nice to know if it does or not but not a big deal either way.
Thanks again for the feedback.
Output Flange said:
E38Ross said:
Those cars you described have 6 cylinder engines. They aren't about speed, they're about the waft and smoothness. A 4 pot diesel going slightly quicker won't feel as luxurious ad a slightly slower 6 pot. Unless, you've missed a large point of 6+ cylinder engines? 
Except the diesel will have far more torque than the 6 pot, so won't need its neck wringing to get it to move along. In big, modern luxobarges the noise of the engine rarely enters the cabin without the window down, so that doesn't need to be a consideration.This would be fine were the engine required to operate within a very narrow speed range (like the engine of a ship or an electricity generator). A motor car, however, needs to change its speed frequently and rapidly within a very wide range of (in ordinary use) 0 to 125mph. I find these diesels are quite hard to drive smoothly, so suddenly do they puff in and out. They also need seven and eight speed transmissions so that they might be on the boil at any given road speed, forever swapping cogs.
While modern cars' sound insulation is amazing, there is not much that can be done to insulate the occupants from vibration and harshness. 4 cylinder diesels are dreadful in this respect, especially under load. My Mk 5 Golf TDI is much, much quieter than my 1986 Mercedes SEC, but the latter is the more refined car by a very wide margin.
A luxury car is better served by a large capacity, multi-cylinder (preferably six or 12) petrol engine which is capable of generating torque and power (which of course is torque multiplied by engine speed) over a very wide range with great smoothness. Such engines will pull smoothly from very low speeds; and they will develop their power consistently across a wide speed range; they need to change gear less frequently. They pull cleanly from idle to 6,000rpm or more. My 5.6 V8 is a good example: at any given engine speed, from 1,000rpm to 5,500rpm, it can generate never less than 90% of its maximum torque (which is 336lb/ft).
Besides, all other things being equal, 350lb/ft at 2,000rpm is less useful than 200lb/ft at 4,000rpm. This is why a petrol engined car ultimately is faster, even though its headline torque output is so much lower. That E38 728i with its relatively puny 200lb/ft torque peak will be a match for today's 520d.
As someone else aptly put it, today the market is about maximum show for minimum monthly cost. This is symptomatic of the troubles our society faces.
E38Ross said:
Those cars you described have 6 cylinder engines. They aren't about speed, they're about the waft and smoothness. A 4 pot diesel going slightly quicker won't feel as luxurious ad a slightly slower 6 pot. Unless, you've missed a large point of 6+ cylinder engines?
A wheezing struggling 6-pot isn't great either and certainly doesn't have the effortless waft of a great big V8 with a massive dollop of torque from 1200rpm. Let's face it, the small engines versions of yesteryear's luxo barge were often just fine, but they were still an economy compromise over the larger engined models. A small diesel is just today's economy compromise which trades one set of compromises for another.Pappa Lurve said:
SpeckledJim said:
Pappa Lurve said:
SpeckledJim said:
Worst engine in the range, but nice cars. £600.
Ok, so 400 is a decent deal? And why is that the worst engine? Anything I need to worry about? A neighbour is using the car now until his new company car comes and once that turns up the the next 2 weeks, the company was going to just shove it in an auction to get shot of it so an offer of £400 seemed to be fair.Thanks for the feedback :-)
It also has a crazy oil capacity of something like 10 litres.
Do any of you know if it has and OBDC connector? Makes no actual difference other than letting me play with some apps on my phone so would be nice to know if it does or not but not a big deal either way.
Thanks again for the feedback.
r129sl said:
Besides, all other things being equal, 350lb/ft at 2,000rpm is less useful than 200lb/ft at 4,000rpm. This is why a petrol engined car ultimately is faster, even though its headline torque output is so much lower. That E38 728i with its relatively puny 200lb/ft torque peak will be a match for today's 520d.
As someone else aptly put it, today the market is about maximum show for minimum monthly cost. This is symptomatic of the troubles our society faces.
But surely that has always applied, hence cars like the S280, 728i, A8 2.8 etc. As someone else aptly put it, today the market is about maximum show for minimum monthly cost. This is symptomatic of the troubles our society faces.
Your 560 might waft about effortlessly but did a 280 SE from the same era manage it in quite the same way? Surely that was aimed at the same market as today's entry level models.
r129sl said:
Torque is terribly misunderstood. I do not claim to understand it fully. Nonetheless, the modern, turbocharged diesel engine does not have a torque curve so much as a torque spike. We all know how it goes: the engine is gutless from idle to about 1,600rpm, whereupon it bursts up to 2,400rpm, then tails off, rapidly so after 3,000rpm.
This would be fine were the engine required to operate within a very narrow speed range (like the engine of a ship or an electricity generator). A motor car, however, needs to change its speed frequently and rapidly within a very wide range of (in ordinary use) 0 to 125mph. I find these diesels are quite hard to drive smoothly, so suddenly do they puff in and out. They also need seven and eight speed transmissions so that they might be on the boil at any given road speed, forever swapping cogs.
While modern cars' sound insulation is amazing, there is not much that can be done to insulate the occupants from vibration and harshness. 4 cylinder diesels are dreadful in this respect, especially under load. My Mk 5 Golf TDI is much, much quieter than my 1986 Mercedes SEC, but the latter is the more refined car by a very wide margin.
A luxury car is better served by a large capacity, multi-cylinder (preferably six or 12) petrol engine which is capable of generating torque and power (which of course is torque multiplied by engine speed) over a very wide range with great smoothness. Such engines will pull smoothly from very low speeds; and they will develop their power consistently across a wide speed range; they need to change gear less frequently. They pull cleanly from idle to 6,000rpm or more. My 5.6 V8 is a good example: at any given engine speed, from 1,000rpm to 5,500rpm, it can generate never less than 90% of its maximum torque (which is 336lb/ft).
Besides, all other things being equal, 350lb/ft at 2,000rpm is less useful than 200lb/ft at 4,000rpm. This is why a petrol engined car ultimately is faster, even though its headline torque output is so much lower. That E38 728i with its relatively puny 200lb/ft torque peak will be a match for today's 520d.
As someone else aptly put it, today the market is about maximum show for minimum monthly cost. This is symptomatic of the troubles our society faces.
Nonsense.This would be fine were the engine required to operate within a very narrow speed range (like the engine of a ship or an electricity generator). A motor car, however, needs to change its speed frequently and rapidly within a very wide range of (in ordinary use) 0 to 125mph. I find these diesels are quite hard to drive smoothly, so suddenly do they puff in and out. They also need seven and eight speed transmissions so that they might be on the boil at any given road speed, forever swapping cogs.
While modern cars' sound insulation is amazing, there is not much that can be done to insulate the occupants from vibration and harshness. 4 cylinder diesels are dreadful in this respect, especially under load. My Mk 5 Golf TDI is much, much quieter than my 1986 Mercedes SEC, but the latter is the more refined car by a very wide margin.
A luxury car is better served by a large capacity, multi-cylinder (preferably six or 12) petrol engine which is capable of generating torque and power (which of course is torque multiplied by engine speed) over a very wide range with great smoothness. Such engines will pull smoothly from very low speeds; and they will develop their power consistently across a wide speed range; they need to change gear less frequently. They pull cleanly from idle to 6,000rpm or more. My 5.6 V8 is a good example: at any given engine speed, from 1,000rpm to 5,500rpm, it can generate never less than 90% of its maximum torque (which is 336lb/ft).
Besides, all other things being equal, 350lb/ft at 2,000rpm is less useful than 200lb/ft at 4,000rpm. This is why a petrol engined car ultimately is faster, even though its headline torque output is so much lower. That E38 728i with its relatively puny 200lb/ft torque peak will be a match for today's 520d.
As someone else aptly put it, today the market is about maximum show for minimum monthly cost. This is symptomatic of the troubles our society faces.
I'm no diesel pervert, but even in my ten yr old 1.9 TDI, I get a good spread of torque from 1800rpm all the way up to 4500rpm.
The great thing about them is that there's so much torque available at low rpm, that you don't need to try at all to achieve decent forward momentum. With your 728 example, you'd be wringing the neck of it to achieve similar momentum to the modern 520d. That's neither refined, nor very pleasant.
r129sl said:
Torque is terribly misunderstood. I do not claim to understand it fully.
They also need seven and eight speed transmissions so that they might be on the boil at any given road speed, forever swapping cogs.
Given the number of ratios and the speed and grace with which they're swapped about, the modern 7 and 8 speed boxes are perfectly suited to the small diesel engines, and hence the application.They also need seven and eight speed transmissions so that they might be on the boil at any given road speed, forever swapping cogs.
A 4-pot diesel barge doesn't interest me in the slightest, but then nor does the 6-pot petrol version.
But, I can understand why some people will want all the competencies of an S Class, A8 etc with the lowest possible running costs - not everyone cares about the speed at which they travel, rather than the comfort.
confused_buyer said:
But surely that has always applied, hence cars like the S280, 728i, A8 2.8 etc.
Your 560 might waft about effortlessly but did a 280 SE from the same era manage it in quite the same way? Surely that was aimed at the same market as today's entry level models.
It is a fair point that you make but...Your 560 might waft about effortlessly but did a 280 SE from the same era manage it in quite the same way? Surely that was aimed at the same market as today's entry level models.
The 280 SE's principal qualities were its refinement, its ease of operation and its longevity. It also had a significant performance advantage over the small fry in their Cortinas and Cavaliers and Montegos. It may well have been leased or (more likely) taken under some form of purchase credit, but it likely was kept by its first owner for a good many more years than two.
When it comes, the S250 CDI's principal qualities, if you can call them that, will be its flash-to-cash quotient and its low CO2 rating. Its buyer gets a S-Class for £499 a month/palatable BIK charge. The vehicle will not be particularly refined (4 cylinder diesel), it will be ergonomically compromised in order to save money, and its intended service life will be less than 10 years. It is unlikely to show a Mondeo TDCI a clean pair of heels in the traffic light grand prix. Of course, it will not be a rubbish car by any stretch of the imagination!
Trustmeimadoctor said:
Trustmeimadoctor said:
What's a r reg 728 worth with about 70k on the clock Arctic silver black leather 5 months tax 11 months mot says it has premium audio what ever that is
It does look very tidy
can anyone help me with a rough offer i should give ?It does look very tidy
V8mate said:
Trustmeimadoctor said:
Trustmeimadoctor said:
What's a r reg 728 worth with about 70k on the clock Arctic silver black leather 5 months tax 11 months mot says it has premium audio what ever that is
It does look very tidy
can anyone help me with a rough offer i should give ?It does look very tidy
r129sl said:
It is a fair point that you make but...
The 280 SE's principal qualities were its refinement, its ease of operation and its longevity. It also had a significant performance advantage over the small fry in their Cortinas and Cavaliers and Montegos. It may well have been leased or (more likely) taken under some form of purchase credit, but it likely was kept by its first owner for a good many more years than two.
When it comes, the S250 CDI's principal qualities, if you can call them that, will be its flash-to-cash quotient and its low CO2 rating. Its buyer gets a S-Class for £499 a month/palatable BIK charge. The vehicle will not be particularly refined (4 cylinder diesel), it will be ergonomically compromised in order to save money, and its intended service life will be less than 10 years. It is unlikely to show a Mondeo TDCI a clean pair of heels in the traffic light grand prix. Of course, it will not be a rubbish car by any stretch of the imagination!
I'm willing to bet that it'll be more refined than a six-pot S-class, ten years it's senior though. And probably quicker too.The 280 SE's principal qualities were its refinement, its ease of operation and its longevity. It also had a significant performance advantage over the small fry in their Cortinas and Cavaliers and Montegos. It may well have been leased or (more likely) taken under some form of purchase credit, but it likely was kept by its first owner for a good many more years than two.
When it comes, the S250 CDI's principal qualities, if you can call them that, will be its flash-to-cash quotient and its low CO2 rating. Its buyer gets a S-Class for £499 a month/palatable BIK charge. The vehicle will not be particularly refined (4 cylinder diesel), it will be ergonomically compromised in order to save money, and its intended service life will be less than 10 years. It is unlikely to show a Mondeo TDCI a clean pair of heels in the traffic light grand prix. Of course, it will not be a rubbish car by any stretch of the imagination!
That's progress for you.
Whilst I shan't leave my seat in anticipation, I expect to see literally billions of the things in and around Heathrow/West London in coming months (all debadged, naturally); proving that there be a market for such a vehicle and then some.
I can't tell you the last time I saw a non-diesel S-Class in fact (Russian-spec AMGs notwithstanding). Them's the time's we live in. But getting back to your point, it also shows just how far diesel engine technology as come and the market has reacted accordingly.
Never thought I'd say this even five years ago, but I can't think of a single reason why I'd go back to petrol for my week-day wheels now. The combination of diesel, modern fueling technology and turbos, makes for grunty, fuel efficient and refined long-legged machines which trump their petrol counterparts in every area bar aural satisfaction and (to a lesser extent) NVH.
Great Pretender said:
I'm willing to bet that it'll be more refined than a six-pot S-class, ten years it's senior though. And probably quicker too.
That's progress for you.
Whilst I shan't leave my seat in anticipation, I expect to see literally billions of the things in and around Heathrow/West London in coming months (all debadged, naturally); proving that there be a market for such a vehicle and then some.
I can't tell you the last time I saw a non-diesel S-Class in fact (Russian-spec AMGs notwithstanding). Them's the time's we live in. But getting back to your point, it also shows just how far diesel engine technology as come and the market has reacted accordingly.
Never thought I'd say this even five years ago, but I can't think of a single reason why I'd go back to petrol for my week-day wheels now. The combination of diesel, modern fueling technology and turbos, makes for grunty, fuel efficient and refined long-legged machines which trump their petrol counterparts in every area bar aural satisfaction and (to a lesser extent) NVH.
Except for when they go wrong, which isn't too infrequent. Also,the difference between a turbo diesel and a turbo petrol is far less than you think. The petrol being better of course That's progress for you.
Whilst I shan't leave my seat in anticipation, I expect to see literally billions of the things in and around Heathrow/West London in coming months (all debadged, naturally); proving that there be a market for such a vehicle and then some.
I can't tell you the last time I saw a non-diesel S-Class in fact (Russian-spec AMGs notwithstanding). Them's the time's we live in. But getting back to your point, it also shows just how far diesel engine technology as come and the market has reacted accordingly.
Never thought I'd say this even five years ago, but I can't think of a single reason why I'd go back to petrol for my week-day wheels now. The combination of diesel, modern fueling technology and turbos, makes for grunty, fuel efficient and refined long-legged machines which trump their petrol counterparts in every area bar aural satisfaction and (to a lesser extent) NVH.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff