C220 vs C250

Author
Discussion

yellowbentines

5,313 posts

207 months

Friday 21st November 2014
quotequote all
windydog said:
The fun stuff is working out how many stages the 220 has, which frankly is still up for grabs depending on what date their car was made in the W204 run.
I know this is dragging the argument on, but do you have any links to back up the suggestion that there was ever a W204 C220 cdi with a single turbo (like the links I posted above, the autocar one was written pre-launch), something other than what someone who's never owned one thinks on a forum, because I can't find anything to back up the suggestion at all.

Getting well into nerdy geek zone territory now, but I DID find quite a nice article on the entire lifecycle of the engine written by 4 engineers from a company called Daimler AG in Stuttgart wink , which actually suggests that the 170bhp OM651 was made in both single and twin turbo variants (which explains why you can find different turbos when searching for parts), HOWEVER, the single turbo'd variant was made for transverse applications only, which rules out the W204 C-Class.

http://www.ac-kolloquium.rwth-aachen.de/pdf/Vortr_...

Edited by yellowbentines on Friday 21st November 07:55

windydog

36 posts

121 months

Friday 21st November 2014
quotequote all
I'm sold, and fully concede on that evidence. Credit to you, that's a great article and I think the debate is now firmly steering towards 220 Twin, 200 Single. The references quoted simply add a huge credibility to the article, which frankly I'm not qualified or going to dispute. This is the best evidence I've seen so far.

"Single-stage turbocharging with variable turbine geometry and electric actuation is used for passenger car types up to an output of 100
kW." - Insert C200 Cdi

"For the 125kW and 150kW output levels in EU6 types and for BIN5 applications, two-stage turbocharging is used. Both the high pressure turbocharger used here and the low pressure turbine are wastegate turbos, with a compressor bypass with an actively engaged flap on the air side. When the wastegate valve opens once the engine is in the full load range, this flap reduces pressure loss and protects the high
pressure turbocharger from being overloaded. - Insert 220 Cdi and above.

The only links I have found that would evidence a single turbo charger theory revolve around putting a 2008 C220 Cdi turbo request into a spares site and being thrown the Garret single stage as the spare required. That and the widespread proliferation of the 220 single stage theory on the various other forums, of which I am a member, it was therefore assumed and not checked.

There are plenty of schematics out there for the OM 651 unit, but nothing conclusive suggesting the application. If you don't mind, I'll get my humble pie out the oven and accept your theory.


yellowbentines

5,313 posts

207 months

Friday 21st November 2014
quotequote all
windydog said:


The only links I have found that would evidence a single turbo charger theory revolve around putting a 2008 C220 Cdi turbo request into a spares site and being thrown the Garret single stage as the spare required.
As above, you will find single turbo variants of that engine in the transverse applications (A/B Class?) but not in a C Class.

No need for anyone to eat humble pie, this is a forum for discussion, to ask for and receive advice. I'm far from the most knowledgeable on here with regards to oily bits and their workings, I just happen to have owned a few Mercs and tend to read up on everything I can about any car I buy.

windydog

36 posts

121 months

Friday 21st November 2014
quotequote all
Likewise, i'm still figuring out the whole MB ownership thing, but in this instance i'm further back in the evolutionary chain. My school work is complete on this.

Give me anything on fuel, that's my technical speciality, particularly Jet and military applications (and my living) but the whirly metal bits when not installed in an aircraft, need some development.

So now....

If the C200 is just what it is, and the 220 and 250 Cdi are therefore basically the same with teh 250 being optimised. Then this suggests that a remapped 220Cdi is suddenly a very interesting proposition, and will have most comparable engines on toast, indeed one could suggest that if you didn't want or need 6 cylinder refinement, then it makes the 320 Cdi's position a little shakey too, unless of course it was optimised.


yellowbentines

5,313 posts

207 months

Friday 21st November 2014
quotequote all
MX-5 Lazza said:
Some interesting stuff in there. I noted that the 220 and 250 are NOT identical as they have different injectors which limits the max they can squeeze out of the 220.

MX-5 Lazza

7,952 posts

219 months

Saturday 22nd November 2014
quotequote all
I think the ECUs are different too from what I've read on that forum.