RE: Mercedes marks 40 years of the 190

RE: Mercedes marks 40 years of the 190

Author
Discussion

GTRene

13,920 posts

208 months

Wednesday 23rd November
quotequote all
Never owned one, though a few years ago I was thinking of building something nice, but I can't do such myself, yes I can do a lot myself, but not engine swaps from say 4 to V8

I was thinking of a 190 with Evo 1 spoilerkit (not a real one) sometimes you see some really nicely done examples with a Evo 1 kit.

then bring such car to some good engine swapper and build in a AMG V8 best from such C63 or E63 with the 6.2 (6.3) engine, but a M113 with 360hp would probably cheaper/wiser, otherwise more chassis work and so on I guess.

But would be a nice classic, Evo 1 looks, with AMG V8 .

so say those looks and under its body a V8 bigger brakes and so on, so most hidden.




Mr Tidy

18,752 posts

111 months

Wednesday 23rd November
quotequote all
I'd been a Merc fan for years and had a W123 280e in 1991.

Then in 1998 I bought a manual 1989 2 litre 190e to replace a 1991 Sierra Sapphire 2.0GLSi. The Mercedes manual was OK - I've no idea why everyone seems to prefer the slushbox! And it was so much better built than the Ford!

A motor trader mate loved them too. I drove his manual 2.3 16V and loved it, but he already had a buyer for it so I missed out. But his 190d Auto was so slow it was dangerous trying to enter a roundabout.

I replaced my 190e with a W202 C280 Sport Auto which was the most disappointing car I've ever owned, so now I get my RWD fix from BMW.




ES335

150 posts

150 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
My wife and I ran a W201 190E for 23 years - up to past a quarter of a million miles. In the entire time it only ever needed service consumables.

Absolutely fabulous cars. The weak point in the range is the M102 engine (totally reliable but a bit of a nail in terms of refinement). The six cylinder 103 is a far nicer engine. But in Ireland, they were nearly double the cost in road tax i.e. over £1,000.

in terms of quality, the Mercedes of that era (201,124, 126) put modern Mercedes to shame.

W201_190e

12,474 posts

197 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
I loved my 1990 2.0 Auto, and miss it. It was a bit needy though, doing 30 miles a day 5 days a week at 30 years old. I didn’t have space to keep it and it just wasn’t feasible as an every day car, otherwise I’d still have it.

smilo996

2,149 posts

154 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
The most popular taxi in Northern Europe and some legendary km's put on them in tough driving environments. That one stalk does it all and the elliptical windscreen wiper.

ingenieur

2,143 posts

165 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
blue al said:
This instead… https://www.pistonheads.com/buy/listing/12186783

No wonder BL went bankrupt
Don't know why they're selling that as unexceptional. It's exceptionally ste.

I'm a fan of older cars for sure... but I can't see any way to like that.

spreadsheet monkey

4,325 posts

211 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
Nicolas Lazar said:
Opportunity to ponder what core qualities of the real life / every day passenger car have been improved since then. Real qualities, not gimmicks.
Passive Safety
Performance
Fuel Economy
Refinement/NVH

I would imagine a basic 2022 C180 would beat a basic Merc 190E 1.8 on all of these measures.

But yes, we’ve gone backwards in terms of visibility, ride quality and mechanical simplicity.

Kawasicki

Original Poster:

11,788 posts

219 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
spreadsheet monkey said:
Nicolas Lazar said:
Opportunity to ponder what core qualities of the real life / every day passenger car have been improved since then. Real qualities, not gimmicks.
Passive Safety
Performance
Fuel Economy
Refinement/NVH

I would imagine a basic 2022 C180 would beat a basic Merc 190E 1.8 on all of these measures.

But yes, we’ve gone backwards in terms of visibility, ride quality and mechanical simplicity.
Ride quality of a modern base model C class would completely trounce a 190.

E30KB

145 posts

48 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
spreadsheet monkey said:
Nicolas Lazar said:
Opportunity to ponder what core qualities of the real life / every day passenger car have been improved since then. Real qualities, not gimmicks.
Passive Safety
Performance
Fuel Economy
Refinement/NVH

I would imagine a basic 2022 C180 would beat a basic Merc 190E 1.8 on all of these measures.

But yes, we’ve gone backwards in terms of visibility, ride quality and mechanical simplicity.
Bruno Sacco said the product lifecycle of his designs was 30 years so I would imagine he is giving himself a small pat on the back 4 decades later for a job well done as far as the 190e is concerned.

Snow and Rocks

722 posts

11 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
Kawasicki said:
Ride quality of a modern base model C class would completely trounce a 190.
Having owned a modern e class and recently been a passenger in a well sorted w124 i'm not so sure about that.

On almost every other objective metric apart from build quality and durability yes, but I really had forgotten how well they ride.

sinbaddio

1,923 posts

160 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
0a said:
I love mine. They really do have a big Merc distilled down to a small Merc feeling to them. With the sweet 2.6 engine, it’s fine in modern traffic (though really you just potter about in them). I am very happy doing my usual 320 mile trip in it.


I even have the original bill of sale which is nice - £25k though back in 1988 was fairly chunky though!



Edited by 0a on Wednesday 23 November 18:08
On the Bank of England inflation calculator, that works out at £65k today!

Slow work day, so I've specced a current C300 on the configurator, and that comes out at £55k.

Limpet

5,724 posts

145 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
My first experience of Mercedes was a 190E 2.6 belonging to a well-heeled school friend's dad in the late 80s. Got a lift in it a couple of times and it felt unimaginably smooth and vault-like compared to the Ford and BL stuff my parents were driving at the time.

That was the only Mercedes in my entire circle of family and friends at the time. Very few BMWs or Audis either. Seems unthinkable now.

cerb4.5lee

24,942 posts

164 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
Snow and Rocks said:
Kawasicki said:
Ride quality of a modern base model C class would completely trounce a 190.
Having owned a modern e class and recently been a passenger in a well sorted w124 i'm not so sure about that.

On almost every other objective metric apart from build quality and durability yes, but I really had forgotten how well they ride.
In my head I always think that the older cars ride much better than the newer cars too. The older cars generally have much smaller wheels and higher profile tyres, so they help with the ride versus the massive wheels/low profile tyres that we have now.

cerb4.5lee

24,942 posts

164 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
sinbaddio said:
0a said:
I love mine. They really do have a big Merc distilled down to a small Merc feeling to them. With the sweet 2.6 engine, it’s fine in modern traffic (though really you just potter about in them). I am very happy doing my usual 320 mile trip in it.


I even have the original bill of sale which is nice - £25k though back in 1988 was fairly chunky though!



Edited by 0a on Wednesday 23 November 18:08
On the Bank of England inflation calculator, that works out at £65k today!

Slow work day, so I've specced a current C300 on the configurator, and that comes out at £55k.
I find it a little bit sad that you can only buy a C-Class now with a 4 cylinder engine. In the past there have been some very nice 6 and 8 cylinder petrol engines to choose from in comparison.

Being old school I'm not a massive fan of this downsizing trend and the gradual move to electric. It is a real shame where cars are heading now for me. frown

Limpet

5,724 posts

145 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
cerb4.5lee said:
I find it a little bit sad that you can only buy a C-Class now with a 4 cylinder engine. In the past there have been some very nice 6 and 8 cylinder petrol engines to choose from in comparison.

Being old school I'm not a massive fan of this downsizing trend and the gradual move to electric. It is a real shame where cars are heading now for me. frown
And the base diesel engine is a Renault 1.6 lump, to boot.

I'm with you on the downsizing, but to put a positive spin on it, there will be less to mourn in terms of new car choices as we inevitably switch to electric. An electric motor replacing a typical characterless modern 4 pot is nowhere near as sad as one replacing a bigger, more exotic engine.


carinaman

19,313 posts

156 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
Rostyle said:
So its the early 80s , new company car, my Dad's choice comes down to Rover 2600s, Audi100CD , or Merc190E. The BMW 320i was quickly discounted as it looked similar to the 70s model ( if you look at next gen E36 there is definitely a hint of 190E , even BMW knew their shape was old hat in the mid 80s...) Audi 100 no good as I think it was just too long. So we knew that 190E was beautifully engineered but it was so expensive and so small inside ,sadly it was discounted early on . We ended up getting the Rover 2600s face-lift version which was actually very nice . Still hanker after a 2.0l 190E after all these years ,auto as I've heard the manual isn't that great.
CAR Magazine had a lot of praise for the 100 but said the physical size was due to the aerodynamics which were also responsible for the poor ventilation.

ARonline has a piece, possibly from or citing an LJKS Car Magazine article, that the 2600 IL6 in the 2600 could've had a greater output but was reined because they didn't want the 2600 competing with the V8 engined models.

BFleming

3,230 posts

127 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
Limpet said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I find it a little bit sad that you can only buy a C-Class now with a 4 cylinder engine. In the past there have been some very nice 6 and 8 cylinder petrol engines to choose from in comparison.

Being old school I'm not a massive fan of this downsizing trend and the gradual move to electric. It is a real shame where cars are heading now for me. frown
And the base diesel engine is a Renault 1.6 lump, to boot.
Not in the latest model - the smallest engines are 1.5 petrol or 2.0 Diesel. I've got the brochure open currently, as I was checking Limpet's comment about all 4 cylinder engines - which is correct of course.
The UK starts at the C220d, but Germany (and undoubtedly others) get a C200d - but it's still 2.0.
Petrol-wise, the UK gets an entry level C200 (1.5, ) but other markets also get a C180 (also 1.5).

Edited by BFleming on Thursday 24th November 12:20

stickleback123

9,198 posts

173 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
carinaman said:
CAR Magazine had a lot of praise for the 100 but said the physical size was due to the aerodynamics which were also responsible for the poor ventilation.

ARonline has a piece, possibly from or citing an LJKS Car Magazine article, that the 2600 IL6 in the 2600 could've had a greater output but was reined because they didn't want the 2600 competing with the V8 engined models.
I can believe that, the V8 was an ancient design even in the mid 70s, ashmatic, weedy, fragile, and inefficient. The only thing it ever did really well was turn money into noise. We only loved it in the UK because everything else was so bad.

The SD1 was very unrefined for a supposedly premium car, the axle tramp from that cheapskate rear end would have been unacceptable in a Marina.

Good article on it here
https://www.aronline.co.uk/opinion/i-was-there/rov...

Edited by stickleback123 on Thursday 24th November 12:55

0a

23,704 posts

178 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
cerb4.5lee said:
Snow and Rocks said:
Kawasicki said:
Ride quality of a modern base model C class would completely trounce a 190.
Having owned a modern e class and recently been a passenger in a well sorted w124 i'm not so sure about that.

On almost every other objective metric apart from build quality and durability yes, but I really had forgotten how well they ride.
In my head I always think that the older cars ride much better than the newer cars too. The older cars generally have much smaller wheels and higher profile tyres, so they help with the ride versus the massive wheels/low profile tyres that we have now.
Most w124s and 190s are knackered now. Even if they look nice they will ride badly. I replaced pretty much everything suspension wise on my 190, and it's great now. Despite being relatively low mileage, it dates from 1988 so the components will have been almost 35 years old.

cerb4.5lee

24,942 posts

164 months

Thursday 24th November
quotequote all
BFleming said:
Limpet said:
cerb4.5lee said:
I find it a little bit sad that you can only buy a C-Class now with a 4 cylinder engine. In the past there have been some very nice 6 and 8 cylinder petrol engines to choose from in comparison.

Being old school I'm not a massive fan of this downsizing trend and the gradual move to electric. It is a real shame where cars are heading now for me. frown
And the base diesel engine is a Renault 1.6 lump, to boot.
Not in the latest model - the smallest engines are 1.5 petrol or 2.0 Diesel. I've got the brochure open currently, as I was checking Limpet's comment about all 4 cylinder engines - which is correct of course.
The UK starts at the C220d, but Germany (and undoubtedly others) get a C200d - but it's still 2.0.
Petrol-wise, the UK gets an entry level C200 (1.5, ) but other markets also get a C180 (also 1.5).

Edited by BFleming on Thursday 24th November 12:20
I've kept a fairly close eye on Mercedes engines because I was gutted that they dropped the 3.0 V6 diesel engine in the facelifted GLC and the new gen GLC(I used to have a 2017 GLC350d with the 3.0 V6 diesel). So I ended up buying 2022 GLE400d instead(with the newer 3.0 straight 6 twin turbo diesel engine) because that was the only way I could get my hands on a 6 cylinder diesel engine.

I've never fancied a pretty big and heavy SUV with only a 4 cylinder engine to be fair. I made that mistake in the past with the E61 520d Touring, and that 2.0 diesel engine wasn't up for dragging its 1700kg weight around for me, and obviously the SUVs are much heavier than that too.