Mercedes Diesel 2.1, C class coupe --- bloody hell
Discussion
My brother just bought a 2013 c class coupe c250, and wow, this thing has pace.
The torque is 369 pounds or 500nm and it surges forward like nothing I've felt before. Gets breathless at the top end but load it up with four adults and head up the nearest steep hill and it's really impressive.
I just can't believe Mercedes can get 500nm from a 4 cylinder reliably!
For comparison my V8 diesel Range Rover puts out 700nm but it's hauling a much bigger load so doesn't feel as quick.
Anyone else driven this car?
The torque is 369 pounds or 500nm and it surges forward like nothing I've felt before. Gets breathless at the top end but load it up with four adults and head up the nearest steep hill and it's really impressive.
I just can't believe Mercedes can get 500nm from a 4 cylinder reliably!
For comparison my V8 diesel Range Rover puts out 700nm but it's hauling a much bigger load so doesn't feel as quick.
Anyone else driven this car?
Edited by robm3 on Thursday 3rd April 07:52
I've got the same engine in my SLK, and it's fantastic. I prefer it to the 5l V8 in my old SL. I get 68mpg going to work too. The torque is bonkers in such a small car. Love it.
Of course the reality is that it's s
t, because it's just a poxy four pot diesel which is no way good enough for the cloud-cuckoo land fantasists who occupy most of PH. 
Of course the reality is that it's s
t, because it's just a poxy four pot diesel which is no way good enough for the cloud-cuckoo land fantasists who occupy most of PH. Dog Star said:
I've got the same engine in my SLK, and it's fantastic. I prefer it to the 5l V8 in my old SL. I get 68mpg going to work too. The torque is bonkers in such a small car. Love it.
Really?That's 20% more than Mercedes claims, which means about 40% more than real world figures.
Dog Star said:
I've got the same engine in my SLK, and it's fantastic. I prefer it to the 5l V8 in my old SL. I get 68mpg going to work too. The torque is bonkers in such a small car. Love it.
Of course the reality is that it's st, because it's just a poxy four pot diesel which is no way good enough for the cloud-cuckoo land fantasists who occupy most of PH.
Hand in your membership card on the way out!Of course the reality is that it's s
t, because it's just a poxy four pot diesel which is no way good enough for the cloud-cuckoo land fantasists who occupy most of PH. 
Another person who thinks the outright torque figure means the car is faster than a petrol
The torque figure is largely irrelevant because it's power which propels you and also reaches the higher top speed.
It's 7.0 to 60mph and 149mph tops, that's not especially quick.
For comparison a BMW 328i has considerably less torque (although it produces it's peak torque over a MUCH wider band than the diesel because it's petrol and turbo charged, so it'll have more in-gear shove/be developing more power more of the time than the diesel) but because it revs higher it makes 245bhp. Despite a similar mass it's below 6 seconds to 60mph and will hit a 155mph limiter, despite having less torque.
For the record, it actually (surprisingly!) develops it's peak torque at an even lower rpm than the diesel.....1250-4800rpm vs 1600-1800rpm for the diesel.
The torque figure is largely irrelevant because it's power which propels you and also reaches the higher top speed.
It's 7.0 to 60mph and 149mph tops, that's not especially quick.
For comparison a BMW 328i has considerably less torque (although it produces it's peak torque over a MUCH wider band than the diesel because it's petrol and turbo charged, so it'll have more in-gear shove/be developing more power more of the time than the diesel) but because it revs higher it makes 245bhp. Despite a similar mass it's below 6 seconds to 60mph and will hit a 155mph limiter, despite having less torque.
For the record, it actually (surprisingly!) develops it's peak torque at an even lower rpm than the diesel.....1250-4800rpm vs 1600-1800rpm for the diesel.
eldar said:
cheddar said:
Really?
That's 20% more than Mercedes claims, which means about 40% more than real world figures.
Possible, I can get that sort of figure driving like a nervy nun. Realistically 40 to 50MPG.That's 20% more than Mercedes claims, which means about 40% more than real world figures.
Sure your comparing like with like? Official stats are online with what the other chap stated so your economy is notably down
Welshbeef said:
And how does this compare against the BMW x23d or the x20d??
As far as in aware BMW have the edge on all and its a game of car and mouse as in BMW are always a generation ahead of the others.
Torque on the BMW is lower, but it develops it over a wider range, it therefore produces a little more power and is slightly quicker to 60 and has a higher top speed.As far as in aware BMW have the edge on all and its a game of car and mouse as in BMW are always a generation ahead of the others.
edit - that's the 325d, which is a 2.0 litre 4 cylinder so a slightly smaller engine too.
Edited by E65Ross on Saturday 29th March 22:01
eldar said:
cheddar said:
Really?
That's 20% more than Mercedes claims, which means about 40% more than real world figures.
Possible, I can get that sort of figure driving like a nervy nun. Realistically 40 to 50MPG.That's 20% more than Mercedes claims, which means about 40% more than real world figures.
Or just for a portion of it on a quiet B road at 50mph?
I barely know of any car that can average 68mpg let alone a 2.1 litre 369lbft torque, 150mph sportscar.
Welshbeef said:
http://www.carmagazine.co.uk/Drives/Search-Results...
Sure your comparing like with like? Official stats are online with what the other chap stated so your economy is notably down
I drive a 2012 C250CDI, so same engine as the OP. I know someone who has averaged 59mpg over 37,000 miles in a similar car, though that is long motorway trips so ideal conditions.Sure your comparing like with like? Official stats are online with what the other chap stated so your economy is notably down
I do mainly urban stop/start stuff, and average 42mpg.
cheddar said:
68mpg from start-up on your driveway to journey's end?
Or just for a portion of it on a quiet B road at 50mph?
I barely know of any car that can average 68mpg let alone a 2.1 litre 369lbft torque, 150mph sportscar.
I'd hardly call a car doing 60 in 7 a sports car its pretty average to be honest. Or just for a portion of it on a quiet B road at 50mph?
I barely know of any car that can average 68mpg let alone a 2.1 litre 369lbft torque, 150mph sportscar.
The thing is with these mega mpgs from decent bhp cars its down to the superb 8 or even 9 speed gearbox with coast functions. It means at 70mph you might actually be idling in 9th gear as to sustain 70mph you only need 30bhp - a modern day overdrive if you like. That is how its done.
I had one of these from new in a '59' saloon ...swift & fun when it went, never more than 51/52mpg, usually low 40's and rattled more than a tin of marbles. Broke regularly too....
Six cyl diesel BM replaced it to huge sighs of relief. New gen 4 pot diesels just seem over stressed and too highly tuned.
Six cyl diesel BM replaced it to huge sighs of relief. New gen 4 pot diesels just seem over stressed and too highly tuned.
E65Ross said:
Another person who thinks the outright torque figure means the car is faster than a petrol
The torque figure is largely irrelevant because it's power which propels you and also reaches the higher top speed.
It's 7.0 to 60mph and 149mph tops, that's not especially quick.
For comparison a BMW 328i has considerably less torque (although it produces it's peak torque over a MUCH wider band than the diesel because it's petrol and turbo charged, so it'll have more in-gear shove/be developing more power more of the time than the diesel) but because it revs higher it makes 245bhp. Despite a similar mass it's below 6 seconds to 60mph and will hit a 155mph limiter, despite having less torque.
For the record, it actually (surprisingly!) develops it's peak torque at an even lower rpm than the diesel.....1250-4800rpm vs 1600-1800rpm for the diesel.
I'm sorry, but that's utter bThe torque figure is largely irrelevant because it's power which propels you and also reaches the higher top speed.
It's 7.0 to 60mph and 149mph tops, that's not especially quick.
For comparison a BMW 328i has considerably less torque (although it produces it's peak torque over a MUCH wider band than the diesel because it's petrol and turbo charged, so it'll have more in-gear shove/be developing more power more of the time than the diesel) but because it revs higher it makes 245bhp. Despite a similar mass it's below 6 seconds to 60mph and will hit a 155mph limiter, despite having less torque.
For the record, it actually (surprisingly!) develops it's peak torque at an even lower rpm than the diesel.....1250-4800rpm vs 1600-1800rpm for the diesel.
ks.Power = Torque * RPM /5252
So, power is totally dependent on torque (and gearing), and thus relevant in every way.
Torque delivery characteristics of petrol and diesel engine are usually very different, hence the difference in gearing and driving experience.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff