Merc 270 CDi vs Alfa 2.4 JTDM

[phil1979]

Any comments welcome...

I am yet to drive either, but have narrowed down my search to either a manual 156/159 2.4TD or an auto CLK 270TD.

I'm after a bit of poke, but with the frugal nature of the diesel (fk you, Gordon).

Can anyone offer any real-world verdicts on either of these cars with the diesel options? Re the Alfa, looking at 159s, but would entertain a late 156 2.4 with all the kit. I assume it's the same lump in the same state of tune?

Edited by phil1979 on Wednesday 14th April 14:29

[Silverbullet767]

I may be wrong, but I thought the 2.4 was a pig of an engine, with the 1.9 multijet being the one to go for.

[phil1979]

Silverbullet767 said:

I may be wrong, but I thought the 2.4 was a pig of an engine, with the 1.9 multijet being the one to go for.

Really? I wasn't aware of this. I was under the impression that bigger was better, but maybe not so with Alfa. Anyone care to offer an opinion who has owned both 1.9 and 2.4?
Cheers

[Remagel2507]

The 270 lump is an ok engine (I have an E270 on 98,000). Its quite clattery at start up but on the move its not that bad and actually sounds pretty decent top end. If you've ever driven a V6 CDI then dont be expecting it to be as refined but its still ok.

Had a fair few problems with mine:

Mass Air Flow sensor - Replaced

Charge Air Pressure sensor - Replaced

Leaky injector - Recon unit

SBC pump failure - waiting to be done under recall

Auto Gearbox electronic issues - Replaced gearbox loom and did oil and filter

Battery Draining - SAM units to blame

SAM units failing - Full units replaced

Speedo occasionaly not working - cleared itself

When I first had it is was averaging around 17-18 MPG, since I sorted the problems and remapped it its gone up to about 25-27 MPG but I have a lot of hills around my end so may do a bit more on flatter ground. Gets around 39-45 MPG on a long run.

Remapping it has made a lot of difference and you can feel the extra power straight away as well as the boost in economy.

Mine is currently off the road while I investigate a running problem thats causing it to go into limp mode.

Just out of intrest why a 270? Because I know they had a 280 V6 along side and then eventually phasing it out all together.

Also you might want to post this in both Alfa and Mercedes parts of the forum and see what feedback you get.

Edited by Remagel2507 on Wednesday 14th April 15:02

[jamieboy]

Silverbullet767 said:

I may be wrong, but I thought the 2.4 was a pig of an engine, with the 1.9 multijet being the one to go for.

I don't think that's right. A few 2.4s in the very first Brera/159s had some issues, but these should all be fixed under warranty by now, and the newer engines are a bit different.

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

[phil1979]

jamieboy said:

Silverbullet767 said:

I may be wrong, but I thought the 2.4 was a pig of an engine, with the 1.9 multijet being the one to go for.

I don't think that's right. A few 2.4s in the very first Brera/159s had some issues, but these should all be fixed under warranty by now, and the newer engines are a bit different.

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

Tell me more about the lack of economy you speak of....

[phil1979]

Remagel2507 said:

Just out of intrest why a 270? Because I know they had a 280 V6 along side and then eventually phasing it out all together.

Edited by Remagel2507 on Wednesday 14th April 15:02

All the CLKs I look at seem to be 270s - my budget is around £10k. Maybe the 280s are in newer models, of which I cannot afford.

[Remagel2507]

phil1979 said:

Remagel2507 said:

Just out of intrest why a 270? Because I know they had a 280 V6 along side and then eventually phasing it out all together.

Edited by Remagel2507 on Wednesday 14th April 15:02

All the CLKs I look at seem to be 270s - my budget is around £10k. Maybe the 280s are in newer models, of which I cannot afford.

Ok I would try and buy one with as many extras as possible as you need toys on a car like this.

[jamieboy]

phil1979 said:

jamieboy said:

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

Tell me more about the lack of economy you speak of....

I have the 1.9 so can't give you specifics, but from what I've seen low- to mid-30s seems to be about the best you can expect from the 2.4.

The 1.9 isn't super-economical either, I think the main reason on both is the DPF - good for the environment, bad for economy.

[phil1979]

jamieboy said:

phil1979 said:

jamieboy said:

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

Tell me more about the lack of economy you speak of....

I have the 1.9 so can't give you specifics, but from what I've seen low- to mid-30s seems to be about the best you can expect from the 2.4.

The 1.9 isn't super-economical either, I think the main reason on both is the DPF - good for the environment, bad for economy.

Mid-30s would be great for me. My 2.0 145 is returning about 25mpg at the moment, and I'm driving like a granny, too.....

[Reedy156]

jamieboy said:

phil1979 said:

jamieboy said:

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

Tell me more about the lack of economy you speak of....

I have the 1.9 so can't give you specifics, but from what I've seen low- to mid-30s seems to be about the best you can expect from the 2.4.

The 1.9 isn't super-economical either, I think the main reason on both is the DPF - good for the environment, bad for economy.

I have a 156 2.4JTD and the Dad-In-Law has a 147 1.9 JTD - Not identical, the 156 is about 150kg heavier, but no 156's have DPF's on them, 147's may have, not sure - but after driving both:

156 2.4JTD has a variable vane turbo, pulls like a train from 1500rpm all the way through to 4750rpm, so none of the massive torque dollop and the nowt as fairly long gearing for a diesel! It is 5 cylinder, so sounds VERY nice for a diesel and returns 440 miles on £50 of Diesel (£1.15/ltr cannot be arsed to work out the MPG!) with mixed driving - will be more if really steady and less if hammered - remapped they will run 190bhp no worries and handles lovely! - I love mine!!

147/156 1.9JTD is four pot, in 16v guise is very nimble, does not have variable vane turbo so it is dollop of power, gone, change gear, dollop of power, gone, change gear etc!! does not sound as bad as a lot of diesels out there, but does have the usual dag dag on tick over - but not on the move, it is very driveable still when you get used to it!.... It is more economical than the 2.4JTD, but nowhere near as refined or quick - I would say that the £50 in a 1.9 would do 20-30 mile more?

The new JTDm engines in the 159/Brera are quiet simply brilliant!... standard they are 210bhp and again, remapped, they can go to 230/240bhp!...

Edited by Reedy156 on Wednesday 14th April 15:38

Edited by Reedy156 on Wednesday 14th April 15:41

[ZesPak]

phil1979 said:

jamieboy said:

Silverbullet767 said:

I may be wrong, but I thought the 2.4 was a pig of an engine, with the 1.9 multijet being the one to go for.

I don't think that's right. A few 2.4s in the very first Brera/159s had some issues, but these should all be fixed under warranty by now, and the newer engines are a bit different.

The only legitimate complaint levelled against the 2.4 seems to be the (lack of) economy.

Tell me more about the lack of economy you speak of....

I've been looking for a 2nd hand 159 and have been advised against the 2.4 as it would be suprisingly thirsty for a diesel.

My old man has a E270 and is not to pleased with his economy either (auto box, heavy car). So far they haven't had any problems with it (4years old) but the 270 (which is discontinued iirc?) doesn't have the best reputation.

As for the alfa: the 1.9 JTDm 16v is the one to go for, with some mapping it is very happy with about 190bhp, bringing it very close to the standard 2.4.

[jamieboy]

Reedy156 said:

I have a 156 2.4JTD and the Dad-In-Law has a 147 1.9 JTD

Need to be quite careful - the 2.4 is pretty different in the 156 than the 159, and the 1.9 isn't the same either.

[Reedy156]

jamieboy said:

Reedy156 said:

I have a 156 2.4JTD and the Dad-In-Law has a 147 1.9 JTD

Need to be quite careful - the 2.4 is pretty different in the 156 than the 159, and the 1.9 isn't the same either.

The 1.9JTD 8v & 16v in the 147 is the same as in the 156?? It is the JTDm (140bhp) that was not used in the 156 IIRC?? and is in the Alfa GT and 147 (like your DC!)??

The later 2.4JTD's are different, as they are 20v not 10v and use a GM gearbox and driveshafts (made of cheese apparently?) and have 175bhp in the oldest of the 20v's.... upto the newest (159/Brera's) which are 210bhp.. the 20v was used in the 156 after the external facelift and later in the 159/Brera.....

The OP did not mention any budget so it is not really relevent as the 156 2.4JTD's are all pretty similar except the internal facelift from 2002 and externally in 2004?....

I would have a 159 JTD in a heart beat TBH, but my budget dictates I have a 156 JTD and it is brilliant!!

(@ jamieboy: I know your over on Alfaowner as I am, but I do not post on here that often as there is loads of Alfa bashing!!! You coming down to York on the centenary weekend? I think it was your RZ i was drooling over at the National Alfa Day in Ripon last year!!)

Edited by Reedy156 on Wednesday 14th April 17:28

[jamieboy]

Reedy156 said:

jamieboy said:

Need to be quite careful - the 2.4 is pretty different in the 156 than the 159, and the 1.9 isn't the same either.

The 1.9JTD 8v & 16v in the 147 is the same as in the 156?? It is the JTDm (140bhp) that was not used in the 156 IIRC?? and is in the Alfa GT and 147??

Yes, but the 16v 150bhp 1.9 in the 147, 156, and GT isn't quite the same as the 16v 150bhp 1.9 in the 159 (159 has more torque, different CR, multi-vane turbo) - that's what I was getting at, albeit I maybe wasn't clear.

[Reedy156]

jamieboy said:

Reedy156 said:

jamieboy said:

Need to be quite careful - the 2.4 is pretty different in the 156 than the 159, and the 1.9 isn't the same either.

The 1.9JTD 8v & 16v in the 147 is the same as in the 156?? It is the JTDm (140bhp) that was not used in the 156 IIRC?? and is in the Alfa GT and 147??

Yes, but the 16v 150bhp 1.9 in the 147, 156, and GT isn't quite the same as the 16v 150bhp 1.9 in the 159 (159 has more torque, different CR, multi-vane turbo) - that's what I was getting at, albeit I maybe wasn't clear.

Aaaahhhh!! got ya!! I think that clears up the thread hi-jack!!!

Edited by Reedy156 on Wednesday 14th April 17:34

Edited by Reedy156 on Wednesday 14th April 17:35

[jamieboy]

Reedy156 said:

@ jamieboy: I know your over on Alfaowner as I am, but I do not post on here that often as there is loads of Alfa bashing!!!

Funny enough, that's why I don't bother with AO much - I don't think the new cars are rubbish, I don't think the dealers are all thieves, I don't think ARUK are clowns, I don't think an Alfa has to be red, I don't think the 156 was the first and last good car they ever built*, etc, etc - I don't fit in too well over there.

Unfortunately I likely won't make it down to York - it might well have been my RZ at NAD, it was one of the three (four?) that were there.


*no offence intended - I'm not, by any stretch, saying the 156 isn't a good car

[Reedy156]

jamieboy said:

Reedy156 said:

@ jamieboy: I know your over on Alfaowner as I am, but I do not post on here that often as there is loads of Alfa bashing!!!

Funny enough, that's why I don't bother with AO much - I don't think the new cars are rubbish, I don't think the dealers are all thieves, I don't think ARUK are clowns, I don't think an Alfa has to be red, I don't think the 156 was the first and last good car they ever built*, etc, etc - I don't fit in too well over there.

Unfortunately I likely won't make it down to York - it might well have been my RZ at NAD, it was one of the three (four?) that were there.


*no offence intended - I'm not, by any stretch, saying the 156 isn't a good car

I do know what you mean, I have to be broad minded with my Dad in law, he has a 1967 Duetto Spider, a 1997 GTV 2.0TS and the 147 JTD!! I have the 156 and TBH they are all fantastic cars in there own way and rights!!... But yeah, I do know what you mean on AO, but I keep myself to myself and just try to be constructive and helpful to anyone I can (although sometimes a tad uninformed obviously!!)

[V6Alfisti]

I had a 2.4 JTD 156 and a 1.9 JTD GT

The 2.4 was the better unit for me, absolute little rocket ship, good economy (around 40mpg)and made a nice sound at speed.

The 1.9 is a good unit but corser and I found it less revvy. Late 40mpg from memory.

However the engines (and their later versions) were less economical in the 159 mainly due to the DPF.

I would have the 156 for the lightweight agility, timeless design (I personally still think it looks nicer than most new cars) and economy. However the suspension can be a little crashy over less than perfect roads, small compromise considering the rest of the package imo (hence i'm on my third!)

159 - Agressive design, build quality shot up quite a few notches and was very well rated by DEKRA http://www.dekra-faultsreport.com/, deals much better with bumps, and suspension not made out of butter, but it is less economical and doesn't have quite the same Alfa'ness of the 156. Think more like an Alfa with german build quality but also some german driving dynamics (ie high grip, but slightly less involving drive)

I am going to start my next sentence with

"My friend has"..a C270 2004 Merc C Class Saloon and everytime I speak with him it seems to have developed a new fault, things I can remember...suspension issues, smoke pouring out of the back (due to a seal if I remember correctly), I think the fuel lines become pourous with age on these Merc's, so it starts to suck in air and took 4-5 turn of the key to get it going, some kind of tensioner went and I remember there being another rather large bill for a raft of other things, the car only had 70k on her.

I am sure this will be following by people saying the same about an Alfa 156/159, but it shows that all cars have issues.