I am interested in buying a Merc C Class and have found a dealer offering a 1997 1.8 Sport and a 1996 2.5TD Estate, both at the same price (£8995). The Sport has the advantage of lower mileage (35K against 84K) but I am tempted by the extra economy of the Diesel.
Can anyone give me any information on Mercedes cars of that age please and also the relative merits/drawbacks of the two variants? Also one or two people have said that Mercs built in the last few years are not as well built as they used to be.
I would be grateful for any comments
|
Having driven c-classes with both engines I can say that the diesel is by far the better engine and 84k for that engine is not an awfull lot if its been maintained properly.
|
|
I'll second that - I know a few people who drive Mercs and those diesel engines are very robust as well as refined, so the one you're looking at should last at least 3 times as many miles if it has been and continues to be looked after. I've driven a previous-generation C220 TD saloon, and didn't find it too underpowered considering that it was an older design, so the 250 should have enough go for you as well.
|
|
|
Saloon v Estate preference aside, my money would be on the 250TD.
The 5 cylinder engine is strong & reliable with significant torque at low rpm, understressed & relaxed to drive.Acceleration in the mid torque range (30-50 & 50-70 mph) puts many others to shame.
Turbo lag is noticeable but once familiarised is easily accommodated.It has the advantage of having no ignition system.
80k is insignificant for this engine.
If prodigious mileage is required, carry out interim oil/filter changes at 6k-always with good quality synthetic.
Driving moderately, coupled with the the 5 speed autobox, mpg should return 38-42mpg (unless used constantly in town/city conditions).
Early 722.6 autoboxes often suffered internal valve gear failure
between 48-70k but you are outside that period now.
The waterbased paintwork can be absymal but can be protected in frontal areas.
Interior trim is decidely inferior to the older bulletproof 124 series. Engineering quality survives.
It does not possess all the un-necessary electronic gadgetry of current M-B cars but can still provide the occasional annoying problems that Star Diagnosis fails to instantly pinpoint.
Premium quality tyres are necessary at the rear, even with ESP & ASR.
The engine/gearbox has sufficient design/stress reserves to competantly cope with an ECU chip to bring it up close to the 270 models, without mpg losses.
Once your dealers warranty expires, find a good independant & save significant money on the astronomical hourly labour rates.
Full MBSH is not cost/effective on this age of car, henceforth.
It is not an exciting car to drive.It is a car that you buy with your head & not your heart.
Simon T.
|
Simon
Briliant summary!
Pat
|
Simon
Thanks very much - agreed a superb summary.
Just one further point - both these cars have manual gearboxes. Everyone tells me not to go for the manual but I have never really been an auto fan. Does this make any difference?
|
Brambob, most decidely, forget that car & look for another with auto.That engine,mated to the 5 speed auto,is one of the most pleasing combinations that M-B has produced.
Simon T.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Only concern is how long you are planning to keep your prospective purchase for - how many miles you do a year. If you do 10k miles a year and keep a car for 3 years well suddenly the diesel has 114k miles and this will be a problem for many buyers I reckon...
|
There is a small point to consider. The C-class isn't actually that good a car, certainly not as well screwed together as urban myths would suggest and it isn't that nice to drive either.
I would have thought that your money could be spent better.
|
|
|
|
