1.5 Eco Warrior vs 2.0 Turbo - real world results

[MB-BTurbo]

Having took my B200 Turbo in for a service I was given a B160 (1.5l) Blue efficiency as a courtesy car. Due to technical difficulties associated with the Turbo B class I ended up with the B160 for a full week which presented me with an opportunity to test its real world fuel economy and compare it to the bigger, forced induction engine.

Firstly the route from my house to the dealership was 13miles, mixed evenly with slow moving town traffic, steady 40mph-50mph A roads and a 4 mile, 70mph motorway. Conditions were identical and time taken was roughly the same. Here are the results.

B160 Blue efficiency - 30.3mpg
B200 Turbo - 31.6mpg


Over the full week driving diverted little from my usual 15 minute, 4 mile commute involving a short motorway section (2 minutes over 2 mile) and very slow moving traffic. The B160 faired better here.

B160 Blue efficiency - 26.2mpg
B200 Turbo - 22mpg


Performance wise the difference was huge. The B160 produces 95bhp, while the B200 Turbo produces 193bhp - more than double. Driving on anything other than roads full of traffic the B160 was tedious and slow. Put your foot down and you were met with absolutely nothing. It was clear that the smaller engined car struggled to keep up with other cars, especially at motorway speeds. At 70mph the rev counter showed 3,150revs while on the B200 Turbo it showed 2,500revs and Im sure that this had a significant impact on the overall economy readings.

I remember when I was looking for a B class finding and reading many reports, tests and reviews. There was one magazine that questioned the viability and necessity of the Turbo model over the N/A engines, stating that the 136bhp B200 would be the one to go for and the best compromise. I honestly believe that the B200 would show the worst efficiency results while only offering marginally more than the base 1.5 units. It has the same engine as the B200 Turbo but without the efficiency of the Turbo. I would like to readdress what was claimed and suggest that the 2.0 Turbo is the only petrol engined B class worth considering and this is before all the standard extras are added in such as the AMG wheels, sport 1/2 leather seats, sports styling exterior etc.

It is such a shame that they dropped it. The drive, the engine and relative efficiency of it is highly underrated.


Sorry for the rather unflattering picture, Ive just realised this is the only one I have.

 

[Dieselman]

At 70mph the rev counter showed 3,150revs while on the B200 Turbo it showed 2,500revs and Im sure that this had a significant impact on the overall economy readings.

Was the B150 a variable ratio gearbox and the B200 a manual?

 

[MB-BTurbo]

No idea what a variable ratio gear box is Im afraid. It was a 5 speed manual and the B200 Turbo is a 6 speed manual.

 

[Londonscottish]

Small engines bad. Big engines good.

Especially when the engine in question really is tiny in comparison to the weight of the car, as in this case.

 

[Peter Hill]

There just ain't no substitute for cooobic inches...

I have had a series of B Class size cars. I was recently persuaded to have a 1.5 diesel after having previously happily driven a 2.0. It was very much as the other owner says -

Performance wise the difference was huge. The B160 produces 95bhp, while the B200 Turbo produces 193bhp - more than double. Driving on anything other than roads full of traffic the B160 was tedious and slow. Put your foot down and you were met with absolutely nothing. It was clear that the smaller engined car struggled to keep up with other cars, especially at motorway speeds. At 70mph the rev counter showed 3,150revs while on the B200 Turbo it showed 2,500revs and Im sure that this had a significant impact on the overall economy readings.

It is very noticeable that the engine is working harder on the smaller engine, and the noise level is inevitable increased. The lack of 'get up and go' is also very marked.

I now drive the 2012 Merc. B Class B200 with the 1.8 diesel and I'm quite happy.
(or I was, until I just noticed that MB now offer a bigger faster B Class - grr!)

P.

 

[MB-BTurbo]

Not much better as it was raining but at least you can see the front now.

 

[rhud]

I think the 1.5 is ok in the A Class,but the B is step too far for it.

 

[theogeor]

If I remembe correctly the official figures for the B class showed beter fuel economy and lower CO2 for the B180 (1.7l) rather the B160 (1.5l). I think the 1.5L engine was too small for that car with the 1.7l making more sense. The 1.5l is fine for the A class and for City driving but beyond that you need a bigger engine.
A few times I have compared the fuel consumption on the motorway between the A class (A160 Blueefficinecy) and my Porsche 911 (997 manual). When cruising between 70-80 miles the fuel consumption is not much difference with only 5-6 mpg between them. I can do 29MPG on the 911 at that speed and about 36-37 in the A class. However when it comes to city driving we can still do 30+ MPG in the A class but 15-18 MPG in the 911...

In any case your observations are great to know and confirming what a lot of us know about the real world fuel consumption and the relation between small/large engines etc.

Regards


Theo

 

[MB-BTurbo]

Ive just remembered this Topgear clip, the first bit is just some silly fun but skip to 3.35 for a quite revealing few minutes on fuel economy that backs up nicely what we are saying.

Topgear M3 vs Prius

 

[theogeor]

Ive just remembered this Topgear clip, the first bit is just some silly fun but skip to 3.35 for a quite revealing few minutes on fuel economy that backs up nicely what we are saying.

Topgear M3 vs Prius

Yes I remember that as well.... I bet my 911 is more economical rather than the A160 that I have for my wife at speeds over 80. The 911 will still be happy as it will be travelling at half its top speed while the A160 will just about to cope... I think that is what the TG showed at the time....

Regards

Theo

 

[rf065]

I've had a few B Class courtesy cars and I've noticed the very same. They were gutless and had very poor MPG compared to my CLK, could not wait to get my own back each time.

Russ

 

[bigmacplease]

Lovely B

Need to get those wheels for mine!

I decided to go for the B170 as it seemed to be ideal in the middle for my wife to do short trips but not completely under powered like the B150 but not as much as the B200 as that would be a waste!

I average about 35mpg with town driving short trips which I'm more than happy with.

 

[MB-BTurbo]

So better than the B150 then...doesn't surprise me. It's odd why they even bothered making it, I cannot see the point. Why not make the B170 the base model?
I think that the B170 and the B200 Turbo are the only petrol engines worth considering pretty much as they are the 'tuned up' versions of each engine. Saying that I heard rumours that they had intended to introduce a B25 AMG which was a tuned up version of mine. I nearly got a remap done on Saturday which would have made it 225bhp- not far off the 250bhp they intended for the AMG.

I nearly went for a newer B170 (B180 as the 08 onwards models see called) when I was looking until I drove the Turbo, then all concerns of running costs, insurance hikes etc went out of the window as the power in a relatively small car of a B class was so addictive. As it turned out the running costs weren't so bad but try getting anything repaired... Everything is twice the price as the turbo unit obscures every access point

 

[bigmacplease]

Indeed its like when the Focus first came out and they did a 1.4!! Its just stupid!

 

[wemorgan]

Indeed its like when the Focus first came out and they did a 1.4!! Its just stupid!

I imagine what you must now make of the 1.0 Ecoboost engine in it.

 

[bigmacplease]

No it's very good! It's quicker and more powerful than the previous 1.6

 

[MB-BTurbo]

I imagine what you must now make of the 1.0 Ecoboost engine in it.

My inlaws have just bought a B Max with the 1.0 eco engine. That actually was a surprise, with its turbo torque it has similar real world performance to their old '57 1.8 C max.

 

[MB-BTurbo]

I've just been to Bradford to night, relatively clear roads, deviating between 25 and 50mph. A few stop starts and the odd traffic lights to sit and wait at but still impressive for a family car with near on 200bhp.

 

[Dieselman]

I still impressive for a family car with near on 200bhp.

Of which you were using about 12 of.

 

[MB-BTurbo]

Lol, cant you just be happy for it? I was.