• The Forums are now open to new registrations, adverts are also being de-tuned.

190 Evo 1

Thats a beautiful machine! I really hope that doesn't sell, im actually in the process of saving for one and am seriously considering this.
 
I thought the Evo models normally go for high teens or more, or is that just the Evo II?

Anyway, looks nice:

avantgarde : MERCEDES BENZ 190E EVOLUTION 1

Over to Will

You're thinking of Evo-IIs price-wise Alex.

That Evolution-I is a nice enough example, but it's just a bit too expensive IMHO. It's been advertised for quite a while now.

I've seen them sell for anything between £6/7k (!) and upwards - I'd personally say that the Avantgarde example would be easier to move on at around £10-12k tops. That's if it's as nice in the flesh as it looks - I'm not keen on that exhaust though.

Being that the standard Evo isn't really any quicker than a regular 2.5-16 (unless it has the 'power pack' upgrade), and are LHD, you really need to want one to pay top money for them.

A properly mint, low mileage example could obviously sell for more but I do think that most of these rare/collectable models are priced optimisitically for the long run rather than priced to sell. Point in case being the £40k+ (:rolleyes:) MCP Evo-II :o...

Will
 
So whats the difference with an Evo II?

Are they really that good to drive? i know how much you liked your 190
 
i think it's just uprated internals, reworked suspension and a bodykit with a lower drag coefficient.

I'm sure you could build relatively easily from a standard car.
 
according to the ME article recently, the EVO 2 was a LOT different and in a different leaque to the 1.
 
Evo II is a complete different animal compared to the EVO I or any of the Cosworths. The 2.5-16V engine funnily enough shares almost the same engine architecture as the 2.3-16V Cosworth, as it is a short stroke which allows it to rev even higher 1000rpm compared to the EVO I.

The EVO II gives about 231bhp (181ft-Ib) compared to the 204bhp (177ft-Ib) on the EVO I.

Both use the KE-Jetronic fuel Injection

Weight:
EVO I - 1320kg
EVO II - 1340kg

Both EVO's had full SLS suspension which the driver could adjust the ride height from an interior switch.

Here's some more info...

With the debut of the BMW M3 Sport Evolution, Mercedes' direct competitor, it became obvious that the 2.5-16 needed a boost for the circuit. In March 1989, the 190 E 2.5-16 Evolution debuted at the Geneva Auto Show.



The Evo I, as it came to be called, had a new spoiler and wider wheel arches. Many changes were to under-the-skin components such as brakes and suspension. There was a full SLS suspension allowing vehicle ride height to be adjusted from an interior switch. All were intended to allow the Evolution cars to be even more effective round a track.


The Evo I's output similar to the 202 bhp (151 kW) of the "regular" 2.5-16. However this car had a redesigned engine of similar capacity but, most importantly, a shorter stroke and bigger bore which would allow for a higher rev limit and improved top-end power capabilities. Additional changes stretch to "rotating masses lightened, lubrication improved and cam timing altered"http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W201#cite_note-practical_classics-6. Cosworth also list a project code "WAC" for the development of the short-stroke Evolution enginehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W201#cite_note-cosworth-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-Benz_W201#cite_note-cosworth_type_reference-5.


Only 502 units of the Evolution model were produced for homologation in compliance with DTM rules. For those customers desiring even more performance, a PowerPack option engineered by AMGhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mercedes-AMG was available for DM 18,000. The PowerPack option included hotter camshafts, a larger diameter throttle body, more aggressive ignition and fuel management as well as optimization of the intake and exhaust systems. The net result was an additional 30 bhp (22 kW).


In March 1990, at the Geneva Auto Showhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geneva_Auto_Show, the 190 E 2.5-16 Evolution II was shown. With the success of the first Evolution model, this model's 502-unit production was already sold before it was unveiled. This car retailed in 1990 for USD $80,000.


The "Evo II" included the AMG PowerPack fitted to the same short stroke 2.5 engine as the Evolution, as well as a full SLS suspension allowing vehicle ride height to be adjusted from an interior switch. An obvious modification to the Evolution II is a radical body kit (designed by Prof. Richard Eppler from the University of Stuttgart) with a large adjustable rear wing, rear window spoiler, and Evolution II 17 inch wheels. The kit served an aerodynamic purpose — it was wind tunnel tested to reduce drag to 0.29, while at the same time increasing downforce. Period anecdotes tell of a BMW executive who was quoted as saying "if that rear wing works, we'll have to redesign our wind tunnel." The anecdote claims that BMW did.



As mentioned 502 were made in "blauschwarz" blue/black metallic. But the last two, numbers 501 and 502 were made in astral silver.

Even more interesting info....

AMG Power Pack

Available only to 2.5-16 and Evolution I models, optional AMG Power Pack increased power to 224 bhp (166 kW) at 7,200 rpm and torque to 181 lb·ft (245 N·m) at 5,000 rpm, whilst pushing the top speed up to 155 mph. In their final incarnations, these engines produced up to 350 bhp (260 kW) in racing tune.

More interesting facts...

In 1983, from August 13-21 the 190E 2.3-16V (yup, the Cosworth-built head), broke three FIA world records by driving 31,068 miles at maximum speed of 153 mph in the Nardo Ring Testing Facility in Italy. (20 second pit stops every two hours) in a total of 201 hours, 39 minutes, and 43 seconds.

This was the time when mercedes engineers were allowed to go "free" with the design.

Interestingly enough, if you do a search on on Mercedes doing the testing at the Nardo Ring with the 190E 2.3-16V, you won't find any detailed information or records (apart from 1 or 2 sites just giving very breif information). This is due to the fact that Mercedes themselves kept this information from the press/media as the development of the 2.3-16V engine with the 190E body was so successfull and "over-engineered", that it could have perhaps jeopordized the sales of the other Mercedes Benz models/line ups.
 
"In 1983, from August 13-21 the 190E 2.3-16V (yup, the Cosworth-built head), broke three FIA world records by driving 31,068 miles at maximum speed of 153 mph in the Nardo Ring Testing Facility in Italy. (20 second pit stops every two hours) in a total of 201 hours, 39 minutes, and 43 seconds."

It was actually an 'avarage' speed of 153 mph, not maximum:thumb:
 
So whats the difference with an Evo II?

Are they really that good to drive? i know how much you liked your 190

The standard 2.3/2.5-16s were a great car to drive - a perfect package. The power, chassis, brakes etc - all in perfect harmony :)

The Evolution models are both 2.5 litre cars, but the engines are slightly different to the regular 2.5-16 as mentioned in Niks' extract above. Bored larger instead of stroked for the extra capacity unlike the regular 2.5-16. IIRC Oettinger expolted both options and created an even larger 4-cylnder engine with a longer stroke and larger bore that took it up to about 2.8 litres - pretty huge for a 4-cylnder.

I've driven an Evo and they do feel more revvy, more peaky. The character is more like the earler 2.3-16 with the 'oversquare' engine.

The steering boxes are different from the standard cars too. IIRC the Evo-I is 3.0 turns lock to lock, and the Evo-II is something like 2.7.

Standard 2.3/2.5-16 came with 7Jx15" 15-hole forged wheels, the Evolution-I moved up to 8Jx16" 15-hole wheels (as used on R129 SLs etc) and then the Evolution-II came with large 8.25Jx17 'Ceginus' wheels as used on the W124 E500 Limited and the 'Mille Miglia' R129 SL model.

Thicker anti-roll bars front and rear, and of course the height adjustable front/rear hydraulic self-levelling suspension combined with the quicker steering and lower profile tyres means that they feel a fair bit more sporty to drive. I think a well-driven 2.5-16 Evolution-II would show many a more modern/powerful car a 'clean pair of heels' on a challenging/twisty road/track. You can use virtually all of the power most of the time where as many more modern cars are IMHO overweight, overcomplicated and overpowered. My CLK55 might have ~ 150bhp more than my old 2.5-16, but I know what would be quicker point-to-point in the real world.

Will
 
`
So what have 2.5-16 values been like over the last 2/3 years?

Fairly stable?

(following on from the 500E thread http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/general-discussion/81059-500e-future-value.html)

I think they've changed in a similar fashion percentage wise to 500Es. Slightly more expensive these days for a nice car, because they're a little more tricky to find :)

The difference between good cars and average examples has increased a lot over the last ~ 5 years or so too. Many tattier examples are getting broken for spares too, which is obviously making them rarer by the day.

IMHO, they're still somewhat undervalued. I sold two 2.5-16s last year and compared to the value of an equivalent E30 M3 they were both somewhat of a bargain for the new owners.

Worth noting that (from memory) the 2.5-16 was around 25% more expensive new than the M3, but they typically make around half the money these days for an equivalent car.

So - is the M3 overpriced or is the 2.5-16 undervalued :o

I can see the value of clean original cars staying firm or getting slightly stronger over the next few years - unlikely to lose as they're not currently overpriced IMHO.

Will
 
An obvious modification to the Evolution II is a radical body kit (designed by Prof. Richard Eppler from the University of Stuttgart) with a large adjustable rear wing, rear window spoiler, and Evolution II 17 inch wheels. The kit served an aerodynamic purpose — it was wind tunnel tested to reduce drag to 0.29, while at the same time increasing downforce. Period anecdotes tell of a BMW executive who was quoted as saying "if that rear wing works, we'll have to redesign our wind tunnel." The anecdote claims that BMW did.

Mercedes have tended to produce some very aerodynamic road cars - the regular 190 was especially good in this respect - but I really can't see how the Evo body kit reduced the drag coefficient. Reduce lift yes, but reduce drag no.

The spoiler is huge, and the frontal area would be increased with the deeper front valance, wider arches and wider wheels - and whilst I can't see any references in the Wikipedia extract above I would be surprised if cooling wasn't revised in the Evo models which would increase drag further.
 
The thing with the E30 M3 is that it was LHD only, rather like the 500E, so in terms of marketplace, it is a whole lot larger for this type of car, as the whole of Europe enters the equation (especially these days with the internet)....

As good quality stock has dwindled on the continent & prices have boomed as a result, people/traders/enthuisiasts have been forced to look further away... Like the UK, & as a result M3 prices here have been driven up.

Nice M3's have been heading back to the continent for a while now & with the current drop in sterling its become an even better proposition.

And its all down to the E30 M3 being LHD.

If the 190E 16v had been LHD it would have been the same story IMO.

The reason why 500E's from here may not have started heading back to Europe is that theres still plenty of good ones (unmolested/unabused) in Europe to satisfy the demand, whereas M3's & Cossies seemed to have suffered from falling into the wrong hands..
 
Dee CAB whats your point? 500e's were LHD and some e30 m3's were RHD (being converted after they left the factory).
 
Dee CAB whats your point? 500e's were LHD and some e30 m3's were RHD (being converted after they left the factory).

My point is that if the Cossie had been LHD like the E30 M3 maybe the values of the two cars would have been more similar instead of current values where Cossies are seriously undervalued compared to the M3...

Yes a few m3's were converted to RHD from new by Bird's & probably a few more over the years by 'Barry' type mechanics who did such a comprehensive job of converting to RHD they usually forgot to change the wipers over to RHD...

These cars are usually worth less than original LHD examples even though they are harder to find, further proving my point...

Whats your point?
 
You have to remember, the EVO models weren't really the sole intention of mercedes selling it to the public. The whole purpose of mercedes designing and building the EVO version was so that mercedes had a car to enter into motorsports again...the DTM. However, the regulations stated that atleast 500 (or there abouts) road going versions had to be built for them to enter the DTM back then, so hence only the minimum built numbers.

The EVO in essence is a track car, forget about it being aerodynamic like modern matchbox cars today. Like I said, it wasn't intended to be a normal road car in the first place. The whole point of the bodykit design on the EVO II and that rear wing (which has 2 adjustable flaps, one on top and one on the bottom) was to keep it firmly planted to the track when cornering, thus giving the car slightly more edge over other cars on the track. Mercedes had to work within the rules and regulations of the DTM in those years, so this was the best they could come out with.

Clearly it worked and that bodykit including the rear wing did its job as intended, you can tell from the wins and results, hence the popularity of the car.

It was all about the track, not the road so the bodykit is functional and does work as a whole setup.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom