M272

[IVOROSKI]

Would engine no 27298530968358 be clear of the balancer shaft problems
, need urgent reply please

 

[BTB 500]

Yes it would be clear.

The Complete M272 Engine Thread | Engine

Following on from my Complete M271 Engine thread please feel free to add resources to this thread for the M272 Engine. Mercedes-Benz M272 engine Mainly from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia but added to: Technical brief: 76 pages...

forums.mbclub.co.uk

 

[IVOROSKI]

Yes it would be clear.

View attachment 158678

The Complete M272 Engine Thread | Engine

Following on from my Complete M271 Engine thread please feel free to add resources to this thread for the M272 Engine. Mercedes-Benz M272 engine Mainly from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia but added to: Technical brief: 76 pages...

forums.mbclub.co.uk

Thank you BTB

 

[IVOROSKI]

Yes it would be clear.

View attachment 158678

The Complete M272 Engine Thread | Engine

Following on from my Complete M271 Engine thread please feel free to add resources to this thread for the M272 Engine. Mercedes-Benz M272 engine Mainly from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia but added to: Technical brief: 76 pages...

forums.mbclub.co.uk

So do you think I would be safe enough going for a 2008 CLS 350cgi with 65000 miles on it with good service history

 

[BTB 500]

So do you think I would be safe enough going for a 2008 CLS 350cgi with 65000 miles on it with good service history

Sounds like a reasonable bet ... for a 16 year old car! AFAIK it's based on the W211 E Class, which is generally well regarded.

The other known issue with the M272 is failure of the variable length intake manifold, but this isn't as major as the balance shaft gears and shouldn't be an issue at 65k miles. It went on my 2007 C Class (W203) at twice that mileage.

 

[slade1]

How many actually fail 1-5%?

 

[BTB 500]

How many actually fail 1-5%?

Balance shaft gears/solenoids or intake manifolds?

 

[slade1]

I

Balance shaft gears/solenoids or intake manifolds?

Is there was a potential problems with intake manifolds on M272 ?
There is a problem with balancer shaft chain sprockets.
My CLK has done 92K miles with many short trips is super quiet and no EML
All IC motors have potential problems, have just blown the head gasket on my 190B.

 

[BTB 500]

Is there was a potential problems with intake manifolds on M272 ?

Yes, I mentioned it above! It's on Wikipedia too, if you look for the page on the M272 engine.

The ramp inside the manifold that lengthens the inlet path at low rpm to improve torque is affected by carbon deposits from exhaust gas recirculation. This makes it more and more difficult to move, until eventually the plastic actuating arm snaps. You can't buy the arm from MB - the fix is to replace the entire inlet manifold. There are (or certainly used to be) replacement arms on eBay etc. but really you need to take the manfold apart and remove all the carbon deposits before fitting one of these. Although the car still drives OK it puts the EML on, which is an MOT fail of course.

My CLK has done 92K miles with many short trips is super quiet and no EML

Which of the 3 groups (based on engine number) is it in? As above the third category is just an oil leak - no EML.

All IC motors have potential problems, have just blown the head gasket on my 190B.

The M272 balance shaft gear problem was very well known though (MB issued internal technical bulletins about it), and it was a major repair (engine out job) that would write off virtually any affected car now because of the cost. There were a couple of class action lawsuits about it in the US.

 

[E55BOF]

The M272 (non-CGI) in my 2008 CLK is as sweet as a nut at 127k miles.

 

[BTB 500]

The M272 (non-CGI) in my 2008 CLK is as sweet as a nut at 127k miles.

Which group is it in, based on the engine number? Our 2007 C Class was in the second category (adjustment solenoids rather than gears) but was still OK at 114k miles when we traded it in. The intake manifold arm had failed though so the EML was on.

 

[E55BOF]

None of the groups; engine number 272.960 30 955758.

Incidentally, when I got the car, it seemed noticeably livelier than I recalled from the CGI version in the S211 I had some years ago. I put it down to wishful thinking until I happened on this on Wikipedia:

"The E35 is a 3.5 L (3,498 cc) version. Bore and stroke dimension is 92.9 mm × 86 mm (3.66 in × 3.39 in).

Output is 272 PS (200 kW; 268 bhp) at 6000 rpm with 350 N⋅m (258 lb⋅ft) of torque at 3500 rpm.

A direct injected variant debuted in 2006 under the name Stratified-Charged Gasoline Injection (CGI). First fitted to the CLS350 CGI, it produces 292 PS (215 kW; 288 bhp) and 365 N⋅m (269 lb⋅ft) of torque while lowering fuel consumption.

In 2008, the non-CGI engine was uprated to 316 PS (232 kW; 312 bhp) at 6500 rpm and 360 N⋅m (266 lb⋅ft) of torque at 4900 rpm with 350Nm being delivered at 2000rpm. This was achieved by raising the rev-limit to 7200 rpm……"

That's slightly more power than the M113 500, and a torque plateau rather than a torque peak. Memory had not played me false.

I like it a lot. It's very traditional Mercedes - wood, leather, quiet and serene; cruising at a bit more than 70, the engine is barely audible.

 

[BTB 500]

None of the groups; engine number 272.960 30 955758.

Should be fine then unless the intake manifold arm breaks. As mentioned our C Class still drove OK even then, although the EML was on. That was only the 2.5L version with 204 bhp, but it sounded great and was a nice drive.