Sparky1963
New Member
- Joined
- Jun 19, 2004
- Messages
- 1
Can you please let me know your thoughts as to the best type of gearbox for a mercedes 220cdi. I am thinking of buying one and need to know reliability
Manual or Auto
- Thread starter Sparky1963
- Start date
pammy
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2003
- Messages
- 7,468
- Location
- North Yorkshire
- Car
- hers - slk 320, his - dull diesel BMW fleet :/, Xtrail, Honda CBR 1100xx, Yamaha YZF600, Ribble Road
T'others will be able to comment about reliability - but MB Auto boxes are reknowned for their quality. As for driving - I wasn't sure if I'd settle with an auto box when I bought my SLK last December, but have since driven several diff MB's with auto boxes now and am a total convert. Petrol, diesel - all give good performance and very smooth change indeed with a wicked kickdown 
If you can afford it the auto box is a better option.
A manual mercedes will sit on a dealers lot for a good long while , so they are popular to take back in.
When we were looking for out W211 ( new E class) the dealer we were in had an E270 CDI in Titinite red ( another colour no no ) with a black cloth interior , pana sunshine roof etc etc .. nice looking car.. till i looked inside
maunal gearbox and the salesman friend of ours said they had it for ages and they couldnt shift it even at a vastly low price.
This is coming from past dealings with a manual C180.
A manual mercedes will sit on a dealers lot for a good long while , so they are popular to take back in.
When we were looking for out W211 ( new E class) the dealer we were in had an E270 CDI in Titinite red ( another colour no no ) with a black cloth interior , pana sunshine roof etc etc .. nice looking car.. till i looked inside
maunal gearbox and the salesman friend of ours said they had it for ages and they couldnt shift it even at a vastly low price.This is coming from past dealings with a manual C180.
pluggers
MB Enthusiast
Got to be an auto IMO!
esox
Active Member
- Joined
- May 15, 2003
- Messages
- 730
A C220cdi will do a hill start without even touching the throttle-it will pull uphill easily just by easing the clutch out-if you really want a manual do not worry about what you may have heard.R2D2 said:
KLP 92
MB Enthusiast
I had an E280 manual which i had for 2 years. The manuals are not as bad as people think. Its just a nuisance on hill starts but then again if you have good clutch control you don't need to worry as i hardly used the hand brake apart from when i parked the car. The manual boxes let you have the full flexibility of the engine at your hand, an experience an auto cannot do. But then again an auto is a stress free drive especially in town in traffic. All depends on the type of driving you do and whether you are comfortable will the footbrake idea. Best option would be is to test drive a manual and auto and see which suites you. After all its you that will be driving the car and not us.
uumode
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2003
- Messages
- 1,587
- Car
- C300 AMG Line Premium Plus
After driving an auto there seems no point in manual cog swopping.
A decently big engine mated to a auto box dismisses the argument of a manual box making the best use of and flexibility of an engine. If you have ever driven a 320 you will know what I mean. It just pulls! Of course if the auto is mated to a 1.8 in a heavy body it won't budge particulary when an auto is typically slower than it's counterpart. Bad examples of auto boxes are in super minis where they mate a 1.3 to an auto
Slower manufactuers performance figures for auto are less than you would think in the real world... and are more or less similar. The way they measure the performance for the manual boxes is pretty ruthless I believe, to obtain the best possible, and the test driver revs the engine to hell in neutral then drops the clutch while ramming the gearstick through the gears. All the test driver can do in an auto is floor it.... which is what you would do in the real world.
Autos are safer in high speed driving, most if not all high speed police chase vehicles are auto so the driver can have both hands on the wheel and focus on the chase. Both eyes on the road instead of having to watch the red line in case you blow up the engine.
Autos are always in the right gear, never caught out, nor do you have to mentally calculate which is the lowest gear you can shift down to for maximum power in case you over rev the engine... and modern autos are also smoother in kickdown than a manual.
Plus you don't have to change the clutch, I had an Audi 90 from to 144k and it never needed a clutch.
Autos are also slightly easier to park in very tight spaces, particularly on a slight incline courtesy of the car's creep, you don't actually have to press the acclerator to move slowly forwards or backwards and your foot can cover the brake.
Downside to autos is their higher fuel consumption and higher purchase price in most instances, and less suited to small engines, and where peak torque is locked in the top end with a gutless low end. A diesel engine is purrfect. (peformance wise) but takes a economy hit.
However some state of the art autos e.g. like from Audi the auto is actually more fuel efficient and faster in peformance on paper by a hair than the manual.
A decently big engine mated to a auto box dismisses the argument of a manual box making the best use of and flexibility of an engine. If you have ever driven a 320 you will know what I mean. It just pulls! Of course if the auto is mated to a 1.8 in a heavy body it won't budge particulary when an auto is typically slower than it's counterpart. Bad examples of auto boxes are in super minis where they mate a 1.3 to an auto
Slower manufactuers performance figures for auto are less than you would think in the real world... and are more or less similar. The way they measure the performance for the manual boxes is pretty ruthless I believe, to obtain the best possible, and the test driver revs the engine to hell in neutral then drops the clutch while ramming the gearstick through the gears. All the test driver can do in an auto is floor it.... which is what you would do in the real world.
Autos are safer in high speed driving, most if not all high speed police chase vehicles are auto so the driver can have both hands on the wheel and focus on the chase. Both eyes on the road instead of having to watch the red line in case you blow up the engine.
Autos are always in the right gear, never caught out, nor do you have to mentally calculate which is the lowest gear you can shift down to for maximum power in case you over rev the engine... and modern autos are also smoother in kickdown than a manual.
Plus you don't have to change the clutch, I had an Audi 90 from to 144k and it never needed a clutch.
Autos are also slightly easier to park in very tight spaces, particularly on a slight incline courtesy of the car's creep, you don't actually have to press the acclerator to move slowly forwards or backwards and your foot can cover the brake.
Downside to autos is their higher fuel consumption and higher purchase price in most instances, and less suited to small engines, and where peak torque is locked in the top end with a gutless low end. A diesel engine is purrfect. (peformance wise) but takes a economy hit.
However some state of the art autos e.g. like from Audi the auto is actually more fuel efficient and faster in peformance on paper by a hair than the manual.
GrahamC230K
MB Enthusiast
- Joined
- Jul 14, 2002
- Messages
- 9,755
- Car
- Audi A3 & S4 quattro
Sparky1963 said:
I am not aware of a reliability issue with either.
I think Jaymanek had a w202 c220xcdi manual and found I a nice combination I believe.
If you can stand on one leg without falling over you won't notice the handbrake hard to use.
kjgood
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 24, 2004
- Messages
- 130
- Location
- South Wales
- Car
- Currently w211 E240, Porsche 911 C2 Cab, oh and a Fiesta
go for the auto
In my view a merc has to have an auto box, no question about it
In my view a merc has to have an auto box, no question about it
