Revolutionary new diesel: but where is it?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

hawk20

MB Enthusiast
Joined
Jul 15, 2006
Messages
4,344
Location
Lymington, Hampshire
Car
ML250 BlueTEC Sport Jan 2013
Some time back I posted a thread about the revolutionary new diesel engine developed by Mercedes. It would offer S320cdi performance with A160cdi emissions and fuel economy and would be available on the C class this autumn. i.e. now.

So said the info that came directly from MB. Here’s the link: -
http://mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=50827

However, I have seen no signs of this engine emerging in the C class or anywhere else. Anyone know what has happened.? Is it imminent or have there been some pre-production problems? Or have I missed news of its arrival?
 
It has been on the German price list for a while. I understood that orders have been accepted since 15/10/2008 but I'm not sure when first cars are delivered.
 
cool , but who wants to drive about on low rolling resistance tyres :confused:

I guess the same people who want to buy this BlueEffeciency car....for all other people there are cheaper petrol and diesel options available.
 
UK delivery scheduled for 2009 I think once all the Germans have got their twin turbos?;) bearing in mind some of the problems BMW are rumoured to be having with their twin turbo cars maybe a mixed blessing??:eek:
 
Last edited:
Well, I must say that the specs on this new C250 sounds great. Very impressive. Not just the low consumption, but also the torque and power.

I wonder what kind of premium they want over a "normal" C220 Cdi and how far of the much smoother V6 in the C320 Cdi!?
 
UK delivery scheduled for 2009 I think once all the Germans have got their twin turbos?;) bearing in mind some of the problems BMW are rumoured to be having with their twin turbo cars maybe a mixed blessing??:eek:

No problems with my twin turbo.

gary
 
The lower rolling resistance tyres do work, I had the latest bridgestones on my 3 series touring, I got a constant 46mpg with those tyres on, I then swapped to a lighter BBS CH wheel and put some Falken FK452's on those, and while the ride was smoother and the grip far better, especially in the wet, my mpg was down to around 41 doing the same driving.

I was amazed at the difference, so they do work, but at a cost I am not prepared to live with, they are crashy and the grip levels are poor.



Also in the real world, with an auto gearbox you need to be careful of these consumption figures, I reckon there will be 10% difference in MPG between the 320cdi and the 250cdi at most.
If you buy manual you may see a fair bit better, but not on an auto.

The benifit will be in the handling, and fun department, lighter up front for the 4 pot, if the turbos don't weigh silly amounts of course?! :)
 
Why should the difference between auto and manual be any different from what it is now with current engines? MB always do good mpg on autos IMO. So many choose the auto option, they set it up to suit the auto box.
 
MPG on autos is always tend to get lower than the combind figures, where as manuals tend to get a little above.

Until recently a Mercedes manual would on average return around 30% more than the same model in auto guise. Autos are getting better and better, and that gap with Mercs is now down to around 10%.....on paper.

However, the consumption tests really do make out autos to be better than they are in the real world if you do lots of shorter journeys or do anything other than long motrway miles.


My point was, buy it because you like it, but not because you think that it will give huge savings at the pumps over a nice smooth 6 pot.
 
Until recently a Mercedes manual would on average return around 30% more than the same model in auto guise.

.
I would be very interested to see any road test by reputable magazines, or govt figures, that can back up that claim. IIRC even in the 80's and 90's the MB autos were rarely more than 10% different from manuals, and nowadays they are often far closer than that.

Any engine that has emissions as low as this new diesel is going to offer phenomenal mpg whether manual or auto -if driven gently, of course.
 
My father in law used to run a taxi company and alot of the guys run merc diesels, and nearly all of them in manual guise (probably because a used manual merc is cheap as chips!), round town they would get nearly 40mpg where as the auto cars wouldn't break the 30mpg mark.

Government figures mean sweet F A. Official figures mean sod all too.


The 123d has a combined figure of 54mpg and the 330d (no 6cyl 1 series and no twin turbo 4 pot 3 series) has a figure of 45mpg.

However owners of the 123d are reporting they are between 38-45mpg real world and the 330d owners are reporting roughly the same, if not a little better.
The 6 pot owners are delighted and the 4 pot owners are more than a little disapointed.


I am guessing if the C220cdi is £26,745 and the C320cdi is £33,275 the c250cdi will be around the £29/30k mark??

The C320cdi will probably come with a slightly better spec. and comes with auto as standard, and more importantly be the best diesel in the range so come resale will always be more sought after than a 4 pot.
I tend to drive quite hard, so for me the difference between say a C220cdi auto and an E320cdi auto is maybe 2-4mpg, so it comes down to which one I want to drive, and as good as these 4 pot twin turno diesels are (test the new Alpina D3 Bi-Turbo to see how it should be done) they are not going to save you any money, and in the long run will probably cost more.

This is aimed at the company car driver, and for that reason alone will sell well, as someone spending your own money I think you have to seriously weigh it up, it may not be the sensible choice.
 
Looking on the Mercedes.de website the C250cdi blueEFFICIENCY is only available as a 6 speed manual, no auto option.

Also the combined figure between the c220cdi manual is not that much different..

Kraftstoffverbrauch kombiniert (l/100 km) C250cdi 5,2–5,7 C220cdi 5,9 –6,1
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom