Parts Catalog Accessories Catalog How To Articles Tech Forums
Call Pelican Parts at 888-280-7799
Shopping Cart Cart | Project List | Order Status | Help




Go Back   PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum > Mercedes-Benz Tech Information and Support > Mercedes-Benz Performance Paddock

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
  #16  
Old 07-13-2002, 11:38 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,841
A good point - in England the fuel cost will be quite high with a 500E. At least the oil cost (hopefully) won't be as much as with my 190E ... burning all that oil can't be good for the evironment!

I live at Royal York Villas, just below the Royal York Crescent in Clifton Village, but only rent the house.

later
__________________
190E's:
2.5-16v 1990 90,000m Astral Silver
2.0E 8v 1986 107,000m Black 2nd owner
http://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall.jpghttp://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall2.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #17  
Old 07-14-2002, 01:12 AM
Senior Canadian Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally posted by David Hendy
Another two important points are that the 500E drive only, whereas the 16V can be had in right drive. Plus, the 500E will cost you almost 70 quid to fill the tank, and you may only see 250-300 miles from a tankful.

The 16v is much friendlier on the wallet. I know, I've had both here in the States.

Where in Bristol do you live? I was there last week, I lived in Bristol until I was 25.
Actually, I'm finding the mileage to be better on the 500E than on my 16v...but that could be indicative of my driving habits in the 16v
__________________
'94 W124.036 249/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'93 W124.036 199/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs, up in flames...LITERALLY!
'93 W124.036 481/040 leder; euro delivery; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'88 R107.048 441/409 leder; Euro lights
'87 W201.034 199/040 leder; Euro lights; EvoII brakes; 8x16 EvoIs - soon: 500E rear brakes
'70 R113.044 050/526; factory alloys; Euro lights
Reply With Quote
  #18  
Old 02-18-2005, 12:34 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Dallas, TX
Posts: 5,008
V8 in the UK

I ran a 250CE back in 96 and that nearly broke the bank, i remember letting a friend borrow it for a week and he gave it back after a couple of days saying he cant afford to drive it.
__________________
With best regards

Al

Check out the W114, W115 enthusiast website.
http://www.stroke8.org

http://www.w108.org

Join the Mercedes W108 group
http://autos.groups.yahoo.com/group/mercedesw108/

My 280SL restoration

http://www.w108.org/gallery/albums/a...0959.thumb.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #19  
Old 02-23-2005, 08:43 PM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Posts: 2,633
Quote:
Originally Posted by yhliem
Actually, I'm finding the mileage to be better on the 500E than on my 16v...but that could be indicative of my driving habits in the 16v
I believe the 16v made no more than 195 ft-lbs of torque, while the 500E makes over 340 ft-lbs.

Hence you have to open the throttle wider (worse fuel mileage) on the 16v just to get some decent torque/performance.

The 500E will be making more torque at 2300 RPM than the 190E-16v throughouts its rev-band. Hence, it is possible for the 500E to get better gas mileage in daily driving. That's the beauty of lots of low-end torque, esp. if broad/spread around the rev-band. It's also why the 190E-2.6 (inline 6) with a 5-speed can be just a fast as a 190E 2.3-16v.

If you like to shift and don't need the bigger size, get a 190E-16v or 2.6 w/stick!

:-) neil
Reply With Quote
  #20  
Old 02-25-2007, 07:18 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,841
Well I thought I'd revisit this old thread! My original post said I knew I would have a 16v or a 500E, though I don't know how I would pay for it. A few months later I won a car which I sold. I sat on the money for a while but eventually 18 months ago bought a 2.5-16.

I think I made the right choice for me. It's great fun but sensible enough to use everyday (though the drivetrain can be jerky). It's reasonably cheap to run - certainly compared to a 500E - and still feels quite special. It's not massively fast, at least not in a straight line, but its handling once you get used to it means you can keep up with much faster stuff. It is brilliant fun to drive, yet rides beautifully.

There are no excuses to make for it, except perhaps the relative lack of torque, and even in standard form on track it doesn't feel heavy and is well balanced. It's also very forgiving so inspires confidence.
As a bonus the 2.3-16 and 2.5-16 seem to be gaining popularity in the UK. It attracts a surprising amount of attention of the right sort. And I like to think I regularly take by surprise those who have no clue what it is .

I haven't driven a 500E yet but really hope to one day. I've driven the W140 S500 and was disappointed. It didn't feel as fast as I was expecting and needed 'winding up' (higher revs) to feel like it had 5.0 litres. It was only a brief drive though so I probably was expecting a bit much in the 15 minutes I had.

Likewise the R129 SL500 was similarly disappointing. It was quicker but again didn't thrill anything like I expected. But again more time with it would probably help. I wonder therefore if the 500E can thrill or if I'm just more into lighter cars.
__________________
190E's:
2.5-16v 1990 90,000m Astral Silver
2.0E 8v 1986 107,000m Black 2nd owner
http://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall.jpghttp://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall2.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #21  
Old 02-25-2007, 07:49 PM
Senior Canadian Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: British Columbia, Canada
Posts: 827
Quote:
Originally Posted by pentoman View Post
Well I thought I'd revisit this old thread! My original post said I knew I would have a 16v or a 500E, though I don't know how I would pay for it. A few months later I won a car which I sold. I sat on the money for a while but eventually 18 months ago bought a 2.5-16.

I think I made the right choice for me. It's great fun but sensible enough to use everyday (though the drivetrain can be jerky). It's reasonably cheap to run - certainly compared to a 500E - and still feels quite special. It's not massively fast, at least not in a straight line, but its handling once you get used to it means you can keep up with much faster stuff. It is brilliant fun to drive, yet rides beautifully.

There are no excuses to make for it, except perhaps the relative lack of torque, and even in standard form on track it doesn't feel heavy and is well balanced. It's also very forgiving so inspires confidence.
As a bonus the 2.3-16 and 2.5-16 seem to be gaining popularity in the UK. It attracts a surprising amount of attention of the right sort. And I like to think I regularly take by surprise those who have no clue what it is .

I haven't driven a 500E yet but really hope to one day. I've driven the W140 S500 and was disappointed. It didn't feel as fast as I was expecting and needed 'winding up' (higher revs) to feel like it had 5.0 litres. It was only a brief drive though so I probably was expecting a bit much in the 15 minutes I had.

Likewise the R129 SL500 was similarly disappointing. It was quicker but again didn't thrill anything like I expected. But again more time with it would probably help. I wonder therefore if the 500E can thrill or if I'm just more into lighter cars.
At 400 lbs less, you will find the 500E to more dynamic than the SL500 snd even moreso than the S500.
__________________
'94 W124.036 249/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'93 W124.036 199/040 leder; 8.25x17 EvoIIs, up in flames...LITERALLY!
'93 W124.036 481/040 leder; euro delivery; 8.25x17 EvoIIs
'88 R107.048 441/409 leder; Euro lights
'87 W201.034 199/040 leder; Euro lights; EvoII brakes; 8x16 EvoIs - soon: 500E rear brakes
'70 R113.044 050/526; factory alloys; Euro lights
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 02-25-2007, 10:47 PM
Ara T.'s Avatar
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Santa Rosa, CA
Posts: 2,075
The w201 will always be a better handler thanks to there not being a big 8 cylinder lump up front and much smaller dimensions and probably 700 lbs less weight. That is quite significant. I'm not talking body roll here, but rather the ability to toss the car around and feel what is going on with the tires. I am betting the 500E has more grip due to bigger tires but grip is definitely not handling.

If you want a cruiser get the 500E, if you want the handler get the 190E.
__________________
1985 CA 300D Turbo , 213K mi
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 02-25-2007, 11:19 PM
t walgamuth's Avatar
dieselarchitect
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Lafayette Indiana
Posts: 34,592
i wouldn't mind having either car, but if i could get a euro 2.5 with a five speed i would take that over the 500e, i think.

on a smaller engine like that an automatic would be like dragging around a big 200 pound bag behind the car.

imho

tom w
__________________
[SIGPIC] Diesel loving autocrossing grandpa Architect. 08 Dodge 3/4 ton with Cummins & six speed; I have had about 35 benzes. I have a 39 Studebaker Coupe Express pickup in which I have had installed a 617 turbo and a five speed manual.[SIGPIC]

..I also have a 427 Cobra replica with an aluminum chassis.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 02-26-2007, 12:26 AM
Glen's Avatar
...auto enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Carlsbad, CA USA
Posts: 1,187
Having owned both at the same time over several years I can say that the 16V is definitely the better "handler" but with almost twice the horse power and torque the 500 will always be faster from point A to point B on any public road given equal drivers. On the flip side, the 500 driver won't be having as much fun.
__________________
Glen Tokuhara
Beauty & the Beast and the wagon that could!
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 02-26-2007, 04:34 AM
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: England
Posts: 1,841
Quote:
Originally Posted by Glen View Post
Having owned both at the same time over several years I can say that the 16V is definitely the better "handler" but with almost twice the horse power and torque the 500 will always be faster from point A to point B on any public road given equal drivers. On the flip side, the 500 driver won't be having as much fun.
That's pretty much what you said 4 1/2 years ago (first page of thread!)
__________________
190E's:
2.5-16v 1990 90,000m Astral Silver
2.0E 8v 1986 107,000m Black 2nd owner
http://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall.jpghttp://www.maylane.demon.co.uk/190esmall2.jpg
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 02-26-2007, 01:46 PM
Glen's Avatar
...auto enthusiast
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Carlsbad, CA USA
Posts: 1,187
Quote:
Originally Posted by pentoman View Post
That's pretty much what you said 4 1/2 years ago (first page of thread!)
LOL. I should have gone back and looked before posting. At least I'm consistent!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On




All times are GMT -4. The time now is 11:33 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2018 Pelican Parts, LLC - Posts may be archived for display on the Peach Parts or Pelican Parts Website -    DMCA Registered Agent Contact Page