List of US Mercedes Models with only 4 cylinders
 

Dear friends,

Could you please list Mercedes cars which have only 4 cylinders.
(including diesel and gasoline ones). Which of them is the most
reliable?

Thank you very much.

Eric

1967 two hunnet 200 D fintail, slow
any 240D is very reliable

190D 2.2 automatic, slowest thing alive

190E 2.3-16 nice car, but a tuned up 8v is about as fast
190E 2.3-8v Id prefer the 8v actually

200E w124 body euro
230E w124 body euro

Thank you very much, Omegabenz and tkamiya.

tkamiya: I'm only interested in 4-cylinder cars because I'm very much for environment, and I also do not drive fast.

SUV's with 4L+ engines should completely disappear from this earth IMHO :)

Thanks again.

Eric

What does the fact that your car has four cylinders have to do with the environment? The most significant effect on fuel mileage is WEIGHT. Why are you not asking what is the lightest weight Mercedes ever made?

We are ALL concerned about the environment. Extremism that leads to driving cars with only four cylinders has an insignificant effect, even if everyone drove one.

The world is about BALANCE. What about folks who drive an SUV so they can haul several people rather than having three smaller cars on the road? Do the math on that.

In case you haven't noticed, this is America. I don't choose to drive an SUV, but if I did, and I were willing to spend the extra fuel money, it is my right to do so, just as it is your right to ride a bicycle if you wish. That's an idea, if you are so concerned about the environment, why don't you ride a bicycle?

Have a great day,

Amen.

Geeeez louise, bite the guys head off why don't you:rolleyes:

'I'm only interested in 4-cylinder cars because I'm very much for environment, and I also do not drive fast. SUV's with 4L+ engines should completely disappear from this earth IMHO'

Yal, these statements bring strong reactions because they demonstate a strong conviction and firm conclusion based on a complete misunderstanding of the technology and and how it affects the issues that concern this individual. This same faulty reasoning is common in other non-expert fields, such as politics and political activism. It's too bad, because the issues ARE significant.

Steve

Yes, the issues absolutely are significant. What turns it all into emotion is EXTREMISM.

I am a landowner. As a landowner, I consider myself a steward of the earth, at least my little piece of it. I take this responsibility seriously, but with practicality, rather than an extremist approach.

Have a great day,

Our originator sounds like a Honda Civic man. A new one would be cleaner burning than any of the older vehicles described to this point.

Leave the old MB's to people who know and like automobiles.:)

Take it easy gentlemen!

Eric

How about the W115 230.4 offered through 76 and the W123 230 offered in 77 and 78?

Sixto
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

if I wanted a benz in the US for fuel economy and environment I would go with the 1987 190D 2.5 turbo stick shift, extremely rare car, but about 46 mpg easy.

Microbes eat diesel soot, so its all good there.

Diesel is a byproduct of making gasoline.

If I could get any mercedes Id get the new one like the C30 AMG or something like that, its the diesel. Next year in the C coupe.

One too many cylinders :p

Sixto
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

There is usually a Citroen 2CV on E-bay. It has a 550 cc. 2 cylinder engine.

Probably the most ecological friendly cars would be the Toyota Prius or that Honda Insight 2-seater with the hybrid gas/electric engine.

The VW 1.9 TDI barely throws out any soot, gets 45+ mpg and they say they last forever.

You could run it on vegetable oil and have an exhaust that smelled like french fries, or for a special treat, burn peanut oil.

Add a teensy bit of Hershey's syrup for a Snicker's-like exhaust.

mmmmmm!

I feel much the same. I want MB driving experience, but don't wish to compromise on things like fuel economy.

The aspro W202 M111 engined C-Class sounds like an ideal car for you. I get mileage in the 27-35US MPG range, but have a very sound car with superb safety, great handling, and capable of making some decent fun on a mountain road.

The M111 aspro engine (94-98) is as smooth as most sixes (save maybe for an MB six) and is easy to maintain. The 97 and 98 C230 cars have the five speed tranny which aids performance. The 1998 cars have the "later" exterior and interior bits and side air bags. They also have the SmartKey, which is nice. This time last year my father bought a super clean 1998 C230 Elegance for less than the price of a new Accord. He's loving it.

Just because someone hates SUV's doesn't mean they have to drive less than a Mercedes.

On the new car front, look at the C240 (it's a six, but very economical, especially with 6-speed) or the new C230 1.8L sedan.

You might also consider an E-Class diesel. Our 1998 E300 got 35+US MPG and was a very large car. Look at the 1996-1997 non-turbos, as they seem to be less problematic that the 98-99 turbo cars.

Thanks blackmercedes!

I live in Silicon Valley, and the sight of thousands of SUV's (with a single driver in each of them) stuck in terrible traffic jams makes me feel really bad for the way human beings wastefully consume our Earth's precious resources.

Eric

Not a very popular outlook lately, it seems. Be prepared for lots of flaming on this board. Plenty of SUV owners around...

As was said before, just because you have 4 cylinders doesn't mean that you are more enviroment friendly or get better mileage.

Look to Honda. All their cars right now are LEV, with the Accords and Civics being ULEV. Also as mentioned, the Insight is SULEV and gets excellent gas mileage.

Generally speaking, four bangers are smaller displacement, get better mileage, and are less expensive in the long run to maintain. The Honda Civic is a four cylinder, and the Accord four is more economical than it's six variant.

The feeling I got from the original post is that the person is looking for some sort of compromise. He wishes Mercedes goodness, but in the most economical and environmentally friendly version. Even the new M112 V-6's in 2.6L format cannot match the mileage of the M111 equipped W202 cars. While the M112 engine is a lower emission engine, it consumes more fuel therefore creating more greenhouse gases. It's a compromise decision.

Compared to ANY SUV bigger than a CRV, a Mercedes four cylinder is a miserly automobile indeed. Even the six, and some V-8's are economical compared to a full sized SUV.

Doing the math on carrying capacity? Hhhmm. A C230 driving in city traffic get's about 9.0-9.5L/100km's in "normal" urban driving. My neighbour's Expedition gets about 20L/100km's in city driving when taking it easy. We could drive TWO C230's carrying 8-10 people and use LESS fuel than the Expedition. And most of the time, that behemoth is carrying one person, and it's capacity is wasted. If you need to carry 7 people ALL the time, it might make sense. Using two highly efficient cars allows greater flexibility. We can leave one at home when we don't need it.

A Prius is a good choice, but does not work well for enthusiast drivers. It handles poorly, and lacks many of the safety features of the Mercedes. It is not capable of effortlessly climbing a steep mountain pass or passing a long line of cars. A Mercedes four-cylinder car can do those things. However, for an urban-only car, a Prius would be an excellent choice.

As I said before, just dare to mention that you would actually make a conscious decision to consume less fuel, and be prepared to be slammed.

Environmental concerns
 

If anyone is really concerned with the quality of the air and/or the eventual depletion of the world's oil resources(won't be very long to go), why don't you go out and get yourself a solar powered car and if there isn't one ready yet, get this started by forming some company to start it going before we all languish in poverty, unemployment and economic disaster? This is really magic, the last couple of days I was racing down the freeway(in my Toyota 2.2ltr) with a bunch of University sponsored solar powered cars in a challenge race here fully escorted by back up cars, news cars, police on motorbikes and hazard-warning vehicles. They can go pretty fast like close to 60kph and maybe more like 80kph. However, they have to be extremely light, one person car with lots of roof space for the very expensive quick converter solar panels(they look like UFOs). What more can you ask? No need for fossil fuels, no emmissions, very quiet without exhausts, just keep it under the sun thats all! Problem is they cannot go up steeper slopes and may need charging up overnight and its got to be sunny for it to work. Sorry, you cannot win all the time! I drive a Euro C180 and the gas mileage is fantastic. The 4cyl of the 1994 model sounds a bit "agricultural" , but the later upgrades like the 1998 is very smooth and quieter. Maybe mine needs an overhaul its 191,000kms.

Some people really like to take simple things into an extreme.

The poor guy asked a simple question on which M.B. would serve best for his interest on the environment. I know, the 4 cylinder issue is a total misconception, but fuel economy (although an important factor on polution) is not the ONLY issue on being eco-friendly.

That is why in Europe car manufactures are now required to print the car's polution factor along with its fuel economy.

Certainly an S600 V-12 is not as green-friendly as a C180, BUT a new technology C320 V6 is certainly less poluting than an older tech 230 (W123) 4-cylinder.

Just my 2 cents...

I've asked three separate Toyota service departments and no one can tell me the life expectancy of a Prius battery pack. Admittedly my purpose is to find out how it affects cost of ownership more than to find out what a dead battery pack means to the environment.

Sixto
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

"SUV's with 4L+ engines should completely disappear from this earth IMHO "

An automaker whose biggest engine is 3.5L will be very glad to hear this.

But this is not likely going to happen IMHO. If my family can only keep one car, my Ford Explorer will be the one. Yes, my Mercedes 400E is a nice car, I personally like it the most, but to be realistic, my family can live without it, but without our SUV, my family has to sadly change our life style.

I will be missing all its conveniences, I can no longer easily do home DIY project, I have to rent a truck for fishing trips, I have to rent a truck to tow tent trail, owning boat will be impossible. when it snows heavily, I can no longer drive without shoveling my driveway in the early morning, I will worry about my wife being stuck everytime snowstorm comes. I need a real truck, I need a truck with 4WD, with at least 4L engine and 5000 lb towing capacity, it should take the abuse, not an unibody FWD platform Honda pilot that can tow only 3000 lb, which is the same as my last Volvo.

And most of all, I can not afford to own 3 vehicles, it will be costly if we use 2 cars as daily drive and park the SUV at home, only use it when absolutely necessary.

The chemicals and heavy metals used to manufacture solar cells and the storage batteries in hybrid cars makes gasoline and diesel look like mother's milk.

Rato brings up a great point. There is NO perfect solution.

Todays cars are SO much more efficient and environmentally friendly than those of 15 or 20 years ago it's unreal. It was not that long ago that carburetors and extra weight made for MUCH dirtier and more fuel hungry cars. 20 MPG was a really economical car unless it was very small. NOW our moderate sized SUV's, such as my wifes 4Runner get 20MPG. Nowdays 20MPG is almost considered a fuel hog. The emmissions from this car are a small percentage of those emmitted from a similar vehicle of 20 years ago.

We have taken great strides in fuel efficiency and emmissions control. But, there are laws of physics that prevent drastic improvements without moving to newer technology. That technology is coming, just be patient.

In the meantime, let's not consider someone the AntiChrist because they choose to spend the extra money to own and operate a larger vehicle. This is America where we all have the right to do what we please as long as it is legal.

Have a great day,

"I live in Silicon Valley, and the sight of thousands of SUV's (with a single driver in each of them) stuck in terrible traffic jams makes me feel really bad for the way human beings wastefully consume our Earth's precious resources. "

One of the moderators should probably move this thread to a different forum, but as long as it's here...

The key in the above statement is what you relegated to parentheses. When this country gets serious about resource conservation, mass transit will become the more attractive alternative. Trying to force folks into driving in jammed up traffic every day in a vehicle in which they feel unsafe in a mishap is just not going to happen on a scale to mean anything.

I too hate seeing all those SUVs, because I'm in a car, and I can't see around the $&%#%' s. I retaliate once every couple of weeks or so by driving my 5.7l carbureted '83 class-C motorhome into work. In that I see just fine, and everyone else can fret.

Steve