the engine in the C200 is a M111, with the 4 DOHC. Do u know if its the last generation of that series motor? or is does the w203 have the same motor just modified?

We don't get any four cylinder W203 cars here, :mad: so I have no idea if they are M111 mills or not, but I would assume they are. The M112 V-6's were carried over.

Oh ok....still I think your philosophy of drive em till 400 k is good....still it takes FOREVER to get there and in the meantime if ur like me, you would like to be updating to the latest model..still it think maybe sometimes there would be better things to spend money on other than cars even though im a mercedes diehard...


Christian

89 300TE
97 C200

My experience has shown all the 2 valve V8s to have similar wear characteristics. Notable changes were in the valve guide oil seal style - the last change I know of came in 83-84 (before 420), the valve guides/valve stem diameter - came with the aluminum motors - 1980-81.

I looked up cam numbers and they have been the same since the 420 came out except in the european version where the number currently in use for US models changes. The US numbers are 117 051 08 01 and 09 01; these numbers chnge to 20 01 and 21 01 after engine number 965: 048805.

Most changes to the car were cosmetic/trim from 86-91 although the car did enter onboard diagnostics in 1988. The A/C controlled the aux fans and was smarter from 88.

Its probably more important to find a nice example of any of those years than to get a particular one. I would go for after 88- though as a start.

Look at it this way:

1998 C230 new, Canada, $43,000. Worth 4 years later, $28,000.

Depreciation charge: $15,000. Average mileage 100,000.

Cost per km: $0.15.

Projected price of 15 year old C230 with 375,000 kilometers: $7000. Depreciation: $36,000 (here a 15 year old high-mile 190E sells for about $7000. I sold my very-high mile 190E 2.3 for $9500. This analysis of course has no accounting for inflation along the way.)

Cost per km: $0.09.

Factor in interest opportunity costs on new cars, (even people who pay cash give up interest income) huge initial depreciation charges, and even with the high repair/service costs associated with a 10+ year old car, and it's much cheaper to keep driving.

I have no need to drive the "latest" model, and the only reason I bought my C230 brand new was a desire to own an MB right from the showroom floor. I wanted at least one that would get the care I lavish on cars right from kilometer one.

Steve,

Regarding your findings:
Do you know if this was the case for the 560? I thought in '89 or so they started using a cam that wasn't so "soft". Perhaps, they did and didn't change the part # (??)

Good info!
Thanks,

The US does get the W203 chassis with 4 cylinder. The new compact coupe!! W203.747 has the M111.981 engine.

Doesn't the US C240 also have an M111?

Sixto
91 300SE
81 300SD

Well, that is interesting. There was a cam change on the 117.968 motor at 027352.

What is really interesting is that the replacement cam 117 051 26 11 and 117 051 27 11 (replaces 18 11 and 19 11) are to be installed with new number 116 055 15 01 (rocker arms) to replace 116 055 11 01 (whitch changed at the same chassis break). Early rockers failed regularly before 100k. They took cams with them. I always wondered if we would be doing rockers again on these cars; maybe not.

Looks like I'll be checking part numbers on the cams when I pop the valve covers off the 560.

No. It's not an inline 4-valve-per-cylinder DOHC design. It's the newer 2.6L M112 family 3-valve-per-cylinder SOHC engine in V-6 form.

It's turning about to be a great engine, but I'm a tad disappointed at the C240 performance. It has 18hp more than my C230, but at the track this summer, my C230 automatic ran pretty much exactly the same acceleration times as an 01 C240 automatic. Mid 8's 0-60 and mid 16's 1/4's. I imagine the manny-tranny C240 might be quicker.

I would strongly consider a new W203 SEDAN (sorry about missing the Coupe) if they offered the 2.7L inline-five turbodiesel. Auto-mags agree that it's the real jewel in the C-Class line. Unreal fuel economy combined with stump-pulling torque. Our stupid low-grade diesel precludes us from getting it here.:mad:

I learn something new everyday. Thanks.

Sixto
91 300SE
81 300SD

So Steve what you are saying is that rocker arms changed later in the 117.968 run along with the harder cam that wasn't prone to lobe problems (??) Was that in '86?

Thanks,

The change was made at engine 968: 027352. That means the 27352nd engine. They started in late 85, I guess. I don't know where that engine number fell. Looking back at our shop history of 560SEL chassis numbers the earliest I found was in the 200000 range and was an 86. The first 27000 might have all been euro cars.

Actually I was confusing chassis number with engine number. Using the data card for a few different cars I found that a chassis number ending with 322258 had a motor number 27839 which is a few higher than the change point. This car was an 87.