German Car Zone

For years, Mercedes-Benz has fed its U.S. customers a diet of ever-more-powerful engines in its E-class sedan. It's been decades since the forebearer to today's E-class had a four-cylinder engine behind its signature radiator grille - at least in America. Our lowliest E-class Benz, which isn't so lowly at all, has instead come with a six, with a V-8 as the move-up engine, and, for a time, a supercharged V-8 in the AMG version, which has since switched to a normally aspirated big-block (6.2 liter!) V-8.

In Europe, Mercedes offers those same engines, but they're the tippy top of a much larger pyramid. Four-cylinder gasoline engines and diesels, considered insufficiently muscular to power a compact C-class over here, comprise the bulk of E-class sales over there. For 2010, the redesigned E-class has a new family of four-cylinder gasoline and diesel engines at the base of its powerplant pyramid.

The two gasoline engines are turbocharged and direct injected. Both displace 1.8 liters. The more powerful version makes 201 hp, which isn't much shy of a typical V-6's output and is enough to send the E250 CGI from 0 to 62 mph in a not too shabby 7.7 seconds. With its five-speed automatic, the E250 CGI is rated at 32 mpg (combined city/highway, European test procedures). It's lesser powered but more economical sibling is good for 181 hp and is a full second slower to 62 mph, but returns 35 mpg in the E200 CGI, which has a standard six-speed manual.


Full Story: Automobile Magazine - GREEN: First Drive: 2010 Mercedes-Benz E220 CDI Diesel


M

Loving this new E220 CDI. I am pleased to hear that the engine is now even more refined. Should be so since it is newly developed.

The new 4 cyl diesel is great, although I can not understand why anyone would buy the 220CDI. The 250CDI has much more power from the same engine while having the same fuel consumption, MB even states in the materials that the power difference is due to different engine tuning (just as the outgoing 200CDI was compared to the 220CDI, and 280CDI compared to 320CDI). The recent MB tradition of detuning the engine to create "cheaper" models is disturbing.

There is a market for the E220 CDI out there. Taxi and police fleets for instance, but also business and rental fleets will find this car very appealing.

The E250 CDI will more likely appeal to private customers. It's like the mid 1970s all over again. The W123 200D with 55-horsepower was the car aimed at the taxi market. The W123 220D with 60-horsepower (yep, 5-hp more!) was aimed at the private market. Both got roughly the same gas mileage though the 220D was a bit faster. The 200D was popular was a taxi, but so was the 220D or 240D and even the 300D. Likewise, the 200D was also bought by private market customers who just wanted a good car that was economical and incorporated typical Benz qualities.

We can assign that same story to the E220 CDI vs E250 CDI where the E220 CDI is the 200D and the E250 CDI is the 220D.

Oh I know the MB tradition of having several power plants, but back with the 123 200/220/240/300 D models, they had different engines, with varying power and fuel consumption. With the 220/250 it is the same engine with a different state of tune, which by itself would be acceptable if the lower power version was more efficient, which is not the case here.

I would not consider an E250CDI to be "inferior" to an E350CDI, in fact, as it stands the smaller/cheaper engine is more advanced. It is nearly as powerful yet much more efficient. With the 220, it is only less powerful, but consumes just as much fuel. This model is pure price discrimination.

Well I don't quite understand the problem. It has always been so that the lesser models were bought primilarly because they were cheaper. Not because they were better than the more powerful units.

Here, what is the interest of the 220 compared to the 250? It is sufficiently motorized while cheaper to buy. If you are no peformance-whore, the 150ps 220 is enouh and gives you roughly 1.000 € to spend elsewhere.

If it is cheaper for Mercedes to make the 220 out of the 250 instead of spending precious R&D € in creating a different motor, what's the problem? That's the electronic-era.

They'd be stupid to act differently, as there is no interest in having several powerplants where one can do. One 4-pot and one 6-pot but many power/torque outputs, well that looks like clever engineering to my eyes, and the client doesn't suffer one bit from this.

Only thing is that the 350cdi needs upgrade to withstand the oh-so-close 250cdi. Bit more refined and nice center-console due to 7-speeds DIRECT SELECT won't be enough.

I'd like to find one of nuts at Mercedes and give him a good kick.

Why not build one powerplant the best you can and offer it. All these offereings just confuse and make it hard for dealers to stock everything. I think the fact that they are the same block is even more insulting.

Does the 220 and 250 really cost a pennies worth of differnce to make? I doubt it.

The engines in the 200D, 220D and 240D all descended from the OM615 family. The OM615 was used in the 200D and 220D. For the 220D, the OM615 was modified by receiving a larger stroke (87 x 92.4mm [220D] as opposed to the 87 x 83.6mm [200D]).

The 240D received a modern version of the OM615, the OM616. It was basically a redesigned OM615 with a larger engine capacity but with the same stroke as the 220D. The power outputs of these engines were very similar too.

200D: 55-horsepower @ 4200 RPM (60-horsepower @ 4400 RPM beginning of February 1979)
220D: 60-horsepower @ 4200 RPM
240D: 65-horsepower @ 4200 RPM (72-horsepower @ 4400 RPM beginning of August 1978)


There are buyers, generally older, that find the fuel economy of the E220 CDI to be fitting for their needs and the power output to be "reasonable".

Someone looking for more performance will definitely find the E250 CDI the more appealing car.

Why do you think BMW still keeps the outdated 116i in its lineup? The 118i is faster and more economical. The 116i is slow and thirsty, but it appeals to a certain niche in the market that find 143-horsepower (118i) to be "overpowered".

Some people are glad to pay less and have a 220.
Some people are glad to pay bit more and have more powerful 250.
Some people want more and go for the V6.

What's the problem with that? Sure the 250's better than the 220, let alone the 200. But some people gladly go for the less expensive 220. While the 200 will do for taxi and fleets.

Don't see the problem, really, just because Mb uses the benefits of electronic fine-tuning instead of making several powerplants? It's the same block, doesn't mean that the client shouldn't be offered a choice of powers and prices for their cars.

Does BMW come with only one power level for each model maybe, or Audi? No, they do just the same, as do every sensible carmaker!