Mercedes-Benz news - engineers dramatically improve an old 190D

  • Thread starter Thread starter homeforsummer
  • 80 comments
  • 5,383 views
I remember reading an Autocar in 1992 on the subject of catalytic converters, but as I was only seven years old at the time I was more focused on the amusement at them being nick-named "cats" than I was about my wallet being emptied by the government another decade and a half down the line...
 
Am I missing something? If Famine is indeed talking about Catalytic Converters, they were developed back in '73. Please tell me we aren't talking about the same thing! :lol:
 
So a company that had $99 billion in revenue in 2007 and is worth 10's of billions of dollars is fined $30,000,000? I am sure they care but I doubt they are going crazy over it. They could afford the fine every year. If they wanted to get past that fine they would probably losing more than that each year.
 
Last edited:
Am I missing something? If Famine is indeed talking about Catalytic Converters, they were developed back in '73. Please tell me we aren't talking about the same thing! :lol:

In the UK they were made compulsory in 1993 on all new cars sold. Technically if you have a post-93 car and have removed the catalytic convertor, your car can be deemed unroadworthy even if it passes an emissions test (which it must have once a year).
 
It's not rocket science.

Mercedes make big cars. Big cars are heavy. Heavy cars need powerful engines to give them even respectable performance. Powerful petrol engines are not economical.

Not so much of an issue in Europe as most E/S/M classes I see on the roads are powered by diesel engines. Diesel engines are much more fuel efficient.

Mercedes could still manufacture the small numbers of halo models such as AMG and black series if the rest of their range became more efficient. But this would require America to embrance diesel as the fuel for everyday cars.

And the driver/buyer should be punished for poor fuel efficiency, not the manufacturer... roll the fines in to MUCH higher fuel prices and watch how quickly the market shifts to smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles.
 
In the UK they were made compulsory in 1993 on all new cars sold. Technically if you have a post-93 car and have removed the catalytic convertor, your car can be deemed unroadworthy even if it passes an emissions test (which it must have once a year).

Ah, Interesting to know!
 
And the driver/buyer should be punished for poor fuel efficiency, not the manufacturer... roll the fines in to MUCH higher fuel prices and watch how quickly the market shifts to smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles.

No, nobody should be punished. What the hell are they being punished over, anyway? Their property? Like I said, it's absurd. Their "punishment" is inherent in the lack of fuel efficiency in the vehicle they decide to purchase.
 
OK, then the driver/buyer should pay for the fuel inefficiency.. and there's little incentive to change whilst US gas prices are such a small proportion of the income of the average American.
 
OK, then the driver/buyer should pay for the fuel inefficiency.. and there's little incentive to change whilst US gas prices are such a small proportion of the income of the average American.

They are paying for the fuel inefficiency. They pay through the gas that they have to buy. When gasoline becomes ultra-expensive, the market will adapt. Those who do not or can't adapt (i.e., GM) will go out of business and make way for those who can.

If car companies compete against a government mandate instead of against each other, then you only get improvement up to a certain point. Look at what happened in the late 70s. Companies had to churn out pieces of crap that met the standard. The standard was not sustainable for our market. Manipulating capital like that only sets a business (or an economy) up for failure or recession. The best way to have sustainable improvement is through healthy, indefinite competition between firms.
 
Agreed... and the best way to make companies compete is through their consumers.

Encourage (or force ;)) US car buyers to buy more fuel efficient cars through increased fuel pricing and the manufacturers will have to change. The US will use less oil (reducing their reliance on the Middle Eastern oil states) and polution will be reduced for everyone.

Consumers will drive the change if you 'incentivise' them in the right way.
 
Agreed... and the best way to make companies compete is through their consumers.

Encourage (or force ;)) US car buyers to buy more fuel efficient cars through increased fuel pricing and the manufacturers will have to change. The US will use less oil (reducing their reliance on the Middle Eastern oil states) and polution will be reduced for everyone.

Consumers will drive the change if you 'incentivise' them in the right way.

I think the solution you may be looking for is a more advanced, pricier way of the US' Gas Guzzler Tax. Which is actually something I don't encourage.
 
Consumers will drive the change if you 'incentivise' them in the right way.

Well, you're also incentivising other change that I'm not sure you were expecting. Like a rise in grocery prices, increases in shipping costs, increase in airline travel costs, etc.

But if we're to "encourage" people to avoid gasoline by taxing it, surely there's a good reason for doing so... What would that reason be?
 
How do you make an old diesel cleaner? Remove engine, install BlueEfficiency unit, bask in pure awesome

The Mercedes 190 D BlueEFFICIENCY experimental vehicle

Back to the future: Baby-Benz with an up-to-date C-Class diesel engine

* Driving enjoyment: almost three times the output of a 190 D
* Economy: considerably more frugal fuel consumption
* Protection: many more safety and comfort features today
* What if? Practical implementation of a theoretical discussion

From the outside it looks just like a more than 20 year-old Mercedes 190, tens of thousands of well-preserved examples of which can still be seen on Germany's roads. Pressing the accelerator tells a different story: equipped with the ultra-modern OM 651 common-rail engine developing 150 kW / 204 hp, the Mercedes 190 D BlueEFFICIENCY shows the full potential of this new four-cylinder diesel engine. With a maximum torque of 500 Nm between 1600 and 1800 rpm, this experimental car has more than twice the torque of the most powerful model in the old W 201-series. The 190 E 2.5-16 Evolution II, which was presented in 1990 and produced 502 times as a homologation model for the Group A DTM touring cars, "only" manages 245 Nm.

The idea for this unusual experimental vehicle came about during an evening discussion about the enormous developments in diesel technology over the last 20 years. The question was: "How might one make this progress directly tangible, in isolation from the equally profound changes in the safety and comfort of the car as a whole?" The result was a factory-tuned car of a different kind: the 190 D BlueEFFICIENCY. It accelerates from 0 to 100 km/h in 6.2 seconds. It therefore manages this standard sprint 11.9 seconds faster than a 190 D of the time, which caused a sensation on its 1983 introduction with its newly developed, fully encapsulated "whisper-diesel".

The differences between the two diesel generations are even more impressive when it comes to fuel consumption: despite the significant increase in output by 72 hp (OM 601, 1988) to 204 hp (OM 651, 2009), the new engine in the old body consumes 4.9 litres per 100 kilometres (NEDC) instead of the 7.3 litre figure for 1988.

But what is really astonishing is that measured according to the DIN standard used during the time of the 190 D, the Euro-Mix consumption of the current C 250 CDI BlueEFFICIENCY is a mere 4.6 litres per 100 kilometres, and 5.1 litres per 100 kilometres according to the present NEDC method. This represents an improvement of around 30 percent – not to mention the exhaust emission levels.

The playing field is by no means level: a Mercedes 190 D is 385 kilograms lighter than a current C 250 CDI BlueEFFICIENCY, for example. In addition to more interior space – the current C-Class model is 16 centimetres longer, and around nine centimetres wider and higher than a 190 – this is due to the high standard of comfort and safety features.

As a genuine Mercedes, the model 190 was ahead of its time in terms of safety technology. Nonetheless, customers at the time enjoyed nothing like the extensive array of passive and active safety systems to be found as standard in the current C 250 CDI BlueEFFICIENCY. These include seven airbags, the adaptive AGILITY CONTROL suspension and numerous assistance systems such as ESP® and ADAPTIVE BRAKE. Comfort-enhancing features like the ergonomically exemplary, multi-adjustable seats or electrically adjustable and heated exterior mirrors also contribute to the higher weight.

A number of factors are responsible for the outstanding efficiency of the current C-Class. Aerodynamics is one of them: with a Cd figure of 0.34 the 190 set an example for its time. The new C-Class betters this figure by far, however, and is once again the trendsetter in this segment with a Cd figure of 0.27. The progress is equally impressive where the powertrain is concerned: while the 190 D was equipped with a four- or optionally five speed manual transmission, the C 250 CDI has six gears available. Plus a large number of friction-reducing measures. The radiator fan, power steering and generator also operate much more efficiently than 20 years ago.

Source: AutoBlogGreen

benz-190-d-blueefficiency.jpg

It's basically a Mercedes PR stunt to show how great their new engines and cars are, but still, those are some pretty impressive gains they've realised - trebling the power, cutting 12 seconds off the 0-60 time and a rise from 32mpg to 48mpg.

I love this sort of thing. A classic design with modern technology.
 
Yasus... when will they sell the conversion kits? I want one!

190E looks with diesel economy and near 6-second 0-100 times? Lovely. And I bet if I take off all the anti-emissions exhaust equipment, I can give it an engine note, too. :lol:
 
and put a big ol' honkin' turbo whilst you're at it, and maybe route the exhaust through the hood. ;p
 
*chuckles at everybody's responses, and all the old tax banter going on almost a year ago* since this is WAY to old to comment about (a board I'm on considers any thread with content over thirty days old a zombie), i can't comment on the old fuel stuff. but I will comment on this Merc engine swap.

good luck trying to find a 190 of any sort outside of a museum around here.
 
*chuckles at everybody's responses, and all the old tax banter going on almost a year ago* since this is WAY to old to comment about (a board I'm on considers any thread with content over thirty days old a zombie), i can't comment on the old fuel stuff. but I will comment on this Merc engine swap.

I decided to dig up my own thread rather than start another Mercedes-related one. If anyone wants to add Merc news to this one they're more than welcome, and I'll update the thread title accordingly 👍

good luck trying to find a 190 of any sort outside of a museum around here.

In Europe 190s virtually grow on trees and they're dirt cheap.
 
I decided to dig up my own thread rather than start another Mercedes-related one. If anyone wants to add Merc news to this one they're more than welcome, and I'll update the thread title accordingly 👍



In Europe 190s virtually grow on trees and they're dirt cheap.

Here too... well... the 190E 2.3 16v is rare, but it's not too hard to find a lesser 8v 190E or a 190D for a reasonable price.

It's an amazingly simple project... and one that's amazingly effective... I dearly hope Mercedes or AMG will release a turnkey version or at least a box kit for private owners to do their own conversions.
 
But the 190 was always such a dull car in the first place. I wouldn't expect much change from £8k for a hypothetical kit for it. That's a lot of cash to chuck at a £2k car
 
In Europe 190s virtually grow on trees and they're dirt cheap.

Its roughly the same in Michigan. Well, I mean they're not everywhere, but somewhat common. A nice and shiny red one was for sale down the street from me the other day, and it sold quickly.
 
But the 190 was always such a dull car in the first place. I wouldn't expect much change from £8k for a hypothetical kit for it. That's a lot of cash to chuck at a £2k car

The 190 is also one of Mercedes' most iconic cars. It's one of the last of the "milled from solid" Mercs, has a classic shape, and because it's cheap it makes a great project car.

It's academic anyway as I doubt they'll release this as a "kit"...

Also, £2k? You see plenty of really nice ones for £500 :lol:
 
Back