C-Class (W204) Official: 2010 C-Class Upgrades

[rvbn_]

Can someone please translate the article from German to English. I wish they will get more than just a minor facelift. The interior needs to be upgraded too.
dtd

google is your friend...
Click Here

 

[coolraoul]

Presentation in late 2010, sales early 2011.

They say it'll be way more than just a minor FL. The C will get the seats of the E and all its electronic gizmos, the interior will change too with a fixed screen (jesmb.de says the interior will be highly similar to the E-Coupe one).

New direct-injection petrol V6s with turbo, slightly more powerful but noticeably more fuel-efficient. No mods on the diesel 4-pots, already new gen in the current car.

 

[dtd]

Thanks guys. I really appreciate that. Just wonder what engines will they offer in the U.S. More important, how much will they raise the price.
dtd

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

Presentation in late 2010, sales early 2011.

They say it'll be way more than just a minor FL. The C will get the seats of the E and all its electronic gizmos, the interior will change too with a fixed screen (jesmb.de says the interior will be highly similar to the E-Coupe one).

New direct-injection petrol V6s with turbo, slightly more powerful but noticeably more fuel-efficient. No mods on the diesel 4-pots, already new gen in the current car.

Great news. MB seems set on making sure the C doesn't age against the new 3.

 

[dtd]

Hi guys,
I wonder what the new DI petrol V6s with turbo will be? Is it going to be a3.0l V6 with turbo or a 2.2l V6 with turbo ? I'm confused. When they say " slightly more powerful but noticeably more fuel efficient" I would imagine the engine would be less than 3.0l V6, so the output could be 240hp rather than 228hp from the 3.0l V6.
dtd

 

[rvbn_]

Hi guys,
I wonder what the new DI petrol V6s with turbo will be? Is it going to be a3.0l V6 with turbo or a 2.2l V6 with turbo ? I'm confused. When they say " slightly more powerful but noticeably more fuel efficient" I would imagine the engine would be less than 3.0l V6, so the output could be 240hp rather than 228hp from the 3.0l V6.
dtd

well the 350 cgi has already 288 hp. turbo'd it shure will have more than 300 hp to match the bmw 35i.

 

[Merc1]

^^ We don't even get the 288hp version, we're stuck with 268hp and no DI.

M

 

[rvbn_]

^^ We don't even get the 288hp version, we're stuck with 268hp and no DI.

yeah, I know...
is the fuel in the US really that bad? aren't there any DI cars in america?

 

[dtd]

Here's what I think the new engines line up for FL Class 2011 MY in the U.S.C250CDI , C300CGI ( with 240hp) and C350CGI (292hp).Remember, MB will try to match BMW in term of power , but they still have to show the fuel effeciency to customers too.
dtd

 

[Merc1]

yeah, I know...
is the fuel in the US really that bad? aren't there any DI cars in america?

Yes there are plenty of them. Ford, BMW, Audi, VW, Cadillac, Buick, Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac, Porsche, and others all sell DI gasoline engines here.

Yet Mercedes claims that U.S. fuel is too dirty. I don't get it. How can the others sell DI engines here if the fuel is so dirty?

Please.....anyone?


M

 

[keith100]

Yes there are plenty of them. Ford, BMW, Audi, VW, Cadillac, Buick, Chevy, Saturn, Pontiac, Porsche, and others all sell DI gasoline engines here.

Yet Mercedes claims that U.S. fuel is too dirty. I don't get it. How can the others sell DI engines here if the fuel is so dirty?

Please.....anyone?


M

Mother Benz always knows best!

Lack of cash, right now, to develop new engines across the line?

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

I think the Chyrsler debacle has had bearing on MB falling back in terms of engine development.

They originally intended to co-develop a complete range of V6's and V8's with Chrysler. This obviously was shelved following the split. MB now has to go it alone, which in all honesty is probably for the best (less compromise!). Subsequently I think its going to take a few years for MB to overcome this defficiency and start producing some impressive units.

 

[coolraoul]

Yeah, I think this is the explanation on this slow release of the new engine generation.
However, I hop they won't rush them out (like it seems they did with the OM651 diesel engine and its share of faulty injectors).

Better late but good than quick but not so thoroughly tested and ironed out, imo...

 

[Merc1]

I'm not so sure that the engine project between Chrysler and Mercedes is over or that it wasn't completed. Jeep is using the ML for a basis of the new 2011 Grand Cherokee, and there is a new 3.6L V6 with 280hp being used. If Mercedes shows up with a new 3.6L V6 it will be very suspect.


M

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

I'm not so sure that the engine project between Chrysler and Mercedes is over or that it wasn't completed. Jeep is using the ML for a basis of the new 2011 Grand Cherokee, and there is a new 3.6L V6 with 280hp being used. If Mercedes shows up with a new 3.6L V6 it will be very suspect.


M

I think that the platform sharing of the ML and Jeep is as far as it goes. I hope so at least. I think even if the engines have a common architecture, MB will be working on making theres unique, making theres better and making theres what is expected of an MB engine. I suspect both went there seperate ways with the development once the split occured, using what was already done as a base.

 

[Merc1]

I hope that is the case, but get ready for the raining of ignorant comments like...."it is a Mercedes with a Chrysler engine". Just like an Aston-Martin has a "Ford Duratec V12".


M

 

[Wunderkind]

I think that the platform sharing of the ML and Jeep is as far as it goes. I hope so at least. I think even if the engines have a common architecture, MB will be working on making theres unique, making theres better and making theres what is expected of an MB engine. I suspect both went there seperate ways with the development once the split occured, using what was already done as a base.

Chrysler could not afford to use Mercedes engines and drivetrains. The Crossfire (SLK clone) was an exception.

 

[Mr. Mercedes]

Chrysler could not afford to use Mercedes engines and drivetrains. The Crossfire (SLK clone) was an exception.

They were definitely working on a range of shared units. And yes the fact that chrysler could not afford older MB engines was very worrying. How compromised would these new engines have been to make the price point suitable for Chrysler products.

 

[klier]

yeah, I know...
is the fuel in the US really that bad? aren't there any DI cars in america?

Well with the price they pay for gasoline, I'm sure it's the very worst stuff available on this planet....

Chrysler could not afford to use Mercedes engines and drivetrains. The Crossfire (SLK clone) was an exception.

How about the 300c? Doesn't it have a lot of E class tech (W210) on board???

 

[tennmb]

How about the 300c? Doesn't it have a lot of E class tech (W210) on board???

The base 300 had nothing in common. The Hemi 300c had the 211 rear end suspension and the old 5-speed auto tranny. That was about it, I think.

The Crossfire was an SLK with different sheet metal. It was all old tech, that MB gave to Chrysler. Old engine, old tranny, old platform. So, it costs barely a thing to get the Crossfire into production. They were even made in Austria.

The marriage was bound to fail. every area MB could have benefited turned out ot hurt MB. Yes, parts sharing is a way to drive down costs. Ask Toyota/Lexus. Do you know how much of a Lexus is parts binned right from a Toyota?
So, MB saw a way to mass produce parts and drive down the cost. However they never did it. They focused on engines and platforms instead of window motors and CD players. Who cares if a car shares a window switch. But if a car shares an engine? Watch out.

A total debacle, and MB has no one to blame but themselves. And they will be paying for it for years to come.