Benz Forum banner

1 - 11 of 11 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I notice the specs on 2003 C230 Coupe is quite different than the 2002 model. The 2003 Canadian model has a much smaller engine (1.8 L), and a much narrower torque band. I am glad I got the 2002 model.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
23 Posts
definetely!!!

totally agree with you... :D
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
24 Posts
The 2003 has a smaller engine, but they have Xenon lights option now!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4 Posts
2002 Vs. 2003: The heat is on!

Any idea where we can find comparative studies / tests? The 2003 has a brand new engine? Is it technologically more advanced? Any advantages of having the 2003? Why did they change the engine anyways?

I'm getting a 2003 :oops:
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
The engine was changed in response to upcoming Euro emissions laws. It is more techically advanced. It has variable valve timing on both intake and exhaust, instead of just intake. It has balance shafts to make it smoother. It is just slightly less powerful, but uses 7% less gas. And it does make a lot less pollution. It is lighter because it is all aluminum.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
258 Posts
Lynn said:
The engine was changed in response to upcoming Euro emissions laws. It is more techically advanced.
Lynn, do you regret getting 2002 C230 and not waiting for 2003?

Thanks,
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,950 Posts
Waiting was not an option. I had to buy a car. My old 280z was too dangerous to drive because of rust. Also, when I bought my car(s), no one knew there was going to be an engine change. I think I would prefer the 2002, anyway. The conditions in which I drive make the wider torque curve more desirable, although I think the 1.8 would do a good job, too. Also, the M111 is at this time more readily modified. I haven't gotten any mods yet, but I will. Unlike many others, I don't think the 2.3 is a rough engine, and the so called tractor like sound is minimal in my car and only lasts for about 30 seconds.

I really don't think one engine is better than the other, just somewhat different. I would be happy with either.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6 Posts
Why does everyone keep saying that the torque band on the W203 is narrower?!

According to the MB specs the 1.8 holds produces over 180 lbs-ft of torque from below 2500 rpm all the way to 5000 rpm!!

This is not that far of the 2.3, and the fact that it runs smoother and is kinder at the pump should count for something, unless we all stopped caring about the air we breath.

I'll step off of my soap box now... <sheepish grin>
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
2.3 v 1.8

I just got my 2003 C230 two days ago, and the only major difference I have noticed is that the 1.8 is quieter than the 2.3, with a lot less of the 'tractor' noise.

My fiance's SLK230 has a very distinctive sound, and I can always tell when she is near the house because of that. My C230 is so quiet I sometimes don't know I've started the engine! I hope this trend continues, if for no other reason than to annoy my beloved. ;)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
175 Posts
have the 2002, for a year now, no problems yet (7500 miles) and it does not have the 'tractor' sound. a brief moment at startup and quite.
 
1 - 11 of 11 Posts
Top