Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

2005 C230 Kompressor vs. non-Kompressor. Difference??

67K views 35 replies 14 participants last post by  Utahkompressor 
#1 ·
Hi All,

So, I just picked up my 2005 black-on-black C230 Kompressor Sports Sedan this past monday and love it. Acceleration is really nice, and the car makes me feel like a mini/young executive. To me, it sounds like a 'mini' or 'baby' AMG, with a slight AMG-like purr to it (is it just my ears?? lol).

Anyway, I know there is a non-Kompressor version of the C230, which has slightly more horsepower but not supercharged. Does the C230 have better or worse acceleration than the C230 K?

Also, are there any other performance differences between the C230 and C230 K?
 
#2 ·
The non-kompressor is slightly slower, but gets better gas mileage. Has a smoother feel to the engine, or so I have heard. Never drove one, so wouldn't be sure. You're talking about the v6 non-kompressor vs the 1.8lt supercharged m271, right?
 
#3 ·
yea i heard the kompressors are slightly faster...i suppose due to weight?....and i believe the coupe kompressors are faster than the sedan due to weight i think :) lol....makes sense to me...correct me if im wrong lol
 
#4 ·
in 06 they switched the C230 to a 2.3 V6 from the 1.8L s/c I-4 motor. The v6 had more hp but WAY worse gas mileage. I had a I-4 C230 that was all done up. Actually bought a RENNtech pulley for more power, but ended up selling the car... and now looking to sell the brand new pulley kit as well.

If you do a nice eisenmann exhaust on your I4 it will sound really good, guaranteed. I had one. Wow... I loved it.

As for acceleration, the v6 had a bit more pick up cause of more hp. But overall, after driving both, I still love the I4 s/c'd motor. Great gas mileage for the power output. As well as a nice little exhaust note.
 
#5 ·
You're right badassc230k, I was confusing the m271 kompressor, with the v6. It is the m111 that is faster, but gets worse gas mileage. The m271 is a little slower, but has better gas mileage. The v6 has really bad gas mileage, but is slightly faster than the m271 kompressor, right? Is the v6 faster than the m111 kompressor though?
 
#8 ·
Wait, so, what is the difference between the m111 and m271 engines?
The m111 is a 2.3lt 4 cylinder, and the m271 is a 1.8lt 4 cylinder.
2002 - the v6 is faster then the m271. more cyclinders. more power. horrible gas mileage. again, v6 is faster then m111
What is the engine stats on the v6, and it's engine name?
bio - m271 came in the coupes 03 to present. m111 was in the coupes up to 02. m271 were in 01-05 sedan [C230 komp]
Yes, I knew about the m271, and m111 years, and models. The m111 is also in the SLK230 Kompressor. Wasn't sure about when the v6 was used in the C230 Sedan until I read your first reply on this thread.
 
#9 ·
Actually the 05 kompressor is as quick as or faster off the line than the 06. The 1.8 has more torque and the fat part of the torque curve starts sooner in the rev band than the V6 as well. I drove both the 05 and 06 versions and ended up getting the last 05 kompressor the dealer could find because of the differences both in power and content.
 
#10 ·
Interesting....If this is the case, why did Mercedes decide to replace the 1.8liter Kompressor engine with a 2.3 liter V6 that get doesn't give better performance than the 1.8liter K, yet has far worse mpg rating?

It seems that 2005 is the best year for the w203 C230 Sports Sedan (looking at a combination of the engine and car design)...
 
#11 ·
The V6 does have more HP, but the I4 Kompressor has a much better and flatter torque curve and is faster 0-60mph by about a 1/2 second. It's never really about HP in performance, HP is a just a formula based on measured torque and rpm. It's torque x RPM / 5252 = Horsepower, this is why when you look at a dyno, torque and hp are always equal at 5,252 RPM (if they are not it's a fake dyno made with photoshop). So what happens on the I4 is the s/c gives it pretty close to about 90% of maximum torque from about 2,500 rpm up to close to redline. If you look at a typical normally aspirated V6, max torque is a peak and it's just for a short amount of time in the rev range.
 
#15 ·
Interesting....If this is the case, why did Mercedes decide to replace the 1.8liter Kompressor engine with a 2.3 liter V6 that get doesn't give better performance than the 1.8liter K, yet has far worse mpg rating?
Good question... If you go a little further back, why did they replace the m111 2.3lt Kompressor with the m271 1.8lt Kompressor?
 
#16 ·
I believe it was for tighter emissions requirements around the world. The 1.8l is a better motor than the 2.3l in many ways, quieter, smoother, freer reving, lighter, lower poluting, better fuel economy. The 2.3l's biggest advantage was they weren't utilizing the s/c to it's fullest which allowed for inexpensive and easy pulley kits to flourish and that block was used for many many years, a solid dependable motor crippled only by junk Bosch electricals which unfortunately continue on. It had a slightly flatter torque curve and a few more ponies so it was a little faster to 60 than the 1.8l but I for one was always afraid to go to the limits because the engine didn't seem to like being pushed where the 1.8l goes to red line way more often, begs to be pushed.
 
#17 ·
I understand this, but they could have just reproduced the 2.3lt with all alluminum block, and the newer technology that is in the M271. Did that, instead of creating an entirely new 1.8lt engine. Of course, the fuel economy wouldn't be as good as the 1.8lt, but it isn't that much better than the 2.3lt anyways, from what I have heard. The progression of the W203 C230 engines is odd, to say the least.

m111 2.3lt Kompressor (Fast, Reliable, Overall Good Fuel Economy)
m271 1.8lt Kompressor (Slightly Slower, Less Reliable, Better Fuel Economy)
(Name?) 2.5lt N/A (Even slower, Reliable?, Worse Fuel Economy)

I usually drive with shifts around 4k RPM, but when you want to stay in high RPM, the 2.3lt definitely doesn't have a problem getting the job done. Yesterday, I went out early in the morning, and got some video of 0-130MPH, along with 0-60 at 8.77 seconds, and 60-0 at 3.70 seconds. I'll put a link in my signature that leads to the video on YouTube, if anyone is interesting in seeing it.
 
#18 ·
There is one simple reason you don't normally see I-4 engines larger than 2.0:
Any I-4 cyl motor larger than 1.8 develops some extreme secondary harmonics when revved. This shows up as NVH and as others have mentioned make you wary to rev it up into its higher rpm range. Although this NVH can be reduced by balance shafts (even the 1.8 has them) the larger the displacement gets, the heavier the balance shafts need to be and balance shafts like everything else thats engine driven suck away available power due to the additional rotating mass that needs to be accelerated. The ultimate expression of this was the Porsche 3.0 I-4 engines starting in the 944 until the last of the front engine I-4 family disappeared. In most cases the car was junked when the engine needed major work due to the expense of reworking anything that complex for less than what the rest of the car was worth.
 
#19 ·
What exactly is NVH, and where does the "secondary harmonics" take place in the engine? What is damaged by the harmonics? Here's something I have never bothered asking, or researching, but this seems like a good place. What determines the liters of an engine? Is it the size of the cylinder shafts, or something else?
 
#20 · (Edited)
This makes for some good reading I think: Balance shaft: Encyclopedia II - Balance shaft - Four cylinder applications

NVH is noise, vibration, and harshness. I know these very well, I drive a 2.7L 4 cylinder Toyota Tacoma. ;)

(She's a 1998 model, one of the most reliable vehicles on planet Earth. I've never had to change a part on it, despite ten years of age, including 3 years in Alaska- love bragging about it)

Displacement is determined by the actual volume of the cylinders that your pistons move through. So yes, you're right.

 
#21 ·
I own a automatic 2005 kompressor and driven an automatic 2007 V6. The V6 is quiet and has less kick compared to my I4. Even when I floored the V6. The steering and the ride on a 2007 is much smoother but it didn't feel sportier because of the engine. I love the sound the 2005 makes along with its quicker acceleration. I'm happy I got the 2005 over any other year!
 
#22 · (Edited)
Interesting observation regarding the driving style of the 2007 C230. I'm assuming the 2006 C230 has similar driving dynamics as the 2007, since I haven't driven either. It seems like Mercedes was trying to be more 'luxury' with the 2006 and 2007 C230, vs the 'Sport' geared 2005 C230 Kompressor. Do the 2006 and 2007 C230 Saloons feel more "floaty" like an E320 or E350 luxury Saloon?

Funny enough, I like the 'harsher' ride of the 2005 C230 Kompressor. I can really feel the response of my Merc as I drive it, and it feels very good. Also, I completely agree with you on the sound of the 2005 C230K. As I stated in my inaugural post, the 2005 C230K sounds like a 'baby' AMG to me. I love the purr/baby roar of my 2005 C230k. It's a very sexy and pleasant sound to my ears, and sometimes I find myself lowering the volume of my stereo just to listen to it.
 
#25 ·
Nothing I drove at an MB event ever came close to the SLK350, you couldn't upset the car if you wanted to, and that 3.5L, wow, great sound, smooth power. In contrast the SL500 wasn't as fast both in accelleration or handling. The biggest dissapointment was the E350, felt like I was driving a Taurus. It did a 180 on one of the turns where I lost it and it was the sport model with the 18" wheels.
 
#26 ·
So the SLK350 is the most nimble, even over an SL500? Why is that so? weight?

Also, what role do the fatter stock all-season tires play regarding the C230K and C320K Sport Saloons vs. the C320, C350, C280, and C240 luxury Saloons? Do they allow for sharper turns and cornering?

Also, the ride hight of the 07-08 E350 sport is lower than that of the E350 luxury, right?
 
#27 ·
The SL500 felt heavy and pushed through corners, didn't carve them like the SLK350. The closest car I had in the past to it was my '85 Vette and even then I think the SLK350 handled better. Don't know about ride height of the new E350 sport model but the one I drove was the sport/amg package model (not E55, just amg appearance package with the 18" wheels) for 2005. My buddy's SLK350 comes off lease towards the end of 2008. It's got low miles, like 18K, maybe have 25K by then. I'm thinking about it but it's bright red, don't know if I can own a bright red car. I like red, just don't know about it every single day.
 
#29 ·
hey guys i drove an `05 nissan altima for a year and its acceleration was really sensitive and now when i got my `05 230k i noticed that i had to actually press gas pedal to get some real acceleration. i dont really feel it until it hits a little over 3k rpm. i still LOVE the car but i was just wondering if this is normal for `05 230k
 
#31 ·
It's normal. No matter how harsh I try to drive the car to make it learn a rougher driving style, it still not as sensitive as any of my friends non-mercedes cars. That's just how it was designed. You could however get a Sprint Booster which alters the throttle sensitivity which eliminates most of the lags. I personally do not have one but if you search there's been threads discussing this.
 
#30 ·
hey guys i drove an `05 nissan altima for a year and its acceleration was really sensitive and now when i got my `05 230k i noticed that i had to actually press gas pedal to get some real acceleration. i dont really feel it until it hits a little over 3k rpm. i still LOVE the car but i was just wondering if this is normal for `05 230k
You need to start giving it some more throttle when you want to accelerate faster. Even going around 40mph the transmission is already in 5th. So, if you barely press the pedal some more at that speed it will stay in last gear... At about half throttle the car will downshift into a lower gear. Full throttle will downshift into the lowest possible gear.
 
#32 ·
It's normal. No matter how harsh I try to drive the car to make it learn a rougher driving style, it still not as sensitive as any of my friends non-mercedes cars. That's just how it was designed. You could however get a Sprint Booster which alters the throttle sensitivity which eliminates most of the lags. I personally do not have one but if you search there's been threads discussing this.
I think once you get used to the transmission it seems setup very good. 05' might have a different transmission than my 02' though? Lately I have been using the manual automatic to keep the car in either 3rd, or 4th. Helps warm up the engine faster, and will give you more acceleration with less throttle applied than in economy 5th...
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top