Suspended
I looking at getting an older C class 180 or 200 around a 96 plate, is there anything out of the ordinary that i should be looking for when buying one of these.
Thanks.
Thanks.
Mercedes C Class
- Thread starter theredguy
- Start date
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
Personally, I think they are terrible cars built by a company at its lowest point when its brand was getting smashed and its cars were breaking down, which is simply against what Mercs should be all about. The new C is lovely but the last models I have driven have been poor cousins of the BMW competition, and they have a very poor reliability record.
Each to their own of course, but the 3 series is a better car across the board.
Each to their own of course, but the 3 series is a better car across the board.
Soldato
I had a C-Class recently which now the ex has. Great comfortable car that is built very well. 4 Cylinder models wont be quick and the auto's are best. 96 model you are looking at poor spec without air-con or anything. Check for oil leakage around the head that will point towards stretch bolt failure. The windscreen wiper can give up which is expensive to rectify. Rust can also be an issue.
They are real tanks and comfortable workhorses but not performance cars. My ex-s has now covered 168k without any troubles.
They are real tanks and comfortable workhorses but not performance cars. My ex-s has now covered 168k without any troubles.
Associate
- Joined
- 26 Mar 2006
- Posts
- 576
Yeah dont get one... minght aswel get a mondeo, go for a 3 Series 
Soldato
My parents have had a 96 N reg one since 98 and it's covered nearly 120k and the only thing other than routine servicing has been an immobiliser fault which cost £40 to rectify.
Plenty to think about, cheers guys.
mine is the 4 cylinder kompressor sport model 2.3litre supercharged, 140k on it now (put 20k on myself) and had no problems except routine servicing and a about 5k ago i changed the clutch as the original 11 year old one's release bearing was whining.
as for kit mine has
heated mirrors,
leather,
electric memory seat,
leccy windows,
dual zone climate control
leccy sunroof,
cruise,
and quite a few other little bits like being able to drop the rear headrests by pressing a button.
the sport model i have has lowered suspension (this gives quite a bumpy ride though), sport bumpers and AMG monoblock 17" alloys, mine is also a manual which i would probably not choose again the manual box is clunky and not the best.
mpg i average about 25-27 which i guess is not to bad for a 240bhp (actually 237 when rr'd) car (stock these are 192bhp mine has had a kleeman sc pulley and remap to suit)
common problems with the age of 92-96 cars are the engine wiring harnesses being made of mercedes own biodegradable cable. this is the biggest cause of the "OMGZOR IT SUCKS AND BREAKS DOWN LOADS" crowd, basically if your good with a soldering iron you can redo the wiring harness for about £30 in automotive cable and never have this issue, this is the next job on mine. the other option is to buy a new harness from MB for circa £1000, however this problem is most common on the kompressor and 6 cylinder models due to the extra under bonnet heat.
Rust wise i have only one spot on the drivers door about a 50p size paint buble just under the rub strip.
the phase 2 cars (post 1997) were supposed to have quite a few quality issues phase 2 models are easiest identified by the aerial, on ph2 the aerial is built into the rear window ph1 cars have an electric aerial coming out of the passenger rear quarter.
i guess my car would be compared to a e36 325se personally i prefer the merc i expect that is a slightly biased opinion though.
regards
Andy
as for kit mine has
heated mirrors,
leather,
electric memory seat,
leccy windows,
dual zone climate control
leccy sunroof,
cruise,
and quite a few other little bits like being able to drop the rear headrests by pressing a button.
the sport model i have has lowered suspension (this gives quite a bumpy ride though), sport bumpers and AMG monoblock 17" alloys, mine is also a manual which i would probably not choose again the manual box is clunky and not the best.
mpg i average about 25-27 which i guess is not to bad for a 240bhp (actually 237 when rr'd) car (stock these are 192bhp mine has had a kleeman sc pulley and remap to suit)
common problems with the age of 92-96 cars are the engine wiring harnesses being made of mercedes own biodegradable cable. this is the biggest cause of the "OMGZOR IT SUCKS AND BREAKS DOWN LOADS" crowd, basically if your good with a soldering iron you can redo the wiring harness for about £30 in automotive cable and never have this issue, this is the next job on mine. the other option is to buy a new harness from MB for circa £1000, however this problem is most common on the kompressor and 6 cylinder models due to the extra under bonnet heat.
Rust wise i have only one spot on the drivers door about a 50p size paint buble just under the rub strip.
the phase 2 cars (post 1997) were supposed to have quite a few quality issues phase 2 models are easiest identified by the aerial, on ph2 the aerial is built into the rear window ph1 cars have an electric aerial coming out of the passenger rear quarter.
i guess my car would be compared to a e36 325se personally i prefer the merc i expect that is a slightly biased opinion though.
regards
Andy
Last edited:
I had a '97 C200 which I really liked. The build quality was superb with not a spot of rust anywhere(its the later 99> ones which are dodgy) but unfortunately it developed a niggly electrical fault that MB couldnt track down. After spending £500+ on it without resolution I eventually sold it.
As for performance - well it is what it is - about 135bhp on the 2ltrs which is enough for a very quiet and comfortable 90mph+ on the motorway. The auto box is silky smooth but this is no performance car and overtaking on single carriage way roads isnt really recommended!. The 2.0 is still noticibly better than the 1.8 though. Its always compared to the 3 series but its a very different car. Much more comfortable and better built but its softer all round, built to waft rather than be pushed.
They have an image problem if that bothers you, but no more than any "not current shape" BMW.
As for performance - well it is what it is - about 135bhp on the 2ltrs which is enough for a very quiet and comfortable 90mph+ on the motorway. The auto box is silky smooth but this is no performance car and overtaking on single carriage way roads isnt really recommended!. The 2.0 is still noticibly better than the 1.8 though. Its always compared to the 3 series but its a very different car. Much more comfortable and better built but its softer all round, built to waft rather than be pushed.
They have an image problem if that bothers you, but no more than any "not current shape" BMW.
It's the entire C class range that rusts not just post 99 models - rare has a rather lovely C32 AMG which is also afflicted with it.