Cosworth 190E 2.3-16

[tjts1]

All 190e (including the 16 valve) have one major weak point: Kjet
This is one of the best candidates for Megasquirt. Several people have installed MS on 16v engines have seen an extra 30-40hp right off the bat. I installed MS on a 8 valve engine 190e and the change was dramatic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EdKJawKNU5Q

You can buy these cars for next to nothing because there are very few mechanics that still know how to diagnose and repair Kjet. The parts are also hard to come by and expensive. The rest of the car was way ahead of its time.

[Emre]

i really like the old 190e. how good would one be for a DD? ive been thinking of making a 190e a daily and my e30 a straight cage'd racer

I own a Mercedes (an '88 560SL roadster), so I'm on the M-B forums quite a lot. And I've been a 2.3/2.5-16 Cossie fan for years. Now that I'm active on various M-B forums, I've learned even more about them.

Based on everything I've heard, the US-market 2.3-16 would NOT make a very good daily driver. There is just too much maintenance and parts are very expensive. It would be like running a tuned E30 M3 as your daily...with the added expense of dodgy electronics, vacuum-operated accessories, even higher parts prices, significantly less parts availability, and a less reliable engine. Plus, you'd be running a very rare (in North America) car into the ground.

Personally, I wouldn't do it. Anyway, a US-market 2.3-16 weighs 3100 lbs and only puts out 165 hp. So, it's a sluggish car around town. If you like the W201, you'd be better off with a six-cylinder model. Or, just go with a modern classic, like the 500SEC (or 560SEC) big coupe:



Or do what I did and look for a clean R107 roadster:

[88e30is]

After I had my 300te 4matic wagon I have dreamed about owning a 190e. I love the way they look.

[Tbolt]

i really like the old 190e. how good would one be for a DD? ive been thinking of making a 190e a daily and my e30 a straight cage'd racer

[Emre]

I'm a huge 2.3/2.5-16 fan. I've been looking to buy one for a while now and just test drove a really clean one a couple of days ago.

The success of the E30 M3 in various touring car series no doubt effected the prices and the following of the 190E

The 190E did well in DTM, but didn't really compete anywhere else. In Germany, the 2.5-16 has a loyal following, especially in Evo I or Evo II trim. The regular 2.3-16 doesn't get much love.

When these cars were new, neither the Cossie or E30 M3 sold well in America. They were languishing on dealer lots. If it weren't for the popularity of the BMW CCA, club racing, etc. I don't think the E30 M3 would be worth as much as they are today. The Cossie really suffers because of a lack of track-junkies in the Mercedes club and a complete lack of venues for club racing. That, plus the fact that the 2.3-16 looks no different from any other 190E means most people don't know or care enough about them.

I think a lot of the reason you don't see so many of them is due in part to their relatively low production numbers compared to the E30 M3.

Actually, the total production was 20K worldwide, which is more than the E30 M3 (around 17K). However, fewer than 2000 were sold in the us between '86 and '87. We didn't get any 2.5L cars at all...just some watered-down 2.3s. So, the M3 is much more common here in North America.

They seem like very cool cars, back when AMG wasn't a trendy add-on badge, but a serious tuning house.

AMG had basically nothing to do with the 2.3-16. It was built in-house, except for the Cosworth head.

Sure, the cosworth head flows air like the E30 M3 one can only dream about, but holy shit does their handling suck.

Having driven a couple, I will have to disagree completely. They handle very well. With stock springs and dampers, they handle about as well as a stock E30 M3...only with less understeer and sharper turn-in. With H&R springs, Bilstein Sport dampers, and the self-leveling rear disabled, they handle like a dream: very little body roll, very pointy front end, zero understeer, and very neutral balance. Compared to any E30 (even an M3) the steering ratio is much quicker, which makes controlling the car much easier when the rear lets go.

The chassis feels much stiffer. Even a clean, rust-free E30 has significant chassis flex that you can feel in corners. The 190E doesn't. The rear end is much more stable in high-speed corners (it's got a multi-link rear similar to BMW's "Z-Axle"). The brakes are stronger with better pedal feel, and can easily be upgraded to 4-piston front/2-piston rear brakes using bolt-on factory parts. Overall, it feels more like a well-sorted E36 M3 or Lancer Evolution 7/8/9 than an E30.

Don't get me wrong, I would still prefer a nicely set up E30 for track work. The E30 is smaller, lighter, and offers more feedback through the wheel. And, of course, there's a TON more aftermarket support. But the 2.3-16 is a sweet little car that would make a fantastic weekend/fun car.

An M3 is so out of my price range, now I'm considering one of these, I had no idea they go for so cheap.

They're certainly cheaper to buy, but they're generally more expensive to fix and maintain. For one thing, you've got all those vacuum-operated accessories, self-leveling rear, fussy automatic climate control, power everything, etc., etc. The engine needs even more maintenance and is even less reliable than an S14. And those Cosworth engine components are even more expensive and harder to get than S14 parts. Aftermarket support and know-how simply aren't there...so you're on your own for maintenance and mods. All in all, it's probably not any less expensive than a solid M3.

The gay Mercedes mechanic I work with (I call him my ugly sister) says the 2.3-16v is a sorry excuse of an engine

Then he's an idiot.

Being less powerful, bigger and heavier than the E30. That says alot.

They were only less powerful in the US market, where they were seriously detuned and came with a taller final drive ratio. The rest of the world got much more powerful engines and shorter gearing. In other markets, the S14 and Cossie were pretty evenly matched in terms of power.

Also, in Europe, the 190E Cossies weighed just over 2800 lbs in street trim...which is pretty much exactly the same as what an E30 M3 weighed around here. However, the US market cars were totally loaded to the gills with accessories, which blew the weight up to 3100 lbs. The power-adjustable seats alone weigh something like 100 lbs each.

On top of that, the 2.3/2.5-16 has less drag than the E30 M3. Stock for stock, a 190E Cossie pulls steadily away from an E30 M3 above 80 mph or so. This is even true for the 2.5 Evo II, with its massive rear wing, chin spoiler, and fender flares.

the cosworth engine had more power but the reliability of the S14 was much better

True. In race trim, the 2.5 Evos were making over 330 hp. Think about it: S54 power levels from a normally aspirated 4-banger designed in 1983. Even in street trim, they made 235 hp. Again, power levels were in the same ballpark as BMW cars of the era.

[FredK]

He meant freshly-built competition engines from back in the day. The S14 was not conceived to be an engine for a daily driver that Sally Homemaker would start up to drop the kids off at school at 8am, then drop them off after school at soccer practice, judo class, and piano lessons, week-in, week-out. This is the kind of long-term wear that does the S14 in.

[AndrewBird]

I know a man ,,
who is an ex DTM driver ,, and runs a company ,,,,, TAUBER-MOTORSPORT

he said in the old days .. these cars were very similair ,, the cosworth engine had more power but the reliability of the S14 was much better,,

sometimes the Mercedes team had to change the engine after qualifying ,,

Whaaa???

[Alpina]

I know a man ,,
who is an ex DTM driver ,, and runs a company ,,,,, TAUBER-MOTORSPORT

he said in the old days .. these cars were very similair ,, the cosworth engine had more power but the reliability of the S14 was much better,,

sometimes the Mercedes team had to change the engine after qualifying ,,

[norcalE30]

sick.

pure sex on wheels

[E-Thirty]

I heard there are no aftermarket coil overs or ride height adjustable suspension options. What camber plates are those? ^^^

[tecks2k]

I've owned one, and it was absolutely amazing. To the people saying it's floaty, they must have been in one with O.E.M adjustable suspension or soft after market suspension. Mine had Bilstien's and H&R race, and it was pretty amazing. What I found was, the car was extremely neutral, very predictable and a lot of fun to drive. Anyway here's a pristine example and if I could own this car, i'd buy it in a heart beat.

[BeirBrennerE30]

I dont like these cars one bit. While they were rivals of the e30 m3 on track the 190 street car lost a lot in translation compared to the e30. I have driven a couple and found them floaty in the handling department. I have never driven an e30 M3 but I would prefer a 325 over a 2.3-16 190 any day. Qualitatively I don't think the look of the 190 has held up as well as the e30 with the big grill and ridged tails.

[Jonny Cash]

I agree. I have a friend locally with the 2.3 16V, and while it's pretty damn quick and looks tits, it's handling pales in comparison to the M3, even Cup-Kit equipped.

Im suprised to hear this. Some say it handles phenomenal, others say it doesent even touch an M3. All week Ive been watching videos of these two cars neck and neck battling it out. I guess the Merc drivers were just better? :???:

Being less powerful, bigger and heavier than the E30. That says alot.

Dont get me wrong, the 190 wont replace the E30.

[e30s52]

/\ I see DC is back.

[Liam]

The gay Mercedes mechanic I work with (I call him my ugly sister) says the 2.3-16v is a sorry excuse of an engine and the 190s in general are junk.

Me, I just think they are ugly and the KIS (CIS) injection system sucks.