Re: 190e 2.3-16v | <– Date –> <– Thread –> |
From: LtWacko (LtWackoaol.com) | |
Date: Thu, 31 Aug 2006 09:34:15 -0700 (PDT) |
I think it just might be me. I thought the US Evo 1 16v's were a big pile of doo doo. They looked great and fast when they were standing still. Then you take the darn thing out on the track and then you felt like you were standing still. Underpowered, underbraked. I did like the dog-leg first gear however, the lower bolster under the steering column make it difficult for me to heel and toe. If I remember correctly, a common upgrade was to bolt up one of the 6 cylinder motors to the stock trans. It made the car more reliable and faster! Also, rust is a problem just like all 190e's. The above mentioned are based on "stock" cars. Now I have a friend with a TURBO 16v. That's the way the car should have come from the factory... fast as hell! Of course suspension and brakes were upgraded and the car is livable. If by what you mean peeling tires up to 80 mph in the first 3 gears livable! If the chassis is good and may possibly want to upgrade in the future, get this car. I love the looks. Otherwise, go with a more modern AMG model for performance. Rodney
-
Re: 190e 2.3-16v LtWacko, August 31 2006
-
Re: 190e 2.3-16v LS, August 31 2006
- Re: 190e 2.3-16v Brian E. Buxton, August 31 2006
-
Re: 190e 2.3-16v LS, August 31 2006
Results generated by Tiger Technologies Web hosting using MHonArc.