2003 C270 CDi performance upgrades

[LostKiwi]

I wonder if it's due to the 4matic system they dropped the torque?

Shock loadings on a 4WD are likely to be less than a 2WD (wheel spinning can give high shock loadings when TC is off). in low range mode the torque loadings through the gearbox will be low (torque multiplication occurs after the gearbox). They may have thought there was no need to over-rate the gearbox as a result.

 

[M80]

I wondered if was due to the lower ratio to final drive of the ML.
The 203 should be revving at approx 1500 revs at 60mph,
the ML will likely be revving at 2000 for the same road speed.

It still seems like a big drop in torque capability though, especially as the ML is designed for more extreme working, I can appreciate the low drive bit though.

 

[oigle]

Yep Box is rated to 580Nm so 500 wouldn't be an issue in the C class.

Interestingly the ML does appear to have a lower rated box (722.662 - W5A 300 so rated at 300Nm) according to everything I've found out.

If that were so, MB could be sued for misrepresentation - their brochures, vehicle owners manual and point of sale material all stated the ML270 had 400nm torque. Would have to be correct.
Ian.

 

[alexanderfoti]

If that were so, MB could be sued for misrepresentation - their brochures, vehicle owners manual and point of sale material all stated the ML270 had 400nm torque. Would have to be correct.
Ian.

It's a continuous rating, whereas the peak torque can exceed this rating. My car has a 900nm version but makes 1000nm...