what's with the A Class?

[pace]

I have noticed that even fairly late A Class models are extremley cheap, are they really that bad? There seem to be lots for sale, representing good value compared to other small cars. I heard some of the early cars had reliability issues and handling problems is that why they are unpopular on the second hand market?

 

[A210AMG]

Hello

The early cars did suffer from build issues and more importantly the elk test?? where it fell over

We bought one 18 months ago and its been great, Wife was expecting so out went the MX5 and this replaced it. Loads of room, goes ok, good fuel, looks good. I drive it every now and again and its great fun, handles very well and being front wheel drive reminds me of the mini days it does have torque steer though and traction isn't great in this weather but the wife funny enough doesn't have these issues

For what we paid second hand theres little that offers what this does for the money and this is certainly rare I've only seen one other on the road.

 

[pace]

Any idea which is the best model and year?

 

[A210AMG]

Hello

If your looking at the shape we have then look for ones with indicators in the mirrors.

I have also heared that the auto box's in the A class or semi autos as some are can cause issues (ours is manual)

Depending on your budet a 170cdi would be a good bet, don't think I would go for a A140 as a little underpowered?

Think the range was A140, A160, A170cdi, A190, A210 Evo, and then you could get the LWB version in these models and classic, elegance, avantguarde and AMG trim levels.


cheers

 

[Micman]

Hi

I used to own an A190 Avantguard with full factory AMG kit on a 99 V reg.

Looked the business (just like the A210 which followed later).

Have to say all in all it was a great little car, nippy, cheap to run and extremely practical - on one occasion I got a double bed headboard in the back with the rear seats removed!

In my experience and having talked to other owners at the time there are certain common issues that seem to raise their head.

I had the following experience:

Numerous rear suspension parts failing (you may notice the back wheels leaning in alot when you view the car from behind, perhaps even notice the suspension creaking when you get in and out or shake the car). You get very worn tyres on the rear inside edge as a result. The rear spring mounts even collapsed on mine on one occassion!!

Gearbox linkage rods can fail on the manual models meaning you lose the odd gear!! Don't fear this is easily fixed however!

I have also heard of issues with the steering rack/pump failing.

In the years I owned mine I never had any breakdowns however, very reliable car that started first time everytime.

I would say go for a A170 diesel or any petrol engine A160 or higher. Forget the A140 it's gutless.

I would however say that when I bought mine back in 2001 there was less choice of mini mpv like cars out there. Today there is a much bigger selection of cars that fit into that mini mpv type mould - it all depends how much you want to spend and whether it really has to be a Merc.

 

[hawk20]

I have noticed that even fairly late A Class models are extremley cheap, are they really that bad? There seem to be lots for sale, representing good value compared to other small cars. I heard some of the early cars had reliability issues and handling problems is that why they are unpopular on the second hand market?

Well I don't know where you are looking. My daughter found quite the opposite. Low mileage ones in good nick fetch high prices so much so that she bought new. I did too. And my wife. Have a look on the MB website and search approved used and I think you will see that the new model, 3 years old, a late 55 one for example, retails at about 50% of the new price. Not many cars can beat that. We bought two recently and the PCP's were offering about a 50% guaranteed residual. No other make we looked at gave better residuals and very few got anywhere near.

If you look at the JD Power survey you will see that the A class came out very well. This is what they said in a survey of 104 models: -

"Mercedes-Benz A-Class
Rating 81.1%
Overall ranking 28th=
The A-Class ran a very close second to the Corolla Verso. It seems Mercedes has got its act together on the reliability front and, like the Toyota, it performed extremely well in this area.

Interior build quality proved to be the A-Class's major strength - owners reported no nasty niggles, rattles or glitches. Heating and ventilation systems, the stereo and the seats also got the thumbs-up, and the engine and transmission proved to be strong.

The A-Class scored highest for exterior styling. On the downside, owners felt costs of service and repair were too steep."

If you are referring to old model A classes, they are now available at sensible money but that is normal when a new model comes out. Remember,too, that the new model has been out since end 2004/early2005, just three years ago now and most 'old model' cars over three years old are cheap whatever car you look at. I think you will find that the A class, age for age, model for model, holds its price well against most competitors. And you don't get the huge discounts that the BMW 1 series has been giving!

 

[hawk20]

Here's a couple of links: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?t=33319
http://mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=45064
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=42833
http://www.mbclub.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?t=43044

 

[hawk20]

Here's a link to a year old 160cdi Classic SE asking about £13,000, which is the price of many a new Golf or Focus given the discounts around at the moment.

http://www.mercedes-benz.motortrak....48527,13348128,13348290&vidindex=2&starthit=5

 

[Rory]

Have a look on the MB website and search approved used and I think you will see that the new model, 3 years old, a late 55 one for example, retails at about 50% of the new price.

A late 55 car isn't even 2yrs old yet, never mind 3.

And the trouble with such relatively expensive cars is whatever the depreciation %, it's more ££ than a cheaper car.

 

[hawk20]

A late 55 car isn't even 2yrs old yet, never mind 3.

And the trouble with such relatively expensive cars is whatever the depreciation %, it's more ££ than a cheaper car.

Sorry, yes, should say early 2005.
Of course dearer cars suffer more depreciation in absolute terms. That is inevitable. They all fall to scrap value in about the same length of time and the higher you start on price the further you fall.

But what is interesting about depreciation is some makes and some models manage to retain about 50% of their value after 3 years (like many Mercs do and many BMWs) but if you check Glass's Guide you will see that most mass produced popular makes fall to 30% of the new list price within two or three years. Very depressing. Lots of useful data on all makes in What Car too.

 

[type49]

These cars did suffer from steering columns knocking (not steering rack), rear swing-arm bushes/bearings, gear selector problems & engine control unit problems. Most of the cars now, would have had all these parts replaced & many parts were modified through production. I wouldn't be put off by the clutch-less manual, it's a standard manual box with an auto-clutch. The box itself has got no more chance of problems than a "manual" manual. Clutches are expensive to replace due to labour times of around 8-9 hours. Starter motors are starting to fail in the last couple of years & at about 4 hours labour, they're not cheap. I would go for the 160 petrol 2001 model of after. The diesels are strong but very agricultural. As already stated, the petrols are good on fuel anyway, so you may as well take advantage of this & get a smoother, quieter car.

 

[GJH]

A Class

I bought an A160Cdi Avantgarde new in January 2004 (my first new car and also my first Mercedes). I had been looking at pretty much everything in that market sector and decided that the Merc was the best package overall.

I kept it for 42 months and 62500 miles before trading it in for my current C220Cdi.

It was (almost) totally reliable - the only problems being the appetite for front brake discs and pads and a sensor that came adrift leaving the thing stuck in 'limp-home' mode, which was not good as it did it at night when a mate and I were on our way up North for a holiday and the thing was loaded with kit.

Apart from that (and a snapped off driver's side seat-height adjuster) the thing was completely fault free.

Average fuel consumption over the period was high 50's and the mpg never dropped below 48 regardless of how I thrashed it (and it did get some stick at times).

The car was taken abroad several times and was plenty big enough for two adults, two teenagers and all our kit for a long weekend trip.

I would recommend it unconditionally as a cheap to run, comfortable and economical small hatchback.

Whoever now owns WP53 OEL has got a damn good car

 

[hawk20]

Any idea which is the best model and year?

Well you have to look at budget and maybe mileage per annum. Personally, I'd bust the bank for the current model. If not I'd go for the LWB version of the old model which rides better than the SWB.

Petrol versus diesel is always a matter of taste. The diesels are smooth and remarkably quiet at cruising speeds as they offer loads of torque and can handle high gearing. The 180cdi is the best all rounder IMO but the 160cdi costs less. Petrol mpg is nowhere near the diesels -as you would expect. I know friends with the 150 petrol who struggle to get much over 30 mpg in mixed use, whereas my brother's 160cdi manual tops 65 mpg on a run easily.

I would avoid sports suspension -it ruins the ride- and over-size wheels have a similar effect. The comfort seat package is well worthwhile (at only £80 extra) and steering column adjustable for rake and reach (£115) makes getting comfortable that bit easier.

 

[type49]

Re-reading your original question, are you talking about the old or new shape A class, as they are completely different cars. New shape A150 petrol is dreadfully slow & appears to seem much slower than the old shape A140. However, the old shape A170CDi is much noiser & harsh compared with the newer A180CDi. Therefore, a budget is needed to decide you choices.

 

[hawk20]

Re-reading your original question, are you talking about the old or new shape A class, as they are completely different cars. New shape A150 petrol is dreadfully slow & appears to seem much slower than the old shape A140. However, the old shape A170CDi is much noiser & harsh compared with the newer A180CDi. Therefore, a budget is needed to decide you choices.

I agree budget is crucial to the decision. The current 150 petrol does 0-62.5 in 12.6secs and has a top speed of 109mph. It has a combined fuel economy figure of 45.6. Don't know figures for old model.

 

[Splatt]

Petrol versus diesel is always a matter of taste. The diesels are smooth and remarkably quiet at cruising speeds as they offer loads of torque and can handle high gearing. The 180cdi is the best all rounder IMO but the 160cdi costs less. Petrol mpg is nowhere near the diesels -as you would expect. I know friends with the 150 petrol who struggle to get much over 30 mpg in mixed use, whereas my brother's 160cdi manual tops 65 mpg on a run easily.

My 170 petrol tells me on the computer that since new it has averaged 38mpg , thats mixed motoring with two up. What knocks it back is when I have a full load of five people and luggage. It then drops to around 29/30 and feels quite breathless on hills.
Out of curiosity I asked a Toyota dealer for a trade in price P/E for it recently. He quoted 11K, that`s on a car that cost 20K new seven months ago ( I kid you not )

 

[hawk20]

My 170 petrol tells me on the computer that since new it has averaged 38mpg , thats mixed motoring with two up. What knocks it back is when I have a full load of five people and luggage. It then drops to around 29/30 and feels quite breathless on hills.
Out of curiosity I asked a Toyota dealer for a trade in price P/E for it recently. He quoted 11K, that`s on a car that cost 20K new seven months ago ( I kid you not )

Well, he's trying it on or he doesn't want to buy at this time of year. A lot don't. Go to Glass's Guide website and put in all your details to get a proper part ex valuation, plus private sale prices, dealer prices, all for only £3. Or go to Vauxhall and under Owners you will see Value my Car , or somesuch. That gives you a free Glass's valuation BUT only for a part ex price and with no allowance for extras.

 

[type49]

I agree budget is crucial to the decision. The current 150 petrol does 0-62.5 in 12.6secs and has a top speed of 109mph. It has a combined fuel economy figure of 45.6. Don't know figures for old model.

The old model A160 long wheelbase is 200kg lighter than the newer A150 & also has more power, so there is quite a difference in performance.

 

[hawk20]

The old model A160 long wheelbase is 200kg lighter than the newer A150 & also has more power, so there is quite a difference in performance.

Weight went up partly as the new model is between the old 'normal' and 'long wheelbase' versions and partly the ever rising safety requirements. The new one got best in class at NCAP.

On performance Mercedes have pretty well got the same from the new as from the old by upping the engine sizes a tad or so to compensate for the bigger body. So the 140 petrol is now 150 and the 160 petrol is now 170. The 0-62 times are very similar. The old 140 did 0-62 in 12.9 with a topspeed of 106. The new 150 is a bit quicker at 12.6 seconds and 109mph topspeed.

The old 160 did 0-62 in 10.8 seconds with a topspeed of 113mph while the new 170 is similar at 10.9 seconds and 117 topspeed.

For my money the diesels offer similar performance to the petrols together with greater economy. The low down power is also very relaxing both for cruising (mine does almost 80 at 2000 revs) and in traffic where far less gearchanging is needed.

The 180cdi does 0-62 in 10.8 and has a topspeed of 116 (very similar to the 170 petrol)
The 200cdi does 0-62 in 9.5 secs and has a topspeed of 125mph similar to the 200 petrol which does 9.8 seconds and has a topspeed of 124.

If you want a barnstormer and don't mind the price, the A200 petrol Turbo does 0-62 in 7.5 seconds (just better than an S320cdi !) and has a topspeed of 141 mph.

 

[type49]

I didn't know their "on paper" 0-60 times or the more important 30-50, 50-70 times. All I know is the first two A150s we ever saw went straight on the diag machine, convinced there was something wrong - they're that slow, noticably worse than the old A140s.