Great little cars. I tried so hard to by a manual 190e, but they are damn hard to come by. Although the euro version is definitely the one to go for, it had over 200hp.
NAm (And Euro KAT version) 2.3-16 was 167 bhp
Euro 2.3-16 was 185 bhp
2.5-16 was 195 bhp
2.5-16 Evolution 1 was 195 bhp but peaks 500rpm higher than "regular" 2.5-16
2.5-16 Evolution 2 was 232 bhp
Excerpt from an article that is posted on
http://www.mercedes-evolution.co.uk/
The page does not credit the original article but I have a copy somewhere at home.
Evo 2 Explained by the Engineers:
Engine:
Mercedes-Benz engine development chief Rudiger Herzog concentrated on detail changes to the EVOI engine, altering most of the internal parts in his quest for a more efficient power unit. The engine block was modifed to use a chain driven oil pump to increase flow capacity and the crankshaft was lichtened by eliminating 4 of the 8 counerweights.
Gerhard Lepler, the engineer responsible for all the 16 valve 190Es, explained that, "Our latest high precision engineering has allowed us to do this without running into vibration problems. The lighter crankshaft has less rotating inertia and hence faster throttle response."
Aerodynamics:
As Gerhard Lepler explained: "When you add spoilers to a car, you normally increase downforce and thus stability around corners and down straights. You also normally increase drag and then need more power and fuel compensate. We have managed to actually reduce the drag coefficient of the EVOII by very careful attention to detail"
Mercedes-Benz engineers having established that sufficient air to cool the motor, even at racing speeds, was being provided by the large intake under the bumper -- blocked off the radiator behind the chromed grill. This significantly cuts engine compartment drag. They also smoothed the airflow beneath the car with several flat bolt on sections mainly towards the rear. A longer car is also easier to contour aerodynamically and new, longer front and rear bumper/valence molding have been designed to optimize air penetration and separation.
Comparing the 2.5-16 vs the Sport EVO 1 vs the EVO 2:
To make sense of the comparaison, I drove the stock 2.5-16 first, the the Evolution 1 and finally the Evolution 2. The first few laps in the 2.5-16 were purely exploratory as I never driven at Hockenheim before.
The 2.5-16 is a remarkable car on track. Its controls -- steering, dogleg-first shifter, clutch, brakes and throttle give plenty of feedback. The car feels solid, small and balanced that it becomes an extension of our limbs. The stock 2.5-16 has considerable body roll and its brakes are good to a point but not quite good enough for track use.
The Evolution I has a much gustier-feeling engine, even though on paper it is equal to the 2.5-16. It goes harder, it revs with greater alacrity and it feels snapier. The EVO 1's stiffer springs and shocks make all the difference. The slightly altered gearing also shows up on straights. So its faster, and superbly balanced handling can be exploited even more with the wider rubber. Best of all are the brakes. Where the 2.5-16 washes off speed convincingly, the anchors on the EVO 1 feel like a drag chute has just opened behind you.
The jump from the EVO 1 to the EVO 2 feels less pronounced. The car is most definitely faster, but you must really wind out the motor. Not that it complains. This motor spins like a dynamo. The larger tires give the EVO 2 even more grip, but the new limited slip differential has an effective stabilizing action.
Having upgraded the front brakes on my own 2.3-16 to the 500E Brembos (which were also speced on the Evo2) I can confirm that the braking power of these brakes in a lighter car is nothing short of astonishing. And remember, the Evo1 "only" had 400E brakes and I've not yet upgraded my rear brakes, booster or M/C yet.
