Is300H vs Mercedes 250 CDI Road Test

[Christian89]

For anyone that cares and hasn’t seen this, IS300H beats a Mercedes 250 CDI which has a supposed 0-60 of 7.1 seconds. Good enough for me!

 

 

[IS300FSPORT]

Interesting although not convinced that's a healthy C250CDI they are very torquey with over 500nm in standard form it would easily shake off an IS300H without much trouble. This may well be a C220CDI or a petrol version if I was to guess.  Only reason I'm confident with saying this is because we have a 250CDI within my circle & they do go quite well. 

A GS450H would give trouble to one no problem though 

[Linas.P]

Not even sure what are you trying to say here?

That IS300h did 0-60 in less than 7.1s? No, that is not possible and it didn't. No person with at least one functioning brain cell would believe that.

That C250CDI did 0-60 in more than 9.2s? Sure, manufacturers usually claim best possible acceleration in ideal conditions, so one doesn't have to try hard to do it in more time.

And I am just taking everything at the face value here, is it really 300h, or is it 350, or maybe 300 (200t), is it 250CDI, or maybe it is 180CDI, 200CDI, 220CDI... is 250CDI suppose to do 0-60 in 7.1s? maybe - I haven't checked.

But even if we say hypothetically IS300h is faster than C250CDI, so what? Is C250CDI some sort of benchmark? Faster than C250CDI means "fast", slower means "slow"... C250CDI is entry level C-Class, from the generation before IS, the comparable like for like cars are BMW 330e and MB 350e. They do 6.1s and 5.9s respectively.

I think it is best to enjoy your car as it is - it is good looking, reliable and economical car. It isn't fast, but if one wants fast car then they don't drive IS300h. Trying to use some amateurish video filmed on potato to prove something that it isn't seems seems a little bit desperate.

Sorry, if that was not what you were trying to say, but IS300h isn't fast car.

[GMB]

OK lets be generous --  Nippy?  Hmmm, Maybe?

[Notamech]

I reckon most people who buy an IS300H would never drive it that way. And while it may not be faster than a c250 in the real world its definitely fast enough where it matters e.g. roundabouts.

I had an e250 before this and despite the torque it had like a 1 second delay in response at roundabouts at times it felt dangerous. I assume the c250 from that era might be the same as it had the same OM651 engine. The response on the IS300H is instant and i love that.

[wharfhouse]

TBH that doesn't surprise me - looking at the video it was made in 2013. The description is "All New Lexus IS300h Hybrid F-Sport vs Mercedes C250 Diesel" and there's no reason to doubt that. However, rather than the IS doing the 0-60 in 7.1s I would say the Merc is doing it in longer than it's 7.1s published time. It's been shown that the IS 300h is slightly quicker than the published times (which is 8.1s 0-60) and we also know that the Germans sell their cars to a lot of people who never actually test the car but buy / lease from the specs and so giving the absolutely best 0-60 time is more important to Mercedes than eg Lexus. 

I had a Merc C200 (though petrol and not diesel) back in 2017 for 6 weeks when my IS 300h was off the road waiting for parts due to some accident damage. The Merc was the biggest POS I had driven for some time. The auto box had a mind of its own and was at times downright dangerous in making up it's mind to do something. On paper I think it was meant to be faster than the IS 300h but definitely didn't mange to reflect that in reality. 

If doesn't look like the video is done by "test" drivers and so it's probably just two dudes pressing the pedal to the metal on the go signal. Manufacturers quoted 0-60 times are often done with some interesting "launch" techniques and so this more "real world" video backs up what many of us suspect in how some of the manufacturers times are arrived at. It's also possible that the Merc would overhaul the Lexus over a longer distance. 

Now I don't really care about the manufacturers numbers and the IS 300h has worked for me for the past 8 years and 110k miles in all types of driving - and I came to it from a number of BMWs (amongst other cars) many of which on paper were faster.

I've said it many times before - everyone has different needs and if outright performance is uppermost then the IS 300h is probably not the car for you. But many of us use a car over a broad spectrum of needs and living with a car for a few years (or even a few months) can deliver a very different experience to having one for a day or two. Out of all the cars I've owned I've had two that have been exceptional against that measure and more than the sum of their parts - IMHO - a 1997 reg BMW E39 528i that I owned from new and covered 210k miles in and my current 2014 reg IS 300h that I've had for nearly 8 years and have covered 110k miles in (the car is now at 150k miles). 

Although stated in his usual interesting manner, I think @Linas.P has probably summed up the situation nicely - when you own an IS 300h over a decent length of time then put it against a Merc C 250d like that, who really cares...!

[wharfhouse]

7 minutes ago, Notamech said:

I reckon most people who buy an IS300H would never drive it that way. And while it may not be faster than a c250 in the real world its definitely fast enough where it matters e.g. roundabouts.

I had an e250 before this and despite the torque it had like a 1 second delay in response at roundabouts at times it felt dangerous. I assume the c250 from that era might be the same as it had the same OM651 engine. The response on the IS300H is instant and i love that.

Just written much the same regards my experience of the Merc auto box...!