Mercedes W105

Mercedes W105: which version to buy

The Mercedes W105 was sold in one generation (March 1956–July 1959) as a Sedan with three versions: two manuals both named 2.2 MT (85 hp and 90 hp) and one 2.2 AT (90 hp). All three use a 2195 cm³ Gasoline engine, 6 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Front, longitudinal layout, Carburetor, RWD, a 56 L tank, and a 148 km/h top speed.

The Mercedes W105 was sold in one generation (March 1956–July 1959) as a Sedan with three versions: two manuals both named 2.2 MT (85 hp and 90 hp) and one 2.2 AT (90 hp). All three use a 2195 cm³ Gasoline engine, 6 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Front, longitudinal layout, Carburetor, RWD, a 56 L tank, and a 148 km/h top speed. The buying choice is therefore not “which body or generation,” but which of those three powertrain combinations matches the numbers you care about.

Which W105 version: 2.2 MT 85 hp vs 2.2 MT 90 hp vs 2.2 AT

2.2 MT at 90 hp is the only version with a measured 0–100 figure (17 s). It shares the lighter 1260 kg kerb weight with the 85 hp 2.2 MT, and it shares the stronger 90 hp / 167 Nm engine with 2.2 AT. If the catalogue question is “which version to buy and why” on the numbers alone, that 90 hp 2.2 MT is the version that is not a compromise on either axis.

2.2 MT at 85 hp is the same Manual 4-speed RWD sedan with the same 1260 / 1710 kg weights and the same 148 km/h top speed, but 5 hp and 10 Nm less, and a lower compression ratio (7.6 vs 8.7). Nothing in the data says it is slower to 148 km/h; the top speed is identical. What you give up is 5.9% peak power (5 / 85) and 6.4% peak torque (10 / 157), with 0–100 not measured.

2.2 AT is the 90 hp / 167 Nm engine with an Automatic 4-speed instead of a Manual. It is 15 kg heavier at the kerb (1275 vs 1260) and 15 kg heavier fully loaded (1725 vs 1710). 0–100 is not measured. Top speed stays 148 km/h. The extra mass is 1.2% of kerb weight (15 / 1260). Payload stays 450 kg on all three (1710 − 1260 and 1725 − 1275).

Engine specs compared: same 2195 cm³, two outputs

All three versions displace 2195 cm³, run Gasoline, 6 Inline cylinders, 2 valves per cylinder, No boost, Front, longitudinal, Carburetor, bore × stroke 80 × 72.8, and peak at 4800 rpm for power and 2400 rpm for torque.

Specific output:

• 2.2 MT 85 hp: 85 / 2.195 ≈ 38.7 hp per litre; 157 / 2.195 ≈ 71.5 Nm per litre.
• 2.2 MT 90 hp and 2.2 AT: 90 / 2.195 ≈ 41.0 hp per litre; 167 / 2.195 ≈ 76.1 Nm per litre.

The 90 hp pair therefore makes about 2.3 hp more per litre and about 4.6 Nm more per litre than the 85 hp 2.2 MT. The mechanical difference recorded in the data is compression: 7.6 on the 85 hp 2.2 MT versus 8.7 on both 90 hp versions — a 1.1-point gap, or about 14.5% higher compression (1.1 / 7.6). Peak rpm does not change.

Kilowatts: 63 kW on the 85 hp 2.2 MT versus 66 kW on the other two — 3 kW, the same 5 hp step.

Performance, mpg, and what is not measured

Top speed is 148 km/h on 2.2 MT (85 hp), 2.2 MT (90 hp), and 2.2 AT. The gearbox type does not change the recorded maximum.

0–100 km/h:

• 2.2 MT 90 hp: 17 s.
• 2.2 MT 85 hp: not measured.
• 2.2 AT: not measured.

Do not treat the missing 0–100 figures as “the same as 17 s.” They are not in the data.

Fuel use: city, highway, and combined consumption are not measured on all three versions. CO₂ is not measured. Eco class is not measured. Fuel grade is not measured. There is no mpg number in this dataset to rank versions on economy. The tank is 56 L on every version, so range cannot be compared without a consumption figure.

Weight per horsepower (kerb / hp):

• 2.2 MT 85 hp: 1260 / 85 ≈ 14.82 kg/hp.
• 2.2 MT 90 hp: 1260 / 90 = 14.00 kg/hp.
• 2.2 AT: 1275 / 90 = 14.17 kg/hp.

The 90 hp 2.2 MT is the lightest per horsepower. 2.2 AT sits 0.17 kg/hp heavier than that manual 90 hp car, and still 0.65 kg/hp lighter than the 85 hp 2.2 MT (14.82 − 14.17). On power-to-weight alone, both 90 hp cars beat the 85 hp car; the Manual 90 hp car beats the Automatic.

Dimensions, weight, tank, wheels, chassis

Ground clearance is not measured on all three. Wheel sizes are not measured on all three. There is no length, width, height, or wheelbase in the data, so versions cannot be ranked on cabin or boot size.

What is measured and shared:

• Front suspension: Independent, spring.
• Rear suspension: Dependent, spring.
• Front brakes: Drum.
• Rear brakes: Drum.

Weights:

• Both 2.2 MT versions: kerb 1260 kg, gross 1710 kg, payload 450 kg.
• 2.2 AT: kerb 1275 kg, gross 1725 kg, payload 450 kg.

The automatic does not buy more payload. It buys the Automatic 4-speed at a 15 kg penalty. Tank 56 L is identical, so you do not buy more fuel capacity with either the extra 5 hp or the automatic.

Generations: only one, so the choice is not “which generation”

The W105 has 1 generation: Sedan, production 1956-03-01 to 1959-07-31, 3 versions. All three modifications are dated 1956-01-01 to 1959-12-31. There is no second generation in the data, no restyling split, and no later body type. Comparing generations is therefore empty: nothing later replaced these three on this model key.

What did not change between versions: displacement 2195 cm³, cylinder count 6, layout Inline, valves 2, boost No, engine position Front, longitudinal, feed Carburetor, drive RWD, tank 56 L, top speed 148 km/h, brakes Drum/Drum, suspension Independent, spring / Dependent, spring.

What did change:

1. Output: 85 hp / 157 Nm / compression 7.6 versus 90 hp / 167 Nm / compression 8.7. 2. Gearbox: Manual 4 versus Automatic 4. 3. Mass: 1260/1710 kg versus 1275/1725 kg on the automatic. 4. 0–100: only the 90 hp 2.2 MT is measured (17 s).

Which version to choose, by the numbers

Choose 2.2 MT (90 hp) if you want the highest recorded specific output (41.0 hp/L), the lowest kg per horsepower (14.00), the same 1260 kg kerb as the weaker manual, 167 Nm, compression 8.7, and the only 0–100 figure in the set (17 s). Versus the 85 hp 2.2 MT you gain 5 hp and 10 Nm at the same weight. Versus 2.2 AT you lose the Automatic and gain 15 kg less kerb mass and a measured sprint time.

Choose 2.2 AT if the Automatic 4-speed is the point of the purchase. You keep 90 hp, 66 kW, 167 Nm, compression 8.7, 148 km/h, RWD, and 450 kg payload. You pay 15 kg and accept 0–100 not measured. You do not pay in tank size, top speed, or payload. kg/hp is 14.17, still better than the 85 hp manual’s 14.82.

Choose 2.2 MT (85 hp) only if you specifically want the lower-compression (7.6) 85 hp / 157 Nm Manual. You match the 90 hp manual on weight (1260/1710 kg), tank (56 L), top speed (148 km/h), RWD, and chassis. You sit 5 hp and 10 Nm behind, at 38.7 hp/L and 14.82 kg/hp, with 0–100 not measured. There is no consumption figure that would justify this version on mpg.

What the “extra” 90 hp does not buy: a higher top speed (still 148 km/h), a larger tank (still 56 L), more payload (still 450 kg), different brakes, different suspension, or a different cylinder layout.

What the automatic does not buy: more power than the 90 hp 2.2 MT, a measured 0–100, or more payload. It buys the Automatic and 15 kg.

Reliability, common problems, and prices are not measured in this dataset; ranking versions on those topics would invent numbers. On the figures that exist, the 90 hp 2.2 MT is the strongest measured package, 2.2 AT is the same engine with an Automatic and 15 kg, and the 85 hp 2.2 MT is the same Manual sedan with 5 hp and 10 Nm less.