Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan
Let's try to define this forum as being limited to luxury performance vehicles where the mainstream version in a typical configuration has an MSRP of at least $60k.
A luxury vehicle with a base price of $59k qualifies because it would typically be bought with some additional equipment, bringing the MSRP over $60k.
Vehicles like the E, 5, A6, M, or GS, even if available in certain versions over $60k, don't qualify because they are cars from companies that have higher end cars in their lineups.
Jun 28, 2004 (3:37 pm)
I really have to go with Mark on that one. If Mercedes is guilty of anything its not updating the 320 engine fast enough. In 1998, Toyota's top version of their V6 was 3.0L in the ES300. It didnt have VVT, and made less hp then M-Bs engine. Toyota has updated that powertrain several times since '98 (VVT heads in '99, then the 5-speed w/ VVT-i, then the displacement bump to 3.3L) and MB hasnt changed theirs at all. Theirs isnt the greatest 6 in the world (Porsche's are) but its far from the worst. (Daewoo)
Apr 01, 2004 (4:18 am)
Because it's a mercedes or because it's a good engine? Unfortunately/fotunately trade journals/panels often reserve a spot for past winners (like the last gold medalist automaticly get a spot in the finals)
Wards engine awards are trumpeted by ever automaker that gets 'em and you're some guy on the net.
Whose opinion has more credibility?
That must be why the the 3.2 liter MB consumes more fule than the 3.3 liter Toyota and not meeting ULEV standards whereas the Toyota does.
Um, OK, I wonder if gearing, aerodynamics or weight might have an effect on fuel efficiency IN ADDITION to the engine?
Was Toyota's 3.0L v6 ULEV compliant when it was introduced? I don't know. I thought the 3.3L v6 from Toyota was updated last year. You'd expect some improvement in an updated engine.
That must be why MB is finally replacing the 3-valv/2-spark engines with 4-valve engines in the upcoming lineup.
I think the more likely reason is that unwarranted criticism from buyers who insist on DOHC and 4 valves in the luxury market.
You do realize DOHC engines come with tradeoffs, don't you? The extra cams take up more space and limit displacement, which is what's needed to provide low end torque and up max. torque.
Mercedes is able to offer a 5.0L SOHC v8 which has more torque and power than their competitors', all of whom are offering 4.3 to 4.6L DOHC v8s.
I'm not criticizing DOHCs with continuous VVT on intake and exhaust. I'm just saying there are other ways to get things done. And technology ain't gonna move forward if companies aren't allowed to explore alternative solutions b/c of market demand for DOHC.
Being 90 degree unit is a cost-saving meassure because the block is a chop-off of a V8. In other words, it's hardly a point worth bragging.
It's both cost-saving and a bragging point. I have never driven a 90 degree v6 as smooth as MB's. I would never be able to tell that it's not a 60 degree v6. That's impressive, b/c it's usually not too difficult to tell when you're driving a 90 degree v6.
Honda uses the SOHC on family sedans for the low-cost markets like the Accord V6 for North America (the Euro Accord is sold here as Acura TSX, costing more than the North America V6 Accord even having only a DOHC I4). Honda puts a DOHC V6 in the NSX. That goes to show you where SOHC engines belong nowadays (cost savings); it's a damn shame that MB still puts those (and have one less valve than even the Accord V6) in a car that costs twice as much as an Accord V6 (E series, where the most frequent useage of 3.2 V6 is found)
I guess I'm less concerned with cost savings and more concerned with performance than you are.
If the SOHC v6 performs just as well as a DOHC v6, why do you care that the manufacturer is saving $? Is it your goal to extract every ounce of value out of the manufacturer?
Besides, the SOHC v6s are in Honda's luxury line. Acura TL and MDX are going to have SOHC v6s. No one yet knows what engine the RL will have other than that it's a 3.5L v6, but it will probably be a SOHC v6 as well.
Did they win on name brand, or low-cost? The MB 90degree 3-valve twin-spark V6 certainly is not a smooth running engine, compared to either the Toyota VVTi V6's or even the Honda SOHC V6's, and make significantly less power than either Japanese competition. No wonder MB is finally moving to 4-valve designs in the near future.
Hmmm . . . if all this is true, how come MB's 90 degree v6 is on Ward's 10 Best and Toyota's 3.3L v6 isn't? I'm not knocking Toyota here, their old 3.0L v6 was also one of Ward's 10 Best but I've never found the MB to be a thrashy engine.
As for NVH, every Lexus typically has better NVH than the comparable MB. It's something that Toyota focuses on, I don't know that it's due to the engines.
As for its power, the MB v6 was powerful when it was introduced. I'm sure MB could update the technology to produce more power, but they've chosen to go with the standard DOHC game. It's clear that's what the luxury markets demand, and MB has to comply.
Jun 28, 2004 (7:45 pm)
Lexus' mastery of NVAH is only partially due to a smooth and quiet engine. It is the interior that gives Lexus the edge in that, not that M-B have bad interiors, but Lexus just goes the extra mile with more and better sound insulation, and razor thin panel gaps.
#5554 of 24723 lexusguy
Jun 28, 2004 (9:12 pm)
I think you might be too caught up in specs because I haven't seen one complaint about the E320's performance or engine refinement.
Jun 28, 2004 (9:45 pm)
You mean me or brightness04? I havent complained about the E320s engine refinement. You cant tell me the cabin is quieter (or better put together) than the ES330 though.
#5556 of 24723 lexusguy
Jun 28, 2004 (9:59 pm)
No big deal really but the comment was kinda meant for both of you. This: " If Mercedes is guilty of anything its not updating the 320 engine fast enough." kinda implies that it isn't up to snuff...thus my comment about its performance and refinement, meaning they comply with the class the E320 competes in. As far as the ES330 is concerned yes it is quieter, verified this with my own ears. I does have a nice interior too, but I don't a night and day difference between it and the E320. Mercedes have always gone for the business look compared to all-you-can-stand leather and wood treatments of Lexi. To me the ES330 has to have a superior interior to a whole host of cars, even ones more expensive that it because it drives like a lifeboat and looks like a experiment gone bad. The interior, reliability and features sell the car basically. The styling, driving and overall designs bores me to tears.
Jun 28, 2004 (10:08 pm)
Well I mean since that time, both BMW and Audi have updated their 6's from 2.8 to 3.0L, Nissan and Toyota increased displacement of their sixes, and Mercedes kinda didnt do anything.
Jun 28, 2004 (10:13 pm)
I see what you're saying but BMW and Audi's updated engines still don't shame Mercedes' so its kinda moot point to me. Audi's V6 (without turbo) still doesn't do anything but underperform in the A6 3.0 compared to the E320 and the 528i-to-530i conversion isn't doing much either without a stick shift so......
Jun 28, 2004 (11:50 pm)
I guess, but the C320 isnt exactly a road scorcher compared to the 330.
Jun 29, 2004 (12:33 am)
That is true.