Last post on May 11, 2010 at 11:16 AM
You are in the Mercedes-Benz E-Class
What is this discussion about?
Mercedes-Benz E-Class, Sedan
#5729 of 6720 erik, pho, tomjava
Apr 16, 2004 (3:54 pm)
"Except for the 0-60 time, diesel ourperforms gas.." If I'm not mistaken, you have the 0-60 times reversed and the E320 CDI is actually quicker than the E320 gas. According to one road test I read, the E320 CDI, at 0-60 in 6.8 seconds, is very close to the 1997 E420 (6.7) and my 1995 Maxima 5-speed (6.6). For a nearly 2 ton family sedan that gets over 35 mpg, that's pretty impressive performance.
I haven't considered the C-class lately, although I did consider the C32 a couple of years ago, but decided to keep my Maxima and get a Honda S2000 instead. As for the current C-class, I am under the impression that it's no bigger than the 3 series and, given that size choice, the 330i w/ performance package would be my choice. But I do think the C-class is a nice looking alternative for someone who prefers Mercedes luxury over BMW sport.
I haven't yet read the entire article you posted, but my immediate reaction to the claim that diesels are high pollutants is that it's more politics than science. Am I the only one that finds it strange that California and other states are making it difficult to obtain an E320 CDI that gets 35-40+ mpg while Governor Arnold drives around in a Hummer that gets 9 mpg. And not only didn't he have to pay a gas guzzler tax, but it also qualified for a 100% tax write off??? I'm a Republican, but it makes even me wonder what's in the water out there?
Apr 19, 2004 (10:27 am)
I strongly believe in modern diesel engine. Great power and excellent gas milage. That article mentions high cost associated with reducing NOx gas. That's the reason other manufacturers are not going to introduce diesel in the US.
Apr 19, 2004 (6:26 pm)
Unless congress loosens the scheduled emissions standards for diesel cars the (Mercedes) diesels being sold this year will not pass the new emission standards in CA & NY in 2 years.
Apr 20, 2004 (2:51 am)
I need to research this issue more before I make any mis-statements, but I thought the problem in the US wasn't the diesel engines made by Mercedes and others, but the "dirty diesel" high sulfer fuel that continues to be sold in the US. A friend who worked as a petroleum industry lobbyist until a few years ago mentioned that all of the US petroleum companies lobbied heavily to delay the US adoption of "clean diesel" standards that have been in place in Europe for many years.
I'm buying a TL instead of an E320 CDI for other reasons. But I would like to see the record set straight as to whether the issue is the vehicles or the antiquated fuel that we sell here in the US.
I also find it interesting (and disturbing) that the absolute worst offender of emissions - as far as my nose and eyes can tell - here in the Nation's Capital are the Metro Buses. Drive behind one of those for a few blocks and you need to go to a car wash. I guess it goes hand in hand with lead contamination in the public water.
Apr 23, 2004 (5:42 am)
Today fuel is the emmision problem. I understand legislation is in place for 2006 to further clean up diesel fuel.
#5734 of 6720 2004 E500 price and 2005 Mercedes tidbit...
Apr 23, 2004 (6:48 am)
I had occasion to drive an '04 E500 w/4500 miles (the orig. buyer traded vehicle when tranny needed replacement, which was done), and the dealer is asking $53,450. Orig. sticker was 59k. Does this seem fair?
I also verified that 2005 models will no longer include scheduled maintenance!! Do you think other manufacturers will follow suit? Amazing.
#5735 of 6720 Scheduled Maintenance
Apr 23, 2004 (9:18 am)
I also heard this is being dropped by Mercedes.
As best I can tell, "scheduled maintenance" costs them relatively little to provide - with 10,000+ mile oil change intervals and the like. On the other hand, with Mercedes having a bad rap for being expensive to maintain, I would have thought the perceived value to the consumer would have been high.
The Japanese premium brands have never offered free maintenance, but they don't have the bad rap of Mercedes to overcome. Let's see what BMW does for 2005.
#5736 of 6720 Re: 2004 E500 price and 2005 Mercedes tidbit... [nickjc #5734]
Apr 23, 2004 (11:31 am)
Doesn't seem like price is too bad, as long as the car has no other issues and is fully warranted. I'd consider $52k + Starmark. What do you think?
#5737 of 6720 Buying an E500 with early major systems problems
Apr 23, 2004 (1:14 pm)
I'd think twice about buying a car with early major replacements like a transmission.
I am only slightly biased here, but feel that these cars are overpriced to start with and have the same durability and reliablity as a Chevy. Case in point.
I'd ask for a detailed service history on the car before buying it.
How did the transmissin fail? What, if anything, did the failure do to other components in the system.
Having the car starmarked only frees you of paying for the hassles and loss of use a 'bad apple' like this might cause you. Sure you got the money, but do you have the time?
Perhaps the owner got rid of this car for very, very good reasons.
And the salesman is going to tell you the truth. Ask for the owner's name and call him or her if you can.
#5738 of 6720 Re: Diesels
Apr 24, 2004 (1:40 pm)
I had the chance to test the E320 CDI today. Although its torque was apparent off the line, the turbo-lag was rather noticeable and a bit disappointing. Also, although it was relatively quiet inside the cabin, the typical diesel chatter was still discernable when standing in front of the hood (not that that is the usual position for a driver!). While the bullet-proof nature of a diesel is appealing, I doubt that I will be driving 20K-30K miles per year to really take advantage of it, though if I did I might go for it. So like Habitat1, I will be going back to look at the TL, as well as the BMW-3. Also found the "floaty" feeling on the regular (not Sport) suspension more isolating from the road than the bimmer.