chicagosuburban

Hi, I am new to this post. Considering a MB for the first time after years of driving Lexuses ... I am looking at the 2016 E350 V6 and the new 2017 E-class. I love the looks of the E-class but am concerned about the V4 engine. I appreciate its turbocharged etc but ..... Would love to hear other perspectives.

cetialpha5

It's actually an inline 4 cylinder engine with a 2.0 liter displacement as opposed to the 3.5 V-6 in the previous generation. Horsepower is down to 241 from 302. In the old days people used to say that there's no replacement for displacement. It's really CAFE and the new fuel economy standards that they have to hit. I'm not sure how reliable new turbos are, they're much more common now due to CAFE. In the old days when they failed, it was sudden and quick. But given a choice, I'd still prefer a V-6 to a turbo I-4 as I'm not sure a turbo can last 200k-300k that a V6 can.

Peachy

You could wait for the E400, I think it's supposed to have a 3.0-Liter Twin-Turbo engine, 0-60 in under 5 seconds.

You can ask the folks in the W213 forum if they think that 4-banger is adequate in their new e-class
https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w213-208/

dbldpr

I would not buy a 4 cylinder no matter how much turbo power it has. If they do not offer a 6 cylinder then I would go to a car mfg that did offer the 6 cylinder. I want power and reliability

fosterelli

I'm with dbldpr. I may be really old school...but all things being equal (torque, horsepower), I'd prefer a naturally aspirated V6 to a turbocharged I4.

I don't like the idea of the smaller engines working extra hard to try to match larger engine power. No different than Ford using the Ecoboost turbo V6 to replace V8s, and turbo 4s to replace V6s. I don't want a large SUV or F150 with a six banger...no sir, only V8s belong in large vehicles. Again, I could be old school.

SEC1939

In the EU they run small displacements at 120 mph. It's a global warming issue in the end. Engines are becoming less and less important to the average consumer. No one even lifts the hood anymore. Just gas & go. recall the old days when a trip from Chicago to Wisconsin required a tune up, new belts and hoses and a brake job.

bmeck2003

I purchased an 2017 E300 last month. Coming from a Lexus LS 460 with a smooth powerful V8 engine I was very apprehensive about the 4 cylinder turbo.

I first took a short demo drive while I was trying to figure out what new car to purchase. When I seriously considered purchasing the E300 I went for a 45 minute test drive - on city streets, on 2 lane roads and on the interstate. The 4 cylinder, combined with the new 9 speed transmission, has more than enough power for normal driving and is reasonably responsive for safe passing. It is quiet on the inside, but if you stand outside the car with the engine running it sounds like a coffee can with marble rattling around inside.

The engine is not as smooth as my E350 coupe's 6 cylinder, but we bought the E300 instead of a 2016 E350. I love the interior of the E300. So far, we are happy with our purchase.

By the way, FYI there is a forum on MBWorld for the new E class, called the W213 forum. It is immediately above the W212 forum.

thenew3

I'm a current E350 owner and test drove the E300. It has plenty of pickup for around town driving due to the torque at low rpm's from the turbo 4, but once you get to 65 or so mph and need to pass, it just doesn't have the HP to gain speed rapidly enough.

I'm not all concerned about reliability as that 2.0T has been in use for a few years and the bugs should be worked out. Plus my wife drives a 2016 X3 with a 2.0t, and we've had plenty of other cars with small turbo engines (Audi TT 1.8T 225hp, 100k hard miles, no engine issues), and our families in asia have been driving small displacement turbo 3 and 4 cylinders for decades without turbo issues. Turbo technology has come a long way.

What I don't like besides the lack of power at highway speeds, is the roughness of the 4 cylinder. the BMW N20 in the X3 is much smoother and sounds better than the MB turbo 4. The sound and harshness of the MB 4 cylinder reminds me of something out of a Camry or Altima rental car I've had numerous times.

If I buy another MB, it will have to be with the TT V6 unless MB can make the 4 cylinder smoother and sound better.

The G Man

I agree, the new E300 gets around in the city very well. Highway passing is fine but could use a few more horse power. Overall a pretty quiet engine from the inside considering it is a 4 banger. From the outside, like all high efficient and high performance modern day 4 cylinder engines, it sounds like diesel truck. I suspect most people who buy the E300 is buying it for the new interior, which is pretty amazing in my opinion. Personally, I would wait for the 6 cylinder turbo version.

fosterelli

It's not the mph that matters - it's the longevity and health of the engine. You can get very small engines to push amazing performance numbers...but reliability becomes a factor.

It's an economic factor for some (who want to spend the least amount possible on the car and fuel).

Others care about the environment, their carbon footprint, and preserving natural resources.

And it's a CAFE problem the government is imposing in the States.

But I have to disagree about engines and people not caring. There has always been a large population who doesn't give a crap about their engines or performance...even decades ago. And then there were the rest of us, who love performance, sound, and can afford the lower mpg, higher vehicle costs, and love it! And most of us don't buy into the global warming scam either.

BeachBunny

Add me to the camp of people who want a normal V6 instead of turbo 4. Similarly, I'd prefer a normally-aspirated V6 over a turbo V6, even if the performance was less.

What I value: Quietness, smoothness, longevity.

I have a '15 E350 w/normally-aspirated V6. I still miss the torque & quietness of my M45's V8.

aquinob

I've driven the 1.8 in the C250 and the 2.0 in the A6. In both cases, even though the cars were nice (esp the A6), there was no hiding that you had a 4 banger under the hood if you wanted even moderate acceleration. If this 2.0 in the E is anything like those, then it wouldn't be for me. You just cant isolate the vibrations and noise that 4 cylinders makes, especially if you push it.

Interestingly enough, my wife has a brand new 2016 Avalon Hybrid which also has a 4 under the hood, but its mated with a 40 hp electric motor. Under normal to moderate acceleration, its really quiet. Not super speedy, but quiet. Step on it hard and the 4 will roar and you'll think, Yep, that's a 4, but in most day to day driving, its a pretty serene experience. I think the big difference here is that the hybrid 4 is not pushed to be a performance engine and the first 40 horses come from quiet electric. 4 bangers when pushed to their limits are rougher and nosier, whether they are German, American or Japanese designed.

Zavato

I own an E350 and have driven a C300 with the turbo I4. I found the I4 peppy but the V6 is smoother.

beejAMG

not sure if this matters but....

though older models, i have 2 I-4 turbos and a big V8. the I-4 turbo is more than enough for daily driving. quiet inside where i normally am when im driving so i dont really care about the noise it makes outside if any.

i make a pass as convenient and easy as i do with my V8 even when trying to pass bigger engine cars. i push it to 150k at times and feels like im doin under a hundred.

now the V8 can do all of those but a lot faster. but unless im on the tracks, who cares? i still get to the same place i want to at the same time. i almost empty my tank over a weekend on my V8 vs a couple of weeks on my I-4s. i had an E320 NA V6 before and i wont trade my I-4 over that, and on a daily basis, ill pick my I-4 over my V8.

a lot of people are shying away from the I-4 coz its small, under-powered etc etc. its a good daily and besides, im not in a hurry to get to where im goin, im just enjoying the ride.

my 2 cents...im sure the newer I-4 performs a lot better than my old I-4s so theyre fine and they will do what you need them to do. but my money would be to get (wait for) the NA V6, you may cover all the bases with it.

Peachy

This is the future, small displacement engines with turbos. I'm sure Mercedes wouldn't have used the engine if they weren't confident about its performance. My 2010 E550 with a naturally aspirated 5.5-liter V8 engine is the stuff of yesteryear. Hopefully it'll last me long enough to get an affordable autonomous vehicle :B

fosterelli

It's only the future for those who want it. The market dictates what the manufacturers offer, and then the manufacturers produce a bunch of government-appeasing/EPA policy-abiding other stuff (for the section of the market who doesn't care or actually prefers small engines).

As long as there are enough consumers who care, and choose their makes/models based on performance & displacement, there will be manufacturers who supply that demand.

Whenever we buy a new car and get the manufacturer and JD Power surveys, I fill them out knowing exactly the intent. I answer that I chose my vehicle based on performance, safety, and technology - not price, fuel economy, etc. And I say that I didn't choose the competitors' models due to lack of performance.

Heck our Escalade still has the 6.2L - would've been easy for GM to throw something smaller and more fuel efficient in there...but what sets the Denali and Escalade apart from the Yukons, Tahoes, and Suburbans is the 6.2L and some extra bells & whistles.

thenew3

Small turbo 3 and 4 cylinders have been in use in many countries for years without major reliability and longevity issues. In Taiwan for example, majority of the vehicles on the road are small I3 and I4 engines, and most cars are kept on the road well past 100k miles. In the harsh (hot and humid) weather.
My mother in law has a old, large ford sedan with a 2.0 turbo I4 with 200k KM or about 120k miles on it, no engine trouble and she only changes the oil once every 30k KM.

My uncle had a small 1 liter I3 turbo that went 400k km (about 250k miles), before he got rid of it because the rest of the car was falling apart, engine still ran strong.

It's only USA that's used to big displacement V6/V8 engines and are afraid of small displacement I4's.

Having said that, the noise/vibration of the I4 is not very appealing in a car of the E class caliber. If they could smooth it out, make it sound better and add another 50 to 60 hp to it, then it would be perfectly fine.

CarolinaBluetec

I will probably go back to a diesel for my next car. I miss the torque.

El Cid

In the mid-80's I had a Saab 900 Turbo. Everyone warned me about the turbocharger. The 4 cylinder engine and turbocharger were the only components that didn't fail. Excellent performance - when it ran.

babacah

Got a E300 as a service loaner. Liked the way it handled. Didn't like the Ipad in dash until I used Nav and then I thought it was great. I think that would grow on me. Like my speedo and gauges set up on my 14 better.

Engine I did several runs on highway 50-80 and that is where it lacked IMHO. I would have liked to see base horsepower increase 60 not decrease. If I want 30 MPG I'll buy a Honda. Plus I've gotten 30 highway in the E350 so not sure why they needed to go 4 turbo to gain 2-3 mpg.

CarolinaBluetec

I guess I will have to save my pennies for an E43.

jahquan3

Interesting enough when I went out for lunch I saw a new E300 parked next to my car. I'm trying to find out who the owner is so I could ask them their opinion of the ride. Soon as I log on this post was right there.....how ironic?
I'm going to ask for only E-Classes as loaners going forward cuz the C feels to small and uncomfortable with passengers along for the ride. I assume they'll give me either a 350 again or a E300 this time.

Edward993

Want vs Need.


If all one "needs" is "sufficient" power to ramp up to 70, or even cruise at 120 (for those fortunate enough to have this freedom), then a turbo I4 is enough. But are mere "necessities" why one buys a car like an MB, or any other really "nice" car"?


Sorry, but if I'm spending dough on what I think is a really "nice" car (which means "serious dough" since it is nice), I'm getting the engine I want, not the one that merely "does the job." My long way of saying a buzzy I4 does not add befit a car of this stature, even if it is reliable in the long run. A smooth, torquey, and quiet 6 or 8 fit the bill for what we're discussing here. And I will vote with my wallet


Edward

The G Man

I agree, heck, even a 2 cylinder non-turbo engine can get the E class up to 70 MPH, its how it get up to speed that's the difference.

PeterUbers

Interesting how some people are tolerating this four cylinder ...

For the cost of the car it should be a v6 or turbo 6