shotgun_banjo

To those people who had both the glk350 and 250 blutec given the chance to buy the same car which would you buy again and why?

ble2716

A GLK350 for me.
Not because of all the bad stories about ad blue issues but I don't want a diesel.
Just a personal preference.

GLK350AMG

I would have gotten a diesel GLK or a ML as I find the GLK a little bit on the small size.

Cwdawson

diesel all the way... awesome highway cruiser... 110 kph up 30 mile hill in 7th gear every other vehicle I've driven there has shifted back and forth between gears whether it was a v6 or an 8.... and still averaged 42 mpg... whats not to like...

davidjohnbamber

We took a ride down the hill approx 3500+ feet in elevation change to Scottsdale to drive both a gas and diesel GLK two months ago. I drove the diesel, and it was lights out. We have been averaging just under 26 MPG with the diesel. The Jeep Liberty it replaced would struggle to even get 12 MPG with our driving habits. The BlueTec is a great power train for the GLK. Just my opinion. Our last trip down to the valley from Payson to Scottsdale we averaged just under 38 MPG according to the readout on the dashboard. If given the choice again I would pick the diesel. My wife and I are way past the time when we wanted to "blow everybody's doors off" in the stoplight Grand Prix. This is our first diesel, and it won't be the last.

Eyesncars

The GLK250 without a doubt. 43.2 mpg on our last trip. Great torque and just an all around perfect versatile vehicle.

SmokinReefer

I owned two ML gassers before I went to the diesel side. I'm currently on my second ML diesel. And then I took delivery of another ML in March. This time...... I went back to gas. Just had too many issues with the diesel.

While awaiting delivery if my new gasser I had to replace the oil cooler and the AdBlue heater. But since I spent so much repairing the diesel (it was out if warranty) I kept it. So now it's my daily driver while the gasser sits in the garage with only 150 miles on it

So after 200K+ miles in gas ML's and even more in diesel ML's, I would go gas. The diesels just get too expensive when you get up there in miles on the odometer. The added fuel mileage is great but I believe it's not enough to offset the higher maintenance costs.

shotgun_banjo

This is the one that scares me. So if you will keep the car for 6-8 years are you saying just go with the gas version? Also, if the car will just run for 15 kilometers in a day will that be bad for a diesel?

cpsseals

According to consumers reports the ML diesel has a very bad rating for reliability. So far nothing bad about the GLK. Diesels like to run warm, and with the 250 I can sure see the fuel economy improve the longer I'm on the highway. Fortunate for me I live about 50 kilometres from the closest town and double that to the closest major centre so getting it nice and warm isn't a problem.
Yesterday's run to town netted a 6.0 litres per km / 47 imperial MPG over a 200 kilometre trip.
The 4 pot GLK vs the 6 banger GL gives much better economy, let's just hope that the long tern reliability is on par with other German 4 cylinder TDIs.

SmokinReefer

If you plan to keep it more than 100K miles then keep it covered under a warranty. I bought extended coverage to 100K and the vehicle started dropping oil around 105K

jrct9454

No question at all in my mind - the diesel is the way to go. We consistently average 36+ mpg at highway speeds, with excellent performance and no extra noise or vibration. We were lucky to get 23 mpg with our GLK350 on the longest trips, and 18-20 mpg was more the norm in everyday use. Figure at least 35-45% LESS fuel used. Fuel consumption was the only thing I didn't like about our '10 - the '14 GLK250 has been superb. Best engine they make....

GLK350AMG

SmokinReefer, could you list out the items you had to fix (and costs involved) along with a timeline (in terms of milage) of when things started going wrong with your diesel? I've driven my GLK350 for about 5000 miles and am still wondering if I should have gotten diesel.

bdelong36

Buy the diesel! Great powertrain. Fits the vehicle and AWD system perfectly. Good in town and smooth on the highway. Fuel economy in a lux SUV that beats most econo cars. Very happy with our 250 GLK and would buy (for me) a c250 diesel wagon tomorrow if MB would just import the thing!

LesF

yes to the question even though my '13 250 had to go back to the dealer. I replaced it with a '14. Mileage up to 42 a US gallon. Average for my longer trips 37-38.

cpsseals

If Mercedes made a C class coupe with the diesel and a 6 speed manual for our market I'd buy one today!!!


A boy can dream...

bop11

Seeing that the 0-60 times for the 350 is 5.8 sec and the 250 is 10.1 seconds (which sounds slow, probably more like 8 seconds) and the over whelming support for the 250, I wonder why auto companies are spending so much money on making cars accelerate so fast. Eight seconds to 60 seems like a very acceptable acceleration to me.

ble2716

0-60 times isn't a big deal for me even though it's fun to do once in a while.
I had so many CR-v and CX-5's tried to race me and they all won. LOL

For me, gas mileage isn't an issue.
I know the 250's maintenance is costing more the 350.
Those are the reasons why I choose the 350.

volkvin

Not sure what were your circumstances, but i kept up with a tuned '02 STI yesterday. After a few stop light starts and a 5km highway run, the guy dropped his window and thumbed up that turbo is a beast if you catch it spinning

koalatm

I'd do the diesel again for sure. In fact, if Mercedes brings out the new C class wagon with this engine I'd be all over it for my personal vehicle (GLK is the wife's).

rmfnla

Same for me.

We drive less than 6K per year so gas consumption isn't such a bog deal.

What I would do differently is get the Bi-Xenon light package; I'm still annoyed that I didn't know about that when I selected my GLK...

koalatm

Yeah, you'd think bi-xenon would be standard on this sort of vehicle. But, with German vehicles you just have to be extra careful. I'm looking at ordering a Porsche Cayman GTS and even on that you still have to add them.

Rascally Wabbit

If I needed 4WD, I would opt for a diesel, otherwise a Glk350 2WD. Our 2010 was a dealer loaner bought with 17K on the clock. Very disappointed in how the vehicle was maintained & then prepped for the extended warranty. Would likely buy from private owner or order new next time IF a dealer is close (<50 miles) for service when we relocate. Wife loves the car which is all that matters.

super7pilot

While I have only owned a GLK250 for a short time. I have owned a trucking company in the past. So have a fair amount of diesel driving experience.

I happen to think that the main negative to diesel ownership is the fact that most folks buy a diesel for the fuel economy and have no idea how a diesel likes to be operated. Just look at any article in this forum or test review of the GLK250. It will without fail be mentioned (in a negative way) that the diesel is just to slow to 60MPH. Call me crazy. But I thought the GLK250 was a 4WD SUV geared for economical driving. Not an SLS AMG. If I want to drive a sports car. I will drive my sports car and leave the GLK behind.

Which leads me to believe that most folks are still thinking "gas" while driving a diesel. Diesels live for low rev cruising and are not ideally suited to the stop light Grands Prix of commuting short distances where the engine will not likely reach full operating temp or the aforementioned sports car driving style. I would even venture to say that most diesel car owners don't even know the proper shut down procedure after having just come off the highway into a rest area.

jrct9454

I've driven both diesel and gasoline cars for a long time [see list below], and never thought any modern turbo-diesel was too "slow". Since I have direct, back-to-back experience with both a GLK350 and a GLK250 diesel [each with AWD], I can say that there has been no circumstance where the difference in acceleration has been a problem. Sure, any driver with any sensitivity can tell the difference, but it simply is not enough to affect any part of the driving envelope I've encountered.

As for gearing, yes, it is correct to observe that the final drive in the diesel is "longer", that is, designed for lower rpm in every gear. The 250 spins at 2000 rpm at 75 mph, which is right smack in the middle of the torque curve. It is comfortable at just about any engine speed above 1300 rpm - like all diesels, the story here is torque, not peak power.

All I can say is that I just couldn't be happier about the decision to get the GLK250 - easily the best of all our M-Bs, and in turn, probably the best car I've ever owned....and I've had 60 cars over the past 50+ years.

I too would have preferred a C-Class wagon with the same engine, but as we all know, MBUSA has blinders on with this topic, so no point in beating the horse again. Similarly, my ideal would be a B-Class diesel, but I can't buy that one in the USA either....even though it's available in Canada and just about every other market in the world.

Anyway, we paid $38k before T/L on a year-end deal that included dealer $ and a kicker from MBCA [here's a plug for joining the MB Club of America - I'm a longtime member] on a lightly optioned car...money well-spent.

ashwats

I have ordered a 250, what is that shutdown procedure please?