pinebaron

Hello Everyone,

I finally found a Bluetec owners forum. I am pleased to see so many reports. I am expecting my Bluetec delivery mid june. Even if it gives me 30mpg it is great; my daily commute is a 153 mile round trip (80% highway) to the office in a Ford Expedition at around 13-15mpg on highway. Though I will continue to own the Ford for my hobbies (RC Planes), I am really looking forward to driving to work with fewer bumps and in a quieter car, it will be a tremendous change and adjustment for me from driving an imposing suv to an MB sedan

Cheers
PineBaron

saffrontiger

So yesterday I tried testing how my 2005 CDI compares w/real world mileage.
Specs:
2005 CDI. Approximately 52,800 miles. Temp 83 w/ AC running and windows up. No passengers. Tire pressure 33 PSI all around rolling on 18".

I drove down the Dallas Tollway for 22 miles that has straights and many hills. I averaged 36.7 MPG with the tach hovering aroung 2200-2300 RPMs. Average speed was 71mph. Not too bad. Howver, city is a different issue with best mileage only 24.3. I'm not too worried as I have bigger issue to worry about, but I am happy that the car seems to be holding up really well. Hope this helps but the bluetec is a different motor after all.

harkgar

Same here. I am not worried about the mileage because diesels are usually about 30-33% more economical for the same engine displacement so we get a year's free fuel every 3 years. If you keep the car for 9 years you get 3 years of free fuel. Unbeatable.

The Bluetecs are like high maintenance ladies. Good to school but not to bring home to your parents. I am day dreaming about what happened 40 years ago, of course.

pinebaron

With my current fuel cost estimated at nearly $8000/year for my daily office commute (excluding personal travel), I stand to recover at least half of my fuel cost; gas guzzler vs Bluetec. In my case, fuel economy will be icing on the cake, since I required (IMHO), a new commuting vehicle. Even if the prices were to halve, in say the next five years, I cannot wait.

By the way I received the VIN # of my Bluetec which is presently in final stages of production.

I have a question for current Bluetec or MBenz owners; I hear/read things about reliability issues with MB, perhaps more so from non owners. Any truth in that?

Thanks
PineBaron

Untertürkheim

From my personal experience, MB reliability has been unbeatable. Meticulous maintenance, with very few relatively minor exceptions, has been all my cars ever needed. I am aware of quality issues that existed in the late 90s to about 2001, but I have not suffered as some others have. Even so, I would guess a large number of those complaining about reliability issues have improperly maintained or used their cars, there are so many examples of this happening.

On a side note, I have found that most non-owners who criticize MB reliability do so because they would rather use that excuse about not owning one, while the truth may be that they in fact could not afford one (or do not want to pay for one).

DerekACS

Take a look at JD Power & Associates website for 2007 Premium Cars.
The 2007 E Class won its category for the IQS award, beating Lexus, BMW, Audi, etc.

Untertürkheim

The most important fact to keep in mind is that assuming your car is maintained properly and has proper tire pressure, fuel quality has an enormous impact on performance and fuel economy. The same trip can yield significantly differnet fuel economy based on where you bought fuel.

traumatic

Have any of you noticed any significant differences in economy with different qualities of fuel? (BP/Shell, etc. vs. Sheetz, Speedway, Citgo, WalMart, or orther discounters)? I found that there was significant performance and economy differences using better grade, higher octane fuel in my BMW and parents' Audi A4, but am not sure about variations in diesel quality.

DslBnz

I've noticed about as much as a 20% difference in fuel economy between some stations, than others given the season. With the same station I usually strike +- 10%. AND THAT'S GOOD, relatively speaking.

Diesel fuel mileage (for me; non-CDI) is totally inconsistent. One week it could be 31 mpg, the next 26 mpg. Driving patterns are unaltered.

There is no particular station I've found that has a superior fuel over the other. They're all poor quality to a certain degree.

DG E300

Just some non-senceical 2 cents here. And a couple questions.

I average ~21-28 in the winter in my '98 E300 TD and ~32-36 in the summer. Don't drive bu 20 miles each way with about 75% of that on the highway.

Where I buy my gas is a big factor - It differs a lot!

My questions are - what are the egrand alda things your talking about? Do either of these apply to my '98?

Sorry for the quality of my reply- but I am a Newbie here. I've had my 300TD for 2 years now.

Green E-300 DT

Me too. We do know what gears the N A vehicles have.

What is needed is for someone over yonder to crawl under and check the gears in a E-320 CDI and verify.

Gears here are 2.65.

BTW, the ratio is stamped on the lower right-hand corner of the differential. Easy to locate.

The later vehicles with the 7G tranny should have a slight advantage due to the extra gear
(7th) which is 10 percent higher, but according to many reports here, don't seem
to be getting better mileage than the straight sixes with the five speeds.
In many cases. it seems as if the 3.2L straight six with the five speed does get superior
fuel economy to the 3.0L V6 equipped cars with the 7G transmission.

WHY?

harkgar

Can Maximus Filters and low ash engine oils reduce the mileage significantly? With the early 1970s gasoline engines it was low power, low mileage as well.

Untertürkheim

My sincere apologies to the board, I take pride in maintaining current knowledge on MB automobiles, and I have made a mistake. The previous E320 CDI with the I6 came equipped worldwide with a 2.65 differential and a 5-AT.

According to the technical data sheet, the E320 CDI Euro has the 7G with a 2.47 differential, while in the us we have the 2.65 from the previous model. One caveat is that MBNA is a bit lax with maintaining the accuracy of the information on the US site. The best would be if one of the current owners here could peek under their car to see what differenital is really installed. (My car is still being built).

harkgar

I shall read the ration next time I have my oil changed. However it is a moot point if the mileage is obviously different, to either models favor.

Today I did look under several diesels, both Ford Powerstroke trucks. One of them a 2006 (brand new F550) and the other a 2007 (F350 Super Duty). The difference is shocking. The older truck has a single small cat and the lamp post size exhaust runs straight to the rear bumper via one muffler.

The 2007 has an enormous cat and particulate filter and some weird looking flame trap capping the exhaust tip. The function of this tip is to stop flames from coming out of the exhaust under hard acceleration.

All this point to one thing for sure. For the saving of a few trees in the next 500 years we are obligated to buy more expensive, less reliable, harder to repair cars and trucks for the State of California. When we are trying desparately doing this good deed the good folks in India and China are busy burning coal to negate our efforts.

It makes a lot of sense for North Americans to spend money going bio-diesel and E85 to boost the price of corn and beef and support the Kee-Ko-Ko Summit agreement.

harkgar

Like the length of skirts and the width of men's trouser bottoms they get shorter & longer & wider every few years so the designers can sell more pants and skirts.

Same with those hippies turned environmentalists. In the 1970s Jimmy Carter warned us of the running out of oil in the year, well, about now. Gasoline, diesel, propane and other fuels are still in abundant supply. There is 300 years worth of coal reserve and we are already saying it is too dirty to burn it because of alkaline rain and global cooling and the loss of the ozo layer (is it some kind of sex toy?). Its all lies. The world has a lot of fuel and when one type runs out another takes its place.

I am telling these tree hugging kill-joyers. Back off, go and ride your bicycles. Leave us to burn lots of fossil fuel and bring some warmth to this world. All that dirty oil will do us no good staying underground.

Improviz

.....what do scientists know anyhow???

You see, it is obvious: the overwhelming majority of the world's scientists, including those in our own government in agencies such as DoD, NASA, NOAA, EPA, et al are involved in an evil conspiracy, in lockstep with the evil left-wing commie pot-smoking hippie types. Their evil plan: to rule the world by cleverly conspiring to disseminate false information about co2 raising the world's temperature. This, they believe, will allow them to win the popular vote and rule the world. How will they win the popular vote? Simple: by taking extremely unpopular steps like limiting co2 emissions. In this brilliant plan, they seek to win power by implementing policies which will inconvenience people and cause them to sacrifice, in the name of something which is all just made up. What a clever ploy....what a fantastic electoral scheme!!

As to those pinko scientists: it is not that they are actually doing the things that scientists do: taking measurements, performing experiments, submitting peer-reviewed papers to scientific journals, no, no, no. They're sitting around, smoking pot, reading Lenin and Marx, coming up with evil plans to deprive us all of cars and electricity, which they all hate; after all, they invented them!! That's what scientists do, you see: invent things, and then scheme to take them away from us. Yes, scientists long to return to the days of the slide rule and the abacus, because they hate the computers and electonic instruments with which they do their research.

So when you see images and video of things which would seem to constitute actual physical evidence of this occuring, like glaciers melting, oceans rising, islands dropping below sea level, average temperatures rising, etc etc etc., just remember: ignore what your eyes and ears tell you, and simply listen to Faux News, and the few crackpot scientists who they feature who have been bought and paid for by the oil industry--just like the scientists who were hired by big tobacco to cheerfully tell all of us that nicotine was not addictive, and that smoking did not cause lung cancer.

Lastly, if you have the choice to believe independent researchers or researchers funded by an industry which has a vested financial interest in selling more product, who do you believe? Why, the choice is crystal clear: the industry-funded researchers. Which is why I still use Vioxx to this day: because, by golly, I trust the industry-funded scientists who told us all how safe it was, not those pesky safety nuts who claim that the drug leads to heart attacks....nothing but a bunch of tree hugging pot smoking liberal commies, that's all!!! Those people who died would have died anyway, and were probably all pot-smoking liberal commie pinko brokeback mountain loving rainbow-wearing gay hippies trying to relive the 60's.

StevethePilot

Umm ... isn't this off topic? Also, since when do politicians have the right to say "The debate is over" and declare something scientific fact based on "a consensus" of scientists? There's a lot of debate regarding the planet warming, how much, how fast, for how long, and why. It's like candy corn; we know it's there, but we don't know why it's there exactly, or how it works, or whether we can have any direct effect on it.

You should watch "The Great Global Warming Swindle," by the BBC, and "Global Warming: Doomsday Called Off," by the CBC, as well as a series of other reports showing that the idea there is even a consensus is rather flimsy.

DG E300

We do know why it's there, how it works, the effects and how it is affected

I've updated my sig. with occupation...

We just don't know how to tie our shoes >> thank god for slip-ons

Diesel Benz

Aren't people talking about the E320 Bluetec versus the E320 CDI in Europe?

According to MB USA, the Bluetec rear differential ratio is 2.65:1 while the current European equivalent has a rear of 2.47. Should also explain the 0-100 km/h versus 0-60 mph acceleration difference, 6.8 s for the Euro car versus 6.6 for the US car.

harkgar

Is it Sanjaya? If so I agree with everything you wrote though I fell asleep reading it. Too long.

I just hope your name is not "Sicko" Michael Moore.

harkgar

Read somewhere that Europeans had the common rail and 7G transmission in the MY 2006 cars. If true, that would have been a brilliant combo.

I really love the CDi though, does not need the tender loving care required by the Bluetec.

Untertürkheim

Based on what I know, the new V6 is no less reliable than the old I6. The new engine is more powerful and more economical though. You're probably referring to the added emissions control equipment, which is not on European models anyway...you can go buy a 2007 CDI with any engine you want (420), and a simple, effective emissions control system.

Diesel Benz

Yes but that was with the V6 CDI, the engine was available in Europe a lot earlier than they started selling it in the US. No I6 CDI with the 7G-Tronic that I would be aware of.

Diesel Benz

Which emission control do you mean actually? The diesel particulate filters have existed quite some time in Europe, perhaps initially not on all countries but definitely in Germany before the US and today probably on most European countries (some probably later than US).

I'm afraid this Bluetec name is confusing, as long as there is no add-blue, the US E320 Bluetec must be equal to e.g. the German E320 CDI (if you give part numbers, I can check).

Green E-300 DT

2.47 X .73 = 1.8031 overall X 810 = 1460 revs per mile/revs at 60 mph.

A rather tall gear indeed. Putting the engine just barely into its' torque range.

Bet those cars will get some really high fuel economy at speed!