Anyone have the 2011 E350 Bluetech? If so what are your inital thoughs?

 

Get a 2006 E320 CDI instead, much better car.

 

Says someone who's probably never seen the newer car.

My thoughts are based on seeing them at the dealer and adBlue and runflat tires have finally come to the E-class.

The W212 is an improvement on the W211 and although the engine is same as 2007-on W211 Bluetecs (minus the adBlue) either run rings around the '05-'06 inline diesels with the silly old 5-speed. Have had both.

Newer is ALWAYS better with Mercedes, as it's a reputable company selling on its engineering. Those that think the old stuff is better are simply jealous and rationalizing their position.

 

The silly old 7 Speed has had a lot more issues than the 5 spd.


My dealer service advisor even embraces the 05-06, and thinks the Torque is better on the older inline 6 then the newer V6!

Newer is not always better, look at all the W211 early problems (03-04) in comparison to how good the previous generation was!!!

But this is all subjective! Buy what you like and what you feel is best!

 

Can't comment on w212 vs w211, but I do prefer the inline-6 with 5-spd vs the new v6 w/7spd. The I-6 in our '05 CDI is louder and ALOT stinkier (esp idling in traffic), but has smoother power delivery and the 5spd auto seems to know exactly when to shift. The v6 in our '09 GL Bluetec is still smooth, quieter than the I-6, and has absolutely zero diesel exhaust (or any other) smell. Power delivery isn't as seamless as in the '05, and the 7spd transmission (or at least its tuning/shift points) is not a great match for the diesel power curve IMO. Always seems to want to rev higher-than-necessary before upshifting around town, almost like its tuned for a gas engine.

Just curious, but what about the Bluetec V6/7spd runs circles around the I-6/5spd? I thought power & acceleration were very close, and the I-6 actually got slightly better mileage...

To the OP, everything I've read about the w212 Bluetec has been positive. We may look into one in a couple years, especially if MB releases a Bluetec wagon. But I'm really hoping for a w221 Bluetec...

 

Stay away from any mercedes diesel beyond the 06 CDI with the straight 6. From 2007 until today, the V-6 diesel engines are throw away. The US EPA has destroyed the once reliable workhorse of years ago - the diesel engine of today is so burdened with stringent emission controls that you can guarantee routine shop visits to fix all the check engine lights that will plague the owner for years to come. Urea injection and particulate filters are regulatory requirements beyond the technology to build any reliability into these engines.

 

That is false information. The only reason its "faster" is because it uses a very small turbo for instant response (which sacrifices top-end power) and the DPF allows it to be tuned dirtier for more low-end torque.

A simple ECU reprogram and the E320 CDI will run rings around the bean-counter designed V6, get much better fuel economy and outlive it by many years (Not to mention its actually rebuildable when it wears out, the V6 is scrap metal when its worn out).

That is very wrong. Remember the 90's? Have you actually DRIVEN (not just looked at in a dealership) a V6/7sp?

Also false. Their marketing is based around luxury, performance and history. Engineering is at the back of the bus these days.

Except the worse fuel economy and $5000 DPF.

 

Interesting

 

Wow, that DPF's price goes up in every one of your posts! It'll be 10K by January!

 

Yet, General Motors determined it couldn't live without its German engineers.

And, again, the lack of rebuildablity is a red herring, as pretty much ZERO gasoline engines can be either. You're talking about the realm of industrial engines that has ZERO relevance to today's automobiles. Sorry, but light weight is a virtue.

Perhaps those looking for knowledge here rather than a platform to denigrate the world of Mercedes may find some value in ...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Diesel_particulate_filter

 

You are talking about three different things here, rebuildabililty of modern engines, unreasonable and excessive emission controls in the USA and the virtue of lightweight cars.

1) Rebuildability of modern engines. 240 is right in pointing out that new passenger car engines are more and more "throw away" in their designs. Using MB as an example there are still lots of MB passenger diesel cars running on the road these days all over the world with amazing mileage, a lot of them taxis. Think of the resources and energy saved if these cars were junked instead of being rebuilt.

2) When cats were installed in 1971 or so it was the cure-all for air-pollution. The standards were tightened every few years, to the LEV and eventually the ULEV and soon zero emission vehicles. Like cigarette smoking the real and ultimate goal is the killing of the diesel and the gasoline engines. Unfortunately Ralph Nader and Alfonso (Ozone Man) Gore and disciples are very much alive and well.

3) The "virtue" of lightweight cars. There is none apart from fuel conservation. From the US governemnt's own research data passengers travelling in heavy vehicles survive much better in crashes with lighter cars. This is common sense needing no confirmation. If you try to hit me head-on when I am driving in my 3/4 ton Suburban with your mini or Mercedes Smart car you will end up somewhere under my rear axle, all squashed up in the process. If you can afford it drive the biggest and safest car always. Try shutting the doors of a MB 560 SEL (I owned one), the 1992 S500 with the double-glazed glass (I drove one) and feel the difference. The modern MB cars are tinny by comparison. Audi and BMW are using aluminum extensively to save weight. Have you ever priced the cost of a paint job on a 100% aluminum body Audi A8? Colossal. My brother drove one.

 

I have no idea what a PDF costs. 4, 5 or 10 k.
However, I do know that you have to buy one just when your car is worth less then the cost of a PDF, after the MB warranty expires.

Are you going to buy a new replacement PDF or cut it off and re-program the computer? The choice is easy and obvious to most.

 

Unfortunately I agree with you totally.
Older (pre 2006) MB diesels are workhorses alright. Change the oil, fuel filter, transmission and axle fluids and you are done. The less emission junk there is on the engine the less there is to go wrong. Remember ALL emission equipment on the modern engine was designed neither for performance enhancement nor better fuel economy and therefore add nothing of value to the vehicle. The EPA had the brilliant idea of forcing car makers to do this Check Engine Light (CEL) thing for all emission equipment failures, to scare motorists into fixing their cars. Now they had forced MB to do the 50 start thing with the AdBlue diesels. When your urine solution runs dry you don't drive. What a joke! Would you like to be stranded in the middle of nowhere because of a stupid piece of emission equipment?

 

That is false information. Try learning to read the post instead of making up false facts.

Thats because Americans have always sucked at engineering. GM can't find any 'mericans to do a decent job so, naturally, they outsourced.

Let me know how many 50k+ cars don't have rebuildable engines. Mercedes' V6, V8 and V12 g@ssers are all rebuildable. Its only the Diesel that can't.

Sorry, that is false information. An engine is an engine.

How cute! You actually think wikipedia is a source of information! You're just as likely to find factual information in Urban Dictionary.

 

Latest sales numbers. GL leads the Mercedes-Benz fleet!

 

You guys can keep bashing the bluetec that I have, but I think I'll be fine. I'm willing to pay for repairs or do them myself. If my DPF costs 2K every 100K miles, I think I can cope. Additionally, if my engine is reliable and scalable enough to be used in trucks around the world, I think it can't be as worthless as those who drive 30 year old taxis may attest. Considering my car is paid off, if I have to spend 3-5K in one year a few years down the line to keep it up and running circles around 99 SL500's while getting 36MPG highway, I think I'll be able to deal with it..

 

Great, people like the Tribeca lookalike.


It isn't. The biggest its used in is cargo vans with a 11300lb GVWR.
If you're going to troll, please try and get your facts correct. Otherwise people such as myself will continue to walk all over you.

 

You are playing with words again . 2.1 ton truck or van , what is the difference. He made his point.

 

Whats the difference? Work ability. Look at an actual truck of similar size, such as an Isuzu NPR, and their rating is above 20,000lbs, double that of the sprinter.

 

Drove a 2010 R-class BlueTec this weekend. It was impressive. After reading this thread I must say it is crossed off my list. As a long-time Mercedes owner, the non-rebuildable feature of this engine is totally unacceptable to me. Replacement long blocks from Mercedes have never been cheap, but I can only imagine what they will charge, given that they know there is no other option. Aluminum is intolerant to overheating, so a bad radiator hose and inattentive driver may render a $18k R-class diesel worthless. I can buy a lot of gas for my Suburban to avoid that risk.

In the past I always bought Mercedes that were at least 10 years old, because that was what I could afford. That practice allowed me to side-step a lot of problems, e.g. the bad wiring harnesses in the 90s, transmissions that lasted 85k because they told us not to change the fluid, etc. Now that can afford a new one, I will continue that policy, because I cannot trust the engineering of an untested Mercedes.

Thanks to all who posted on this thread, given resources like this forum we can all learn from the experience of others.

Caveat emptor

 

+1 - speaking from expierence - I drove every possible 'letter' (E, R, ML, i6, V6) - my biggest mistake was selling 2005 E320 but I couldn't drive it in winter condition (it was too dangerous put family and take snowy road)

 

Of course you realize this is just a figment of one guy's imagination.

It' is NOT the truth.

 

Hey, I represent that remark!

Us USAians can certainly engineer. I'd put MIT grads up against Max Planck alumni any day.

UMich grads, however...

In my experience, most every company, regardless of product or business model, always sees R&D as a cost center/rent extraction, and wants to hire the cheapest they can get, then lay them off ASAP. That's why they prefer overseas folks who rely on their employers for visa sponsorship.

Used to have a UMich grad for a boss. One day, he complained about me being unable to work late because I was taking a class for my MS: "I never went to most of my classes at UMich, and I still got A's..." It showed.

 

USA companies have to pay their assembly labor so much they have to cut back on materials and engineering quality to still compete at common price points.

 

That is false information.

The iron cylinder liners are cast into the aluminum cylinder block and no press in sleeves are available. That means once the cylinder bore is damaged or excessively worn, the block (aka, the engine) is scrap metal. That, by definition, means the engine is not rebuildable.

The entire engine is filled with integrated parts that, if damaged or worn, require many other components to be replaced with it.
The valvecovers are integral and machined to match to the cylinder head. That means if a valvecover is damaged the entire cylinder head must be replaced.
The turbo is not sold as individual parts. That means if the electronic actuator fails (as they frequently do) the entire turbo must be purchased.
If any of the piston cooling jets in the block are so much as bent, the block is scrap metal (Per MB).

So on and so on. The entire V6 is based around minimal manufacturing costs; not reliability, ease of repairs or longevity.