pinebaron

While browsing through specs for the Bluetec sedan rwd on MBUSA site, I found they changed rear axle ratio on the newer models. How do owners of 2011 Bluetecs feel about torque and speeds from start and while passing cars over 65mph.
I own a 2007 model and with my 19" wheels and tire setup no doubt has altered the ratio a tad, but it is a rocket and a blast to drive. I plan to have the speed governer disabled shortly.

2007 E320 Bluetec V6 came with a rear axle ratio of 2.65
2011 E350 Bluetec V6 states a rear axle ratio of 3.07 on MBUSA

ImInPA

I believe your 320 is faster than the new Bluetecs. I have a 2011 E350 Bluetec and find the acceleration to be very good. The torque is very good. I have the 7G tranny, and, I generally leave it in E mode (economy), so it starts in second gear. It will still over power the tires. I love my Bluetec.

NoFoolyn

2010 - 2011 Bluetec's are ~~ 350 lbs heavier than 2007 -2009 models ( if 09's actually came into USA). The '07 ( W-211 ) has 0-60 time of 6.6, while the '10 ( W-212) is supposed to be 0 - 60 @ 7.3 seconds. This makes me doubt the rear axle ratio was changed to 3.07 That'd be a big difference in right foot punch. Would be nice to see what the new ( exclusive to 2012 M Model SUV engine only ) with modified combustion chambers and new cylinder wall coating technique would do in an '07 Bluetec sedan. Torque has gone from 400 lb-ft ( maybe ) to 455, while HP has been upped too...something like 208 up to 255 ?

At 66 yrs of age, with license suspended several times in earlier years for speeding and "exhibitions of speed" the Bluetec I have is OK with me...with original 255 16 inchers. I did do 125 mph recently, and gave it an "Italian Tuneup" today while showing a mouth breather in a Honda Accord what CLEAN DIESEL TECHNOLOGY and 400lbl-ft or torque at 1600 rpm is all about.

listerone

I'm fully satisfied with the acceleration...both off the line and in passing maneuvers...of my Bluetec.I'm an old fogy so that kind of thing isn't important to me so that fact may color my opinion.However,as I've said before...my BMW diesel,which was much smaller,lighter and had a more powerful engine (265hp,425 ft lbs torque) had a *much* zippier accelerator which,I must admit,was sometimes fun to experience.I sometimes wish that MB had placed a similarly powered engine in my car.

dlakeman55

My first diesel was a 2008 E320 CDI (W211). I now have a 2011 E350 BlueTec (W212). If I had not owned the 2008 I'd be happy with the performance of my 2011. However, I wrote a letter to the President of MB saying I was not happy in what appears to be a drop in performance. Seems the 2011 is "struggling" more from a standing start, and the engine revs to almost redline when passing. My 2008 just "leaped off the ground" and had a powerful and smooth acceleration to over 100MPH.

ImInPA

The additional 350 lbs., as noted above, is a lot more mass to get moving. There is no doubt that the w212 with the current diesel will be a bit slower than the CDI. I hope MB replaces the current engine with the new version in the S class. Nice.

Green E-300 DT

How is it possible to really verify the different weights of the various diesels starting with
my CDI and continuing through the 2007 Bluetecs (W-211s) and the currect W-212s?

How is it that many people think that the current W-212s weigh so much more?
Aren't they equipped with totally Aluminum motors? Aren't the V6 motors
lighter than my straight six with its cast-iron block?



Derrel

ImInPA

The curb weights of the vehicles are published in the brochures, and, are verified in road test magazines. It is not the weight of the engines it is the total weight of the vehicle. The CDIs do not have the urea injection hardware and fluid. The adds a quite a bit of weight.

Green E-300 DT

If you do not have all the brochures, then what? Where do you look?

The 'urea injection hardware and fluid' does not weigh as much as the spare wheel
and jack which the W-212s do not have as they are on run-flats because the
mentioned AdBlue fluid reservior tank uses the spare wheel space!

350 pounds is a lot of extra weight!

The seven speed trans is said to be lighter than my five speed.
My engine must be heavier than the all Alimunim V6.

Maybe its the DPF and other related smog equipment that was added in 2007?
No, that could not weigh that much.



Derrel

ImInPA

Keep in mind that the new car is also much wider, so there is more body too. In any event, I am sure the specs you seek are located somewhere on this site. The new model is heavier. The taller final drive is no doubt to accommodate fuel economy figures, but, I find that there is more than enough torque to twist the gearing just fine. I have never found myself feeling disappointed in the power train of the W212 Bluetec in any way. Of course, just being me, I would love the next version to have 300 hp and 500+ lb-feet of torque.

Green E-300 DT

I believe that my 2005 CDI has 2.65 gears in the back. So in overdrive fifth speed, the
overall ratio is 2.1995, good for approximately 1772 rpms per mile or at 60 MPH.

Now what gearing does yours have? Or asking it in another way, exactly what are
you turning at a true 60 mph in your highest gear? If I know that, I can
figure closely enough and determine what I think your gears are.
Yours came with 17 inch wheels, correct?



Derrel

2005_E320cdi

[QUOTE=ImInPA;4838258]I believe your 320 is faster than the new Bluetecs. I have a 2011 E350 Bluetec and find the acceleration to be very good. The torque is very good. I have the 7G tranny, and, I generally leave it in E mode (economy), so it starts in second gear. It will still over power the tires. I love my Bluetec.[/QUOTEitsits
less friction on torque converter if it starts on first gear