E320 straight six or v6 which one is better
The inline engines also last much longer than V's (except the head gasket problem of course)
I bought my E320 for the I6 engine.
Like i said I'm biased, I like the inline six, I'm old school, don't take me too seriously

in making a choice of w210's It is much easier to find low mile fine examples of the 112 and 113 motors than it is to find a m104 jet engine with low miles
chrysler did a lot of things to drag down mercedes,the modular engine was not one of them.
keep them in good shape and all Mercedes engines are worthy of praise
The inline engines also last much longer than V's (except the head gasket problem of course)
I bought my E320 for the I6 engine.
Like i said I'm biased, I like the inline six, I'm old school, don't take me too seriously

oh for the love of god. The inline 6 has its own issues (ever see what happens to a crank and cams that long?)
The inline 6 is going to last longer? why? The v6 is not exactly very stressed. You have no basis in fact for your statements, just your longing for "the good old days".
The inline 6 is going to last longer? why? The v6 is not exactly very stressed. You have no basis in fact for your statements, just your longing for "the good old days".
I just don't see many V6 mods other than a pulley on the C32 AMG.
https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w124/198814-finally-tt-install-pix.html
And, the engineer will tell you that the inline engine is a safety hazard as compared to a V engine as regards front-end collision crash worthiness.
Yes, the ideal V6 engine would be a 60-degree, 120-degree, or 180-degree design, but if you're going to use same tooling to make a V8 you compromise on 90-degrees and add a balancer shaft. This stuff seems to make little difference these days, however, as for example the current V6 and V8 Mercedes diesel engines are both 75-degree designs, both with balancer shafts.
In the recent "turbo" era in Formula One, the engines were V6s. Inline engines would have created handling nightmares.
The added expense of having two versus one cylinder heads with the accompanying cam drive complications seems well worth it given the other advantages. Porsche's been doing it for years. BMW's inline engines are these days just marketing, although as noted previously it does permit "modularization" with inline fours.
My point is that the actual mechanics of the v6 should be just as good as the I6.
The sludge problem was due to owners not using synthetic oil in the first batch of engines because MB never told them to.
I would also think the reason why the W140 never used the M112 was because it wouldn't be worth making all the changes when it was about to be phased out (last year for the W140 was 1999).
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
The inline 6 is going to last longer? why? The v6 is not exactly very stressed. You have no basis in fact for your statements, just your longing for "the good old days".

Sure, the shorter cams and crank shaft will have to bear less stress but guess what, they are also made to bear less stress which means: they're CHEAPER to make (cheaper steel, cheaper to machine, etc). are you telling me that the engineers who designed for mercedes (and we're talking good old genuine mercedes) were that stupid to not think about the stress on the components? please if you don't have respect for me have a little respect for those engineers that made mercedes benz one of the best car makers in the world in the "good old days". and look at Benz's reputation now: listed in the worst rated cars list. Thank you, I rest my case.
Just because an engine looks new and runs like new because it IS new doesn't mean it's a better design. only time will tell.
Let's face it. Mercedes leaned a little too far to the economic side of car production in the past decade.
The design of a car is balanced result of: cost vs performance and quality.
Knowing the above, explain to me how a brand new E class cost 50,000 in 1997 and now in 2007 (10 years later, after inflation and prices rising) it's still in the same range?
Thank you.
You're right about the Formula 1. An engine rotating at 10,000 and higher rpm is going to have a lot of angular momentum which will cause trouble in handling. But you're talking about a racing engine not a daily driver with a little edge to it.
When the V6's came out Mercedes was trying to recapture market share (and still is) the only way to do it was to offer more choices in vehicles. Thus they had to cost cut with the SOHC engines (notice how now they have went back to a DOHC so they can implement advanced VVT). The V6 paired with the SOHC provides great economy, but in the whole scheme of things it is (and even when it came out) a very uninspiring design. There is nothing great about that engine.
Last edited by husk323; Dec 21, 2007 at 11:14 PM.
When the V6's came out Mercedes was trying to recapture market share (and still is) the only way to do it was to offer more choices in vehicles. Thus they had to cost cut with the SOHC engines (notice how now they have went back to a DOHC so they can implement advanced VVT). The V6 paired with the SOHC provides great economy, but in the whole scheme of things it is (and even when it came out) a very uninspiring design. There is nothing great about that engine.
This shows that you have not read up enough about the M112 V6 and driven the later model W202s and W210s powered by this V6 engine. Firstly the V6 layout gives engineers more room to work on, on safety isssues. And yes its true that the M112 V6 is an SOHC engine, but that does not make it less powerful. In fact it produces about 3 extra kilowatts more at 165 kw vs the 162 kw power output of the Straight 6. Still both are great engines of their respective generation. The M112 V6 produces 85% of its maximum torque at just 2000 rpm, and has a completely flat torque curve above 3000 rpm. This gives the car a very torquey feel, with a nice ammount of power to go along with it. The M104 is not capable of that, and feels heavier having a cast iron block. You should drive a later model E-Class with the M112 V6 under the bonnet and compare it to another E320 powered by the Straight 6 before passing a judgment.
Last edited by SechsPackSound; Dec 22, 2007 at 03:44 AM.
Stiff competition from other makers and the poor quality/cost controls were and still are the reason they are scrambling to regain the lead they once enjoyed.
Simple,cheap,uninspired?http://www.whnet.com/4x4/new_V6.html
That's what i heard in the 60's about the small block chevy and 40 years later it is pushing out 640 h.p. in its latest "uninspired" iteration and the V platform on the mercedes will still be kicking long after the last L-6 springs an oil leak.


Sure, the shorter cams and crank shaft will have to bear less stress but guess what, they are also made to bear less stress which means: they're CHEAPER to make (cheaper steel, cheaper to machine, etc). are you telling me that the engineers who designed for mercedes (and we're talking good old genuine mercedes) were that stupid to not think about the stress on the components? please if you don't have respect for me have a little respect for those engineers that made mercedes benz one of the best car makers in the world in the "good old days". and look at Benz's reputation now: listed in the worst rated cars list. Thank you, I rest my case.
Just because an engine looks new and runs like new because it IS new doesn't mean it's a better design. only time will tell.
Let's face it. Mercedes leaned a little too far to the economic side of car production in the past decade.
The design of a car is balanced result of: cost vs performance and quality.
Knowing the above, explain to me how a brand new E class cost 50,000 in 1997 and now in 2007 (10 years later, after inflation and prices rising) it's still in the same range?
Thank you.
As for your statement about quality, MBs from the 80s didn't have nearly the same technology, features, options or HP, that the new ones do, hence they are prone to less problems. While MB had a few bad years, the complaints about the modular engines was limited to very early years.
The I6 is a great engine, but there is nothing wrong with the V6.
To say one is better than the other is silly. However, the V6 makes more power and torque, and there is no concrete evidence to show that its longevity is in question.
>) It makes it complicated to add VVT, and the only way to get power is to add boost. The M104 is torquey as well, you should take a theory class on how an engine works at your local community college. Most of your statements are based on "what you feel" rather than facts.
Stiff competition from other makers and the poor quality/cost controls were and still are the reason they are scrambling to regain the lead they once enjoyed.
Simple,cheap,uninspired?http://www.whnet.com/4x4/new_V6.html
That's what i heard in the 60's about the small block chevy and 40 years later it is pushing out 640 h.p. in its latest "uninspired" iteration and the V platform on the mercedes will still be kicking long after the last L-6 springs an oil leak.


Only problem is the M112 has the "crippled" v6 with a SOHC, if this engine was designed to be a top of the line engine how come they did not design it with 4 cam shafts? It was obviously designed for economy, to reduce the cost of engine development, and ease of maufacturing. Once Mercedes realized (market forces BMW, Lexus,Audi etc and with the AMG Models) that people wanted performance they ditched the SOHC went to DOHC and ditched the Cylinder De-activation system etc. This motor by no means was a no-cost barred motor, it was designed to be Mercedes' cross platform "generic" motor. Its a great reliable motor, but its design is far from groundbreaking.
Variable intake runners,3 valve cylinders,multi spark coils,etc. were a far cry from the technology used on the m104 engine so in that aspect compared to the tractor motor -Yes it is groundbreaking.
Variable intake runners,3 valve cylinders,multi spark coils,etc. were a far cry from the technology used on the m104 engine so in that aspect compared to the tractor motor -Yes it is groundbreaking.

Your E320 has 232 lb ft of torque, the SL320 has 232lb ft of torque, so how is that hands down more torque? You are talking non-sense. 3 valves per cylinder, how is that ground breaking when Audi had 5 valves per cylinder and 4 valves per cylinder were the norm? Your motor doesnt even have VVT, now that is embarassing.
Kept on the subject,no nonsense,no throwing in comparissons to newer engines,apples for apples the v-6 alum block is light years ahead of the 1950's technology employed in the l-6 engine.
>) It makes it complicated to add VVT, and the only way to get power is to add boost. The M104 is torquey as well, you should take a theory class on how an engine works at your local community college. Most of your statements are based on "what you feel" rather than facts.Last edited by SechsPackSound; Dec 22, 2007 at 09:55 PM.
A properly designed head with 1 large exhaust valve in the proper path will out flow the obstructed path of two small valves and the shrouding they exhibit to the path of the exhaust gases. More complex and more valves and more cams does not always make a more powerful engine,and that is not feel that is facts.
1999 v-6 0-60 7.2 seconds
1997 L-6 0-60 7.9 seconds
feel?my ***!that's lengths,that's facts.
case closed
Yes, the ideal V6 engine would be a 60-degree, 120-degree, or 180-degree design, QUOTE]
Here is the "Better" short crankshaft.

This is award winning engineering?????

And by the time an engine gets to 180 it is no longer a V, now they call it horizontally opposed, flat, boxer, pancake, suitcase. and it's characteristics are closer to an I6 than a V6 in that, it has a real crank, and can be balanced.






