tmounib

Here is another NEW information I found out, the 1996 E320 with L6 engine have the CAST IRON BLOCK, from late 1997 and newer Mercedes redesign the engine to ALLOY block which is almost 120 POUNDS less than the L6 cast iron block, meaning, it will take more ENERGY (fuel) to heat up the CAST IRON vs. the ALLOY which reflects greatly on the MPG result, I own both cars and been taking notes regarding MPG and fuel efficiency. bottom line, the newer (1998) V6 engines are much better on MPG vs older L6 engines, keeping in mind that the 1996 and older were made to LAST longer,

OldMBGuy

Hear you on that, the "new" V6 was advertised as having been engineered for better fuel efficiency way back when, and it's true.

Many of us were skeptical about MB leaving the old inline 6 behind, from both a reliability and longevity perspective. So far, so good; there are some really high mileage V6's out there...

tmounib

Hello everyone, I am still discovering all about my E320 (1996 and 1998) but I have noticed one thing lately (since the weather here in VA getting pretty cold) The 1996 with L6 engine takes for ever to emmit any heat and the temp Gage does not get about the first notch (something like 100 degrees which is 1/4 the scale)
I have checked the heater valve for dirt and corrotion and it was clean,, any suggestions???
I need some more heat this winter,,

SoutieRSA

I found that you can use a small, flat screwdriver, and wedge it between the centre pin, and the "serrations" around the edge, and CAREFULLY turn. Generally does the job, if the torx's aren't too tight. I'm just too lazy to buy a driver set, and most of the access control readers I've worked on use similar, yet smaller 'screws', and the same procedure works 100%

manila58

Just returned to San Jose from LA. Some stop and go on I-405, cruise control 75 on I-5, some slow traffic on 152, easy 101 and 85. Average 30-31 mpg.

desired_speeds

Have you checked your thermostat?

renault12ts

A couple of times I've seen over 50mpg.

To qualify that a little, my car is a diesel, and this would be imperial gallons. I believe the US gallon is c.3.8 litres, whereas the Imperial gallon is c. 4.6 litres.

MBtechman

HI, I just joined. I've been a MB tech at a CA dealer for 30yrs. The longer I work the more I realize I don't know.
My 1st MB was a '75 240D, 2nd an '83 300SD, now a 2000 E320 (two wheel drive). With the high cost of fuel of course we all think about milage.
I've only had the E320 a short time. Only 3 tank fulls so far (50-50 city/hwy). 1st tank was Shell premium, next was USA petroleum premium, next was Flyer premium.
So far I got 20.0, 20.9 20.0 mpg. real figures. Trip computer (after reset) says 26-28.8mpg since reset (I resetted each fill up). The (after start) computer will show up to 31.5 mpg at times & often will read 26-28mpg when cruising 65-70 mph. Also often reads 14-17mpg around town.
Very large difference in computer & real life.
The speedo & odometer are accurate according to the odometer tests on the frwy & the radar speed displays on side of road. My cats are perfect, the short & long term fuel trim adapations are perfect & the o2 sensors are perfect. Air new & recent fuel filter repl. Complete trans serv done. Mich Primacy MXV4 tires. 34psi. Have only 64000 miles & has not used any oil & runs perfectly.
A few of the emplyees have these cars & all have similar experiance with trip computer reading too high.
The "after start" as well as the "after reset" readings are determined by injector open time & miles driven, with a correction factor I don't understand that is built into the computer. Therefore after start will be quite low after a cold start. If you hold the reset button going down a long hill the milage will read quite high since you are coasting with no open injectors.
Anyway, the trip computer started in 2000 with the pushbutton steering wheel. On the V6 eng from 97-2000 you have ME2.0 fuel injection accessed by the HHT diag tester (now incorperated into the SDS diag tester). In 6/02 ME 2.8 came out, mostly for the the MY 2001 & newer. You now got MPH digital display on the screen via pushbutton steering wheel with ME 2.8. ME 2.8 is a direct access diag with much more info & diag possible. However MB doesn't tell us every difference in fuel managment between ME 2.0 & 2.8. The systems are very similar.
Some say ME 2.8 gives better milage, but I cannot confirm that at this time.
Visually the MAS, ME computer, CATS, Trans look the same. Transmissions have had various improvemnts (mostly in bearings) , but gearing & lockup converter are the same so far as I can tell.
A few of us at work have these cars. Most of us get right around 20-21mpg in combination driving. Oddly they percived much higher, but real testing showed this. One fellow claims 25-27, but I would like to verify the readings. He states trip computer shows 26-30mpg.
Now, on my last fill up I used Chevron premium. So far only about 100mi. on tank, but remaining fuel shows no obvious improvment. Car runs no better or worse on Chevron than USA or Flyer gas. $4.41 vs $4.09. I will report actual milage w/Chevron. Next test will be USA regular 87. One fellow at work has used the cheapie regular for 5 yrs to good results... on a '98 C280 (V6 eng & same trans). C-class v6 seems to get similar milage to E320.
Lastly regarding the inline 6 & V6, the inline is cast iron block w/alum 4 valve head. The V6 is alum block w/alum 3 valve head. So far both have been quite durable. A wash as far as repairs concered. The V6 has roller rockers which use less energy & lighter weight moving parts. On paper, the V6 cylinder wear should be less due to the rings ride on silicon glass particles mixed into the alum casting. MB has used this for several years & so far it tends to outlast iron. We have a few E320s coming into the shop with near 300,000 that are still running good with no major eng repairs, meaning the motors have never been apart. To me the V6 tends to run better, more powerful feeling & just drives nicer.
Diesel motors are more effecient than gas for various reasons. They will give more mpg under the same conditions. I expect diesel hybrid will be the motor of the future until fossil fuel runs out.
I also still have the '83 300SD. I recently drove from San Francisco east bay to MB training in Rancho Cucamonga. 25mpg southbound hwy5 @ 72mph no a/c & small tail wind. North bound got 23mpg @ 76mph w/ac & small headwind. I drove around the area & up to Big Bear & got 23 during that time. It will get 28mpg on a slow drive 45mph or so. But... 18mpg @ 82mph with a small headwind up hwy 5. Another fellow drove a 300D (124 chassis) same time. He got a true 35 @ 65mph no a/c. He drives nonstop. I stop every hour.
I'll keep you posted on my E320 mpg figures with the different fuels etc.
Don

MBtechman

Hi Kathern, No, the 98 &99 do not have fuel consumption displays/trip computer. That came out with MY 2000. The 2000's have a different cluster display screen & steering wheel with push buttons to control display, radio, phone etc. Of course all the years have odometer & trip odometer, if that's what you are thinking of.
Manufacturers add such things as time goes on. My MY2000 doesn't have digital mph display. That came out the next year. Bummer for me, but just how it is.
I need to make a correction. Fuel injection version ME2.8 came out in 6/00 not 6/02 as I stated in my last post. Sorry for the error.
Speaking of the digital mph display, I cannot find a way to program it into my 2000 car. It may be possible, but not with the equipment we have at the dealership.
Don

C280 Sport

I will take my 02 E320 on my morning commute tomorrow and post a pic. Will keep updated.

Weather conditions will be very humid with fog.

C280 Sport

Ended up topping out at 29.5MPG averaging around 70MPG.

Hot and humid moring. 80'

suntubi

I get between 28 and 30 at 70 - 78 mph with cruise on

MBtechman

Hi Suntubi, Exactly what model, year is your car & what brand/size/pressure tires are you running? Is this with the trip computer, or pin & paper true milage? Thanks, Don