cscheat

Hey guys !!

BLUETEC IS COMING !!! WOW !!!


CHECK THIS OUT !

http://www.mercedesbenzone.com/archi...in_the_USA.htm

tpliquid

**** CA, we aint gettin that ****. I want that. i wanna trade in my audi for one

Talbot

Just buy one in Alabama, let me put 7500 miles on it for you, and then I'll ship it to you.

hjcsdca

I'm hoping California keeps the laws strict.

Last I heard these new diesels needed urea injection in order to comply with California law.

That is absolutely unaccepetable. California needs to create laws that remove current diesels, like older Mercedes from our freeways, maybe send them to other states that don't mind them as much.

Talbot

Why do you dislike diesel so much?

Alan Smithee

Yeah, that makes sense...more room for Hummers and Escalades.

hjcsdca

I guess its because it seems like everytime I'm driving down freeway with windows down I stuck behind those 80's diesel Mercedes that seem to keep on trucking to this day. The stench that quickly fills the car is very unpleasant and gets much worse if they press the gas and shoot black clouds of smoke out the back.

I'm guessing these car's weren't too bad back in the day, but these days they are disgusting to see on the roads, I don't want to see a repeat of this with E320 CDIs 20 years from now. It's not all Mercedes fault though, any new Dodge Ram Heavy Duty or Ford F350 does the same thing on the free on-ramp.

Also a final thing, diesel seems a cheap alternative for manufacturers not willing to invest the technology or R&D to create capable hybrid systems. Simply adoptioning a diesel from European market to US systems is by far much cheaper than licensing or make a surperior hybrid/new gas type of system.

Talbot

So, because you don't like something, you want to automatically empower the government to "fix" it for you? Good luck with that.

Consider that a gallon of diesel has more energy than a gallon of gasoline. This results in better fuel economy than gasoline (translation: less need for imported oil). Also, it results in less CO2 emissions, and diesel has little to no CO emissions. Add urea, and the NOx emissions are greatly reduced too.

There has been a lot of R&D that has gone into making cleaner diesel engines, and it certainly wasn't something done just because it is cheaper. Diesel engines of 20 years ago have little in common with today's Bluetec engine. (It costs $1000 more, too). The reduction in soot (which is what you can see - black smoke) or particulates is around 90% from what it was in the past. I hate to be the one to break this to you, but just wait until you find out that diesel hybrids are coming. Again, this is because the diesel fuel economy trumps gasoline.

I read somewhere an estimate that if we had 30% of our cars running on diesel, we could reduce oil imports by 350,000 barrels a day. Surely that's worth something to you.

There's a lot of good information out there, and I think you'd find it enlightening. Look for yourself, and see what you come up with. It might surprise you.

Alan Smithee

To add to Talbot's response, there's a healthy market for used MB diesels for those who are converting them to run on bio-fuels. These people are helping the environment much more so than hybrid buyers (although I realize that bio-fuels are not a realistic alternative to petroleum based fuels for the masses).

IMO, hybrids aren't the solution; they are more complex than a diesel, heavier, won't last as long, and have battery technology that will quickly be obsolete. They also provide an appliance-like driving experience, and do not come near the EPA estimates in real-world situations. Diesels are equal to if not more fuel efficient, and more fun to drive.

Talbot

Well, they're about as realistic as any other present alternative. Not that any of them is really realistic against fossel fuels.

husk323

If I knew you were behind me I would be sure to "shoot black clouds of smoke". Why don't you read about diesel technology before spewing off some concocted BS. Please provide figures that show that Toyota, Honda, GM and whoever else makes Hybrid vehicles that their R&D budgers are more than AUDI, BMW, MERCEDES' diesel R&D budgets. You have no idea what you are talking about

SEC1939

had a crotch rocket bike on my tail recently. Backed him off real quick with a quick puff of the black stuff. kind of like the batmobile with the oil slick device.

jimbo1mcm

You haven't lived unless you have owned a 78 Olds Diesel. When you floored it, NOTHING BUT BLACK SMOKE CAME OUT!!! Fun car. I put a water separator on it immediately and got 149,000 miles out of that engine. Only 3 injector pumps. Thanks GM for making me a Benz customer.

DslBnz

There is no excuse for even a 20 year old Mercedes diesel to smoke as described. I wouldn't tolerate it.
Unless it needs fuel/air filters, or has been neglected in some other general maintenence. The latter usually the case.

I can put mine past kickdown and there might be barely a quick visible puff (whitish smoke, not black), and then nothing. Darn near impossible to get any smoke to eek its way out.

Or does that have anything to do with the ULSD with the B5 blend I am using?

You have no idea how bad smoking can get until you've driven a 350SD with several 1/4 " holes in one of the piston crowns. Thanks to brilliant Mercedes diesel engine design (AKA rod bender engine) of which they STILL haven't claimed responsibility for their diesels faulty internal design.

That said, I am eager to see this new V6 in person. In the long term, parts should be plentiful since Mercedes is becoming Chrysler and vice-versa with their CRD, Sprinter, and E320 Bluetec diesels.
That can be looked different perspectives, of course. Inexpensive parts availability longterm, but a deliberate sharing of Mercedes technology destroys residual values.

Alan Smithee

No, not at all. Over time, a W211 E320 Bluetec will not be worth less than a W211 E320 CDI just because it shares its motor with a Grand Cherokee.

DslBnz

I didn't say that the 211 CDI non-Bluetec would be worth more or less. Residuals may suffer on all, however.

Why are Mercedes residuals already tanking? Its because of mass production, and the supply and demand principle. Not speaking for diesels alone, but in general. That, coupled with the quality control that Mercedes has flaunted improvements upon over the past few years. Instead of paring down the amount of models, and reducing costs, DCX is adding more and more new product every year, and spreading themselves incredibly thin. Zetsche's philosophy is pretty much the same as Schrempp. Wolfgang Bernhardt desired a complete restructuring of Mercedes-Benz, and the complete selloff of Chrysler. He was ousted for his radical proposition, and someone like Zetsche was promoted as a the DCX figurehead (Dr. Z to you and me). Zetsche is DCX's way to assure customers that a new age has dawned, yet Zetsche's ideals are the same as Schrempp's.

Would you buy a Mercedes E-Class with a Hemi V8 in it for $70K over a Chrysler 300C, an E-Class derived chassis, with the same engine for $35K?

That may very well be the future. Why buy a Mercedes when a Chrysler fits the bill?

Holson

Yeah.. stupid Mercedes diesels..

I'd rather drive my clean smelling and non-smoky 4 liter Jeep Cherokee and burn gas at 10mpg

just joking... I had a Benz diesel...and my Cherokee gets 13mpg.. not 10..

To get back to the thread, yes I'd love to have an E320 Bluetec with the Sports Package. With the amount of city driving that I do, I think I'd rather have it than my CLK55.

ClayJ

"The switch-over to new ultra-clean diesel fuel is going smoothly and supplies should be readily available at retail pumps when the rules take effect on Sunday".
- Guy Caruso, head of the US Energy Information Administration

Alan Smithee

This topic comes up often, and while it is true that there will be more parts and platform sharing in upcoming Chrysler and MB products, it is a good thing for all of us, and it won't affect MB resale values.

First of all, MB residual/resale values are not "tanking". As a percentage they may not be as good as they were in the 1980s, but that doesn't have anything to do with the current marketing strategy or merge with Chrysler; rather, it's competition from Lexus, BMW, and others that have forced shorter model cycles, along with exchange rates that have kept prices steady, and low interest rates that make attractive leases (resulting in large quantities of late model used cars on the market).

Even though quality and perception of quality may have declined, sales are at record levels and prestige has not been tarnished, so it is not affecting resale.

Addition of models will not result in "residual values suffering on all". Take the new GL-class, for example; it is in addition to the ML- and G-class, and appeals to a different market than either due to its larger size. Why would it have an affect on resale for the ML- and G-classes?

Sharing of technology with Chrysler products is good. It keeps technology and prices of new MBs competitive (or would you rather they were outrageous as in the past?), and makes for better Chryslers. Even if we wouldn't consider buying a Chrysler product as MB owners, as an alternative to Japanese brands more market share for DCX is beneficial for the US economy. If an upcoming Chrysler 300 and upcoming E-class are built on the same platform with the same drivetrain at the same factory and only differ in body styling and the MB at twice the price, yes there will be a problem. I don't see MB being that stupid.

Finally, DCX is positioning Chrysler products below MB in the American market in an effort to keep MB 'prestige', even though A- and B-class models (as well as stripped-down C- and E-classes) are sold along side S and AMG models costing 10x as much in other markets without affecting 'prestige', not to mention the popularity of Smarts, MB industrial products, etc.