BudC

Note photo 26.

http://www.worldcarfans.com/photos.c...r/country/gcf/

harkgar

[QUOTE=DerekACS;2299140]I am ignorant of your view that the diesel V-6 was built in Berlin. Do you know if the line can be called upon to produce other V formation engines as well whether diesel or gasoline?

I never said that the new engine is not as good as the old but merely surmising the fact that MB is doing this for the sake of cost savings rather than the inherent superiority of the inline engine over the V.

For your info MB also carried out a very similar stunt in Texas or Florida in 2004 or 2005, running the straight 6 diesels for hours or days to "prove" these engines were reliable, for propaganda purposes. In those days alloy heads were a novelty.

BudC

Our '84 190D had an aluminum head.

DerekACS

[QUOTE=harkgar;2299462]See the link in post #51 above. If you go to this site, you will see more than two dozen photos showing the entire production process for the V6 diesel.
There is also a video about its build @ www.worldcarfans/german cars.

After you have witnessed the unprecedented quality control checks throughout the entire process, you might better understand why this engine has been flawless so far. I have yet to read of any problems with the V6 engine.
There is no question in my mind about the past and present reliability of the I6. It has been and remains an outstanding power plant.
However, I do not accept the argument advanced by a few owners of the 320CDI that the primary reason for MB to replace this engine was to save production costs. MB cannot afford to risk the well earned reputation of its diesel engines in order to save a few euros per engine. It would not surprise me if the V6, a more sophistocated design, actually costs more than the I6 to produce.
IMO, the motivation to design and engineer a new V6 diesel was brought about by having to meet the much more stringent emission standards and by the desire to produce greater performance with less weight.
The other benefit of the V6, mentioned by several posters, is its compact size, allowing for it to be fitted in a greater range of models.

MH434

"Space and cost" are the keywords here.
The V6 can fit in every MB Class except the A and B series.

I6 engines are to long to fit in the engine bay of smaller MB Cars

stickygreen

First of all, let me say that the following is my opinion, and nothing more as I don't have anything to back it up with.

Agreed, on both counts.

Lets be realistic here. The two reasons MB went to a v6 was to reduce productions costs and make the engines more "fittable" into all model lines. In 1998, they introduced the 3.2L SOHC 3 valve v6 to be made in the same production line as the 4.3L 3-valve v8, which just so happened to have the same displacement per cylinder as the v6. Thankfully, they put enough into these motors to make them as durable as the earlier inline engines, at least at first glance. In the same respect, I am 99% sure that the new 3.0L diesel V6 will be built on the same line at the 4.0L v8 diesel, once again reducing production costs. The new v6 diesel could very well cost more than the old inline engine per motor, but I can all-but-guarantee that the development costs of the v6 & v8 diesel engines combined is less than the previous inline-6 and previous v8 diesel engines combined.

Mercedes could have easily met the current "more stringent" emission standards and and achieved greater performance with an inline-6 engine by incorporating more modern fuel injection. Lower engine mass is a benefit of using a v6 over an inline, but I highly doubt this was a major factor in deciding to switch to a v6 in a 4000lb E-class.

I disagree! (in similar fashion to the "drive-by argument" in one Family Guy episode)

Agreed.

Yacht Master

Sticky,
I agree 100 % Most here think we are picking on the new V6, it is not that. We know all V6s are a compromise, plain and simple.

harkgar

Yea. Sticky owns a Dodge Ram diesel. Great torque monsters.

DerekACS

[QUOTE=stickygreen;2299641
The new v6 diesel could very well cost more than the old inline engine per motor, but I can all-but-guarantee that the development costs of the v6 & v8 diesel engines combined is less than the previous inline-6 and previous v8 diesel engines combined.
[/QUOTE]

How is this relevant to the original post ?

It seems to me that no matter what the facts are with respect to the V6 diesel, many owners of the I6 are convinced of its superiority to the V6.

I have driven both the I6 and the V6; there is no doubt in my mind which vehicle offers a better overall combo of engine and chassis performance.

Despite the acknowledged improvements to the handling dynamics of the 2007 E 320 Bluetec, some I6 owners continue to believe that that 2005-2006 E320 CDI remains the superior package, based primarily on their opinion that an iron block is far superior to an alloy one.

I see no merit in trying to argue this issue any further with I6 owners on this forum.

For me at least, the opinions of Bluetec owners hold more validity, especially those who have owned or driven the previous CDI.
In the words of one owner, the E320 Bluetec is "more fun to drive than my 2006 Porscke 911".
Another owner stated, that on the highway, his Bluetec "accelerates like an M3".

What has become clear to me is that the owners of both the E320 CDI and the E320 Bluetec are equally passionate about their respective diesel charriots !

Isn't that something worth celebrating ?

stickygreen

From an engine design standpoint, inline-6 engines are inherently better balanced than v6 engines, gas or diesel. It seems very obvious to me that the switch to v6 engines was primarily cost driven, but thankfully Mercedes hasn't let their engine division slack like they've done with electronics, and the new v6 should hopefully prove to be very durable. I was rather skeptical of MB's switch to v6 engines in 1998, but those 3-valve motors have held up very well.

Though I still prefer the design of an inline-6, I am currently looking for a CA legal GL320 cdi with the v6 turbodiesel as I am a bit more comfortable with the new motor based on some of the testimony I've read on this board.

Back to the original question: Though I personally prefer inline engines over V engines, I might have to go with the new v6 model for one main reason: no SBC! We have not encountered any problems with our SBC yet in 55 k miles (knock on wood), but with all of the horror stories, I figure it's just a matter of time.

Absolutely

DerekACS

Yes, I would have to agree with you, having driven a number of BMWs with I6 engines over the past 20+ years.

However, as someone once said,"the proof is in the pudding". Try driving a V6 back to back with your I6 and your concerns about a balanced engine will be laid to rest.

In a quote from the MB E Class brochure on the Bluetec engine, "the uncanny smoothness of this engine can be attributed to the Lanchester balancer shaft and extensive damping. Extra smoothness is added by the standard 7G-Tronic automatic transmission."

Alan Smithee

Being a current owner of a CDI and Porsche 997, and a former owner of two M3s, I can assure you that as great as the MB diesels are, there is absolutely no comparison in terms of performance. Anybody that finds a two ton MB diesel sedan more "fun" than a current Porsche 911 cannot be taken seriously...and acceleration similar to an M3? Only if you're limiting the M3 to the diesel's ~4,500 RPM redline.

As for the I6 vs V6 debate, on paper the two are nearly identical in terms of performance, economy, and weight...so the V6 was obviously not designed to be an improvement in these areas. Therefore it is as mentioned by others here...production efficiency and compatibility...so it is cost as a bottom line. Not that there's anything wrong with that...if they can make a V6 diesel as smooth, durable, and efficient as an I6 while saving the company money overall...that's progress.

DerekACS

Alan, until a few weeks ago I was driving a 335i twin turbo which is as fast as any M3 according to various reviews, including Car & Driver. When I took a Bluetec out on the highway to test its performance, I was stunned by its passing power. It felt as fast or faster than my 335i between 80 -120km/k (approx. 50-70mph).

So, upon reading your sceptical remarks (perfectly understandable if you haven't driven a Bluetec), I decided to do a little research to see if my impressions of the Bluetec's passing prowess were in fact accurate.

Well, here's what I found @ Car & Driver magazine :
In their test of the 335i coupe (Nov.2006), they stated that the top gear acceleration 30-50mph was 6.5secs and from 50-70 mph, it was 6.0 secs.

Now here's what they found for the same test with the Bluetec (May 2007); top gear acceleration 30-50mph was 3.7 secs and from 50-70 mph, it was 4.7 secs.

Perhaps now you have a better understanding why the Porsche owner that I quoted was also impressed with the Bluetec's performance.

Alan Smithee

Um, Derek, here's a bit of info when comparing 'top gear acceleration': Cars with automatics downshift, well, automatically into the meat of the powerband. Manual transmissions do not; they are left in 'top gear'. Of course a 335i in sixth gear at 30mph (or even 50mph) is at a disadvantage against an automatic.

Take a look at 1/4 mile times and trap speeds...that's more telling of the cars' acceleration capabilities. The Bluetec and CDI are almost identical, and way, way behind the 335i and M3.

Alan Smithee

I've got nothing against the Bluetec, but it just isn't the giant leap over the CDI you seem to believe it is. With 12,000 miles on a CDI, I have a pretty good idea of what a Bluetec is capable of. From Car and Driver:

1/4 mile, CDI: 15.3 @ 91 MPH

1/4 mile, Bluetec: 15.1 @ 92 MPH

30-50 MPH, CDI: 3.5
50-70 MPH, CDI: 4.8

30-50 MPH, Bluetec: 3.7
50-70 MPH, Bluetec: 4.7

Edit: For the record, the M3 is mid-13s in the quarter at 108 MPH, with the 335i just a tick behind. Not even in the same ballpark.

DerekACS

That's not what I was suggesting. I was trying to make a comparison between the 335i and the Bluetec, only in passing power, not 1/4 mile or 0-60 mph.
Of course, I accept your point about a manual top gear v's auto transmission, but the figures I presented are correct. Actually, I found the top gear (6MT) acceleration of my 335i to be very impressive, with 300 lb.ft of torque on tap @ 1400 rpm.
In any case, when comparing the passing performance of these two vehicles, it's worth noting that that although the Bluetec is 14.9% heavier than a 335i, the Bluetec has 33% more torque !
It's that huge torque advantage that impresssed me.

harkgar

Quit arguing. I had owned a Mustang GT, a Porsche 911 Targa, a Corvette and an E55. There is absolutely no way a 6 cylinder MB production passenger diesel, straight or V shaped, can outrun any of these cars. You do not buy a diesel car just to go fast.

No one said the Bluetec is not a good engine. OK?

Diesel Benz

MB would not produce gassers if they were not good for anybody. A CDI would not outperform an E63AMG, the point here should be that a modern CDI performs quite equally to a similar sized gasser. The E320CDI used to perform like the E320 when it was made, and at some time they had the exact same price tag. Now the (3 litre) E320CDI performs just about the same as the E350, and costs a bit less (here at least). Again, the general understanding is that diesels are really slow while they now perform equally to a similar sized gas engine.

harkgar

True. Diesel is the fuel for tomorrow if we do not want to drive battery powered dinky toys suitable for people 5 foot and under.

Honda admitted it. No more Accords. Civic size suits battery cars.

Untertürkheim

What I find sad is that MB is not producing an AMG diesel. I find the 320 diesel to be a better engine than the 350, and the 420 diesel to be FAR superior to the 550 gas. Wouldn't it be nice to have an E50 CDI AMG? I'm envisioning 450 HP and about 700+ torque, while using half as much fuel as an E63.

TPAbnz

And 2009 is apparently the US diesel intro date; 52 mpg for Accord.

http://www.autobloggreen.com/2007/06...to-hit-52-mpg/

harkgar

I shall buy one if it is as peppy as a chipped Jetta TDi and comes with a manual transmission.

Sloanranger

I currently have a 2006 E 320CDI and recently purchased a holiday home in France, to escape the Arizona summer and am considering exporting the E for our own use
Is the US 2006 CDI the same as the 320CDI model sold/serviced in France or do they use the Bluetec version ?

Any guidance would be greatly appreciated, as the cost delta to purchase a CDI in France is significant.

Thanks for yor help

lkchris

It's the same.

The term "bluetec" is meaningless in most respects, as all it describes is extra exhaust stuff on the V6.

Untertürkheim

The US version cars are very similar to the european version. I believe that the headlights can be left unchanged if it has the bi-xenon upgraded lights, but the standard headlights would need to be replaced for EU compliance.

After that, only the speedometer would need to be changed and the 210km/hr limiter removed, only the suspension is slightly softer, otherwise, it is the same.