The URL below is a consumer guide rating of the E320/E500. It would be interesting if those who have these cars can comment on the validity of the many criticisms in this report.

Consumer Guides' bottom line: Their design is more contemporary and sophisticated inside and out, but otherwise, the new E-Class sedans seem no big advance on the cars they replace. Indeed, they arguably move backward for interior room and, with the air suspension, for ride comfort. But they do offer new features that are worthwhile, cost about the same as previous models, and are built and furnished the way a Mercedes should be.




http://auto.consumerguide.com/auto/n...84.htm#ratings

 

yea, the a6 blew it out....i dont get it, i thought the E would get such higher ratings but i guess not, but this year, they highered the standards and lowered the points

 

I really don't pay any attention to Consumer Reports. Nearly all reviews/reviewers are biased...some a little, some a lot. I read a variety and try to understand and adjust for the bias.

I can't remember the details (nor am I inclined to attempt to look it up), but CR was involved in a dispute with Bose somewhere around the late 70s or early 80s. I was really into stereo equipment at that point, and it seems that someone proved that there was unbalanced reporting with regard to Bose. There may have even been a lawsuit filed. I can't remember if they were pro-or-anti Bose, just that CR received tangible gains by their position.

Whatever it was, the effect at that time was that I lost interest in CR, and I've never used them as a credible source since then. 'Course I gotta admit I've killed a few brain cells since then...

 

This is not Consumer Reports which accepts no advertising so as to presumably avoid the appearance of influence in their reports. This is a commercial publication, Consumer Guide with plenty of advertising. I have always ignored anything they say. The suggestion by them as one of the alternates to "look at the roomy Cadillac Deville" speaks for itself. Notice, no one is indicated to be the author of the article.

The report is, of course, subjective in most respects. Notice, there are no measurements made by them except, supposedly, fuel mileage. Here is what they say about fuel economy: "Test E320 averaged 23.7 mpg, test E500 19.4; both inflated by primarily highway travel. All E-Class engines require premium-grade fuel." Notice the highly scientific calculations: "both inflated by primarily highway travel." Then, on performance, they indicate that they had "no opportunity to time yet". What does that mean? They didn't drive it? Well, then how did they reach the other conclusions about acceleration, etc.? Very believable!!

Then, there is the selection process for their "experts". Must be a highly competitive situation. Just click on the link entitled "Reviewers" at the very bottom of the full review page of the E Class. I clicked there thinking I would learn who wrote the review. Not so. You too can become one of their top reviewers!!!! They solicit outside "reviewers" rather than employing a staff to do the reviews. I am sure they have an exhaustive editorial process to assure accuracy.

To answer the issues criticized: I have an E500 and have no problem with any of the areas they have suggested. The ride is great even with the airmatic on the tightest setting. (Of course, if you want a Cadillac or Lexus soft ride, you wouldn't like it). The power is strong and smooth through all ranges. The handling is tight and sure. The styling is anything but a step back. The trunk is larger than last year's and bigger than the S Class (I guess they didn't bother to check). Etc. Etc. Look and drive for yourself. Or, if you want, buy the "roomy Cadillac Deville".

 

I think Mercedes makes so good cars, so difficult to make them better. If there is CR's point, then I could agree.

 

http://www.thecarconnection.com/index.asp?article=4733

 

The posted article is from "Consumer Guide" not "Consumer Reports". They are not the same organization. "Consumer Guide" likes people to think it is "Consumer Reports" and many people confuse them as some of our forum's members have. While everything done by a human has potential for bias, Consumer Reports is published by Consumer's Union, a not for profit organization, that accepts no advertising.

Consumer Guide is part of a for profit publishing house that is all about advertising. That, of course, does not make the review poor or biased. But, read it thoroughly and you can see how inadequate it is. Also, they do not reveal the identity of the "reviewer(s)". Thus, no one can guage their fitness to make the judgments they make. You know who you are hearing from in the legitimate trade publications like Car & Driver, etc. who rate the E much more highly.

 

Here is a link to two postings (one from Whatup? and one from Skymast) on our forum which, in turn, link you to legitimate reviews with author's names indicated:


https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...light=articles

https://mbworld.org/forums/showthrea...ghlight=forbes

Thanks to whatup? and skymast!!!

 

As far as I see, no-one is addressing the points! So let me try - my personal opinion only! I only address the critical points - the positive points I agree with (I am biased too: I own one and love it). My comments apply to the E320:

"Languid Acceleration - 6". I agree entirely. Does not bother me much: at 43 I no longer want to drive a race car, but it IS languid for a 3.2 litre engine. Much slower than the C320 which is almost the same weight and has the same engine, so blaming the throttle may well be right. And the delays are noticeable: when I switched from BMW to Mercedes a few years ago I noticed this in about one minute.

"Instruments/Controls 6 - some operations aren't obvious, like the steering-wheel buttons for calling up trip data and setting such features as headlamps-off timer"

Agree! I had a C320 for 2 years and still cannot get the menus right every time. And I am the CTO of an Internet company so buttons and computers do NOT scare me.

"Four-zone temperature control [...] also takes getting used to."
Disagree. It is a no brainer. It is not as good as in the C320 (I regularly feel too warm or cold) but it is still superb.

"Cruise-control stalk, to left of steering wheel, sometimes easily confused with turn-signal/wipers stalk below" - disagree, though the control is perhaps not quite intuitive enough.


"Shallow rear window and invisible rear corners." - disagree. No problems.

"Room/Comfort (rear) - A tighter feel here too" - plenty for my family.

"Cargo Room 5 - ...the long rear parcel shelf restricts trunk height and thus outright volume. Sickle-shaped trunklid hinges eat into available space, but are shielded to prevent cargo damage"

I think the trunk is HUGE!

"Only average in-cabin storage for small items."

I agree. The glove box is about big enough for some gloves. I could do with a lot more storage!


Overall: a fair review. They miss some of the problems (QC, as I have pointed out, seems sub-optimal; user interface in many ways is not intuitive enough, wipers have a mind of their own, etc), but they are quite thorough and they are entitled to their opinions. I would not dismiss this as biased. It's a pretty good review and is pretty complimentary,a fter all: "they do offer new features that are worthwhile, cost about the same as previous models, and are built and furnished the way a Mercedes should be."

Michael

 

1. Languid Acceleration

2. Instruments/Controls 6 - some operations aren't obvious.

3. Cannot get the menus right every time.

4. Only average in-cabin storage for small items.

5. The glove box is about big enough for some gloves. I could do with a lot more storage!

Thanks for the comparison/confirmation MWillems. Items 1-4 apply to my 2001 E320 also. Perhaps MB does not consider them worthy of correction. I cannot imagine how they would ever escape attention of any focus group. #5 is a new complaint. Maybe MB thinks the reduced glove box is offset by the new drawer to the left of the glove box.

I am thrilled with the more spacious trunk.

 

I never even looked at a Consumer Report magazine again after they picked a Bose sound system as the best home theater speaker system available. I think they only tested systems from Sears.

I guess they've never heard of Monitor Audio, Aerial Acoustics, etc...

 

When I read their claim that the NEW E is SMALLER internally than the OLD one, I know their inaccuracy here makes this report not believable in its totality!!

 

But perhaps you can just adress the points: never made who made them, they may or may not be valid, and it's OK to address them, no?

Mike

 

I do not beleive that they tested out the new E and then wrote this report. Its evident by all the 'est' in it. And that is the point. I cannot value their report for their innaccuracies that reveals carelessness on their part.

There are other reports that I value more from writers that actually drove the new E cars amongst other brands that they also drove previoously and wrote about

 

Sure, but a few of their points are valid, say I - an owner. So, maybe I am wrong, but I qualify to speak. And stand ready to be corrected if necessary ! :-)

Michael

 

The only things that you agree with them on the report is 1) Glove box =small; 2)Acceleration = Languid; 3)Instrument cluster = Menues.

#3) Just takes getting used to. Other cars have fixed or no delay at all. The more flexibility there is, the more you need to "know"

#1) = its never enough, regardless!

Now # 2). The E320 produces most of its torque at the low end of the revolution curve. That translates to faster response than if the torque was more biased toward the higher revolution part of the curve. If you give it enough gas , its sure going to take off. The question is :From Stand still; or while running. For safety purposes, I would not want it to rocket off from standstill with a little depression of the acc pedal. The same should be true for the E500. T

he C320 is not the same weight as the E320 and every bit of extra weight on the E will slow it down by comparision. I recollect that some test reports say 6.9 sec for 0-60mph for the E320. Even 7.1 is really good I think.

The E adapts to the driver's style and driving habits, so if you baby it, the shift points are alterred; So drive it hard for a while after the break in period if you may and then see if its response changes.

I think the other cars you mentioned are also lighter than the E. If its not enough trade for E350 in a year or two.