I have a relatively wierd question about the E Class.

In 1995, there was the E500 Sport Sedan with the following specs:

Engine 5.0-liter twin-DOHC 32-valve aluminum-alloy V-8.

Net power 322 hp @ 5,700 rpm. 1993: 315 hp @ 5,600 rpm.

Net torque 354 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm. 1993: 347 lb-ft @ 3,900 rpm.

Compression ratio 10.0:1

Fuel requirement Premium unleaded gasoline.

Fuel and ignition system LH electronic with integrated ignition.

Transmission 4-speed automatic.


So why is it that the current E500's engine looks like a step back in terms of power. I know people will chide me about power not being everything, refinement and economy are part of the equation too. I am just curious as to why MB decided to step back on power on the newer engines.

Any ideas chaps?

 

I guess the most logical answer would be that the 500E/E500 of the W124 E-Class was the top of the line limited-production model, analogous to the position the E55K AMG holds in the W211 model line. The current E500 holds the position that the 400E/E420 held in the W124 line - the mid-level model.

In terms of the performance of the engine, the 500E/E500 was co-developed and manufactured with Porsche, and the emphasis was on high-end performance, as AMG was not a part of MB at that time while the W211 E500 and the rest of the MB 500 line is just a higher-luxury-level and higher-power version of the base (320/350) line.

However, I do understand your point, being that there is quite a big horsepower gap between the old and the new engine - if your figure of 322HP is correct, that is almost a 90 HP difference - the current MB 500 lineup produces about 270HP.

 

The current 5.0 produces approx. 306 hp and 339 lb ft trq, there was a significant cost saving (almost 50%) when MBZ went to the newer modular 3valve SHOC engines from the previous generation DOHC 4 valve per cylinder engines that ceased production in MY 1998. The previous version ran quiter and smoother but the newer ones feel more responsive to me.
There was a recent test of the 500E and the E500 in one of this months US car mags.

 

Then this is just as i suspected - a cost saving measure.
I guess it helped to make the prices for such a fine sedan more palatable but at the cost of sacrificing performance.
Thanks for the answers guys!

 

I forgot to ask this... but i assume DOHC engines are significantly more expensive to make and maintain than SOHC ones right?

 

As I mentioned above the DOHC 4 valave engines were approx %50 more expensive to manufacture.

 

What about the torque & HP curves? I know the current engine gets its torque at early RPMs. I'm no expert though.