E320 Underpowered?
Thread Starter
Almost a Member!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
E320 Underpowered?
I know that this may be a sticky topic but I welcome you opinion on this topic as I still have a chance to change my E320 order to a E500.
Also, is there ny know reliability issues with the 3.2L vs. the 5.0L that should sway my decision.
Thanks and best regards,
John
Also, is there ny know reliability issues with the 3.2L vs. the 5.0L that should sway my decision.
Thanks and best regards,
John
Almost a Member!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
Hello John,
I don't think E320 can be called underpowered. However, 500 has a lot more power and torque. The question that begs the answer is that for a price difference of $3-4k, would you regret later that you should have gone for E500.
In any case, it's a happy dilemma...
I don't think E320 can be called underpowered. However, 500 has a lot more power and torque. The question that begs the answer is that for a price difference of $3-4k, would you regret later that you should have gone for E500.
In any case, it's a happy dilemma...
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 5,110
Likes: 3
From: SoCal
MB
i agree, the e320 isnt underpowerd, its just the e500 has more power. with all the options included with the E500 that are standard over the E320, id say go with the E500, GL
i havent heard any reliability issues with either car btw
i havent heard any reliability issues with either car btw
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 2003
Posts: 304
Likes: 0
From: San Clemente, CA
2003 E-500
Recommend you look at the total package and then decide. In addition to more power and torque, you also get the new seven speed transmission with the 2004 E-500, the Airmatic Suspension is standard, the upgraded heating and airconditioning with adjustments for temperature both front and rear, plus other features you may or may not want.
I had an earlier E-320 which was a "nice car" but my new E-500 is a "great car". I have a neighbor who got his 2003 E-320 the same day I got my new E-500 last November. My wife and I have ridden in his on a couple of occasions in his rear seat and definitely like ours better. If you want basic transportation the E-320 will probably keep you happy but if you want really GREAT performance and more luxury, the E-500 would be my recommendation. I would also recommend you get the "Premium Package" that includes the NAV system, deluxe seats and many other features you had to pay for separtely before.
Let us know what you decide.
I had an earlier E-320 which was a "nice car" but my new E-500 is a "great car". I have a neighbor who got his 2003 E-320 the same day I got my new E-500 last November. My wife and I have ridden in his on a couple of occasions in his rear seat and definitely like ours better. If you want basic transportation the E-320 will probably keep you happy but if you want really GREAT performance and more luxury, the E-500 would be my recommendation. I would also recommend you get the "Premium Package" that includes the NAV system, deluxe seats and many other features you had to pay for separtely before.
Let us know what you decide.
Almost a Member!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
From: Atlanta, GA
When I look at the crystal ball, I see John in a brand new E500 in very near future 
I've yet to see a post where somebody got into the study of comparing the value of 320 and 500 and then settled on 320. The fact of the matter is that the price difference begins to converge when you consider options such as Appearance pkg, Premium pkg, and 4 zone A/C.
I've yet to see a post where somebody got into the study of comparing the value of 320 and 500 and then settled on 320. The fact of the matter is that the price difference begins to converge when you consider options such as Appearance pkg, Premium pkg, and 4 zone A/C.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 1,460
Likes: 0
From: Downtown LA, CA.
r171
ofcourse the e320 is underpowered.... i have a c320 and think its slow and the e320 is even slower. if you can afford the 500 you should get it!! especially if its only 3-4 grand more.
Trending Topics
Almost a Member!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
I also considered the E320, but in the end I went for the E500. I just couldn't get over the fact that the E320 has an analog A/C termperature control unless you get the optional 4 zone A/C. Also, the E500 having more power is much smoother and the air suspension works great.
But the E320 is not a bad car...
But the E320 is not a bad car...
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes 300D Has Pushed Well Past 1 Million Miles and It Ain't Stopping
Verdad Gallardo
10 Most Reliable Mercedes-Benz Models You Can Buy Used
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes Teases Updated EQS With Steer-By-Wire and a Yoke
Verdad Gallardo
Newbie
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
I considered both, and ultimately have been extremely happy with my 2004 E320. My last car was a BMW 525.
The 320 does not have pin to your seat acceleration, but it is lively and more than adequate for steep grades. I live at 1100 feet in southern California and am up and down hillsides and steep freeway grades daily.
Handling is excellent on curves, like Sunset Boulevard. More power would not be of any advantage.
Mileage is remarkable considering the size, weight and performance of the car. This translates into better range, as the E500 has the same gas tank capacity as the E320. That means 350-400 miles between fill-ups for the 320, versus ? 250 miles for the 500.
I would guess the E320 outsells the E500 10 to 1 based on what I see on the road and in dealer inventories.
And hey, why not do your bit for the environment?
The 320 does not have pin to your seat acceleration, but it is lively and more than adequate for steep grades. I live at 1100 feet in southern California and am up and down hillsides and steep freeway grades daily.
Handling is excellent on curves, like Sunset Boulevard. More power would not be of any advantage.
Mileage is remarkable considering the size, weight and performance of the car. This translates into better range, as the E500 has the same gas tank capacity as the E320. That means 350-400 miles between fill-ups for the 320, versus ? 250 miles for the 500.
I would guess the E320 outsells the E500 10 to 1 based on what I see on the road and in dealer inventories.
And hey, why not do your bit for the environment?
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 285
Likes: 0
From: Ohio
2003 E320
I thought of 500 engine as overpowered. I don't race, nor live in the mountanous area, so why not go for better fuel economy. Maybe it's a bad argument for Germans on this forum, but police have found my 320 fast enough for a speeding ticket 
.
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 82
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
As some others have implied, the term "underpowered" is relative to the type of driving you do. I personally think the E320 has adequate power, and with the sports package the handeling is similar to the E500 (the car is a little bit lighter). I also value the gas milaeage of the E320 - just drove 300 miles yesterday and averaged 29 mpg.
I understand the exhilaration you can get from 300hp of acceleration, the question you have to ask yourself is how often will you take advantage of those extra horses.
I understand the exhilaration you can get from 300hp of acceleration, the question you have to ask yourself is how often will you take advantage of those extra horses.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Aug 2002
Posts: 2,006
Likes: 0
From: Long Island
'07 Porsche 997TT
I think my E500 is underpowered, so i'm the wrong person to ask Still kicking myself for not saving my pennies and getting an E55. Seriously, it seems like a better value to get the E500. I think you'll find the biggest performance difference between the two is at passing speeds. I had a 96 (or 98?) E320 and then went to a '00 E430. From a stand still they were very close. The V8 won when you floor it at 65-75 mph. That's when I saw the biggest difference.
Still kicking myself for not saving my pennies and getting an E55. Seriously, it seems like a better value to get the E500. I think you'll find the biggest performance difference between the two is at passing speeds. I had a 96 (or 98?) E320 and then went to a '00 E430. From a stand still they were very close. The V8 won when you floor it at 65-75 mph. That's when I saw the biggest difference.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,095
Likes: 0
From: Southern California, USA
03 White on Stone E320
I think the E320 is adequately powered. It really just depends on your reference point. I think it's slow, but then, I really only started getting satisfied at the C32 level and up. When I compare the E320 to other cars on the road, it's fine. I can pass easily on the freeway with it and I don't feel like I'm tugging a boat. It's the handling that I'm disatisfied with (and yes, I have Airmatic)
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
From: Maryland
03 Eclass, 03 BMW 06 Porsche Cayman S, 03 Harley Davidson "bored & stroked"
I agree with BWL's response, I really don't need the extra power and less mpg from the E500 on an every day basis. I got a real good deal on my Eclass and trade-in too so to upgrade to the E500 was an option. In my case I don't add alot of the extra accessories. So the decision for me was did I need the better leather seats, 4 zone HVAC system, and of course the V8 for another 5K. I also had to admit to myself that I really don't do a lot of spirited driving (anymore). No I'm not an old fart, but In the DC Metro area there are to many cops, radar, traffic, and deer to be safe. Also with the price of gas, I enjoy getting 540 miles highway on a tank of gas. While benzes do handle they are not sports cars, and are more suited for long stretches of high-way with sweepers more than tight roads with twisties, the E320 will cruise between 80-135 mph pretty easy (the E500 is limited to 135 too). By the way I did test-drive the E500 and had fun, but a test drive and everyday driving are totally different for me, I had fun launching the E500 from a stand-still, but in everyday driving that would probably equal 6 mpg and new tires in 12 months. The E320 has more power than a BMW530I, yet BMW sells alot of the 525Is too. So I think folks enjoy both the V6 and the V8 depending what your priorities are.
So enjoy your cars whether V6 or V8 there is a lot more to owning a Mercedes than whats listed on the performance stats.
Now if I every get a 911 it will be a totaly different story!
By the way nice website!!
So enjoy your cars whether V6 or V8 there is a lot more to owning a Mercedes than whats listed on the performance stats.
Now if I every get a 911 it will be a totaly different story!
By the way nice website!!
Junior Member
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
From: Portland, OR
2006 Acura RL
Originally posted by rksharma
When I look at the crystal ball, I see John in a brand new E500 in very near future
I've yet to see a post where somebody got into the study of comparing the value of 320 and 500 and then settled on 320. The fact of the matter is that the price difference begins to converge when you consider options such as Appearance pkg, Premium pkg, and 4 zone A/C.
When I look at the crystal ball, I see John in a brand new E500 in very near future
I've yet to see a post where somebody got into the study of comparing the value of 320 and 500 and then settled on 320. The fact of the matter is that the price difference begins to converge when you consider options such as Appearance pkg, Premium pkg, and 4 zone A/C.
I felt that the 500, while very pleasurable, was not as much fun to drive. The 320 (with the sport package) felt lighter and more nimble. The 500, while very smooth, is heavier upfront and as such doesn't feel as nimble.
I used to have an E430. So, I know how nice it is to have a big V8. However, the fact is, I rarely made use of the power.
As such, I opted for a loaded 320. It was 8K less than the 500 I was looking at, and I've never been disastisfied with it.
I'll admit, at first, I was concerned that going from a 430 to a 320 would suck. But after owning the car for almost a year, I've never once regretted getting the 320.
However, if you have the $$$ and like power, then naturally, the 500 is the way to go.
Thread Starter
Almost a Member!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Originally posted by Davel
Now if I every get a 911 it will be a totaly different story!
Now if I every get a 911 it will be a totaly different story!
Thank you for the very thorough analysis. It's interesting that you make reference to the 911 as we have a 911 that, more or less, became a standard for how we expected a 300HP E500 to perform.
In truth, I was expecting the E500 to feel similar to our 911 in straight line acceleration since the 911 only has a 20HP advantage (and, if I recall correctly, a torque disadvantage). Given this, in retrospect, unrealistic (the 911 has a 500 lb. weight advantage over the E500) expectation, I think at least part of our disappointment in the acceleration of the E500 (see new thread above) resulted from it not measuring up to our 911's performance. The rest of the disappointment in the E500 came upon the realization that, if we were expecting 911 performance, we could buy another 911 for just a little more than the E500 (amazing, but true, given the current heavy currently discounting on Porsches and the skimpy margins MB gives to its dealers)
In view of the above, my wife and I came to the conclusion that we were probably just better off considering the Mercedes an excellent touring car rather than a high performance sports sedan (aka BMW M3, Audi S4, Merecedes E55, etc.) and that given this approach the E320 would a better choice for us.
Now if you are looking for a sports car, get a 911 because there truly is no substitute!!!
Best regards,
John
Last edited by MNJohn; Nov 15, 2003 at 11:00 AM.
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Clk 55 AMG Cabriolet
if it was me id get an e320cdi it has just as much torque as a 500 but doesnt cost as much
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Clk 55 AMG Cabriolet
if it was me id get an e320cdi it has just as much torque as a 500 but doesnt cost as much
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
Newbie
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Clk 55 AMG Cabriolet
if it was me id get an e320cdi it has just as much torque as a 500 but doesnt cost as much
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
okay so its not so quick 0-100 but hu really drives like dat 80-120 the cdi kills the 320normal. if dats not an option id go with the 500 its a more complete car . mi 2 cence
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 1,112
Likes: 0
From: MB - World
A few months ago, MB Australia invited some of their customers for a safety course where people got to drive different models around the track.
I was extremely lucky enough to get the E320 for the day. My impression of the car was the power delivery is smooth, it may not "feel" quick but mate, once you check out that speedo, you know the 3.2L block is NOWHERE near unpowered.
hope this helps
I was extremely lucky enough to get the E320 for the day. My impression of the car was the power delivery is smooth, it may not "feel" quick but mate, once you check out that speedo, you know the 3.2L block is NOWHERE near unpowered.
hope this helps
Super Member
Joined: Mar 2003
Posts: 957
Likes: 1
was '03 E320 - now - '04 S4
I think the power in the E320 is adequate. It's certainly no rocketship - but hey... this car is NOT a sports car. WAAAAY too heavy.
It gets off the line with authority while getting more than 20mpg.
I'm satisfied. But an E55 woiuld be nice!
It gets off the line with authority while getting more than 20mpg.
I'm satisfied. But an E55 woiuld be nice!
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,080
Likes: 4
From: San Diego, CA
C32 AMG
Originally posted by CarlssonCRS
ofcourse the e320 is underpowered.... i have a c320 and think its slow and the e320 is even slower. if you can afford the 500 you should get it!! especially if its only 3-4 grand more.
ofcourse the e320 is underpowered.... i have a c320 and think its slow and the e320 is even slower. if you can afford the 500 you should get it!! especially if its only 3-4 grand more.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 1,155
Likes: 0
From: Land down under
BMW E60 M5 - '08
I agree with those that state the concept of 'underpower' is relative. Over here in Australia the speed limit is around 50km/h in the cities, 60km/h outside the city, 40km/h in housing areas. Under these circumstances even a E240 has sufficient power, but the E320 is a gem to drive. Unless you access the highway or high speed limit roads frequently, I believe the E320 has more than enough power to cater for your various needs.
Having said the above, if the price difference between a E500 and E320 was only around AUD10,000, then I would get the E500. Over here the difference is around AUD40,000 so I could not justify the extra expense.
After having driven my E320 for over a month I've come to the conclusion that it ain't a slouch. When needed, the car has delivered ample power with the kick-down thingy. I've even taken the car up to 220km/h and it was done with ease and minimal noise. Of course it doesn't have the power like the CLK500 or S430 that my dad has, but it has enough with some to spare
Having said the above, if the price difference between a E500 and E320 was only around AUD10,000, then I would get the E500. Over here the difference is around AUD40,000 so I could not justify the extra expense.
After having driven my E320 for over a month I've come to the conclusion that it ain't a slouch. When needed, the car has delivered ample power with the kick-down thingy. I've even taken the car up to 220km/h and it was done with ease and minimal noise. Of course it doesn't have the power like the CLK500 or S430 that my dad has, but it has enough with some to spare
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 1,917
Likes: 14
From: Torquay, England
E-class E300e Estate, Sprinter (stretched limo)
For us non Americans the 320CDI is the way to go. It out accelerates the 320 petrol, has a top speed of 145mph and is extreeemellly economical.
Regarding the options factor, this again is different for non Americans, and getting the E500 is not so attractive.
I believe some European countries have a V8 4 litre CDI engine. That will be some piece of machinery.
Regards,
John Shorter
Torquay
England
Regarding the options factor, this again is different for non Americans, and getting the E500 is not so attractive.
I believe some European countries have a V8 4 litre CDI engine. That will be some piece of machinery.
Regards,
John Shorter
Torquay
England
