E320 CDI vs. E320
05-13-2004, 01:02 AM
#1
Super Member
Thread Starter
E320 CDI vs. E320
Is there any reason to get the E320 over the E320 CDI? The hp difference is minimal, and in the department where it matters most (torque), the E320 CDI creams the E320. Plus, the CDI has better gas mileage and diesel is cheaper than premium gas (I believe).
Are the cars different otherwise? If not, seems like a slam dunk case for the CDI (unless you strongly prefer V6...).
Are the cars different otherwise? If not, seems like a slam dunk case for the CDI (unless you strongly prefer V6...).
05-13-2004, 01:08 AM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Valley of the Sun, Arizona
Posts: 1,794
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
2011 E550, 2013 GLK
Re: E320 CDI vs. E320
Originally posted by Incendiary
Is there any reason to get the E320 over the E320 CDI? The hp difference is minimal, and in the department where it matters most (torque), the E320 CDI creams the E320. Plus, the CDI has better gas mileage and diesel is cheaper than premium gas (I believe).
Are the cars different otherwise? If not, seems like a slam dunk case for the CDI (unless you strongly prefer V6...).
Is there any reason to get the E320 over the E320 CDI? The hp difference is minimal, and in the department where it matters most (torque), the E320 CDI creams the E320. Plus, the CDI has better gas mileage and diesel is cheaper than premium gas (I believe).
Are the cars different otherwise? If not, seems like a slam dunk case for the CDI (unless you strongly prefer V6...).
On the other hand, if you keep a car for a long time, the few thousand difference that the CDI might cost isn't so important and you'll get what I think is a better engine.
I simply don't like the new 3-valve Mercedes engines, especially the 90 degree V6 which is inherently unbalanced.
I'm trying to make up my mind about these two right now along with the 2005 C-Class.
05-13-2004, 01:20 AM
#3
Super Member
Thread Starter
Re: Re: E320 CDI vs. E320
Originally posted by BudC
You can probably buy the 2004 E320 for several thousand less than you'd have to pay for the CDI. You also get some free maintenance and some content that are taken out of the CDI.
On the other hand, if you keep a car for a long time, the few thousand difference that the CDI might cost isn't so important and you'll get what I think is a better engine.
I simply don't like the new 3-valve Mercedes engines, especially the 90 degree V6 which is inherently unbalanced.
I'm trying to make up my mind about these two right now along with the 2005 C-Class.
You can probably buy the 2004 E320 for several thousand less than you'd have to pay for the CDI. You also get some free maintenance and some content that are taken out of the CDI.
On the other hand, if you keep a car for a long time, the few thousand difference that the CDI might cost isn't so important and you'll get what I think is a better engine.
I simply don't like the new 3-valve Mercedes engines, especially the 90 degree V6 which is inherently unbalanced.
I'm trying to make up my mind about these two right now along with the 2005 C-Class.
05-13-2004, 09:46 AM
#4
Member
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Bloomfield .CT
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2000 528BMW 5sp
cdi has more torque
than e500/ 369 lbs vs 339 and it comes in at lower rpm,. Drive the car it a rocket just like 60's muscle car, it throuws you back oin your seat. use diiesel fuel whic is much cheaper than premium gas. and gets
much better milege. Once yo get past the
diesel clatter , its a much better engine
much better milege. Once yo get past the
diesel clatter , its a much better engine
05-13-2004, 09:59 AM
#5
Almost a Member!
Join Date: May 2003
Location: London, UK
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2003 W211
Although the CDi engines are very smooth and powerful, they are more noisy than the V6 petrol engine.
I drove 300 miles at the weekend with 4 people in the car and the boot full so the engine was working harder and it could be heard when accelerating. Normally when I'm on my own in the car, and with the radio on, I never hear the engine.
I drove 300 miles at the weekend with 4 people in the car and the boot full so the engine was working harder and it could be heard when accelerating. Normally when I'm on my own in the car, and with the radio on, I never hear the engine.
05-13-2004, 08:25 PM
#6
Here are some of my impression with my CDI!!
This car is actually my first Diesel car and definitely will be my last one as well!
I bought the car is mainly because I heard a lot of positive feedback about the CDI egine. People here in Germany were saying one can actually save quite a lot money over time by driving a diesel.
I usually can drive appr. 550km with the E240 and every time when I refill the car i have to pay around 75-85 Euro. and now with the CDI it costs me around 60-70 Euro to refill the car and i usually can drive 700-780km with it. If you do some calculations, you can actually save some money over a period.
BUT
A diesel car also has higher tax, the engine is powerful but VERY loud comparing to a V6 and it also make a lot of vibration while the car is standing still.
I usually drive very fast on the highway, usually from 180-220km. Till now i have driven around 20,000km but has to refill the engine oil 3 times already (each time 3 litres). I only useshell engine oil for all my cars and each litre costs 15 Euro (Shell Ultra Diesel 0W-40). I never had to refill so often with petrol cars.. almost non!
as you guys already know that i have 18" on the car and guess what these wheels makes the engince make even louder noise...
I am thinking of now trade in the car for a S211 E55 AMG in Sept.
I will never buy a DIESEL car again!!!!! this is just some of opinion, hope you guys will find it useful.
Regards,
Mike
This car is actually my first Diesel car and definitely will be my last one as well!
I bought the car is mainly because I heard a lot of positive feedback about the CDI egine. People here in Germany were saying one can actually save quite a lot money over time by driving a diesel.
I usually can drive appr. 550km with the E240 and every time when I refill the car i have to pay around 75-85 Euro. and now with the CDI it costs me around 60-70 Euro to refill the car and i usually can drive 700-780km with it. If you do some calculations, you can actually save some money over a period.
BUT
A diesel car also has higher tax, the engine is powerful but VERY loud comparing to a V6 and it also make a lot of vibration while the car is standing still.
I usually drive very fast on the highway, usually from 180-220km. Till now i have driven around 20,000km but has to refill the engine oil 3 times already (each time 3 litres). I only useshell engine oil for all my cars and each litre costs 15 Euro (Shell Ultra Diesel 0W-40). I never had to refill so often with petrol cars.. almost non!
as you guys already know that i have 18" on the car and guess what these wheels makes the engince make even louder noise...
I am thinking of now trade in the car for a S211 E55 AMG in Sept.
I will never buy a DIESEL car again!!!!! this is just some of opinion, hope you guys will find it useful.
Regards,
Mike
05-13-2004, 08:56 PM
#7
Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: New Jersey
Posts: 162
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 C230 Kompressor
I drove a CDI the other day. The engine noise is louder, but not unbearably louder...i think it actually sounds pretty good...
and the added torque is so much of a difference compared to the non-CDI
and the added torque is so much of a difference compared to the non-CDI
Trending Topics
05-13-2004, 10:08 PM
#8
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
S2000, E500 on way
Man, everybody else has it lucky. Here in Cali, the diesel prices are about 10% higher than regular gas. Plus the 1/4 mile times are not very impressive for that high of a torque number. HP is the main factor in 1/4 mile times then gearing, not torque, the torque just makes it much easier to get up and go with ease. For instance, my 01' S2000 has about 280 HP, and maybe 145 torque, but I can pull low 13's all day. Torque just makes a car FEEL faster. Otherwise people would be racing a semi truck.
05-13-2004, 10:59 PM
#9
Super Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by vananron
Man, everybody else has it lucky. Here in Cali, the diesel prices are about 10% higher than regular gas. Plus the 1/4 mile times are not very impressive for that high of a torque number. HP is the main factor in 1/4 mile times then gearing, not torque, the torque just makes it much easier to get up and go with ease. For instance, my 01' S2000 has about 280 HP, and maybe 145 torque, but I can pull low 13's all day. Torque just makes a car FEEL faster. Otherwise people would be racing a semi truck.
Man, everybody else has it lucky. Here in Cali, the diesel prices are about 10% higher than regular gas. Plus the 1/4 mile times are not very impressive for that high of a torque number. HP is the main factor in 1/4 mile times then gearing, not torque, the torque just makes it much easier to get up and go with ease. For instance, my 01' S2000 has about 280 HP, and maybe 145 torque, but I can pull low 13's all day. Torque just makes a car FEEL faster. Otherwise people would be racing a semi truck.
Good thing there are so many different options out there, I guess.
05-14-2004, 01:11 AM
#10
I drove the CDI over the weekend. It did not seem loud at all. In fact, while driving, I totally forgot I was in a diesel. I think I read that MB was putting additional soundproofing on the US models.
05-14-2004, 04:03 PM
#11
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1987 Mercedes 300D Turbo
Originally posted by vananron
Man, everybody else has it lucky. Here in Cali, the diesel prices are about 10% higher than regular gas. Plus the 1/4 mile times are not very impressive for that high of a torque number. HP is the main factor in 1/4 mile times then gearing, not torque, the torque just makes it much easier to get up and go with ease. For instance, my 01' S2000 has about 280 HP, and maybe 145 torque, but I can pull low 13's all day. Torque just makes a car FEEL faster. Otherwise people would be racing a semi truck.
Man, everybody else has it lucky. Here in Cali, the diesel prices are about 10% higher than regular gas. Plus the 1/4 mile times are not very impressive for that high of a torque number. HP is the main factor in 1/4 mile times then gearing, not torque, the torque just makes it much easier to get up and go with ease. For instance, my 01' S2000 has about 280 HP, and maybe 145 torque, but I can pull low 13's all day. Torque just makes a car FEEL faster. Otherwise people would be racing a semi truck.
It is all physics.
You're right that horsepower determines a cars performance. Once you factor in weight, and other real-world factors, with a precise power curve, you could figure a cars performance pretty damn precisely.
Turning force and power are intimitely related.
Put precisely, for ft-lbs and hp units:
HP=Torque x RPM/5252
Meaning, that without torque you have no horsepower. The reason your S2000 gets so much HP and pansy-like torque is because it can rev up to, what, 9000 RPMs?
I guess the only problem with engineering an engine like that is, add a little weight, go up hill, do anything but drag from 0-100, and your car is suddenly less of a car. That's why the CDI is 200 pounds heavier than the gas 320, and still can out-accellerate it.
I guess that's why diesels do all the real work done by, really, any moving vehicle.
I just find the practical appeal of diesel to be very attractive. This new E-class is amazing. From my POV, it seems all anyone could ask of a car (unless of course you care more about quarter-mile times than getting from point a to point b)
Now if only they would send the smaller diesel engines over here, maybe even in a C-class, 200 lb-ft of torque is all I need, add 55 mpg or so to that on the highway, and you have something I think most americans would love.
05-14-2004, 04:13 PM
#12
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY/NJ
Posts: 2,596
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by JaredJohnson
People don't race semi trucks because they weigh too much. However, if you had enough torque on a semi truck you could get it to feel like you are driving a geo metro.
It is all physics.
You're right that horsepower determines a cars performance. Once you factor in weight, and other real-world factors, with a precise power curve, you could figure a cars performance pretty damn precisely.
Turning force and power are intimitely related.
Put precisely, for ft-lbs and hp units:
HP=Torque x RPM/5252
Meaning, that without torque you have no horsepower. The reason your S2000 gets so much HP and pansy-like torque is because it can rev up to, what, 9000 RPMs?
I guess the only problem with engineering an engine like that is, add a little weight, go up hill, do anything but drag from 0-100, and your car is suddenly less of a car. That's why the CDI is 200 pounds heavier than the gas 320, and still can out-accellerate it.
I guess that's why diesels do all the real work done by, really, any moving vehicle.
I just find the practical appeal of diesel to be very attractive. This new E-class is amazing. From my POV, it seems all anyone could ask of a car (unless of course you care more about quarter-mile times than getting from point a to point b)
Now if only they would send the smaller diesel engines over here, maybe even in a C-class, 200 lb-ft of torque is all I need, add 55 mpg or so to that on the highway, and you have something I think most americans would love.
People don't race semi trucks because they weigh too much. However, if you had enough torque on a semi truck you could get it to feel like you are driving a geo metro.
It is all physics.
You're right that horsepower determines a cars performance. Once you factor in weight, and other real-world factors, with a precise power curve, you could figure a cars performance pretty damn precisely.
Turning force and power are intimitely related.
Put precisely, for ft-lbs and hp units:
HP=Torque x RPM/5252
Meaning, that without torque you have no horsepower. The reason your S2000 gets so much HP and pansy-like torque is because it can rev up to, what, 9000 RPMs?
I guess the only problem with engineering an engine like that is, add a little weight, go up hill, do anything but drag from 0-100, and your car is suddenly less of a car. That's why the CDI is 200 pounds heavier than the gas 320, and still can out-accellerate it.
I guess that's why diesels do all the real work done by, really, any moving vehicle.
I just find the practical appeal of diesel to be very attractive. This new E-class is amazing. From my POV, it seems all anyone could ask of a car (unless of course you care more about quarter-mile times than getting from point a to point b)
Now if only they would send the smaller diesel engines over here, maybe even in a C-class, 200 lb-ft of torque is all I need, add 55 mpg or so to that on the highway, and you have something I think most americans would love.
By the way, you are so right - 55mpg and a smaller diesel and it would be hard to find a reason to stick with gasoline.
05-14-2004, 04:27 PM
#13
Almost a Member!
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: SLC, UT
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1987 Mercedes 300D Turbo
Speaking of which, here is what they get in the UK:
"The C 220 CDi is the most economical car in the C-Class range, reaching 62.8 miles per gallon on the open road, and 34 mpg in the city; achieving this without losing the sense of power and responsiveness so important to driving satisfaction. "
(Also, correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't our gallons smaller than their gallons, meaning the numbers are really only 85% of these, or something like that, but they are still impressive)
That would be a nice car. Oh well.
Seeing as this is the 211 forum, all of you can understand the kind of image mercedes has in this country. If they want to sell smaller engine, manual transmission, less-option cars, they would have to do what Nissan/Toyota/Honda did in reverse, and make a separate brand for these cars or something. Seems the same reason Mercedes doesn't sell a little less-luxurious cars here is the same reason Infinity/Lexus/Acura even exist stateside and no where else. I don't know.
"The C 220 CDi is the most economical car in the C-Class range, reaching 62.8 miles per gallon on the open road, and 34 mpg in the city; achieving this without losing the sense of power and responsiveness so important to driving satisfaction. "
(Also, correct me if i'm wrong, but aren't our gallons smaller than their gallons, meaning the numbers are really only 85% of these, or something like that, but they are still impressive)
That would be a nice car. Oh well.
Seeing as this is the 211 forum, all of you can understand the kind of image mercedes has in this country. If they want to sell smaller engine, manual transmission, less-option cars, they would have to do what Nissan/Toyota/Honda did in reverse, and make a separate brand for these cars or something. Seems the same reason Mercedes doesn't sell a little less-luxurious cars here is the same reason Infinity/Lexus/Acura even exist stateside and no where else. I don't know.
05-14-2004, 05:07 PM
#14
Junior Member
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Texas
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
05 E320 CDI
From Google:
1 US gallon = 0.832673844 Imperial gallons.
So 62.8 (highway) 34 (city) miles per Imperial gallon is equivalent to 52.3 (highway) 28.3 (city) miles per US gallon. Still impressive.
1 US gallon = 0.832673844 Imperial gallons.
So 62.8 (highway) 34 (city) miles per Imperial gallon is equivalent to 52.3 (highway) 28.3 (city) miles per US gallon. Still impressive.
05-15-2004, 01:31 AM
#15
Super Member
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Warren, NJ
Posts: 758
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
'05 E320 CDI;'04 S2k;'94 Supra TT;'10 QX56;'38 Buick;98 Port City Offset Late Model
I tested the CDI today. Current car is an E39 530.
Comments: turbo lag is noticible. Engine idle noise when cold, minimal when warm. Noise on full throttle is a deep baritone (BMW is a tenor). Overall power a lot like the BMW (see discussion below on hp vs. torque). Overall ride similar to BMW (Michelin tires seem to be harsher than Contis). Interior looks as if it could be successor to E39 (or E39 successor to W211). Steering about the same. MB has more roll in turns.
Some concerns: auto recirc during smog doesn't appear to be available (std on BMW). Nav screen is very low in dash, really must take eyes off the road. All colors other than black or white are extra $$$ ($1150 for midnight blue!!! All colors std on BMW). Ridiculous satellite antenna (included in fin on E60 BMW). $1995 for obsolete phone (9/05 E60 production includes factory Bluetooth and sat with nav). No heated wheel with premium package. Lease is not as aggresive as BMW, and worse for ED (makes the car more expensive that MSRP indicates).
BMW has issues too. Interior by Hyundai (actually, Hyundai is better!) Three levels of menu to change radio station, a/c vents. Rotary dial for phone (earth to BMW...) Will '05 drop features/maintenance? Ridculously fat steering wheel (my wife has trouble grabbing it). Minimal interior storage. Only modern engine is V8. No diesel yet (BMW has great 3liter diesel). I don't find the E60 exterior objectionable.
Power vs. torque. For performance, ignore torque. However, in everyday driving, engine is about 2000-2500 rpm and needs to double speed for umph. That takes time and makes a perceptable noise that sounds like the engine is straining. Diesel kicks in immediately.
Translating torque to power, the CDI is at about 120 at 1700, 180 at 2600, then 200 at 4200. It shifts soon after that. The E320 is producing 185 at 4200, and less below that. Assuming the same trans ratios, the E320 drops to 3600 on shifts, the CDI to 1700. So the CDI never drops below 175 hp, and is over 190hp nearly all the time at WOT. The E320 drops to around 160 hp, and does pass the 200 for nearly 1000 rpm. Add to that 50% to nearly double the hp for the CDI below 20mph, and thats why the CDI seems stronger in US driving.
But the big advantage has to be at the pump. With gas prices over $2/gal in NJ, the CDI will be $700/year less expensive to fuel. And by 2007/8 (resale time) that may count for more. And as the only '05 luxury diesel, it may sell for a premium used (I expect diesels to be VERY popular in '07/'08, with diesel hybrids common by '10). On resale that could be $3-5k over a gas version. The BMW E60 could have real problems on resale, a potential minefield for BMWFS.
Comments: turbo lag is noticible. Engine idle noise when cold, minimal when warm. Noise on full throttle is a deep baritone (BMW is a tenor). Overall power a lot like the BMW (see discussion below on hp vs. torque). Overall ride similar to BMW (Michelin tires seem to be harsher than Contis). Interior looks as if it could be successor to E39 (or E39 successor to W211). Steering about the same. MB has more roll in turns.
Some concerns: auto recirc during smog doesn't appear to be available (std on BMW). Nav screen is very low in dash, really must take eyes off the road. All colors other than black or white are extra $$$ ($1150 for midnight blue!!! All colors std on BMW). Ridiculous satellite antenna (included in fin on E60 BMW). $1995 for obsolete phone (9/05 E60 production includes factory Bluetooth and sat with nav). No heated wheel with premium package. Lease is not as aggresive as BMW, and worse for ED (makes the car more expensive that MSRP indicates).
BMW has issues too. Interior by Hyundai (actually, Hyundai is better!) Three levels of menu to change radio station, a/c vents. Rotary dial for phone (earth to BMW...) Will '05 drop features/maintenance? Ridculously fat steering wheel (my wife has trouble grabbing it). Minimal interior storage. Only modern engine is V8. No diesel yet (BMW has great 3liter diesel). I don't find the E60 exterior objectionable.
Power vs. torque. For performance, ignore torque. However, in everyday driving, engine is about 2000-2500 rpm and needs to double speed for umph. That takes time and makes a perceptable noise that sounds like the engine is straining. Diesel kicks in immediately.
Translating torque to power, the CDI is at about 120 at 1700, 180 at 2600, then 200 at 4200. It shifts soon after that. The E320 is producing 185 at 4200, and less below that. Assuming the same trans ratios, the E320 drops to 3600 on shifts, the CDI to 1700. So the CDI never drops below 175 hp, and is over 190hp nearly all the time at WOT. The E320 drops to around 160 hp, and does pass the 200 for nearly 1000 rpm. Add to that 50% to nearly double the hp for the CDI below 20mph, and thats why the CDI seems stronger in US driving.
But the big advantage has to be at the pump. With gas prices over $2/gal in NJ, the CDI will be $700/year less expensive to fuel. And by 2007/8 (resale time) that may count for more. And as the only '05 luxury diesel, it may sell for a premium used (I expect diesels to be VERY popular in '07/'08, with diesel hybrids common by '10). On resale that could be $3-5k over a gas version. The BMW E60 could have real problems on resale, a potential minefield for BMWFS.
05-15-2004, 02:19 AM
#16
Super Member
Thread Starter
Originally posted by Silver_Lana
This man knows his diesel engines!
By the way, you are so right - 55mpg and a smaller diesel and it would be hard to find a reason to stick with gasoline.
This man knows his diesel engines!
By the way, you are so right - 55mpg and a smaller diesel and it would be hard to find a reason to stick with gasoline.
05-16-2004, 12:53 AM
#17
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: Vancouver Island, B.C. Canada
Posts: 1,377
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
2005 smart cabrio; 2008 Mercedes-Benz B 200
MPG
smart cdi? Does nearly 80 MPG US in a cool little convertible sound even better to you? I'm getting one in the fall
Sorry, only in Canada
Sorry, only in Canada
