Trunk space: E-Class vs S-Class
Thread Starter
Banned
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 135
Likes: 0
From: NYC
2004 E500 4MATIC
Trunk space: E-Class vs S-Class
Picking up a 2004 E500 4-Matic this Friday. Before we decided on this car, we were also looking at the S430. My wife and I were torn between the two for some time: while the E500 will deliver better performance and sportier looks (important from my perspective), the S430 offered much more rear seat room (important from my wife's perspective, as she will often be back there with the baby in the baby seat). The S430 was not much more than the E500 with options.
The deciding factor, for us (we have to cart around a baby stroller and other baby stuff) was the trunk. The E-class's trunk is so much bigger! At MB Manhattan, we actually put our stroller in the E-class and S-class right next to each other to see how much trunk space would be available AFTER the stroller went in (the stroller will be a constant companion for some time). The difference is considerable--much more in the E-class.
Anyone else have a similar decision, with this being the deciding factor? Or anyone know why the S-class trunk is so much smaller than the E?
The deciding factor, for us (we have to cart around a baby stroller and other baby stuff) was the trunk. The E-class's trunk is so much bigger! At MB Manhattan, we actually put our stroller in the E-class and S-class right next to each other to see how much trunk space would be available AFTER the stroller went in (the stroller will be a constant companion for some time). The difference is considerable--much more in the E-class.
Anyone else have a similar decision, with this being the deciding factor? Or anyone know why the S-class trunk is so much smaller than the E?
Super Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 820
Likes: 0
From: Chicago Western Burbs
'06 SL65
With an E and S in the stable, I've noticed MB compromised the E's rear legroom for a bigger trunk and the S's smaller trunk (still large IMO) for more rear leg space. The rear of the S feels like your in a sofa while sitting in the rear of the E feels like you're on a park bench....LOL.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,596
Likes: 0
From: NY/NJ
Originally posted by LIONHEAD
With an E and S in the stable, I've noticed MB compromised the E's rear legroom for a bigger trunk and the S's smaller trunk (still large IMO) for more rear leg space. The rear of the S feels like your in a sofa while sitting in the rear of the E feels like you're on a park bench....LOL.
With an E and S in the stable, I've noticed MB compromised the E's rear legroom for a bigger trunk and the S's smaller trunk (still large IMO) for more rear leg space. The rear of the S feels like your in a sofa while sitting in the rear of the E feels like you're on a park bench....LOL.
Just kidding.
In some of the documents released before the "Official" release of the W211, they made specifi mention of moving the rear seats foreward and the wheels back and to the corners to give more storage room.
If I recall correctly.
I guess you are seeing the results of said action.
MBWorld Fanatic!
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 5,465
Likes: 0
From: Palm Beach, FL
'03 Yukon XL Denali, '06 Eclipse GS
I agree, the space in the back of the W211's are a bit tight quarters, but still comfortable enough.
As for the trunk space, heck, I can fit more than I'll need.
As for the trunk space, heck, I can fit more than I'll need.
Member
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 172
Likes: 0
From: chicago
only amg
trunk space
looks are so deceiving, actually benz acquired the minimal extra trunk space in the new e by relocating the gas tank, also increased seat travel of front seats to give it more room, and sacrificed only about 1 inch in the rear most noteable in head/leg room, biggest benefit you should consider in your new e would be the folding rear seats, not available in the s
Almost a Member!
Joined: May 2004
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
From: San Marino, California
2002 S500
I also considered the E500 before buying the S500 (either a new E or a used S). I drove the E500 first and was impressed by its acceleration...it shot off like a bullet. But once in the S500, there was no doubt that it would be the car. I liked its SMOOTH and seamless acceleration. I also liked the roomier interior, more solid ride and the luxury. But I am in my early 50s. If I were 20 or 30 years younger, I would probably opt for the bullet (my mechanic's son is in his early 20s and bought a new E500). The E500 is for a younger driver. Also, my wife drives an ML320 and felt the E500 to be too claustrophobic. I also noticed the roomy trunk of the E500 but that was not a deciding factor(not even a consideration). Your baby will be out of a stroller soon enough...unless you plan to have more. I have a ten-year old who loves the spacious back seat. He sat in the back of an E320 loaner and did not like it. If you are the primary user of the car and like the looks and performance of the E500, you made the right decision.
I am still amazed at how well it handles for such a large car. I had an '88 BMW 325 before this and the S500 handles so much better. I am an aggressive driver so the S500 is probably a safer car for me. Its a good thing that I never tested the S55 (I could not afford it anyway.)
I am still amazed at how well it handles for such a large car. I had an '88 BMW 325 before this and the S500 handles so much better. I am an aggressive driver so the S500 is probably a safer car for me. Its a good thing that I never tested the S55 (I could not afford it anyway.)
