ruykava

i'm sorry i must disagree with the post that said that mercedes rides poorly. having test-driving 2 BMWs (330i, 530i) i found them to be amazingly lumpy and jumpy over bumps. yes, they handle better, i've no doubt about it, but RIDE is the one thing that mercedes consistently does better than anyone else, IMHO. it is the very reason why, where i come from (with really bad roads) people either drive a merc -- or a landcruiser, to iron out all the bumps. in this sunny small town, there are around 50 mercs, and 2 bmws.

the interior point is so absolutely true, i can never understand it when motoring magazines (almost always european as far as i know) commend BMW for a wonderful cabin in the 5 while calling the E's cabin "plasticky and messy" (take a look at Car magazine's buying guide, as an example). hmmm.. anyone want to venture a guess?

oh yes, my own E is an E240! haha, most people cannot afford, due to the taxes, anything higher than that here. in fact, the most popular is the E200k. and i can easily overtake anyone else on the road, except those pesky S350 drivers. so i guess speed is relative depending on what you're used to. 0-100k/h in around 8+ seconds is considered fast in this part of the world, especially since most "racers" with huge wings have about, oh, 0.8 litres of engine displacement...

johna1

Where is that part of the world, somewhere in Europe presumably?

SAguirre

I know exactly what you are talking about since I noticed that with my cousin's 2003 E320. I must say though, my E320 is NOT like that. I am very happy about that! Almost 90% of all my driving is in the mountains and I find this 5-speed transmission to be very good! However, I wonder if it is because my car is a 4-Matic, because my car is not running at full power due to the altitude or if it is different than yours and my cousin's because mine is newer.

I don't know.

Steve

cdiken

Steve is right on the money...an E320 is not supposed to be a fast car. Its intended to be a capable, safe, practical yet prestigious car.

3.2 is a Honda light-body Accord or Acura 3.2TL size motor, or Ford Taurus, or Chevy Malibu, or pretty much any mid-size sedan.

The automotive press would smear Cadillac or Lincoln for a puny motor in a heavy car. Chrysler Pacifica is one example of a slug: 3.8 V6 for 5,000 lbs. The press clobbered those numbers.

The E350 V6 will wake up the car. It just needs more torque for the weight, that's why the transmission is hunting. Lower rear gears would help but then you get more business and less fuel economy.

Bottom line, you just don't have enough horses in the stable.

That's why I got the diesel; for most driving situations, it's an E500 that gets 37 MPG. And the cruising range of regional jet.

I drove both E500 and the CDI feels more eager than the E500 in everything except flat-out "drive it like you stole it" blitzing.

BTW Steve, pardon my NY comments, I got an opinion or two about the place. Noticed your age...31....same here, we are by MBUSA statistics about 20 years early for 2004 or 2005 W211 cars, but who cares?

KB

BudC

I also have an E320 and right after I got it I took it on a 4,800 mile vacation (in the US). It's the best vacation car I've ever owned. There were two of us with a trunk absolutely filled to the gills. We crossed at least 6 mountain passes ranging from 8,000 to 10,000 feet and never really had a problem.

We averaged 27 MPG (actual, not computer) for the trip and drove 80 MPH most of the time.

However, once we got home I discovered a few warts. The transmission is very poor in urban driving. My 300E is much better. The E320 has to shift down two gears when slowing to go around a corner. The 300E shifts down one gear. In other words, the 300E is always in a better gear ratio. I also don't like the slippage the transmission goes through to smooth out shifts.

I also dislike the built-in delay in the drive-by-wire throttle. The 300E doesn't have the instant throttle response of a BMW but it's much quicker than the E320.

Finally, I absolutely hate the brakes. They thump and grab at slow speeds and they are very hard to modulate. Yes, in an emergency they outperform other Mercedes brakes but I've gotten along for more than 20 years with regular brakes that cost me peanuts to maintain so why do I need something that will cost me a fortune?

I had to keep my 300E because my wife won't drive the E320. She's driven it one time.

I regret buying the E320. The problem is that there was no alternative. The new BMW 5'er has been ruined by Bangle. I haven't bought an American car since 1977 and don't plan to start now. I won't have an FWD car which eliminates almost all Japanese cars.

If BMW cleans up he 5'er the way they have the 7-Series and the new 3-Series, I'm going to take a long, hard look at the 545I.

SAguirre

No problem on the NY comments, since I am also young, I have the energy to get engaged in the mud slinging .

Interesting about the average age of a W211, I got my W124 (a 1991 300E) when I was 19 and kept it until this July. I do have an Audi that is for somewhat of a younger crowd, but the Audi I have is a fossil now. I will be buying a TDI to replace the Audi very soon.

I LOVED!!! the CDI, but I will not have another RWD car out here. I am waiting for the CDI 4 MATIC (holding my breath ).

221 hp on my W211 is just fine with me! If I want fast, I will buy another Porsche (love them!).

Steve

Silvergt02

I think that a few (not all) 320 owners got a little defensive here. I think the original post was informative opinion for someone shopping for an E and undecided. IT is one mans opinion and not set in stone.

For some people, they "enjoy" their driving experience. I own a 500. I would not be happy with a 320. If I could have afforded a 55 I would be driving one. I dont really think the original thread meant to slam anyone. It was just his opinion and if a 55 owner did the comparo between a 55 and a 500 and gave his opinions on what made them different, I would not feel unhappy with my car in any way or feel the need to slam him.

ruykava

just in response to someone's question, i'm in Asia, actually =)

i'm not sure: i've never found the brakes to lack any feel, in fact i much prefer them to my previous W124's brakes, and for that matter, the brakes on most other cars i've tried. perhaps only someone who's used to driving with conventional brakes will feel the lack of feel? *haha*