lyrixmajor

Is their a real difference. If so what are they?

BudC

Comfort mode starts in second and shifts more quickly. Reverse also is a higher gear ratio.

Comfort mode works well with diesels because these are engines that develop their peak torque at low RPM. Consequently, you want to get to higher gears more quickly.

I believe C-mode is called Winter-mode (?) in Europe. It was designed to make it easier to start or back-up in bad weather.

Since the V8's have the 7G transmission I don't know what the effect would be other than to just make it easier to start out on slippery roads.

I sometimes use Comfort mode with my E320 because I really don't like the five speed transmission. It tends to downshift two gears instead of one when you don't want it to. C-mode makes it work a bit better. The drawback is that it's hard to back up if the car is pointing even slightly downhill.

The five-speed transmission, the electronic throttle and the SBC braking system are all things I dislike about my new E320. One of these days I'm going to go drive a BMW 5-Series to see if they have handled the transition to drive-by-wire better than Mercedes. My 300E is so much more responsive than the W211 that it's not even funny.

SAguirre

In a nutshell, "C" mode is a second gear start. It will also upshift sooner and not slow the car down when you let go of the throttle. I have not used it much at all. With a 4-Matic, a first gear start does not spin the wheels much at all.

Bud,

I had a 1991 300E for 13 years and in spite of it being in show-room condition, I did not find it as responsive as my 04 E320. I must admit that it sure takes getting used to the three things you mentioned, but I don't think that a 04 E320 and a 300E are not really comparable.

However, I respect your opinion, tell us what you think of the BMW,

Steve

BudC

Steve, the drive-by-wire throttle is supposed to learn what your driving preferences are but it can't predict your mood. One day I might be an aggressive driver and the next a laid back driver. With the 300E this is no problem at all. There is a direct connection between the accelerator pedal and the throttle valve. With the E320, the electronics are in the way and keep changing the reaction of the throttle but not in sync with me.

The five speed transmission has fourth and fifth gear ratios very close together. When I slow for a corner and press lightly on the accelerator to exit the corner, my transmission shifts down two gears because fourth is too high (low numeric ratio). Third gear in the 300E is perfect and somewhere between 3rd and 4th on the E320.

The SBC brakes are great on the highway or on mountain passes and grades but at slow speed they tend to grab and when going slow they thump when I press and release the brake pedal. I know they are supposed to be great in panic stops but I would rather have big, multi-caliper brakes driven with the good old vacuum assisted master cylinder.

Oh yeah, that course, cheap sound of the 90 degree V6 is driving me crazy. I'm almost temped to get a new E350 simply because they are supposed to have done something to make the V6 sound better than a GM FWD econo-box.

I'll admit that after a 4,800 mile vacation drive I found the E320 to be a fantastic travel car. The seats are much more comfortable than you would think. The car loafs along at 80 and there is no problem maintaining a pace that eats up the miles.

Despite being loaded down with luggage, the V6 had little trouble with 10,000 foot mountain passes although I suspect the E500 or the CDI diesel would have been much better.

I suppose that a major problem in our household is that we are coming from one of the best cars ever made ('91 300E) and the problem is compounded by the fact we still have it and tend to drive it more than the new car.

SAguirre

Bud,

I find all of your points totally valid. But since my main house is at 5,100 feet and my second home is at 8,600 feet, I must say that I don't miss having to push that pedal all the way to the kick down notch to make it up the hills when full. The 300E was anemic at this altitude. But I still I LOVED my 1991 300E!!!! The only reason I got this E320 is because a Jeep Grand Cherokee making a left hand turn totaled my 300E. I did not even get a scratch (the car served very well for 130,000 miles and protected me well).

However, I had two bad head gaskets by 40K miles, a factory flaw. Leaky injectors by 70K miles. New AC after 5 years, 2 water pumps and two radiators. (Each time the radiators or water pump went bad I smelled the anti-freeze before the engine ever got too hot). I also had the wood panels in the doors get loose and rattle. Oh, and sometimes, when the engine was hot, it would start right up and then stall. I went round and round with the dealer in Tampa about that. Once I moved to CO, the car settled down and had no issues for 4 years. I still considered it a good car though.

As far as the sound of the E320, yes it is a bit loud when revving, but it is not bad (in my opinion). I would not compare it to a GM though. I know what you mean about having different moods why driving and the shifting being different. But like you said about driving in the mountains and hills (which is what I primarily do) the E320 has the 300E beat by a long shot. It might also be that mine is a 4 Matic, but I have not had the tranny shift down two gears at once yet.

As per the SBC, the only thing that does bother me is that clunk sound when the brakes are released (that is annoying to me also!!!). However, when the ABS turns on, and this happens often in the snow, it is seamless and smooth. The 300E sure told you that the ABS was on!

The one thing I miss about the 300E is that rigid tank-like ride. It was really solid. (Not that the E320 is not, but it is different. It KIND OF drives more like my uncle's 1999 7 series BMW, but is still a Mercedes).

Steve

BudC

Steve,
I just finished putting another coat of Zaino on the E320 and noticed a lot of rattling of all the plastic bits and pieces around the front bumper. Since I had the car parked next to the 300E, I conducted a little experiment. I took my fist and lightly pounded on the hood just behind the grill and on the front bumper on both sides.

I then went to the 300E and did the same thing. The E320 rattled everywhere I bumped it. Needless to say, I could pound on the 300E and all that I would accomplish is to hurt my hand.

I think that if the E320 had as much metal as the 300E the noise from rattles would be overwhelming.

The next time I'm at a BMW dealer, I'm going to conduct this test on the 530I.

I had to have the head gasket replaced on my 300E and I also had the injectors replaced. However, that's about all that I ever had to have a dealer do. I'll probably have to spend more to have the SBC brakes serviced than I spent to have the injectors replaced.

I've never had a problem with the coolant system in any Mercedes I've ever owned because I never, ever permit tap water in the system. IMHO, tap water is what screws up most coolant systems.

As for ABS, I used to live in Minnesota and had two Mercedes at the time. One without ABS and the 300E. I conducted a little test between the two on an isolated road covered with ice. I drove the 190D down the road and tried to slow down and make a turn and the car went straight ahead despite having Pirelli Winter 190 snow tires. I did the same thing with the 300E that had V-Rated summer tires and the car turned with no problem. The ABS was noticeable but who cares? It worked just fine.

It's not so much the loudness of the V6 engine that I don't like, it's the type of sound that it produces. I've read that Mercedes are changing the exhaust system on the E350 to make it sound better. There are some engines that have a wonderful sound (Ferrari V12) and some that have a coarse, cheap sound (90 degree V6's).

The V10 in the new BMW M5 is supposed to have a wonderful sound because BMW spent a lot of time on it.

It doesn't do me any good to complain about the E320 because I couldn't find anything I liked better. What I need to do is sell the 300E so I won't get to admire it every day I see it.

SAguirre

I have not noticed any rattles on the E320, but it is definitely lighter build quality. The hood and the two front fenders are all aluminum. That is partially the reason why the weight distribution is almost 50 / 50.

Unlike the Mercedes owners who buy these cars just for status, we (the people on this board) seem to be discriminating and educated MB consumers. We can pick a bunch of things apart and point out exactly what we don't like. Other people just buy it because of the 3-pointed star on the hood.

Before and during the time I had the 300E I also had a 1988 190E 2.3 5-speed. That one also had ABS and some other nice things (I had it while I lived in Germany for a few years, I still had the 300E in storage in the US). That 190E was by far the most trouble-free car I have ever owned (including the Japanese cars I have had), nothing ever broke on that car!

But like you said, there was no other car on the market that I like better. I also think that I will be liking and loving this car just as much as my great old 300E.

Nice chatting with you,

Steve

Check out my thread "Reason I got a 4 Matic" I could never control my 300E as well as this E320!

lyrixmajor

does anyone know if any of the modes are more fuel effcient?

DWP

On my '03 the two modes are labelled as "S" and "W", which stand for (as I recall) "Summer" and "Winter." I thought that the point of a second-gear start in "W" was to lessen the possibility of wheelspin when starting on ice or snow. Snow and ice being unknown here in the Big Tomato, I've never had the car in "W". Am I missing something?

SAguirre

Comfort mode is supoosed to be more efficient.

Steve A.

dacbiet

Does it matter which mode is used with a car that has less than 500 miles?; in other words is one mode preferable over the other during break-in?

DWP

It shouldn't make any difference in Southern California, where traction is seldom an issue even in winter. "Sport" mode will give you faster times off the line than "Comfort" mode, but during the first 500 miles you're driving only like you had an egg between your foot and the pedal, right?

Brian_I.

The manual actually states that it is recommended that you drive the car in 'C' mode during the break-in 1000 miles.

DWP

It's interesting how, between MY 2003 and MY 2005, M-B changed the distinction between the two modes from traction ("Summer" vs. "Winter") to performance ("Comfort" vs. "Sport"). Both distinctions are valid - starting in second gear provides less torque and thus less acceleration and wheelspin potential, regardless of the rationale. Maybe the introduction of 4Matic had something to do with it - M-B had to sell people on the notion that they needed all-wheel-drive in snow/ice, and that just putting the switch into "Winter" mode on a RWD car wouldn't cut it. (Which may be true, but I wouldn't know).

SAguirre

As you know, I have a 4 Matic. In snow and normal winter snowing weather I still keep the car on S mode. Yes, if I punch it I will spin out and the warning triangle turn on. However, if I am on ice (all 4 wheels) then it is much better, even on a 4 matic with great snow tires, to start in C mode. Starting in C mode totally reduces the amount of wheel spin and throttle modulation the computer has to do.

The most important feature of the C mode is always overlooked!

If it is icy on the roads, the last thing anyone, 4 matic or not, should do is engine brake. In S mode, when you let go of the gas it tends to do a lot of engine braking. NOT GOOD!!!!!!!! If you are engine braking and your wheels lock up due to ice, then you have no electronic control to stop the skidding (other than esp). Under bad traction conditions, C mode will coast and NOT engine brake. Then this lets you use the normal brakes and then the ABS can unlock any wheel that hits ice.

I do a lot of hash weather driving and even with a stick shift, you have to remind yourself to push in the clutch and use the brakes. ABS is your best buddy in bad traction situations.

So, C mode will allow you to coast and minimize the amount of engine braking when your foot is not on the gas. This is the ignored point.

O, I did not need any convincing to know that 4 matic is better than a RWD car in C mode in the winter.

Steve

dacbiet

Thank you for that. I've been trying to absorb the manuals as much as I can since I picked up the car last Thursday, but wifey's getting jealous and insinuating that I'm spending more time in the garage with "my new german girlfriend" than her. I tried reading excerpts of the owner's manual to my 4 y.o. daughter for her bedtime story last night; she preferred Barney. I'll probably get hit over the head with a frying pan if I read a manual at the dinner table, so it looks like I'll have to bring all this stuff to work to read where it's peaceful and quiet...

SAguirre

Wow, your work is peaceful and quiet! It must be that secret volcano layer that gives you the privacy. Also, I thought you and Frau Farbissina had a son (Scott), not a 4yo daughter?

Right, Herr Doctor?

lig

I'm just smiling picturing Bud walking into a BMW dealership pounding on various cars with his fist.

Brian_I.

Haha, you sound like me a month ago. You do have the PDF of the manual right? That's the best way to get some reading time in when you're at work.

HELL ONA HARLEY

My manual states "C" is comfort mode (second gear start) and "S" is standard mode...

pa28pilot

I noticed that, but interestingly enough, when I took European Delivery of the CDI, the technician suggested that 'S' mode was better. Go figure.

Brian_I.

I agree that in normal driving conditions S mode is better but did he specify if it was better during the break-in period?

Otto

S is "Standard" mode, not "Sport" mode. W211 is not a sports car -- you cannot switch gear manually, can you? (amg model only provides you more power, what can you do after kicking down?)

C is "Comfort" mode or called W "Winter" mode which starts from the 2nd gear.

I believe C/W mode consumes more gas but it is more comfortable, especially, US W211 does not have a SBC-HOLD feature, C/W is another alternative to hold your car in a steep hill without rolling back.

SAguirre

Otto, I have found the C or W mode tends to make the car roll back easier. This is my theory: If the car is in 1st gear, and the engine is at idle, then the lower gear allows the engine to have more mechanical advantage to either move forward or at least not roll back. If the car is in 2nd gear, the engine is at a huge disadvantage, the car is much heavier to pull forward and the engine does not have enough power, at idle, to keep the car still on inclines.

I have little hill that I need to drive up to get to my house. I have actually tested this. I also have great times using the 4 Matic to make it up the hill since it ices up quite regularly.

Also, if the car starts in 2 gear and shifts sooner (therefore making the engine rev less) then C/W mode will be more fuel-efficient. S mode keeps the car in each gear longer before it shifts (not fuel-efficient).

These are my opinions, I could be proven wrong. So this does not necessarily mean that you are wrong Otto.

Steve

etenn

Otto is never wrong. :p Even if he is proven wrong.....he is not wrong...it is just a conspiracy. :p