ua549

I just ordered an '18 E300. It was a tough choice because of the low powered engine. The competition was an '18 BMW 540i. The deciding factors against BMW were the missing LCD instrument cluster, Android Auto and can't be ordered in red. Additionally the interior styling on the BMW seemed to be a bit outdated.

LAC300

I'm going to order the 540, for about the same $ having the decent engine wins out over the faults, agree that the E interior is a full step ahead though, hopefully an E400 will be available in 6 years or so, or maybe a plug-in that puts out over 300 ponies.

cetialpha5

Well there's always the E43 which you can now price online. It does list for like 20k more, but I believe you get a few more options than the base model and a 396hp 3.0 biturbo V6 instead of the 4 in the E300.

davekarn

2018? Order banks are open for them? Any changes from 2017?

ua549

The changes are in the option packages. The LCD instrument cluster is now part of P2. Multi-contour seats are now a stand alone option (~$660) along with soft close doors (~$550). The center console can be ordered with 3 different finishes. As usual, I ordered via email without complete pricing information. Whether the order books are open or not, I will get the first delivery in late July or early August. I've bought cars from this dealer since the mid-1960's so I'm well cared for.

davekarn

Thanks for the reply! I actually saw the 18 DOG shortly after posting this. I just ordered my 17 a week ago, so I'm happy to see most of everything (especially engine and Drive Pilot) is the same. I wouldn't mind having the Black Ash trim for the center console but definitely not a deal breaker. Glad the P2 folks get more options too, so that's cool. I guess the only hit I'm taking is the $850 extra for the digital instrument cluster. I was worried I'd have a tough choice between sticking with my current order or going for the new one and waiting longer.

jamesmhood

I am planning on ordering a new E wagon. I decided to wait until the MSRP is announced before ordering.
Some of the people commenting indicate they waited 6 months after purchase order date before receipt of E sedan.
The MSRP for the 2017 wagon has not be identified.
A comment by ua529 states he will receive his 2018 in late July or early August.
What is your opinion of when a 2017 E wagon will be received if I do not wait for MSRP?
What is your opinion of when a 2018 E wagon will be received if I do not wait for MSRP?
The only dealer I asked about a price for the wagon offered a 2 percent reduction from MSRP? What is your opinion for a reasonable percent reduction from MSRP on a special order 2017 or 2018 wagon?
Thank you in advance to everyone for answering my questions.

ua549

The delivery time range was provided by my dealer, 6 months give or take. Sometimes there are parts constraints such as the HUD that delay a build.

Having not seen an actual invoice, I can only speculate from the stuff I've seen on the NADA website where E Class invoice pricing seems to about 93% of MSRP. The deal you can negotiate depends on how it is constructed - lease, finance or cash purchase - and how hungry the dealer is.

expresspotato

M264 engine in there?

ua549

One can only hope, but I seriously doubt it.

BlackjackM

Where did you get the info on cost of the multi contour seats? I hope you're right but they are $1,100 in the GLE so $660 seems low.

ua549

The cost came from my dealer. They have some pricing, but not all of it.
That said, pricing can change before it is finalized.

gooner

The e-class is a better car hands down but I cannot fathom how a true car guy would choose a 4-cylinder over a six (not just a six but a straight six) for the same money. The inline 6 e400 will arrive in the next year or 2. Merc will be crazy to think they can get away with offering only a 4 cylinder e-class and not lose sales to BMW and Audi in the critical bread and butter mid-size segment.

I'm willing to bet it arrives sooner than many think, if you think about it...if they made it known it was arriving soon, it would cannibalize sales of the 4-cylinders this year as people delayed orders.

ua549

Bigger engines are going to tough to use in the US due to the ominous CAFE standards being forced on manufacturers. If those standards continue on their current path without modifications we'll all be driving Vespas.

The 2025 CAFE standard for large cars such as the S Class is 46 mpg!

I'd love to have a W213 with Mercedes "other" 2 liter 4 banger from the CLA with 360 hp.

AubreyMcClendon

Congrats on your order - I just ordered my 17 E yesterday. Thanks for the info on the new configurations; would have liked the extra flexibility on options but as other members have posted, I'm glad to not be missing any major overhauls.

As far as 540 vs E300: I'm coming from a 435i (V6) so I struggled with moving to a smaller engine and also considered the new 5 series. I share your disappointment with the interior. While the exterior of the W213 could be better IMO, the new 5 wasn't doing it for me either.

Most proponents of the new 5 will cite the larger engine and I was also in this camp initially. Countless debate on this already but after test driving a half dozen E's I found the 4 banger to give me enough power; I was especially impressed the low-end acceleration. To me it lends itself to a drive that is smoother and more refined than the 5 but this is clearly a matter of preference.

You hit the nail on the head with your comments on efficiency standards driving us towards smaller engines in the long run. Hopefully it spurs innovation and leads to increased performance from smaller engines. Thanks for the info and enjoy your new ride.

Proeliator2001

We're already getting significant power out of small engines. Peugeot have a 1.6 litre 4 cylinder engine putting out close to 270bhp (a fair bit more then a Ferrari 308 v8! And close to a 90s BMW M3) yet gives great mileage if you keep the throttle off the carpet. Ford are ditching their 180 bhp 1.6 four in their fiesta ST and putting in a 3 cylinder 1.5 with 197bhp. That's all big numbers from tiny engines. I've not tried the fiesta but the Peugeot engine was a gem, very little turbo lag, surprisingly strong low down and overall really easy to live with.

Long gone are the days of needing v8s. Merc hardly sells any e class in the UK with more than 4 cylinders (petrol/diesel) as the tax man has made them too expensive to tax and run. But luckily, the little engines are pushing the cars along at least as quickly as older v6s and probably not that far behind v8s from a couple decades back. Not as smooth or melodious but then you're killing far less polar bears per mile travelled!

ua549

For me it isn't the size of the engine, it is the hp to weight ratio. The E300 has to push 33% more weight (~16 pounds/hp) than an E400 (~12 pounds/hp). MB could have put the 4 banger from the CLA45 (376 hp & ~11 pounds/hp) in the E Class and the 6 cylinder engine wouldn't be needed.

Fuel costs are one of the lowest expenses I have when motoring.
In my area today's fuel costs including tax are: Regular $1.95, Premium $2.39 and Diesel $2.33.

Proeliator2001

Do you really need more than even the e300s 240bhp in what is solidly a comfort orientated saloon? With closely enforced speed limits top speed is utterly irrelevant so it's down to acceleration. And as the e is a comfort orientated car is there a need to go blasting along? I'd argue on busy out of town road anything over 200bhp is usually a complete waste unless you live somewhere with long steep roads or twisty rural roads where you want quick overtakes. Even then 300bhp is really enough to do the job. If you need more, and I'm sure that's a fairly small minority of people, theres the e43 or more sporty alternatives from other marques.

It's a sad fact that we've been living for a long time in a world where we've been meeting our wants not just our needs to the detriment of the planet. If driving smaller engines means I can actually keep driving for longer, because resources last longer, that's a trade I'm happy to have.

ua549

Acceleration from 60 to 80 mph is totally lacking making the E300 better suited to town driving rather than highway use. OTOH my purchase was specifically for my wife's use as a grocery getter so it will meet the need. I'll never take a trip in the E300.

Sunrose305

I have spent the last nine years driving a BMW 550i. Since moving from a rural setting to a highly congested area it's performance is all but wasted. No twisties, no drag strips here. So the e300's more modest performance suits my driving needs just fine and I don't mind the 8 mpg boost in fuel economy for the sake of my wallet and the environment.

BeachBunny

I've seen less steamy piles of manure coming from the south end of a northbound bull.

The environmental impact of operating a V4 vs V8 are minimal compared to the environmental cost of building a brand new car.

The government push for efficiency over everything has sacrificed reliability and longevity. Today's cars are not W123s which will turn 1 million kilometers. I know of three E-Classes which were scrapped due to electrical issues. The engine blocks, camshafts, pistons, etc. were physically fine. The issues were electrical/electronic and they couldn't get it to work reliably. Aluminum as a metal isn't going to fare as well as cast iron when it comes to thermal cycling, no way around the physics there.

Similarly, if the US government was truly concerned with efficiency we'd have access to the diesel hybrids Merc sells in other countries. 65-75MPG in an E-Class? Yes please! But wait, the US gov't says you can't bring them in because they don't like how much nitrogen the exhaust has. Instead, you're forced to buy a gasoline (petrol) engine which puts out FAR more soot than the diesel engine ever would.

BTW, cow farts are a much higher contributor to greenhouse gasses than automobiles & trucks. Yes, I had to research this as part of my degree in Uni. So if you want to save the planet -- eat a steak, preferably one which was raised on an industrial feedlot. The grass-fed cows don't fart as much as those fed corn.

Proeliator2001

It's not manure at all. Of course vehicle emissions are only but one problem in a sea of many, and taking your example further, don't even have the hybrids, just use electric cars powered by nuclear or renewables. That doesn't make my point invalid, in that downsized engines have less impact, especially local air quality, than thirstier alternatives.

It's sound logic that if the end to end energy cost is only 1 percent lower, by using smaller more efficient engines, then it's still reducing the environmental burden.

Life cycle costs are of course higher in new cars but then on the whole new cars are outlasting old ones. Modern vehicles still feel fresh offer 100,000 miles whereas 20 years back they'd be feeling their age. Rising population with more money to drive cars means there's more of them on the road so buying another doesn't automatically mean an older car is scrapped. So it's clearly wise that, all things being equal, new cars should reduce emissions as far as reasonably possible. But as you'll know, cars overall at just one thing causing issues.

Your reply does seem to suggest what's the point in doing anything to help the issue because hey, other things are worse so why bother. Quite a sad viewpoint if that is the case.

michaelleongcl

is it possible for the 2019 MY E Class to receive this new M264 engine?

Cao Black

And therein lies the problem. If you cut per-vehicle emissions by half while at the same time doubling the number of vehicles or miles driven, there is no net improvement (which is, more or less, exactly what has happened).

CAFE, in it's current version (a midterm refresh, so to speak), is designed to promote alternative propulsion methods, such as hybrids, electric, fuel cell, yet-to-be-discovered renewables, whatever. Arguments against the current standards say they are too costly and can not be met within the current time frame. And then, of course, there is the need to satisfy the consumer, who, if you read all the commentary bemoaning the lack of engine choices in the the E300, cares less about metric tons of emissions than going 0-60 in less than 6 seconds.

I'm not smart enough to know where this will end up, but for the time being I am willing to live with CAFE. The alternative could well be a massive fuel tax designed to forcefully reduce the number of miles driven, and thereby the corresponding tons of emissions. I will take my under-powered I4 turbo over some bus or rail powered by natural gas (which, BTW, the CA Air Resources Board, wants eliminated) or electricity.

dukester34

any word on pricing yet