I don't understand your "not selling well" criteria. All car sales are down, all sedan sales are down...apparently consumers want a truck, SUV or crossover vehicle. As for Mercedes in general, they are holding their own. C class sales are tops in the small luxury car sales, and "E class" (which now includes CLS sales) outsold it's competitors in January 2017. The S class even outsold the BMW 5 series in January.

Perhaps the E gas tank is the same size as the C because the E get the same mileage with it's new engine. The E300 has a fuel economy rating of 22/30 (25 combined), while the E43 is 18/22. It needs a bigger tank. Rear legroom specs. that I have found at various review sites says they both have 35.8 in. The trunk space is slightly smaller...curious.

I'm not sure what you mean by "not refined", but the 2.0 Turbo is every bit as appropriate as the old V6. Most of the negative comments are from people "conditioned" to favoring the good ole small block V8. There's nothing wrong with that, but it doesn't mean anything less than V8 is inappropriate for everyone else. The E300 isn't a perfect car by any means but your particular criticisms seem unsupported. It's okay for you personally to not like it, but that doesn't mean it isn't a great care, and IMO an improvement of the older E350 model.

Meanwhile go over to good car/bad car and check out all sorts of auto sales information.

http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/

 

I have a 2016 C300, and previously owned a succession of three S Class (2 220's and a 221). The E wasn't yet available in March 2016, so I loaded up a C instead. Overall I'm happy with the C, although a lot of it's interior beauty is skin deep. I don't know if it's a design issue or the Alabama plant build but the 205 sedans suffer a lot of creaks and rattles. Ride is also absurdly stiff on the standard suspension and run-flats, and the "premium" Burmester audio is a huge disappointment. It is a good handler and fun to drive. (I replaced the Burmester with an Audison/Focal/JL system, ordered AirMatic when I had it built, and swapped the run flats for Michelin Pilot Super Sports.)

I've sat in, but haven't yet driven an E300. In most respects the E looks (to me) like a slightly beefier C Class. It's a good looking car, with two exceptions. The wheel offsets are terrible. Too high. The body looks like it's swallowing up the wheels. MB did the same thing with the 222 Sedan & Coupe. Even the AMG cars. I also find the massive black plastic lower front grilles cheapen the fascia. It looks like they're low cost place holders because the nicer option wasn't selected.

Otherwise I like the exterior. On the interior, like with the C Class, you've gotta spend some money or the cabin has all the appeal of a taxi. MBTex and the analog gauge cluster don't cut it. But if you go all-in with the quilted leather and glass dash (or even the Nappa leather) and choose some of the funky trims you can put together a really striking high end cabin package.

Knowing what I do about the standard "Burmester" I'd get the premium 3D system unless all I listened to was talk radio and pod casts. The T4 engine gets plenty of hate in the 205 world, but the truth is, if you welded the hood shut and told someone the car had an NA V6 they wouldn't doubt it, because the power and torque are there and its very smooth for a T4.

When I spec an E300 as I'd want it on the website, with the full P3, acoustic, Nappa, glass dash, Burmester 3D, AirMatic, I'm around $80k, which is a lot of money for a car with a T4 so I'm just going to block that part out, like I already do with my C300.

 

I'm sorry, but you don't know what you're talking about. The E400 wasn't and isn't a big seller, never was. Just like the E550 before it. With all the 4-cylinder cars Mercedes sells now the E400 is NOTHING on them to sell.

M

 

Thread Winner........Game over.

 

Not exactly! The E43 has much much firmer suspension and steering. It can never deliver the smooth ride of the standard non-AMG (E2xx, E3xx, E4xx) vehicle.

 

I beg to differ, the E43 will ride in comfort mode as well as any other E equipped with the same rim/ tire combo and air suspension. The so called AMG "tuning" is primarily a factor of the damper portion of the air strut and only in sport and sport plus. If anything the E 43 rides better than the non AMG version which can suffer from some unwanted "bobbing" in comfort mode under some conditions. The ride is more "controlled" not any harsher. Even the E63 is purported to have left its brutish ride behind this time around, most reviewers have not had any complaints regarding ride harshness. My E43 test drive showed the car even with 20's to ride admirably. I didn't encounter any potholes but it was unflappable on normal roads. Comparing the C400 and E 43 the biggest differences were ride quality and noise with the E being in a whole different level The C is quite good for its category but there is no comparison. The E 43 also banishes any limitations the E300 may have during extreme driving it simply can be driven at the limit by even the most inexperienced driver, it provides absolute confidence that the car will go where you want it to at all times. The difference between the 43 is simple, its and E300 that can be driven as a real sport car. The E 63 simply bumps the same thing up a notch to real track racing worthy.

 

What!? I did not compare the E43 to the C400. There isn't such a model in the current lineup. The E43's 19" tires will never ride as smoothly as the 17" or 18" tires on the non-AMG E Class vehicles. I've driven the E43 with 20" rims and IMO it was a very harsh ride in comfort mode. In performance mode it will loosen a person's teeth fillings. IMO the extra US $18k for the E43 isn't worth the price.

You can see the huge gap in the US E Class product line.

 

Your not reading...."The E 43 will ride the same as a c300 with air suspension and 19 inch wheels."
It is obvious that if you take a C300 and put it on "loofa" 17 inch wheels it will be more comfortable. It will also be more torpid and less fun to drive. Having driven an E43 with even larger 20 inch wheels it still rode with aplomb on normal roads. Detroit moonscape roads might be a different matter.

 

As one of the "very few" E400 drivers, my main frustration is that there is no real equivalent car to the E400 in the current MBUSA W213 line-up. I should not have to pay near-AMG prices just to get an E-Class with enough grunt to keep the current smile on my face.


I bought the E400 only because the E550 had already been discontinued. If there is no E400 equivalent, I'll have to go to the competition.


Fortunately, Gonzo is still young - just in for B1 service today, so he should be around for quite a while yet.


Now I know what some of you folks mean when you call these cars "unicorns." If you need to replace one, there are none available. . .

 

[QUOTE=ua549;7079344]What! I've driven the E43 with 20" rims and IMO it was a very harsh ride in comfort mode. In performance mode it will loosen a person's teeth fillings.


lol, if you think that rides hard, thank the Lord that you don't own an actual sports car, or a HD truck. My E43 feels plush compared to many cars that I own, even with the 20's, but I just can't seem to get it into Performance Mode? Loosen a person's fillings?? come on.(I know you were just joking about that).

 

Why are you posting crap about the C Class? You obviously have not read and comprehended my posts. They are about the E Class.

The E300 and E400 Luxury models don't come with 19" or 20" wheels.
Thus, your comparison/assumption about ride comfort is all in your ...

I've owned many sports cars including Alpha Romeo GTA, Ferrari GTS, Mercedes 300SL and Porsche 356. The E Class sedans are not sports cars, they are sedans. Period.

 

I have Both cars and when I switch to the w212, it is more refined, low end torque and high end with no screaming engine. Driving 100 miles a day with mixed highway and city use as the cars on ECO mode the car barely gets 19mpg while the w212 would get 23 combined on the same route. And Im not driving aggressively either. I don't understand the MPG difference. Go ahead and sit inside the w212 rear seats and see how much more spacious it is and how much rear leg room it has, the new one feels very cramped. Trust me I love this car but cant understand where the space went as its a longer car and a smaller interior (window, leg room, trunk). And whats up with the interior lighting, its way to dim specially the rear.

 

There is no doubt that the rear foot area is smaller than before its barely one inch bigger than a C class. The space has gone to the front, where the seats are now palatial. In addition, the overall shape of the rear area seems more cramped though otherwise identical due to design considerations; the windows are smaller and there is a pronounced rear swoop that was not there on the previous model all for the car to conform to the new design philosophy. There are sound reasons for the new MB design, primarily much better aerodynamics to improve FE. Another difference is the rear seat design it has greater side bolstering thus adding to the "coziness" impression. In general the rear "feels" more cramped despite the overall dimensions being almost identical to the previous model.
MB is well aware of the lack of roominess in the back and that's why it offers an L version for markets where chauffeurs are common. BTW it looks really ugly since it loses all sense of proportion to cater to the rear seat Plutocracy.

 

Any E 63 will rip a Ferraris GTS butt any day after having any alfa for breakfast if that doesn't make it a sport car I don't know what does.It just happens to be a sport car that seats 4. Dang even my old S2000 would embarrass a GTS, and that was a normally aspirated 4 banger with half the power of an E 43.

 

I'm starting to see them on the road finally. The twin eyebrow running lights is the give away. The new W213 has DRLs like the 207 not the double check marks of the 212.

 

I agree almost any new car will outperform a 50 year old Ferrari or any other sports car from the 1950's and 1960's. Back then sports cars were all about superior handling, not sheer power.

The discussion is about E300 & E400 vehicles, not AMG models. The E43 is not an AMG model despite its badge.

From Merriam-Webster -
Definition of sports car : a low small usually 2-passenger automobile designed for quick response, easy maneuverability, and high-speed driving

 

I think you need to rethink your definitions. There is a huge difference between a "sports car" and a "sport sedan".

Get behind the wheel of a Carrera on some mountain roads and you will get it.

 

It sure seems like the E300 is not very popular, as this forum seems very dead for a new model car.

 

Even Brian Cooley doesn't seem to care if it's C or an E ! Mercedes hopefully will fix this.

 

^ lol

 

Same I don't see many w213 out here in Vancouver Canada. Don't think it is selling well here. The body style is nothing to wow about because it looks so similar to a C class. It certainly didn't give me the urge to trade in my w212 for w213.

 

I live down in Florida in Sunny Isles Beach which is north of Miami. There is a huge dealership not far away, Mercedes of Miami. I too have seen very few e300s on the road, maybe two, which is surprising. There are more luxury European cars on the road here than just about anywhere. But it could just be the law of large numbers, so many cars, early in the life of the e300. Hard to know. Mercedes is certainly killing it on the overall sales figures, leading the luxury segment. Regards. Ned.

 

This may not be a factor, but thought I would throw it out there.
Just got an email from Consumer Reports re: Best Value based on their surveys. The respondents ranked the Genesis G80 as Best Value in mid-size luxury cars. It compared very favorably to competitors, but at a much lower cost to purchase and to own.
This is not CR's opinion, but that of the people in the survey.
Just providing this as food for thought.

As for need for speed, I have tested the theory many times (have the tickets to prove it) and found it to really be negligible in normal driving. Even on very long road trips on interstates, the ability to quickly pass and go faster than everyone else usually means you get there 1% quicker than the average driver.
One less cup of coffee enroute would have saved the same amount of time.
Numerous times I have weaved and bobbed, passed and sped along. Upon reaching my destination 2 to 4 hours later, the car I passed in the beginning driving the speed limit and so forth caught me at the second traffic light.

 

The Genesis handles like a 4 poster bed on wheels.

My driving experiences have had the opposite results than El Cid's. Many times I have avoided an extra night on the road by driving faster and arriving at a destination during "business hours". Speed for me is the ability to pass slow traffic when there is a limited break in oncoming traffic. Much of my highway driving is on 2 lane roads where acceleration and handling are keys to arriving today rather than tomorrow. Before I retired I commuted 1,000 + miles per week on 2 lane roads. BTW I never got a traffic ticket.

 

I saw one today, kind of like a unicorn sighting! As far as the subject of the thread, I would add that the four in the e300 is no doubt more than adequate for almost any driver in almost all driving situations. But for many auto enthusiasts that just is not the point. You buy a car for not only basic transportation, and the e300 certainly gives you more than basic transportation, but for fun, excitement, emotional experience, engine power feel, the torque-y lift you get from bigger engines. Many don't get that from a four and want more and those people like me looked elsewhere while we still can. A day may come when that is not a realistic option, but for now it is and I suspect many e class buyers have looked elsewhere. regards. Ned.