heidiw

We are currently looking to buy either the GL350 or 450 & am wondering what the consensus is on what the better family vehicle is. We do mostly city driving but do head out to our cabin about 1 a month (which is a 6 hour drive mainly highway & in the mountains). At the cabin, we need to be able to haul a boat but short distances only. My husband and I cannot come to an agreement - I lean towards the 350 as I love the fuel economy. He prefers the 450 as it has more power and would be better when driving out here. I currently have a 2007 Escalade and am looking for something that will be much better on fuel. Any suggestions/feedback are appreciated!

a2j

Was there a major change in GL450 for 2014 model? Driving in the mountains with a GL350 should be a breeze. 450 just does not have that torque. More horsepower only matters while doing top speed runs. Reset of the time, torque wins every time. So you are on the right track, get GL350. Great for driving in the city and long distance highway.

When we drove our truck in the mountains it was surprisingly good, even with all that 5,500lb curb weight. We were loaded, kids, cargo roof box... passing pick up trucks going up the hill in lower gear and making lots of noise.

I hope this helps.

sak335

I too was looking for an SUV with towing capacity and better fuel economy than the domestic offerings. I ended up with a 2012 GL 350 and I'm very pleased with it. I'm getting 20 mpg around town and 27 on the highway (these are actual numbers, not the numbers the truck shows; those are optimistic.)

It comes down to how you drive; you'll need to test drive both and see what you like. The diesel does not drive like a gas engine at all. It only revs to 4500 instead of 6000 or more for a US V8, and as a result, you don't get the acceleration that you do with a typical gas V8. The typical American driver loves to race from stoplight to stoplight (usually regardless of whether the next light is red, since they are usually fixated on the bumper of the car in front of them) and wants that acceleration. When you drive a diesel, you really need to adapt your driving style to go slower off the line. It's not that it won't do it, it's just that the transmission will be a lot busier in the process - the shift times are one reason why it isn't as fast since you have to shift more on your way to 60 mph. You learn to use the torque that this engine has, and that is different than relying on horsepower.

Towing, it's no contest; diesel wins every time.

Drive them both (both your husband and you if you will be sharing it) and see which one you prefer.

a2j

Just the opposite for me. My truck shows ~0.5pmg lower than the actual MPG. All the time.

heidiw

Thanks for the info! We have only driven the 450 & it was great. Unfortunately we wont be back in the City to be able to test drive a 350 for over a month. From the comments, it sounds like the 350 is still great on the highway. We also have a Jeep & my husband was concerned it would drive more like the Jeep on the hwy - it handles well just doesnt have the power the Escalade has when passing other vehicles especially in the mountain passes.

a2j

I don't know what kind of engine your Jeep has, but GL320 has 400lb/ft torque, GL350 has 450lb/ft. Older GL450 have only 370lb/ft, your 2007 Escalade has 407lb/ft. There is shortage of power passing other vehicles in GL350, especially in the mountain passes.

FastMoneyPlaya

The decision really comes down to whether or not you want to get great fuel economy or not. I just drove from Buffalo to Toronto and back down to CT on one tank (~650miles) in my wife's GL350 (2011). That worked out to about 25.5mpg at highway speeds of 75-80mph (fully loaded too)... you can get closer to 27-28mpg on the highway if you keep it at 65mph

alx

so you (the wife) has a preference for a family vehicle and your husband dares to differ?

what is wrong with you girl?

go get the diesel and cook him a good meal once or twice

(works for me wonders)

JimBarnhart

You might get better opinions in the X166 forum since that is full of X166 (Model year 2013+) owners instead of X164 (model year 2007-2012).

One thing to consider is if you want a GL350, you will likely have to order it. They are in extremely short supply and it's rare to see one on a lot, let alone one that will have what you want for configuration. Dealers aren't willing to give them up to other dealers. GL450's are relatively easy to find in various configs.

Resale is better on the diesel, fuel economy is better on the diesel. I had a GL450 X164 and now have a GL350 X166. I've been happy with the performance of the GL350, and I like that my fuel footprint is reduced.

rayray999

Since you talked about an Escalade, here is how the 350 GL has worked out for us with a similar American SUV.

We replaced a Ford Expedition with a 350 GL ... It was my wife's car, and she basically did 90% city driving, and we also drive to her parents house from San Diego to Northern California (about 440 miles) via going over the Grapevine pass over the mountains every couple of months ...

Also keep in mind that these stats are based on expedition having a 28.5 gallon fuel tank compared to the 26.5 of the GL350.

The stats:
1) Normal driving...
--Expedition: One fill up every week
--GL 350 once every 25 days.

2) Trips up north (440 miles each way plus 100 miles in town):
--Expedition: 4+ fill-ups
--GL 350: 2 fill-ups (once up, and once back, with another 10 days of driving before filling it up

3) Going up hills ? Anyone that thinks a GL450 will go better going up hills - I will take that bet, because they have not driven a diesel ... The GL 350 would blow the GL 450 away, with no down shifts ... in the GL 450 All you would hear is gear down-shifts, and excessive engine noise.

Buy the GL350 - You will not be disappointed ...

Cheers!

EWT

I haven't driven a 450, but a old 550 rarely downshifts even going up steep grades at 75+. Given that a new 450 has almost as much power as a old 550 (and probably more torque with the turbo), I doubt it would do much downshifting either. A 350 is very driveable and gas-like vehicle for a diesel, but you'll be waiting for power at times compared to a bigger gas engine. The fuel economy advantages are significant though. I'd consider a 350 next time around although run flats are probably a deal breaker for me (been there done that, and very unlikely to do it again)

rayray999

Turbos don't give the torque at 1500 RPM ... You still have to wind up the motor to get the power - hence the downshifts.

Agreed that the 550 will do much better than a GL 450, but with the diesel, it would not be "rarely", and rather "never", and you would be doing at 19 MPG vs 9MPG.

Spare tires are overrated .. In addition to the Diesel, we bought an electric SUV. I like to call it a Toyesla (a Model S drive system Tesla, under neath a Toyota RAV 4 EV) - Compliance car for California only ... Now that one will never down shift or up shift, it's a single drive bat out of hell from 0 to 102 miles speed governed top speed that will pin you to the seat till you get there... Of coarse costing you about 5 miles of range in the process (LOL) - It's all for the trees....

But the best part is that not only does it not have a spare tire, it also does not have run flats.... Toyota just provides you with a liquid fix a flat! ..... Now that's called adventure driving...

Cheers!

BlownV8

The 2013 GL450 makes max torque at 1500 RPM. You won't have to rev the engine to go up hills. Also, with a tune on the bi-turbo GL450, you have over 500 hp and over 575 lb-ft of torque. Sorry, advantage GL450 in every performance catagory except MPG's.

EWT

Per MB's website, a 450 is making 406 ft/lbs. by 1500 rpm. Winding the motor up isn't going to be required about 99.999% of the time. Maybe pulling a 7000 lbs. boat up the Pacific Grade in the Sierras, but not in normal driving. It's not a Honda motor. You'll notice the 120hp (50% more in the 450) and 2 second difference in 0-60 times a lot more than 10% more torque.

We'll have to agree to disagree on the need for spares and the concrete blocks that are run flat tires. Switching from RFTs to to normal tires removed 10-15lbs. of unsprung weight per corner (forget the exact weight now) that was very obvious even on a minivan when I made the switch on the Sienna we had prior to the GL. A drawback that isn't advertised is that many RFTs are ruined if they are "run flat" so you'll be buying a new tire if you use that capability. A spare and regular tires is a much better solution.

FastMoneyPlaya

The runflats are definitely a tradeoff... The ride is rough which is the only drawback as far as I'm concerned... One nice thing is when my wife got a flat tire last month, she called me up and asked me what to do? Should she call roadside assistance? No, I told her just drive to the tire store and buy a new tire - no need to sit on the side of the road for an hour waiting for help. In this scenario, it was actually easier to have the RFT than to bother with changing a tire on the side of the road. And even if we had a regular spare tire, I don't think my wife would be strong enough to lift a 20" rim, jack up the car, crack the bolts, and lift off the old tire. And just in case we got a flat and were far from help, I've got an electric pump and some fix a flat in the trunk...

JimBarnhart

Just so everyone is aware, there are no run flats on X166 (model years 2013-2014). They have a spare again.

Oh, well there is one case, if you order the B&O audio ($6K special order item) they put the subwoofer where the spare was and give you run flats.

Fourdiesel

VERY INTERESTING! I conclude from this that the customer comments about run-flats they got back (and seem to have listened to) were something less than favorable!