madeinstein

Every review I've read so far here in UK says that 250d doesn't feel much more powerful in real life conditions.

Found this webpage which (if numbers are correct) suggest that it's considerably more powerful.

220d
250d

Anyone had a chance to drive both?

dejongj

I didn't both, I test drove the 250d and felt like I was doing a Fred Flintstone impression. Your mileage may vary, and it may dependent on what you are used to. I would go for the 350d if you must have a diesel. Or the AMG version as with the options your are looking at you get much better value for money.

ennedomi

I've tested the two engines...
No doubt... 250d is better in every condition: more power/torque (500Nm), very regular, low fuel consumption and, in Italy, small price difference. ..

madeinstein

No question 350d is better. It's V6. But in UK 350d AMG Line with Premium Plus is almost 50k! This is Macan, SQ5 territory and you're probably not far off from AMG43.

Feels like it's a bit too much for medium size SUV. I never had diesel before, my current car has 2L turbo petrol from Audi with DSG gearbox, very responsive. I tried Audi 2.0TDI but didn't like it.. felt vey laggy. GLC 250d on test drive was much better.

dejongj

As I said, it all depends on your reference. If you were already used to a 4 cylinder turbo then you'll likely be fine. I felt the need to floor the 250d on the test drive in order to overtake and it still wasn't doing it quick enough for my liking.

And yes yes I test drive the q5 as well, and the Macan. The Macan comes with a 3.0 v6 diesel anyway, and even my wife didn't want to finish the 2.0tdi test drive on the q5, but was smiling with the 3.0tdi version.

Yes cost goes up, but considering the options you are considering you are there give or take £2K anyway in my opinion it is better value to get the better engine and get all of that as standard.

But ultimately your choice, if it is sufficient power for you then go for it as that is all that matters.

redrover22

I have the 250d and have come from a hot hatch and an ML350 as a point of reference.

I chose the 250d over the petrol 4 as it felt like it had more grunt.

What I have noticed with the 250d is it is very hard to notice you are building speed quickly without watching the speedo. The lack of noise and also smooth twin turbo delivery means it is missing some of the lag then rush of power meaning it can feel perceptually, not all that quick, even though it is.

I have driven it extensively on some of our rough single lane highways in Australia and overtaken cars with ease, finding myself way way over the limit after I have passed them but not really feeling I was going the speed I was.

For me this makes it a great highway cruiser and is plenty quick enough when it needs to be.

decorily

Exactly this!!!


Huge torque is a delight.

bips

A little OT for this thread, but how did you find the handling on our rough, single-lane highways? I find the ride harsh in those conditions, and it can crash into potholes. It's the one downside to a mostly excellent car. I have the AMG line pack and I wonder if the sports suspension is partly to blame. Plus the fun-flats.

To keep this on-topic, I agree that the car is deceptively quick. Perhaps not for those who want the AMG variant or the V6, but enough for me.

MartynW

All depends on how you want to drive. Our 220d is a long term purchase and has quite happily coped with 1000km in one day, a lot of which was at 130kph. There is plenty enough grunt for my old fart style of driving and when I do need oomph, I flick it into Sport+ and it is way beyond the legal limit before I know it! If I wanted a sports car, that's what I would have bought! Different priorities from you young folk and company car drivers

redrover22

I have the AMG line (on Bridgestone) and have been very impressed with how it handles the rough roads. Much better than the ML350 and my old Range rover sport as it is less "pitchy" or floaty as you are sitting lower and it doesn't feel like it is going to drive you off the road compared to the hot hatch.
Only downside is it hits the bump stops easily. So far I have managed to drive around most pot holes but I hit one on a dirt road and it was very jarring. Didn't cause any damage though.

Back on topic I pull out to pass at 90kph and pull in at 140kph. Close to my hot hot hatch but a lot less dramatic at that speed on a rough road.

bips

I may have mis-spoken when I asked about handling rather than ride quality. It's the ride quality on rough and bumpy minor roads that I was referring to. There was a review in a recent NRMA (motorists association) magazine some months ago that compared a C-class to a Kia. It made the observation that the Merc tended to crash into bumps, and that the the sport setting improved matters slightly. (The Kia was better as its suspension was tuned for our roads.) The impact of the crash can be quite a hit to the driver and passenger, esp the passenger as she is quick to tell me.

My interpretation and my own experience with the GLC suggest that sport mode improves handling a little, in line with the NRMA review, in that you feel more in control, but not the ride quality. (Overseas readers should note that the basic 220/220d/250d here does not have adaptive suspension, so sports mode only relates to the steering, which has some impact on the impression of handling.)

Re passing, I find that flicking into sport or sport+ just before overtaking gives me enough grunt. But there isn't the whiplash effect, if that's what you're looking for. If you want a sports car, then buy one.

dejongj

I just want to be able to put my foot down and go, not have to fiddle with switching to other modes. No need for a sports car as the 350d and 43 do exactly that without having to wait As do the Q5 3.0 and the Macan 3.0 and the F-Pace 3.0 which lets face it is the segment it operates in.

redrover22

I find ride quality superior to my early series Range Rover Sport, my 2010 ML350 (both on air suspension) and of course the Hot Hatch. It is still a bit on the firm side with the AMG suspension but the compromise is a good balance with superior car control.

I haven't found the need to use sport yet with overtaking. Just leave it in comfort.

I am yet to take it on the coast roads and enjoy some twisty bits in which I will be engaging sport or sport+ for shore. Mostly for the damper change and super quick gear changes. Mind you I have tried it on some Sydney city roads for a bit of fun

Teckno

We have the 250d, very impressed with handling, speed and economy.
Hate speed humps in Victoria, any speed above 25kph and steel springs hit, jar, the rubber stops, yuk. All our other cars sail over them at 40-50kph ! Go figure ?
We have ordered a new GLC Coupe, but have stipulated air suspension to dampen this horrible issue. Time will tell as we intend to own both GLC 250d variants for more than a few years.
The issue in Oz, between 220d and 250d is academic in a way, if you want some of the extras, you are forced down the 250d build, as MB do not allow mirror build states for both variants.

madeinstein

Are you comparing it to other similar SUVs like Q5 S-Line? In London we have speed bumps everywhere and it's one of the reasons that I want SUV

I assume this is 250d AMG Line on 19'' or 20'' wheels? Although if it's suspension wheels wouldn't make massive difference I guess.

I test drove Q5 S-Line Plus (20''), XC60 R-Design and GLC AMG Line 20'' and I thought the comfort was the best in GLC then Q5 then XC60 - or maybe I just wanted it in that order

bips

Yep, that's it! Have you tried a minor B road with potholes yet?

To answer madeinstein's question, in this country the AMG variant comes with 20" wheels.

Teckno - I happened to be in at my dealer today and heard of one unfortunate soul who pad picked up one of the early coupés and got a nail in the sidewall not soon after. Unlucky you might say, but wait until you hear that the coupe runs a different (Continental) tyre sand there aren't any spares to be had. That pour soul is apparently driving a loaner at the moment. You might like to ask about this at your dealer.

dejongj

I must admit it is a little concern with the GLC43 here in the UK as well. None of my usual tyre dealer do the sizes of the Continentals that Mercedes has put on. And most definitely none do that size with the MO marking that Mercedes require....

Fingers and toes crossed we won't have that issue for a little while.

Teckno

Hi, several answers to above questions.
1. Re speedhumps, steel springs in GLC are harsh, Lexus RX sails over them, as does BMW 330i convertible !!! However on freeways and most roads it's still a good ride, just hate the thump, always looking at bonnet to see if shocks are protruding through .... lol.
2. We have ordered GLC Coupe with air suspension to compensate.
3. Re tyres, firstly told via an MB spares area that world wide shortage of run flats for bothContinental and Michelin, not sure re Pirelli. May impact BMW, AUDI too. Not sure reason, surge in sales in SUV world wide ?
4. New GLC Coupe seems to be standard tyres, not run flats. I did a quick online search of the front and rear different sizes on line and at this early stage found nothing. That said often tyre store managers can work miracles in locating individual sizes. Our earlier Jeep only had 5 casings in Oz three years ago, we got two at the time.
5. I will check if the optional spare wheel kit for the GLC, around $1400, would be the same for the Coupe, given two different wheels sizes ? The Coupe comes with air compressor and can of goo, do not know if jack provided. All on 20" rims.
Thanks for comments.

dejongj

In the UK they are not run flats, there is no jack, air compressor and goo is provided but recommended to call Mercedes recovery instead Airsuspension and 21" and speedhumps are absolutely fine over here...In fact in comfort mode I did a 70 mile trip yesterday and couldn't believe how it just glides over everything, very smooth indeed. Sport+ is a whole different matter, but not crashy at all.

bips

I couple of further comments from my chat with my local dealer.

He said that if the nail had been in the tread they could have plugged it, but not in the sidewall. There was a thread here recently discussing such issues, and questioning whether plugging was officially supported. I supposed plugging may have been considered in this case only because of the unavailability of a replacement, but that wasn't the impression that I was left with.

Second, I asked if the coupé came with run-flats or with get-flats + goo, given how it is supplied in other countries. The dealer was emphatic that it came with run-flats. He said that only the "performance" vehicles come with get-flats in Australia. I'm not sure which vehicles this covers. I don't think it includes the GLC AMG43, but I'm not sure.

More generally, I have wondered which of the following would make the most difference to the quality of my GLC's ride and prevent the crashing over bumps and potholes: (i) having normal suspension rather than the AMG suspension (ii) having air suspension; (iii) having get-flats rather than run flats? I am interested in the experiences of those with air and/or get-flats. It's highly unlikely that I'd upgrade, but it's not completely impossible.

Now to jump in the car and go bush for a couple of days, with a complete fifth wheel in the back of the car. By golly it takes up a lot of space. When I priced the emergency spare kit it was in the vicinity of $AUD2K. Insane!! And it still only gets you an additional 80kms. For the same price I could get a complete wheel with the AMG rim. I opted for one of the cheaper rims, and with the jack kit the price was about 2/3 of the emergency wheel kit. It was a no-brainer. If you have two such cars you'd want to option them so that they could use the same spare.

Penn

Have to agree with all the comments regarding speed humps.

With B roads with potholes and corrugated dirt it really depends on the speed you can maintain.

madeinstein

Yes I would be interested in that as well especially AMG suspension vs Air suspension in this scenario.

This is from TopGear review
"Mercedes is at pains to point out the GLC is the only car of its size to offer air suspension, but as it’s a) £1,495 to fit to your car, and b) likely to struggle with the small bumps in urban streets that air-shocks always hate, it’s not really worth your while. If you cared about ride quality that much, you’d leave the bling wheels."

I'm a bit surprised by this as I though this is exactly where Air suspension should be better?!

dejongj

Third car, and second Mercedes I have it on. I wouldn't be without it. Standard on the GLC43 AMG as well Although if one is to believe the blurb it is a slightly different tuned version than the standard. Definitely worth it, I found the test drive I had with the non air version just plain firm, it was ok, but I already knew how much better it can be.

bips

I should be more careful than to comment on nails in tyres, as in posts #16 & #20. Picked one up yesterday and had it plugged by a tyre place today (MD service guy recommended this, as it is faster and slightly cheaper than having an MB dealer do it.)

And more on the question of bumpy rides ... cop what this silly review:

http://www.drive.com.au/new-car-revi...rticleResults7

says:

"Handsome to look at and dynamic to drive in trying circumstances, our test example was let down by the ride from its standard steel suspension. The GLC feels brittle on the open road, crashing over bumps with little of the suppleness luxury cars should offer. Customers must add $2490 optional air suspension to the GLC to make it a more liveable proposition. "It's kind of the wrong spec - you drive it on air suspension and it's night and day ? the ride quality on this model is absolutely appalling," one judge said."

This review is plainly silly, since who would compare a 3.0L Q7 to a GLC 220d? I have to assume they asked the companies for cars for a comparison and this is what they were given and so were stuck with it, but the write-up doesn't reflect that. Nonetheless, the standard GLC without air suspension is getting an increasingly poor reputation for the harshness of its ride. I only wish I knew a year ago what I know now.

decorily

I haven't read the review you refer to but the piece you quote does not compare and is only the writers opinion of the GLC.


Having driven a GLC 250d on steel for nearly a year I have to say the ride quality can be very poor at times. "Crashing over bumps" is something I have experienced on a couple of occasions.