I thought we were going to get the 2.2 liter clean diesel with the GLK for 2012. What happened?. The GLK would be an amazing buy with this engine. As it sits, a small SUV that gets 17 MPG average isn't high on my priority list. I might as well buy a Tahoe Hybrid with a lot more room and only a slight MPG penalty over the thirsty 3.5 liter V-6.

FWIW, our 2011 GLK is averaging closer to 20mpg with some freeway and city driving. Also, the 2012 engine has Direct Injection and delivers another 10+% horsepower and 10-20+% better fuel economy (though there is some concern that with DI there will be some build up that can become problematic some years down the road...though maybe well beyond what most new owners will keep the vehicle for).

And if you want diesel, why not go for the new 2012 ML? More space and luxury compared to the GLK and probably better value than a Tahoe hybrid.

FWIW:

2012 ML350 Bluetech -- 20/27 (city/highway) -- 22 combined.

2012 GLK350 -- 16/21 -- 18 combined. You must be an outstanding fuel efficient driver!

2012 Chevy Tahoe Hybrid -- 20/23 -- 21 combined.

When you add in the higher price of diesel fuel, the Tahoe is the best option in terms of fuel costs. All are what I'd consider thirsty. I'd love to see the 2.2 Bluetech diesel in the GLK!

^^ those are EPA estimates not real world numbers. When insideline compared GL320 to Tahoe Hybrid, GL got 24 mpg vs Tahoe's 21mpg.

Second, who cares about 2-3mpg, when shopping for a premium SUV.

Third, if you want to make a better point why not compare GLK350 to RX400h then. RX gets 29mpg combined per EPA.

Last, you really can't compare Tahoe and GLK. You might as well compare GLK to Prius.

The GLK Bluetec is still in the air, it was supposed to be here months ago but the launch has been delayed with no release date in site.

Are you sure about Direct Injection and those numbers for the 2012 engine? I don't see any mention if D.I. in any of the 2012 literature.
My research indicates 268HP for the 2010, 2011 & 2012 models. Direct Injection may have been mentioned, like the diesel, but hasn't become fact yet. I'll let you know when mine arrives.

Further poking around finds a new D.I engine in the C350 Sport Sedan. Maybe that engine will find it's way into the GLK one of these years.

Yep - I am seeing 2012 as still the current V6.
But all indications are that the mild facelift for 2013 will bring the new DI V6 engine.

Maybe. The way my luck works, the 2013 with facelift and new engine will hit the dealer's lot about a week after I take delivery of the 2012 version.

FYI I get ~22mpg on my 2011 GLK350. 70/30 highway miles.

What he said!

The EPA under rates diesels in the US because diesel fuel takes more energy to produce, supposedly. I had a GLK350 loaner for about 10 days and got 17 mpg while our ML and R320 CDi's get over 22 for the same routine. An ML320 CDi was driven across the country a few years ago with an RX400h and Tahoe hybrid. The ML used about 10 percent less fuel than the RX400 enen though EPA ratings are much lower. It is a shame MB has been so slow to bring oil burners back to the US. In the 80's one year 80 percent of their US sales were diesels.