Is the 2012 S550 worth the extra $$ new engine
01-14-2014, 09:43 PM
#26
Super Moderator
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Land of 10,000 lakes
Posts: 10,056
Received 3,241 Likes
on
2,018 Posts
AMG GTC Roadster, E63s Ed.1, M8 Comp. Coupe
I think I'd actually prefer the 5.5 NA engine , but thats just me. I love the low growl it makes, the 4.7tt's growl is there but just different with the turbos. When the 5.5 kicks down its instant torque, and while the 4.7tt is in the end quicker, the 5.5 is plenty and really more responsive.
01-15-2014, 09:36 AM
#27
MBWorld Fanatic!
I would stick to the NA engine if you are concerned about long term reliability. Even with the NA engine that had been around for a long time, even as recent at 2007 and 2008 they discovered defects with the balance sprocket that is very expensive to fix. By 2010 I think that engine was very solid.
I would not get the 2012 engine. MB obviously did not think the 4.7tt engine was the best choice for the S550 as only after 2 years they discontinued it in favor of a new engine. Not saying anything is wrong with the 4.7tt but all I'm saying is if you plan to keep the car a while, I'd stick with the simpler NA engine that is almost as much powerful and gives you almost the same 0-60 times.
I would not get the 2012 engine. MB obviously did not think the 4.7tt engine was the best choice for the S550 as only after 2 years they discontinued it in favor of a new engine. Not saying anything is wrong with the 4.7tt but all I'm saying is if you plan to keep the car a while, I'd stick with the simpler NA engine that is almost as much powerful and gives you almost the same 0-60 times.
01-15-2014, 04:45 PM
#29
MBWorld Fanatic!
I could be wrong but I don't think so. I thought the 2012 S550 still took about 5 or 5.2 second to reach 60 based on specs published by Mercedes. The 2014 model has a Mercedes published time of about 4.6 seconds. Maybe they tuned the engine differently but given the difference, I assumed the 2014 S550 has a different engine. It would be good to know so someone please correct me if I'm mistaken.
Either way I'm sure the 2012 engine performs better than the 2011 due to more torque but like I said if it was me buying the car, I'd go with the NA engine because there are fewer things to go wrong and that engine has been around for a longer period. If you go from the Mercedes published figures, the performance to 60 is significant between 2013 and 2014 but not as much from 2011 to 2012.
Either way I'm sure the 2012 engine performs better than the 2011 due to more torque but like I said if it was me buying the car, I'd go with the NA engine because there are fewer things to go wrong and that engine has been around for a longer period. If you go from the Mercedes published figures, the performance to 60 is significant between 2013 and 2014 but not as much from 2011 to 2012.
Last edited by WEBSRFR; 01-15-2014 at 05:13 PM.
01-15-2014, 04:50 PM
#30
Member
Join Date: Jul 2012
Location: FAIRFAX VA
Posts: 206
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
12' ML350 4M & 10' E350 4M
They both have 4.7L TwinTurbo V8s! But like websrfr said its get 0-60 in 4.6 which a vast improvement over the 2012-2013 w221 TT! I'm guessing it's the same engine but with a amazing tune. That's crazy that a car that weighs tons can reach 0-60 that fast.
01-15-2014, 05:16 PM
#32
MBWorld Fanatic!
Now if only they could get rid of all the internal combustion stuff, make it all electric with a 500 mile range battery, and about a 4.2 second 0-60 time like the Model S...
Last edited by WEBSRFR; 01-15-2014 at 05:21 PM.
02-03-2014, 03:48 PM
#34
MBWorld Fanatic!
I would lean towards the 2011 for a few reasons. I keep my vehicles for a long time and this being the first year for the turbo charged motor, maybe some teething issues to deal with as the mileage climbs. Things like leaking turbos, intercooler issues, stress from boost all could be a factor if you keep it after the warranty goes. The 2011 motor has been around a long time with all the bugs worked out......Just my 02.
https://mbworld.org/forums/new-s-cla...ml#post5929358
Don't know how widespread this may be.
03-10-2014, 11:16 PM
#35
Junior Member
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 31
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
98 S500, 2008 CLK550, 2010 S63 (sold), 2012 S550 (sold), 2012 E63
Yes! There's a huge difference. My 2012 S550 will leave my 2010 CLK550 in the dust, and the CLK is ~1500 lbs lighter. A few caveats:
1) The turbo's on gas engines have historically been problematic, although Mercedes has been a noted exception. Somehow MB manages to both keep the turbos cool and well lubed. And so far, not a peep of unreliability. That's reserved for ABC
2) I've yet to see a 278 motor in the shop for turbo issues - waste gates, bearings, heat whatever. They certainly did something right on this design
3) The 2012 was the first year they put the 278 motor in the S Class. Like the early .9 tranny, early versions of high torque components have proven unreliable. But see #3 - they simply are not failing in the field at this time
4) They did a marvelous job of beefing up the cooling system of this motor, as tight as it is. It runs remarkable cool for having two little blowers up there pumping out 1500deg air. Take a look at the intercoolers - you'll go "wow" at the design
5) The 2012/2013 S550 will flat put you in your seat - fully loaded. We put a 2012 on the Atlanta Speedway, and kept it way up top of the bank. It was cruising at about ~155 or so, while the 5 of us played Beethoven's moonlight with the a/c on, 99 deg day. It peaks at 160 before the limiters move in, but there was plenty of room left on the accelerator. These limits CAN be removed if you're that dumb to do so
6) Hot temp days do not adversely affect the 278 the way they do the 273. The 273 (old V8) is just not spirited when you load it up with a/c and hot weather.
7) The lag on the 278 is remarkable - you'll rarely wait for more than a second for them to spool.
8) The 278 will keep up quite well with the AMG 8 Cyl. Other than a much more robust 5 sp tranny on the AMG, 40HP simply is NOT going to make that much of a difference. Interestingly, there have been a few AMG 8's in the shop for serious work lately. But no 278's (yet). Knock Knock Knock Knock on wood!
9) Stay away from the AWD version of the S Class. Unless you live up north and just HAVE to take your $150k car out in the snow, then stick with a 2WD.
10) Finally, avoid ABC at all costs. Period.
In short, MB's done a superior job with the design of the 278 motor. We'll see in 5 years how these turbos are holding out, but they used a lot of the Diesel technology up there and those are almost bullet proof, so we're thinking they did it right. Again. Stay tuned loll
1) The turbo's on gas engines have historically been problematic, although Mercedes has been a noted exception. Somehow MB manages to both keep the turbos cool and well lubed. And so far, not a peep of unreliability. That's reserved for ABC
2) I've yet to see a 278 motor in the shop for turbo issues - waste gates, bearings, heat whatever. They certainly did something right on this design
3) The 2012 was the first year they put the 278 motor in the S Class. Like the early .9 tranny, early versions of high torque components have proven unreliable. But see #3 - they simply are not failing in the field at this time
4) They did a marvelous job of beefing up the cooling system of this motor, as tight as it is. It runs remarkable cool for having two little blowers up there pumping out 1500deg air. Take a look at the intercoolers - you'll go "wow" at the design
5) The 2012/2013 S550 will flat put you in your seat - fully loaded. We put a 2012 on the Atlanta Speedway, and kept it way up top of the bank. It was cruising at about ~155 or so, while the 5 of us played Beethoven's moonlight with the a/c on, 99 deg day. It peaks at 160 before the limiters move in, but there was plenty of room left on the accelerator. These limits CAN be removed if you're that dumb to do so
6) Hot temp days do not adversely affect the 278 the way they do the 273. The 273 (old V8) is just not spirited when you load it up with a/c and hot weather.
7) The lag on the 278 is remarkable - you'll rarely wait for more than a second for them to spool.
8) The 278 will keep up quite well with the AMG 8 Cyl. Other than a much more robust 5 sp tranny on the AMG, 40HP simply is NOT going to make that much of a difference. Interestingly, there have been a few AMG 8's in the shop for serious work lately. But no 278's (yet). Knock Knock Knock Knock on wood!
9) Stay away from the AWD version of the S Class. Unless you live up north and just HAVE to take your $150k car out in the snow, then stick with a 2WD.
10) Finally, avoid ABC at all costs. Period.
In short, MB's done a superior job with the design of the 278 motor. We'll see in 5 years how these turbos are holding out, but they used a lot of the Diesel technology up there and those are almost bullet proof, so we're thinking they did it right. Again. Stay tuned loll
Last edited by geebee; 03-10-2014 at 11:27 PM.
