Petrol or diesel?

[BrianM]

I've recently changed my E240 for a E320CDI (my first diesel). Don't get me wrong, I LOVE the E320CDI, especially the economy and power but ....... it's taking a little while getting used to the characteristics of the diesel engine. It seems to 'surge' forward cf the petrol engine rather than 'glide'. Also seems to take a bit heavier touch on the throttle to get it moving from standstill.

I think, on balance, I slightly prefer the petrol engine characteristics. Your views? Is it just something I'll get used to?

 

[Blobcat]

I prefer the cdi but perhaps I'm biased
Have you tried another one to make sure yours is working correctly?

 

[BrianM]

No - thats a good idea. I've no reason to believe anything is wrong (although I've no experience to compare it with!) TBH the car is great and I'm delighted with it ...... but ...... somehow that diesel engine is taking a bit of getting used to.

 

[Blobcat]

I find diesels great at setting off due to the low down torque. I have stalled many petrol cars setting off. Maybe there is something wrong or you may just have to alter your drving habits

 

[malcolm E53 AMG]

Brian, Try a driving a mondeo diesel for 15 minutes and I'm sure you will think you've bought the crown jewels with the 320CDi.
Like Blobcat I'm biast, but still love that engine even after 2 years.

 

[SLinKyjoe]

i had a c-class C-180 petrol and 6 weeks later I had the C 200 CDI. Both whilst the SLK was being fixed. had them both for a week.

The petrol was quieter, smoother, drove easier and certainly suprised me as to how good it was at accelerating, The diesel was obviously a diesel, and did not seem as urgent off the line, but it wasnt a bad car.


Petrol wins for me on those two.

 

[mlc]

I think we have visited this one a number of times, and lots of people have very strong views.

Diesels are cheaper to run, may last longer and at the end of the day are still smelly diesels. Diesel drivers tell us that they are quicker and quieter than you expect. Petrols are more expensive to run, may not last as long, are seen rather than heard, go like the wind and are driven by all sensible drivers that dont have to worry about fuel costs.

So their you are, a totally unbiased view. Next time you see a car smoking like a truck when the engine is under load, remember it's burning the same fuel as the truck its so perfectly emulating

but I may be wrong of course

Mark

 

[television]

but I may be wrong of course

Mark

Not on this one, you are dead right.

Malcolm

 

[Blobcat]

Ouch. It would be intersting to know which would be faster in a straight legal drive to the South of France. My money would be on the diseasal.

 

[television]

Ouch. It would be intersting to know which would be faster in a straight legal drive to the South of France. My money would be on the diseasal.

I did not know that they made a diesel SL55, any way I do not want to go to the south of france.

Malcolm

 

[Blobcat]

That's why I don't have one
Fit a nice perkins Diesel and I maybe tempted

 

[television]

That's why I don't have one
Fit a nice perkins Diesel and I maybe tempted

Nice Perkins diesel? I had two Perkins 6000cc turbodiesels in my boat when I lived in Sweden, the turbo's were always going down.

Malcolm

 

[hawk20]

I think we have visited this one a number of times, and lots of people have very strong views.

Diesels are cheaper to run, may last longer and at the end of the day are still smelly diesels. Diesel drivers tell us that they are quicker and quieter than you expect. Petrols are more expensive to run, may not last as long, are seen rather than heard, go like the wind and are driven by all sensible drivers that dont have to worry about fuel costs.

So their you are, a totally unbiased view. Next time you see a car smoking like a truck when the engine is under load, remember it's burning the same fuel as the truck its so perfectly emulating

but I may be wrong of course

Mark

Not so much wrong as out of date. Diesels used to be smelly and smokey but they really aren't any more. What with low ash engine oil, particulate filters wall to wall and ultra low sulphur diesel fuel, it is a very different game these days. I have not noticed any smell at all from my exhaust and certainly no smoke. Every petrol car I have had smelt truly foul while warming up, ever since catalysts came in.

My two and a half ton S class has the 320cdi engine and does 0-62 in 7.6 seconds (Autocar) and tops out around the 150 mark. Yet it returns 26.5 round town, 44 on the extra urban cycle and has a Combined figure of 35 mpg. From Lymington to the South of France and back I averaged over 37 mpg (yes manually checked). Truly phenomenal. It is also very smooth and remarkably quiet and it does over 15,000 miles between services.

Asked what car he would choose if he could only have one car the Editor of Autocar said an E320cdi estate.

Some like Pepsi; some like coke. But let's at least try and base the arguments on facts. The modern diesel is quiet, refined, clean, and remarkably economic. And nowadays it offers performance comparable with or better than petrol engines.

A visit to the Mercedes UK website will confirm that the 3 litre diesel E class (called the 320cdi) does 0-60 in 6.8 seconds, while the 3.5 litre petrol does it in a very slightly more leisurely time of 6.9 seconds. Let us at least agree that this is truly remarkable compared with anything a diesel could have done only a few years ago. And this year what won Le Mans -- a diesel. Unthinkable.

 

[mlc]

Not so much wrong as out of date. Diesels used to be smelly and smokey but they really aren't any more. What with low ash engine oil, particulate filters wall to wall and ultra low sulphur diesel fuel, it is a very different game these days. I have not noticed any smell at all from my exhaust and certainly no smoke. Every petrol car I have had smelt truly foul while warming up, ever since catalysts came in.

My two and a half ton S class has the 320cdi engine and does 0-62 in 7.6 seconds (Autocar) and tops out around the 150 mark. Yet it returns 26.5 round town, 44 on the extra urban cycle and has a Combined figure of 35 mpg. From Lymington to the South of France and back I averaged over 37 mpg (yes manually checked). Truly phenomenal. It is also very smooth and remarkably quiet and it does over 15,000 miles between services.

Asked what car he would choose if he could only have one car the Editor of Autocar said an E320cdi estate.

Some like Pepsi; some like coke. But let's at least try and base the arguments on facts. The modern diesel is quiet, refined, clean, and remarkably economic. And nowadays it offers performance comparable with or better than petrol engines.

A visit to the Mercedes UK website will confirm that the 3 litre diesel E class (called the 320cdi) does 0-60 in 6.8 seconds, while the 3.5 litre petrol does it in a very slightly more leisurely time of 6.9 seconds. Let us at least agree that this is truly remarkable compared with anything a diesel could have done only a few years ago. And this year what won Le Mans -- a diesel. Unthinkable.

As I said diesel drivers tell you how much better they are than you think. My journey to work this morning will take me off the M60 and up a climb from a traffic lights standing start. The diesel turbos all smoke, be it new old a ford or a MB, that what diesels do under load.

I should add that I agree completley with the economic arguments, however as I only do 4000 miles a year even at sub 20 mpg around town I only fill up once a month. My 1972 350SL only does 10 mpg around town, but it only did 750 miles last year, for both cars the annual fuel bill is acceptable.



Mark

 

[Blobcat]

If you are covering less than around 12,500 miles per year it is not worth having a diesel.

 

[television]

If you are covering less than around 12,500 miles per year it is not worth having a diesel.

And that has always been the case sinse the 80's

Malcolm

 

[jberks]

If you are covering less than around 12,500 miles per year it is not worth having a diesel.

I agree - IF you buy used.
I bought my 240 used. The price difference between that and a diesel meant that at the mileage I was doing at the time, it would have taken years to recoup the extra outlay, even taking the later trade in values into account. In any case, I'd never have been ahead.

Having done similar to the original post (E240 to E270cdi) my experience is similar to the initial post. Yes, the 270 is quicker than the 240, it's considerably more economical, will age better and depreciate less. All the reasons I switched. My fuel bill alone dropeed by £30 per week when I switched.

However, it's also considerably rougher (the 240 was admittedly VERY smooth) and doesn't have the same straight line increasing surge of power as the revs go up. Hit the cdi turbo curve right and she'll feel invincible, hit it wrong and you're left wondering where all the power went. Add to that, the tractor sound, especially when cold and not crusing (she's silent at a cruise) and as above, the economics have to make the decision.

I took a 320cdi onto the motorway once and being used to the wall of power, launched it into the fast moving traffic. Unfortunatley, as I floored it, I must have slipped above the power band and just sat there until she changed up and started to accelerate again. A petrol doesn't do that.

Would I change back? - if I returned to 8k per year and bought a used 350 petrol, possibly. The 350 will probably drop like a brick compared to the 320cdi, making it a bargain.

 

[jon_harley]

If you are covering less than around 12,500 miles per year it is not worth having a diesel.

While there is obviously some minimum number of miles per year you need to be doing to make a diesel cost-effective, it's not such a simple number. Mercedes diesel engines are a LOT more expensive than their petrol engines but the difference isn't the same for every marque. For example, a few years ago I tried out the Renault Megane coup-cab and the diesel engine was only £500-£600 more than the equivalent petrol engine, making it a good proposition even for much lower mileage - if I remember rightly, I worked out you'd only need to do 8,000 miles/year for it to be worth it over 3 years. (Unfortunately the drive was stiff and boring with either engine.)

 

[Blobcat]

While there is obviously some minimum number of miles per year you need to be doing to make a diesel cost-effective, it's not such a simple number. Mercedes diesel engines are a LOT more expensive than their petrol engines but the difference isn't the same for every marque. For example, a few years ago I tried out the Renault Megane coup-cab and the diesel engine was only £500-£600 more than the equivalent petrol engine, making it a good proposition even for much lower mileage - if I remember rightly, I worked out you'd only need to do 8,000 miles/year for it to be worth it over 3 years. (Unfortunately the drive was stiff and boring with either engine.)

Equivalent petrol and diesel MB's have been almost the same price when new - with my W210 the E320 CDi was the same price as the E320 petrol. It is only when used that the diesels command a premium. It is more down to fuel economy against fuel price differential that the 12,500 miles comes into effect.

 

[blassberg]

Come for a drive with me