Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Mercedes-Benz E-Class Sedans
This discussion has been closed.
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
progress.
Selection 10 might be playing and then it would go to selection 3 instead of to 11, so I tried pushing the increase and decrease buttons on the steering wheel and on the radio face and the selections seemed to jump all over the place.
Anyone else experienced this phenomena and know what to do or must I call on the MB garage?
Thanks for your input.
JR
There is no right or wrong choice about 02 vs 03. But there are good reasons either way.
1. Although almost identical to the 210, the new cars look smaller both on the outside and the inside.
2. There has been a lot of talk in the press about MB's return to "high quality" interior materials with the 211. I can't say I agree at all. From an engineer's viewpoint there are a number of areas where the materials and construction look much cheaper. The interior, however, is "fancied" up with a lot of chrome trim and an effort to increase the impression of parts count. This may be some people's idea of higher quality, but not mine.
3. To me the car hardly looks like a Mercedes. It borrows much from the new Ford-Jaguars, and it has way too many character lines in the body work. It lacks the integrity of a good basic shape and tries to make up for that with over-design of little details. There is some particularly messy sculpting around the upper edge of the trunk and rear fenders. Like the interior, the exterior looks like the stylists were working overtime on stimulants.
4. The sensotronic brakes are wonderful: the modulation, pedal feel, etc. is perfect. The complexity of the system is very high, but I can't see why it could not be reliable.
5. The semi-active suspension is terrific. The manual switching is on the console behind the shift lever, and the different modes provide, instantly, what feels like three different cars. The standard level (no lights on) is an adpative mode biased for comfort, but the car will tighten up during maneuvering. The one-light position is also adaptive, but the car tightens up with less provocation. The two-light position is a non-adaptive, full firm (springing and damping) mode that provides a very tight, but somewhat uncomfortable car (by my ride standards at least).
6. I thought the "cheap" leather interior of the 320 looked as good as the full leather of the 500, and the vinyl will probably be more durable. I wouldn't spend the extra money if I were buying the 320.
7. The 320 has an 18.5 gallon tank, the 500 a 21 gallon. Both cars benefit in trunk depth for having the tank under the rear seat (below the floor pan).
8. The 320 with mechanical suspension feels very much like my 320 (W210) with the Bilstein HD shocks and 235-45-17 Firestone SZ's. The 211 feels a bit crisper, but the difference is very slight. The steering in the 211 is slightly faster (2.8 L to L), which I think is a mistake.
9. Anyone ordering these cars should really think about the distronic cruise control. I've driven this in a CL500 on two road trips and I'd say it cuts the workload in half.
10. The standard climate control in the 320 lacks the pollution-sensing, solar sensor, and charcoal filter of the 210. You have to order the "four zone" system for those features. The four zone system (with temp controls in the rear and vents both at the back of the console and in the B pillars) seems a bit of overkill to me.
11. The front dome light/microphone/sunroof switch is a beautiful piece of design work and a huge aesthetic improvement over the 210.
12. These cars will be considerably cheaper to repair after low speed accidents. They use full front and rear end plastic "caps" that protect the metal work at the expense of adding some awkward joint lines to the body.
13. The standard double spoke wheels look like those VW used on the Cabriolet for many years. Like much of the body and interior, they're busy.
14. I have the feeling that this car is aimed at a younger market that isn't interested in minimalist approaches to design and that equates complexity with cost and quality. I wish I liked the aesthetics of the car better, because I personally would buy it just for the Distronic (and the Parktronic, because my 55 year old next is stiff!). I'm going to wait until they put the 3.5 liter six in it and give it another look. The way engine development is going, the current 5 liter V-8 is going to look awfully under powered and thirsty in a few years.
but a number of factors swayed me towards the 320.
1-live in major city and would be considerably higher gas costs.
2-the 320 has an excellent engine with 221 hp would I really use the extra 81hp.
3-cost factor approximately 6500 w/gas guzzler tax
for the E500 over the E320.
Comments from any current owners is appreciated.
Where I am coming from is Automobiles review of the 2003 where they talked about the 2002 model handling like a drunken sailor during high speed lane changes whereas they really liked the 03. I have also read several postings complaining about the ride quality of the '03.
Do you think that the base '03 suspension (non active) strikes a good compromise between handling and ride? Based on your post it sounds like that the same could be achieved with the '02 model with your shock and tire setup.
Does the semi active add significantly to achieving a perfect ride / handling balance?
Also I would like to hear more about your comment about the tighter steering. Edmunds only critisism of the '97 E420 sport was it's "darty" steering. It sounds like the '03 is even more so.
Utimately the reason I am asking is if a good balance between handling and ride can be achieved on the 210 then I would be inclined toward that direction because like you I am somewhat underwhelmed by the 'O3 apperance in the flesh, though I thought it was a stunner in the pictures. But I went through the same experience with the new C. I really like the 210's body because I think that it harken's back to classic late 50's Benz styling which is my favorite era.
Jean
I thought the base 211 (mechanical suspension) was very, very similar to my 210 with the HD Bilsteins and lower profile tires. I prefer the slightly slower steering of the 210 (3.0 vs. 2.8 L to L), and the high speed handling and tracking is virtually the same. I find the magazines like Automobile to be very deficient in real knowledge of cars and the "drunken sailor" bit is really a bit much. I think Mercedes was pursuing Lexus in the damping figures for the 210 and that the car was too soft. Additionally, MB had just finished paying out $100,000,000 (yes, that's one hundred million) in the class action suit on "premature" tire wear, mostly in the W140. So the rear toe-in settings on the 210 weren't quite adequate, because toe-in produces tire wear. The tires supplied on the car (Michelin MXV-4's) were also a high-mileage, poor-performing tire. So this combination of soft damping, inadequate rear toe-in, and "soft" tires could produce some darty high speed behavior in certain cars. If anyone is experiencing it, I would do an alignment and specify rear toe-in near the maximum allowed by MB specs. That, with the addition of some stiffer shocks and better tires creates a rock-solid car that is certainly comparable to the 211 base suspension.
I think the "semi-active" suspension of the 211 introduces a whole new game. The difficulty with a passive suspension is that wheel control (largely during suspension compression) and body control (during suspension rebound) create some conflicting demands. The 211 suspension eliminates a lot of this by adjusting damping rates instantaneously during compression and rebound; and it also adjust spring rates to improve body control (both roll and pitch) during fast maneuvering. The car is also automatically lowered (I'd guess by something like 15 mm) at 75 mph or when the mid or firm settings are manually selected. So this is a combination that the 210 cannot compete with, particularly in back-to-back comparisons. Whether this accomplishment is worth the complexity is hard to say--I'm very sensitive to these issues and find the ride/handling compromise of my 210 pretty good, but not in the league of the 211. I don't think I've ever had anyone in my car who would notice the difference.
On the ride quality of the base-suspension 211, I'd say it's similar to my 210. But a brand new car is going to be stiffer until the springs loosen up and the shocks overcome piston friction, etc. This is probably a 10,000 mile deal in a Mercedes.
On the steering, I think they're both O.K. and on the fast side, but I'd opt for the 210. If MB was chasing Lexus with the damping rates on the 210, they're chasing BMW with the steering ratio on the 211. I liked Mercedes when they were just following their own line of reasoning. Unlike the car magazine guys, I don't drive six different cars a day, and I don't compare cars back to back. MB has a long history of making cars that are incredibly satisfying over the long haul. I don't think "chasing markets" is the way to accomplish that.
So, let me summarize my impression. If I were going to replace my 210 with a 211, it would be for only one reason: the Distronic cruise control, which adds a whole new level of ease and safety during long-distance driving. Nothing else about the 211 was compelling enough for me to make the change. If I did make the change, I'd also shell out for the electronic suspension (because it is certainly a $1500 improvement) and (for my old neck) the Parktronic.
Thanks to all for the input.
Now if you want to talk disappointment, then lets talk about the 2003 CLK320, I can't believe Mercedes would come out with a 2-door (usually some of their best styling work) that is so forgettable and Japanese looking. I hope the CLK500 with the bigger wheels and bodykit is better looking, haven't seen one yet.
M
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
PR Director
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
BTW, when is Edmunds going to post the 2003 TMV on the new E??????
But when I use cruise control, I usually switch lanes instead of speed up or slow down for cars. I would rather stay at a constant speed.
Some may like it, some might not, luckily it is an option.
The sports package on the E320 is MUCH more expensive, negating the price difference by a a good sum of money. You might just consider the E500 a better deal.
Still have not been able to get any information on the system. Not even the supplier. I have asked seriously at several dealers and they have not been able to get anything.
Why the secret? Anybody know?
They are asking me to order now with the special price incentive and I probably would order an E500 but want to know what the system is.
Can't believe that they will be in production in January and still not have the system completely locked in.
Anyone have a dealer that has a source of information.
Hate to keep bringing this up but this is the best source of information that I know of!!!
I find the Dealers have a lot less knowledge of the product then the people on this board.
I would like to get an order in but the system is important to me in my business.
The COMAND APS system has been given a complete overhaul, so you should find the optimised functions and features even easier to use. Comprised of two separate components, the operating system (COMAND) and a navigation module (APS) located in the boot-the new system can store map data for many different European countries on just a single DVD.
A telephone keypad and softkey function buttons operate the 2-tuner diversity radio, CD/DVD drive and generous 6.5" TFT colour display. You can also have a TV tuner installed as an optional extra. Enjoy a fine quality picture that fades out when the car exceeds 5mph, even though the sound continues.
As for why the unit costs $3,000, this doesn't seem out of line to me for a triple redundant doppler radar unit (three transmitters and three receivers, which is what it took to get it by the NHTSA) that also has the electro-mechanical capability to apply brake pressure. I think the cost will eventually come down and in ten years I'd be amazed if this capability is not as common as cruise control itself is today.
Thanks for any advice.
One could conceivably adapt it to work with the GPS Nav to drive on full auto pilot from origin to destination. Wouldn't that be neat? And no need for sensors embedded in the pavement.
However, I would not consider spending $3,000 for the added convenience of that feature of a cruise control system. First, and most important, my driving is far different from walto's; I spend more time in town and on two-lane roads, with only an occasional trip on an Interstate or freeway. And if I have to travel more than 150 miles or so to my destination, I almost always fly.
Second, if I understand the Distronic system, the distance to be maintained behind another vehicle is specific and must be pre-set, and it stays at that distance unless changed manually. Seems to me Mercedes should have taken the technology one step farther so the car's following distance would be adjusted automatically, depending on speed and possibly other factors involving safety.
Perhaps I'm asking too much, though. But until the Distronic price comes waaaay down in price, I'll just tap the cruise control to "off" and "resume" or use it to slow or accelerate, if I opt to use it at all in traffic on a freeway. BTW, I'm an ex-Air Force jet fighter pilot with 6500 hours of flying time, and walto is absolutely right -- autopilot was a blessing, even in loose formation flying on long flights!
Another possible reason for the harsh ride may have been that MB over inflates tires when cars are shipped to dealer who is supposed to adjust the tire pressure as part of dealer prep. Just a guess.
Yes, S500 does have a very plush ride. But after 2 years with my 2001, there is just too much interior noise from loose plastic panels which distracts from the overall experience. The noise started after 6 months and has just gotten worse.
I had been considering a 2004 E55 or something, but after hearing your experience with an early 320 and a recent drive of the same vehicle, I am beginning to rethink my plans.
At the 60-70K area, one could really look into a BMW M540 or M5, which is much better made from the inside/out, possibly a Lexus Gs430 or Ls430, very different animals, but extremely nice rides, to the new Audis (harsh also..). Never tried the Infiniti Q45, so don't know there.
Also does anyone know if Mercedes charges extra for metallic paints on the 2003 E320, I know it is complimentary in the E500.
Thanks