Topic: First Drive: 2017 Mercedes-Benz E-Class Sedan

[Fobroader]

I thought the Brabus stuff is electronically limited too. Some of those things are pushing 900lbft aren't they?

My buddy got a tune from a company that turned all of that stuff off and you could actually shut the traction control all the way off. His E63 was somewhere in the 700hp range...don't know about torque.

[OliverD]

I dont mind the v6 so much but that AMG car only produces LESS than 400 hp.. 

I mean, seriously, AMG. It should be closer to 500, since the v8 are getting close to 600....

Right, I think I agree more with this.   Just seems weird to have a sub-400hp "AMG" E Class.   A C43 makes sense on the other hand.

The ~400hp E class should be an E550 IMO.

Hmm that is a good point. Even my 07 CLK had 381hp which is basically the same as this E43. So this is definitely E550 level power. Its not that much distance to the C400 (around 330 I think?)

Not that 381/396/whatever is underpowered or anything. But we are talking excess and dick measuring.

500 is a stretch tho, I think mid 400s range would be fine and then the V8 in the mid 500 range.

600 is 65/V12 territory. The current S65 puts out "only" 614. The real kicker is torque at around 740lbft, which is electronically limited so it doesn't implode the transmission. A bit of a downer in a way, but in another way hilariously awesome.

My thoughts here are a bit different.

First off, any car that has 400 hp is still pretty damn fast. And straight line performance is only one part of the equation.

If you look back in AMG's history they've always offered a la carte modifications like wheels, bodykits, etc. It's not as if an E43 strays from their roots.

The market for V8 powered, non "performance brand" midsize luxury sedans is nonexistent to small. Audi and Lexus both abandoned it. The take rate for the 550i and E550 is very small. For Mercedes, it likely makes sense to offer a more performance-oriented V8 model in place of a luxury one.

I do think that the C43 AMG is a more relevant model, mainly because the C63 is RWD and this way you get a high level of performance with AWD in the C-class.

[Serniter]

MB AMG E43 it is with bi-turbo V6 making 396hp. News on another site with pics. Due in the US for the 2017 year

Looks good. Does the engine have any relation to the one in the new Infiniti Q50 (TT V6, 400hp)?

No relation whatsoever.  I was surprised to, but Infiniti and MB went different directions on this.  Infiniti currently is only sharing MB's 2.0L Turbo.

Okay, thank you.

[mixmanmash]

I think next year will see a big shakeup in the line up given MB will be ready with their new modular engines that have I3, I4 and I6 sharing a lot of design and components, diesel and gasoline engines alike.  Long live the MB I6 engines again!

[mmret]

I think next year will see a big shakeup in the line up given MB will be ready with their new modular engines that have I3, I4 and I6 sharing a lot of design and components, diesel and gasoline engines alike.  Long live the MB I6 engines again!

While I do like me a good I6, I kind of like the gruff sound of the 90deg V6 in the GLK (M272 - also used in many other MBs of the last 10 years as it was the default gas V6 for a long while).

Yes I know technically the 60deg V6 is better, but there's just something cool about the sound. Also compared to the TL (3.7L 60deg V6) it feels like it has more grunt and is more satisfying power wise despite being substantially weaker on paper.

[mixmanmash]

I think next year will see a big shakeup in the line up given MB will be ready with their new modular engines that have I3, I4 and I6 sharing a lot of design and components, diesel and gasoline engines alike.  Long live the MB I6 engines again!

While I do like me a good I6, I kind of like the gruff sound of the 90deg V6 in the GLK (M272 - also used in many other MBs of the last 10 years as it was the default gas V6 for a long while).

Yes I know technically the 60deg V6 is better, but there's just something cool about the sound. Also compared to the TL (3.7L 60deg V6) it feels like it has more grunt and is more satisfying power wise despite being substantially weaker on paper.

I hate the MB 90 degree M112 V6s.  My dad's 2000 ML320 has one.  They got their balance shafts so wrong on it.  It is so not smooth at all and I expect more.  Porsche seems to have got their 90 degree V6s right.  Not sure if the M272 is any smoother as I haven't had first hand experience with it.  The Massey Ferguson sounding OM648 in my dad's E320CDI is way smoother.

The one advantage that the 90 degree V6 offers is that the engine is flatter and can be placed lower in the engine bay with all kinds of benefits.  But the M112 being SOHC meant that getting to the 12 spark plugs is a PITA.

[KD]

Nice car I'm sure, but the car that interests me most in this class is the CT6.  I think the E is still the best looking of the Merc sedans, but I'm not totally smitten with the new exterior design.  The CT6 is the nicest looking in the class imo, and the weight saving tech is brilliant!

[EV-Light]

^^^ ugh what?...the CT6 is underwhelming compared to the new E - the CT6 actually looks outdated in my opinion.

[OliverD]

Nice car I'm sure, but the car that interests me most in this class is the CT6.  I think the E is still the best looking of the Merc sedans, but I'm not totally smitten with the new exterior design.  The CT6 is the nicest looking in the class imo, and the weight saving tech is brilliant!

The CT6 is supposed to be a step above the E, competing with the S class. In reality it's more of a tweener though.

[Sir Osis of Liver]

^^^ ugh what?...the CT6 is underwhelming compared to the new E - the CT6 actually looks outdated in my opinion.

Considering styling alone, I much prefer the CT6.

[whaddaiknow]

^^^ ugh what?...the CT6 is underwhelming compared to the new E - the CT6 actually looks outdated in my opinion.

The exterior styling on the CT6 is quite attractive and I would probably put it a hair ahead of the new E, but the interior is all MB - no contest. For a car positioning itself between the E-class and the S-class that's a major fail.

Like it's been said over and over, as soon the as Caddy comes up with something new, ze Germans deal another blow and it's game over for Caddy.

[Noto]

Yeah I could see that. IIRC most modernish (since the 7 speed became common) Mercs start off in 2nd gear, unless you engage Sport mode or 1st gear manumatic.

That 'MB tranny classic' cost MB my father's $...he was about to buy a C-class instead of the Corolla (yeah, I know...), but the tranny p!ssed him off.

And actually, I don't find throttle tip in that aggressive in Honda/Acuras.
Now 2 vehicles that had horribly aggressive throttle tip in making it difficult not to spin the wheels:
1. Every Subaru with the FB-series engine paired to the CVT
12. The previous gen Kia Sedona.
23. Toyota Matrix XRS

^^Fixed.

Some nice clean mechanical gauges would look a lot nicer behind the wheel IMO.    Like a nice time piece, sometimes simpler is better....

Like Lexus's in the RX article posted today?



Re: the CT6 vs E-Class, the CT6 has some interesting tech and is worlds ahead of the old CTS or XTS that it replaces, but sh!t, MB has really upped its luxury game in the latest iterations.  I can't see how the CT6 will compete favourably compared to this new E-class (except perhaps in metro Detroit...).

[bluelines]

I think Audi took a particularly smart approach here: the S6 really isn't a full-blown performance version to compete with the M5, for example. It's more like a 550i with M Sport package, hence why it makes no sense to have a non-S V8. However, from a marketing perspective they made it seem much more exciting by making it an S car. Same approach with the C450 AMG vs. 340i.

I dont mind the v6 so much but that AMG car only produces LESS than 400 hp.. 

I mean, seriously, AMG. It should be closer to 500, since the v8 are getting close to 600....

Right, I think I agree more with this.   Just seems weird to have a sub-400hp "AMG" E Class.   A C43 makes sense on the other hand.

The ~400hp E class should be an E550 IMO.

Hmm that is a good point. Even my 07 CLK had 381hp which is basically the same as this E43. So this is definitely E550 level power. Its not that much distance to the C400 (around 330 I think?)

Not that 381/396/whatever is underpowered or anything. But we are talking excess and dick measuring.

500 is a stretch tho, I think mid 400s range would be fine and then the V8 in the mid 500 range.

600 is 65/V12 territory. The current S65 puts out "only" 614. The real kicker is torque at around 740lbft, which is electronically limited so it doesn't implode the transmission. A bit of a downer in a way, but in another way hilariously awesome.

My thoughts here are a bit different.

First off, any car that has 400 hp is still pretty damn fast. And straight line performance is only one part of the equation.

If you look back in AMG's history they've always offered a la carte modifications like wheels, bodykits, etc. It's not as if an E43 strays from their roots.

The market for V8 powered, non "performance brand" midsize luxury sedans is nonexistent to small. Audi and Lexus both abandoned it. The take rate for the 550i and E550 is very small. For Mercedes, it likely makes sense to offer a more performance-oriented V8 model in place of a luxury one.

I do think that the C43 AMG is a more relevant model, mainly because the C63 is RWD and this way you get a high level of performance with AWD in the C-class.