New engine
 

Does anyone know why MB 2007 Diesels are equipped with a V-6 instead of the inline 6? I just checked with my dealer who confirmed this. It seems to me that with all the fanfare of the 100K run that they would stay with the inline. Could this have something to do with the reformulated diesel fuel coming this year? Now I am forced to buy an untried engine.:D

the fanfare
 

of the 100k run was to introduce the new v6 and dispell thoughts of weakness. it is an all aluminum engine (head and block).

i am pretty sure that it is a packaging move. a more compact motor makes it easier to make the car stiff and save weight. less air to move etc. all toward more effeciency each generation of car.

i dont know either if i would want to buy one.

tom w

I'd rather have the smoothness of an inline six, compactness be damned.

I'll stick with the good 'ol Iron block engines and give the V6's a decade or two to proove themselves (And depreciate into my price range!). :D

Thermally, v engine blocks are more efficient....that is they waste less energy in not moving the car. Also, v engines are usually smoother running than inline engines...provided they are balanced and timed (engineered) correctly as to crank throw vs. firing sequence (harmonics on the shorter crank lessen the vibration). They also use less space which allows better aero on most cars. And they have been reported to crash test better. If the block/heads are properly reinforced (engineered and cast) they are usually a more rigid structure which can lead to longer life. They can use most of these advantages to build a high performance type of engine with fewer drawbacks....the new diesel engines do seem to produce more torque/horse power. That having been said...don't know if I'd wanna be their "test" agent either :silly:

Regards

Run-em--1983 300SD--aka--SPARKY THE DIESEL

i agree with the above
 

poster except on one point.

v engines arent always smoother than inline.

an inline six is generally agreed to be the smoothest naturally of all the configurations.

a 60 degree v6 is very smooth too. a 90 degree v6 is not. it takes balance shafts or offset rod throws on the crank to achieve smoothness. 90 degree v6s are only built to take advantage of 90 degree equipment on hand for building v8s.

a v8 is pretty good.

a flat six is good, and a flat four.

a 60 degree v12 is very very good. (two inline sixes combined).

a straight 8 is good but the long crank is a disadvantage in stiffness and weight.

now adays with balance shafts i suppose you can build any configuration and make it smooth. v7 anybody?

tom w

It's just a guess but my product engineering experience would lead me to believe it's for the additional packaging space. :wacko:

The little I remember of kinematics WRT IC engine configurations is that an inline 6 is naturally smoother than other configurations due to not inducing secondary moments on the crank. Yet, a shorter crank (and engine) allows for a lot of options to improve the whole system - the car.

It's pretty difficult to maintain sealing at the head on an L6 engine, and especially difficult when dissimilar metals (iron block/aluminum head) are used.

Heating or cooling is harder to make stable when cylinders are in line also, particularly with the lightweight all aluminum engines designed for high RPM and power output.

MB is just trying to take care of you as best they know how, and they know how.

Just a correction on my original post. According to Edmunds, It seems that the 100k run in Texas with 3 "production" off the line cars were fitted with the V-6. Much more power like approx 250hp vs 200hp with the inline. However, the 2007 cars with the V-6 will use some kind of urea mixture in the exhaust to reduce emissions. Maybe eventually we can fill the tank directly with cow manure and bypass diesel all together ;) .

A friend of mine who's a salesperson with a MB dealership told me the main reason for a V6 diesel is to be able to offer the 4-Matic version with the diesel in a E-class version.

What kind of power plants do power the actual E320 4-Matic, I don't know about gasers but must be a V6...

Anyhow, that was my hint!

Bye,

I'll keep my eyes on the prices of the 2003/04/05 I6 CDI's thank you. Man those things are sweet... Hopefully the new one is really good so lots of people trade in.

You can almost snatch a CDI for $30k...


The E320 is gone, the M112 3.2 V6 has been replaced by a much cooler 3.5L. 4 overhead cams 4 valves per cylinder, just like the sweet M119 V8. So you either get the E350 now or the E500 if you want the V8.

Off the top of my head I think an E350 has about 280hp, but I am not sure. An E350 4 matic wagon is a nice car, figure about $60k if you want new.

I wonder how well the old SAAB V4 balanced out?

Smaller package
 

The smaller package would certainly allow MBz to offer the engine in a wider range of their (and Chrysler's) products.

Speaking of that, anyone have comment on the Chrysler 4 cyliner T-diesel in their Liberty? I don't know if it was of Deutsch design or US (?Asian). I wasn't very impressed with its reported mileage of 18 pg. Would rather have an NA 616.

I read on another forum where they were debating I6 vs V8 diesel truck engines that the V's advantage is mainly packaging and the ability to have more crash-absorbing structure in front of the shorter engine without resorting to an excessively long front end.

As for Liberty engines, the CRD is made by VM Motori in Italy. VM Motori is owned by DCX. In use, I generally hear about folks getting low to mid 20's for mpg. This sounds bad, but the gassers are getting mid to high teens. Keep in mind that the Liberty weighs over 4,000 lbs and has the aerodynamics of a brick. BTW, I'm waiting for a CRD/manual trans Wrangler.