Cast in cylinder liners, upper cam bearings are integrated with the valve cover, a V-design to fit into more models, it is designed around meeting 07-09 emissions standards, oil spray jets are non-replaceable (Bend one and you replace the block), it uses 4-headbolts per cylinder (instead of 6), it needs balance shafts to run smooth and it has a poorly designed air filter system.

The air filter system looks like a clever solution since the turbo is in the center. MB didn't have to throw on two filters which costs more.

Lots of people say CAT 3208's and Detroit 6.2's are throw away as well, but they last quite a long time.

IMHO MB should have stayed with an I6, I6's are a better design overall. BMW won't stop using them.

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

Agreed. At least there is one company out there doing it the right way.

__________________
The stable, er, 1 horse :
1987 190D 2.5 Turbo (running well, and bloody-well better since it's the only car I have now)

Any idea why the Formula One cars of the 1990s were V6 instead of I6?

__________________
Kent Christensen
Albuquerque
'07 GL320CDI, '10 CL550. '01 Porsche Boxster
Two BMW motorcycles

Probably because they were more compact.

__________________
1992 Mercedes 190D 2.5 turbo 5sp manual. EGT+boost gauges. Boost controller set to ~14.5 psi. 1 1/4 turns on full load adjustment. LPG injection. Next in the list is water injection.

I would imagine that a v-type configuration is better for producing horsepower rather than torque. Inline's are good platforms for torque-ier type applications?

I recalled reading this somewhere, but what do I know

weight.

every gram they can remove is that much closer to the finish line.

__________________
John HAUL AWAY, OR CRUSHED CARS!!! HELP ME keep the cars out of the crusher! A/C Thread
"as I ride with my a/c on... I have fond memories of sweaty oily saturdays and spewing R12 into the air. THANKS for all you do!

My drivers:
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5Turbo
1987 190D 2.5-5SPEED!!!

1987 300TD
1987 300TD
1994GMC 2500 6.5Turbo truck... I had to put the ladder somewhere!

Dunno, but they seem to change their minds quite a bit. After the V6 they went to V10, and now the latest models are V8. The newest V8 models are spinning at 20,000 rpm (the V10's were "only" capable of 18k) so I'm not about to question their design!
I've never heard that, but I do know that an I6 is one of the few inherently balanced layouts. I6, flat-6 (ala Porsche), and flat-12, V12 are the only automobile engine layouts that are inherently balanced.

All other configurations including every I4, V6, and V8 ever made are not inherently balanced and require the use of balancer shafts to reduce vibration.

Additionally, for a V6, the ideal cylinder bank angle is 60 degrees (since you have a firing pulse for every 120 degrees of crank rotation) and for a V8, the ideal angle is 90 degrees (since you have a firing pulse every 90 degrees).

Unfortunately, Mercedes, like a lot of other companies, have decided to use a common cylinder angle for BOTH their V6 and V8 engines (to cut costs, of course ) and since V8 models are considered "higher up", the V6 engine gets the short end of the stick and is stuck with a non-ideal cylinder bank angle - that means additional complication with fancy balancers and counterweights and whatnot to reduce vibration.

No thx!

__________________
'98 E300 turbodiesel

None of those are issues if they last for several hundred thousand miles. Time will tell. From what I've read the V6 diesel is an improvement over the old I6 in many ways, but I don't recall the technical details. I know the V6 is cleaner and more powerful than the I6 even though it's 0.2L smaller. And when I tested it I felt the V6 at idle sounded nicer than the I6. It was the best MB and best diesel I had ever driven.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Because of the particulate trap and NOx cat.

Yup, by having more exhaust treatment the engine can be optimized for more power and still meet the required emission standard. Cleaner & more powerful, it's a win-win situation. The only thing I'm not sure about on the Bluetec is the new 7-speed transmission as I think the older 5-speed was plenty, but when I test drove the Bluetec I didn't really notice any difference. Still 7-speed seems like an overkill.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

Wrong, its a lose-lose. Just like the 85's TrapOx, it consumes more fuel and makes the engine work harder.

Fuel is directly wasted out the exhaust via post-injection cycles to make heat and burn off the soot. The engine has to work harder to push exhaust through a very restrictive filter. Both cause an increase in fuel consumption, both produce more emissions and both stress the engine much more than it would without the Trap.

Their mentality is "If it LOOKS clean it must BE clean." They don't see the total impact that development/testing, manufacture, maintenance, higher fuel consumption, shorter engine life, cost of replacement and disposal the DPF really has.

The best thing for anyone with a DPF/NOX cat to do is remove it entirely and program out the regeneration/post-injection cycle. Its better for the environment, better for the engine and better for the owner.

I know you don't care about emissions so I'm not surprised by your response. For me it's still a win-win. The Bluetec gets the same mileage as the CDI and even better mileage than the older MB diesels and still has much more power. While it may be true that it could get even slightly better mileage without all the emission equipment, it's a worthy trade-off IMO because the exhaust is now very clean, something that couldn't be said of the older diesels.

__________________
2004 VW Jetta TDI (manual)

Past MB's: '96 E300D, '83 240D, '82 300D, '87 300D, '87 420SEL

I'd buy an E350 4matic, just to get the 722.6.

Whats the last year that the 722.6 was put in the CDI? 06?

__________________
1999 SL500
1969 280SE
2023 Ram 1500
2007 Tiara 3200

I think so... There are times when I think the 5-speed in the CDI is a little mushy... very rare though. Once you get used to it you get pretty good at making it work as you'd like. The sport/comfort modes make a noticeable difference.

__________________
John Robbins
'05 E320 CDI - 240k
'87 300TD - 318k