2005 E320 CDI experience/troubles - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

husk · #1 12-22-2008, 07:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimFreeh

Like Marty said there are always going to be a couple of people that can't be convinced.....

To sum up the positions of the short sighted gasser converts

1) maintenance is a wash
2) longevity is a wash
3) performance is pretty much a wash (I'll admit the CDI might be slightly faster)
4) refinement is pretty much a wash

The CDI does indeed get 30-35% better economy but the fuel costs 25% more (even at your more favorable $4 gas vs $5 diesel ratios) - that's pretty close to a wash in my book.

If you are buying new by all means get the CDI but to pay a 10K premium for a used CDI over an equivalent E350 doesn't seem to be a good deal IMHO.

So why woud you not get the diesel? What makes the gasser a better bargain? You will take a much larger hit on resale than new.

Please show figures which show that longevity is a wash, I don't believe a gas mercedes will last as long as a diesel mercedes.

#2 12-22-2008, 08:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by husk

So why woud you not get the diesel? What makes the gasser a better bargain? You will take a much larger hit on resale than new.

Please show figures which show that longevity is a wash, I don't believe a gas mercedes will last as long as a diesel mercedes.

Please show figures to show that a gas MB will not last as long as a Diesel MB.

I fully expect my 119 to outlast the vehicle that is built around it. Neither I nor any indie that I've used has ever seen a 119 in need of a rebuild. Furthermore, the M103 and M104 will run every bit as long as any Diesel of the same era.

Not trying to pick a fight, just saying that they are both great cars!

husk · #3 12-22-2008, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by mrhills0146

Please show figures to show that a gas MB will not last as long as a Diesel MB.

I fully expect my 119 to outlast the vehicle that is built around it. Neither I nor any indie that I've used has ever seen a 119 in need of a rebuild. Furthermore, the M103 and M104 will run every bit as long as any Diesel of the same era.

Not trying to pick a fight, just saying that they are both great cars!

The poster earlier stated that durability was a wash, I would like to see where these numbers come from.

Diesels have less moving parts, fewer things to go wrong, fewer adjustments, and are throttled off air. Granted the new ones are way more complicated, but the premise is the same.

Diesels use stronger components because of the higher compression ratio's they are designed for durability. Gassers might be durable, but not as durable as a diesel. Please show me what specific components on a Mercedes gas vehicle lead you to believe that the durability is on par with a diesel motor.

The M104 will not run as long as a 606, (I own 2 606's and a M104) the head gasket issues are a major problem with these motors.

DieselAddict · #4 12-22-2008, 07:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TimFreeh

Like Marty said there are always going to be a couple of people that can't be convinced.....

To sum up the positions of the short sighted gasser converts

1) maintenance is a wash
2) longevity is a wash
3) performance is pretty much a wash (I'll admit the CDI might be slightly faster)
4) refinement is pretty much a wash

The CDI does indeed get 30-35% better economy but the fuel costs 25% more (even at your more favorable $4 gas vs $5 diesel ratios) - that's pretty close to a wash in my book.

If you are buying new by all means get the CDI but to pay a 10K premium for a used CDI over an equivalent E350 doesn't seem to be a good deal IMHO.

What is there to be convinced about? I don't see any disagreement between us.

Skid Row Joe · #5 12-23-2008, 12:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DieselAddict

A lot of you seem pretty short-sighted. Sure, maybe right now the fuel price differential doesn't justify purchasing a diesel (all other reasons aside). But what about when gas is $4 a gallon like it was a few months ago? Even if diesel costs $5, it's still worth it. You need to look at the price differential as a percentage rather than an absolute difference. The CDI gets about 35% better fuel economy than the its gasoline sibling and that's what counts. Where else can you get a full-size sedan that has the torque of a big V8 and the economy of a 4 banger? (I'm waiting for an answer to this too!)I don't know of any other. Having said that, I admit that if you don't need the huge torque and prefer a wider power band and don't care much about mileage, the gasoline versions look pretty attractive.

Absolutely correct. Some are unable to grasp this.

The diesel will always win the economy game over time for overall utility and value.......always have too.

Anyone that says fuel economy doesn't matter, has a very short memory. Nothing new there either.

nhdoc · #6 12-23-2008, 07:22 AM

I knew that my post would stir up a hornet's nest on this board

What I will concede is that the decision to go diesel is not based upon practicality today but still is appealing for other reasons. There is no economic reason to choose a used CDI over its used gas counterpart, period. The cars are basically identical otherwise and to argue the CDI is somehow less complex than the gas engine is truly showing one's ignorance of the CDI design. You could say that you might save 10% overall on fuel costs but for the average (15K miles per year) driver that would amount to about $10-$20 a month - hardly something that should come into the equation for buying a Mercedes-Benz.

Add to this argument the present somewhat untested emissions controls of the current diesel models (4 separate systems which all have to work perfectly) and the diesel is easily more finicky and complex that the gas model. This makes the choice of buying a new diesel over a new gasser less of a "no brainer" too.

People think I am some newbie to the diesel world because of my recent posts critical of the practicality of owning one. I learned to drive on a '74 240D in the late 70s and have been an advocate of diesels since then, but today, conditions have changed and unless you are willing to admit that *maybe* the decision to go diesel is impractical you are probably just fooling yourself.

OK, here's my last thoughts on this subject. My reason for continuing to drive a diesel is not because of economy, longevity or ease of maintenance. It is because in the early 1970s when there were gas lines at every station the truck stops always had plenty of diesel. My dad said "there will always be diesel because the military and commerce depends on it - if trucks can't get to the stores the whole economy implodes". That still holds true today. In fact, last summer when the refineries were having their problems meeting demands in the south for gas there was always diesel available. So, I guess I can admit there is one practical reason for owning a diesel powered car - in the event of another gas shortage I think the odds are pretty good that diesel will still be plentiful. That's my reason for owning one - it is the peace of mind of knowing I am not 100% dependent on gasoline. Not the greatest reason in the world but a good one for me.

husk · #7 12-23-2008, 10:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhdoc

I knew that my post would stir up a hornet's nest on this board

What I will concede is that the decision to go diesel is not based upon practicality today but still is appealing for other reasons. There is no economic reason to choose a used CDI over its used gas counterpart, period. The cars are basically identical otherwise and to argue the CDI is somehow less complex than the gas engine is truly showing one's ignorance of the CDI design. You could say that you might save 10% overall on fuel costs but for the average (15K miles per year) driver that would amount to about $10-$20 a month - hardly something that should come into the equation for buying a Mercedes-Benz.

Add to this argument the present somewhat untested emissions controls of the current diesel models (4 separate systems which all have to work perfectly) and the diesel is easily more finicky and complex that the gas model. This makes the choice of buying a new diesel over a new gasser less of a "no brainer" too.

People who buy the diesel variants usually drive more than those who buy the gas variants. The untested emission control systems is not that complicated. There is little that can go wrong.

You can run your 606 without a battery for thousands of miles, try that on a gas car.

TimFreeh · #8 12-23-2008, 11:01 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by husk

The untested emission control systems is not that complicated. There is little that can go wrong.

You can run your 606 without a battery for thousands of miles, try that on a gas car.

I wonder if the engineers in 1986 thought the same thing about that new fangled "trap-oxidizer" they decided to use in the USA for the OM603 engine? That one worked out very well don't you think? And I've got news for you the Bluetec system is about 3 orders of magnitude more complex than than any of their earlier attempts at catalyst systems.

As far as the OM606 claim goes... I don't think so. I've pulled the fuse for the ECM on my 98 E300D when the engine is running - it shuts down instantly and won't re-start until the fuse is replaced.

Bio300TDTdriver · #9 12-23-2008, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by husk

People who buy the diesel variants usually drive more than those who buy the gas variants. The untested emission control systems is not that complicated. There is little that can go wrong.

Well up until you typed that, you had a fairly weak argument. Now you just aren't making sense at all. You actually believe that little can go wrong with the new diesel emissions systems. Think EGR to the power of 4 or 5.

DieselAddict · #10 12-23-2008, 12:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by nhdoc

I knew that my post would stir up a hornet's nest on this board

What I will concede is that the decision to go diesel is not based upon practicality today but still is appealing for other reasons. There is no economic reason to choose a used CDI over its used gas counterpart, period. The cars are basically identical otherwise and to argue the CDI is somehow less complex than the gas engine is truly showing one's ignorance of the CDI design. You could say that you might save 10% overall on fuel costs but for the average (15K miles per year) driver that would amount to about $10-$20 a month - hardly something that should come into the equation for buying a Mercedes-Benz.

Add to this argument the present somewhat untested emissions controls of the current diesel models (4 separate systems which all have to work perfectly) and the diesel is easily more finicky and complex that the gas model. This makes the choice of buying a new diesel over a new gasser less of a "no brainer" too.

People think I am some newbie to the diesel world because of my recent posts critical of the practicality of owning one. I learned to drive on a '74 240D in the late 70s and have been an advocate of diesels since then, but today, conditions have changed and unless you are willing to admit that *maybe* the decision to go diesel is impractical you are probably just fooling yourself.

OK, here's my last thoughts on this subject. My reason for continuing to drive a diesel is not because of economy, longevity or ease of maintenance. It is because in the early 1970s when there were gas lines at every station the truck stops always had plenty of diesel. My dad said "there will always be diesel because the military and commerce depends on it - if trucks can't get to the stores the whole economy implodes". That still holds true today. In fact, last summer when the refineries were having their problems meeting demands in the south for gas there was always diesel available. So, I guess I can admit there is one practical reason for owning a diesel powered car - in the event of another gas shortage I think the odds are pretty good that diesel will still be plentiful. That's my reason for owning one - it is the peace of mind of knowing I am not 100% dependent on gasoline. Not the greatest reason in the world but a good one for me.

Traitor!

Personally, I think the disagreements here are minor and both sides have some truth to offer. I feel you underestimate the economy advantage that diesels have, but I understand that if you don't drive much the advantage becomes small, especially if you pay a big premium for a used diesel in which case it may become non-existent. Certainly the possible shortage of gasoline is another good reason to keep a diesel, as is the ability to run non-petroleum fuels in it (unless it's a Bluetec perhaps). Do understand that some of us also like the diesel clatter, so we may be a bit biased.

Matt L · #11 12-22-2008, 07:18 PM

What is the new price of a E320 CDI v. the E350? I know that the 606 didn't cost much (any?) more than the inline 6 gas engine for my '96.

DieselAddict · #12 12-22-2008, 08:53 PM

Probably in the old days diesels were more durable, but I don't think that's the case today. Gas engines now last a lot longer than they used to, probably about the same as diesels, but I don't really have any data to go by. I just know nowadays 200K miles is nothing for just about any engine.

DieselAddict · #13 12-22-2008, 08:56 PM

To the OP, not many people on this board have experience with a CDI. I suggest visiting this forum:
http://www.mbworld.org/forums/index.php

Also www.edmunds.com has useful consumer reviews. Overall I've read good things about these cars and it seems that the quality has improved since the 90's.

Hatterasguy · #14 12-22-2008, 09:18 PM

Once gas engines went to fuel injection the diesels lost a lot of advantages.

We are not talking about SBC's, Mercedes makes such good (and expensive!!!

) gas engines that with some oil changes and a valve job once in awhile...well you will grow tired of the car before you are able to wear out the bottom end. After 300k or so miles the rest of the car is pretty clapped out anyway unless you have been replacing a lot of stuff along the way. Any MB engine gas or diesel will easly cover 300k miles.

I have seen high mileage examples of each, and if taken care of they hold up. Thats why a M119 crate motor cost's $20k...quality isn't cheap.

DieselAddict · #15 12-22-2008, 11:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hatterasguy

Once gas engines went to fuel injection the diesels lost a lot of advantages.

We are not talking about SBC's, Mercedes makes such good (and expensive!!!

) gas engines that with some oil changes and a valve job once in awhile

The valve job might still be a gasoline engine's weakness. It seems that diesel engines don't need it, at least not as often. Gas engines have been fuel injected for decades. I don't see what that has taken away from diesel engines.