I just recently bought an '05 ML350 and am a bit disappointed in regards to it's fuel economy. If I drive it I get about 12 miles per Gallon, if my wife drives it (she never gets the engine over 2500 RPM) it gets 14 MPG. So I have a range of about 250 miles, which I find pothetic.

I really miss my S320 it used to get 18 MPG and had a range of about 370 miles.

I would love to get some feedback from other owners 320 430's or 500's, what is your expirience?

Thanks,
Sab.

__________________
regards,
Sab.
'07 ML320 CDI (398 ft lbs / 1400 RPM)
'02CL 500
'91 928 GT Supercharged

Probably around 14. We did a 1000 mile trip once and it topped out at 19MPH the best I recall.

I get approx. 15 mpg around the suburbs and 24 mpg on a trip averaging about 70 mph. If I go about 65 mph, I get 25 mpg on a trip. If I go 75-80, the mileage drops to about 22 mpg on a trip. (Wash D.C. to Mich.) Interesting, if I hit strong head winds (in Ohio), the mpg really goes down. Tires are Dunlops, at 33PSI. I heard that they changed the final ratio.

__________________
Paul 1987 300 SDL; 2000 ML; '69 MGB; '68 VW Fastback

I have a 2000 ML 430. It's hard to compare different model years. Mine has a 3.46 rear gear, and I believe yours has a 3.70. Yours is also heavier. However I drove 5000 miles on a trip this summer in the western US across deserts and up and down mountains and averaged 19+. Headwinds seem to kill the mileage on these, however tailwinds seem to really help. I went from 17.3 to 19.6 in just 150 miles with a good tailwind in Montana. It seems to like higher altitudes too as the fuel management system seems to cut the power down! I see you're from Florida at sea level (or below) and no hills, so it's hard to compare, but I would take it to the dealer in any case, because it just doesn't sound right to me!!

__________________
David L

I get around 17 mpg in town. In the summer with the a/c on all the time, it drops down into the 16.xx range. (No commuter stop/and go traffic)

Moderately flat/some hills interstate around 65-70 mpg, I get 24 mpg.

Ozark mountain hilly four-lane, it drops to 22 mpg.

I can always pull a long term average back above 20 mpg on a 60 - 80 mile interstate trip.

George

suburban, about 16; highway, steady 70ish, relativley flat surface, about 22.5, with all time high of 23.5, all on dunlop grandtrek oem tires ( recently replaced by yokahama geolander ht-s g051)

__________________
87 300e (white/black; amg body kit)
88 300ce (red/cream; amg body kit)
93 300ce cabrio (white/blue/blue top)
93 300ce cabrio (black/grey/black top)
98 ml 320 (totaled @ 137,000 miles)
99 clk320 (black/grey/black top)

I get 12 - 14 mpg on the highway, towing a 5,000 lb trailer at 80 mph! '98 ML320, 129K miles. Normal is 17 city, 20 highway, driving 60 on the two lanes and 80 on the Interstate. My wife is not really a light footed driver, and I'm WFO all the time. I'm very surprised the new ones do so much worse. Could it be they get better after they "loosen up" a little?

__________________
Lenny

There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games. --Ernest Hemingway

'10 GL550/'04 BMW 545/'99 BMW 323/'98 ML320/'87 VW GTI (race)

I have a 2001 ML320 and I regularly get 21-22 mpg driving around town. On the highway I get 24 mpg.

You are correct that later model MLs don't get as good mileage as they are heavier. Also a big factor on how well the vehicle will do in the long run is how it is treated for the first 1000 miles. If you gun the engine alot during this period, ultimately engine performance is going to suffer.

We really don't drive it hard, it is not really a car that feels good trying to drive it "sporty". Hearing that little engine rev up trying to move this tank is dreadfull.
I just should have done my research better before buying, I looked at the window sticker and it is rated at 15 city and 18 highway. The small print notes that city average during test drive ranged from 10 to 16 MPG. So I guess my expirience at 12 - 14 MPG is just normal.
I am just simply very disapointed by the huge consumption and little performance. I guess it is better to buy the ML500, at least there will be some power with probably similar fuel economy. The 250 mile range is what really gets me angry, since we have to go and get gas every two to three days.
This car has just been a bad expirience since the very beginning. When I got it it was vibrating horribly and the dealer said that was from sitting too long and it would go away. It sure didn't go away and I had to bring it in again. Then I complained about the gas pedal making strange noises and the dealer stated that's how they are. A week later the gas pedal got stuck in open throttle position. I had it towed back to the dealer. Aparently the pedal assembly was screwed up by initial assembly and is now fixed. Now the car still vibrates a bit and upon close inspection the front tires have developed a "saw tooth" profile, so yet again the car is going to the shop...
I miss my 180000 mile ten year old S320, it never had a problem...
Sorry for the rant...

__________________
regards,
Sab.
'07 ML320 CDI (398 ft lbs / 1400 RPM)
'02CL 500
'91 928 GT Supercharged

The tires on any four wheel drive vehicle need to be rotated about every 5,000 to 6,000 miles. Otherwise you will get the wear pattern you describe. Have them rotated now and you will have no problem. Leave them up front too long, and you will get cupping wear.

Our old 320 can go 300 miles on a tankful, about all my bladder can usually stand. My wife would have no problem in one of the old M-B diesels that goes like 700 miles!

__________________
Lenny

There are only three sports: bullfighting, motor racing and mountaineering; all the rest are merely games. --Ernest Hemingway

'10 GL550/'04 BMW 545/'99 BMW 323/'98 ML320/'87 VW GTI (race)

We get 19-20 around town, 22-24 on the road, and about 12 towing a 5,000 pound trailer.

If you are getting 13, did you forget to remove the trailer?

I wish I gforgot the trailer...
You did not mention your year and model, but from what I am getting in this thread, the 2005 model seems to be a pig.
I wonder what the actual weight difference is.

__________________
regards,
Sab.
'07 ML320 CDI (398 ft lbs / 1400 RPM)
'02CL 500
'91 928 GT Supercharged

Looks like you have plenty of responses, here's mine: '98 ML320 since new, easily 22+ combined city and highway. I've never measured just one or the other.

__________________
Francis E. Abate
Automotive Restoration & Preservation
Sheet metal, trim and upholstery

Seems like the trend is the newer the ML the worst the gas mileage!
I used to have a '98 and like other people reported, i took my 22/23 mpg for granted when i got my '01!
I was in for a surprise, my '01 with the M6 pkg barely gets 18 mpg!

You are right and that is a poor trend and a sad sign for Mercedes. I will not buy another new ML. If it is better to buy the older model it's a scary sign...

__________________
regards,
Sab.
'07 ML320 CDI (398 ft lbs / 1400 RPM)
'02CL 500
'91 928 GT Supercharged