considering a good used late model GLK of E class - Page 2 - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

t walgamuth · #16 09-04-2017, 04:05 PM

How much is that rated to tow?

engatwork · #17 09-04-2017, 04:30 PM

Quick Google search says 3500#.

davidmash · #18 09-04-2017, 08:43 PM

Ms Mash has a '13 GLK 350, Polar White, beige leather, pano 2WD, no GPS.

We have had it for 2 yrs now. She loves it. Rides very smooth. We took it to Taos and avg about 24mpg with a roof box. So far no issues. About to turn 40k.

engatwork · #19 11-04-2017, 03:47 PM

Rolled through 80k miles this past weekend.

davidmash · #20 11-05-2017, 05:42 PM

Ours is at about 36k

engatwork · #21 06-04-2018, 08:51 PM

Hit the 100k mile mark the past couple of weeks and I'll say MB did a good job in regards to intake manifold removal on this engine. It was easier to change plugs in than the previous v6 with the twin plug set up.

It continues to be a pleasure to drive.

pawoSD · #22 07-29-2018, 08:04 PM

I recently joined the GLK owners club. Picked up a 2015 GLK250 Bluetec with 68k on it. Black exterior, Black ash trim with light seats interior (tex). Pano roof, no navigation or driving aids. So much different from the 420SEL I was driving, it was finally time for something newer, capable in winter, and not draining $85 a week in gas. Mine is 4matic (as all 250's are). The torque of the OM651 is nearly enough to cause wheel spin on all 4 wheels in the right situations.

Also I drive like I stole it and have yet to see less than 28mpg, and on steady drives of 70-80mph I can get nearly 36 with the A/C on! Its no slouch either, 0-60 is delivered in torque filled quick bursts in about 7 seconds.

TimFreeh · #23 07-31-2018, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pawoSD

I recently joined the GLK owners club. Picked up a 2015 GLK250 Bluetec with 68k on it. Black exterior, Black walnut with light seats interior (tex). Pano roof, no navigation or driving aids. So much different from the 420SEL I was driving, it was finally time for something newer, capable in winter, and not draining $85 a week in gas. Mine is 4matic (as all 250's are). The torque of the OM651 is nearly enough to cause wheel spin on all 4 wheels in the right situations.

Also I drive like I stole it and have yet to see less than 28mpg, and on steady drives of 70-80mph I can get nearly 36 with the A/C on! Its no slouch either, 0-60 is delivered in torque filled quick bursts in about 7 seconds.

I'm just astonished more people didn't buy OM651 powered Mercedes vehicles when they were available.

The level of power, refinement and efficiency are really extraordinary but with the VW issues its pretty much killed all desires for people on North American to purchase Diesel products from any manufacturer.

I'd been waiting for years and years for Mercedes to bring some smaller displacement Mercedes diesels back to the USA and when the GLK250 became available in 2013 I got one as soon as I could get my hands on one.

It's been the best new car I've ever purchased, liked the engine so much I bought a 2014 E class with the same engine. Planing on maintaining them to a high standard and not buying any more cars for another couple of decades.

I've taken our GLK on two cross-country trips and it returns mid to high 30's on the highway at 70-75MPH, the E250 with a lower wind profile is in the low to mid 40's at the same speeds.

The torque from the 2.1 liter engine is just hard to understand, I've got lots of seat time driving OM615 powered 220D's in the 1980's and I still shake my head every time I'm climbing a 6,000 foot mountain at 70MPH in 7th gear at 1700RPM. I keep thinking of the times I did similar climbs in the 220D in 3rd gear, wide open throttle going 50 MPH with black smoke pouring out the back as cars/pickups wizzed by me at 75MPH.

We've come a long way in 40 years.

The twin sequential turbo-charger setup is very cleaver and the high pressure injection system actually uses multiple injections events per combustion cycle, which I think is why they are able to get 370 lb/ft of torque out of 2.1 liters of engine displacement.

I now have 115K miles of ownership experience with the OM651 and the only issue I've had was a faulty intercooler hose going from the high-pressure turbo to the intercooler. It's a relatively soft rubber hose and it developed a split on the seam of the hose, very hard to see because under pressure the hose separated but when de-pressurized the seam went back into place and it looked like a good hose. From a visual inspection standpoint it certainly didn't look like a bad hose and since there was no liquid in the hose you couldn't see anything dripping.

Agree completely about your observations about the solidity of the GLK, it seems at least as substantial than any W123/W126 I've ever driven.

One other observation, the run-flats are not really optimal. When I replaced the tires on our GLK I opted out of the run-flat scheme and there was a substantial improvement in ride comfort and steering response. If you're OK with a couple of cans of fix-o-flat as the spare tire solution I'd recommend the switch away from run-flats.

engatwork · #24 08-06-2022, 07:22 AM

Other than routine maintenance - brakes, filters, oil changes, etc..... everything on the front of the engine that is operated by the serpentine belt has now been replaced. The a/c compressor clutch gap got excessive and quit pulling in about a month ago and the alternator had front to back shaft movement. Everything new went in except the alternator. I purchased a used one. The head lights were changed the same time the compressor with Depo lights. The plastic on the old ones were showing their age. The cam magnets on bank 2 were replaced because of a fault code on them.

It has been a really good, reliable vehicle.

barry12345 · #25 08-06-2022, 09:48 AM

Nice when any car proves reliable over time.