Thanks blackmercedes!

I live in Silicon Valley, and the sight of thousands of SUV's (with a single driver in each of them) stuck in terrible traffic jams makes me feel really bad for the way human beings wastefully consume our Earth's precious resources.

Eric

Not a very popular outlook lately, it seems. Be prepared for lots of flaming on this board. Plenty of SUV owners around...

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

As was said before, just because you have 4 cylinders doesn't mean that you are more enviroment friendly or get better mileage.

Look to Honda. All their cars right now are LEV, with the Accords and Civics being ULEV. Also as mentioned, the Insight is SULEV and gets excellent gas mileage.

__________________
1985 500SEL 124k miles
2001 Honda Civic EX

Generally speaking, four bangers are smaller displacement, get better mileage, and are less expensive in the long run to maintain. The Honda Civic is a four cylinder, and the Accord four is more economical than it's six variant.

The feeling I got from the original post is that the person is looking for some sort of compromise. He wishes Mercedes goodness, but in the most economical and environmentally friendly version. Even the new M112 V-6's in 2.6L format cannot match the mileage of the M111 equipped W202 cars. While the M112 engine is a lower emission engine, it consumes more fuel therefore creating more greenhouse gases. It's a compromise decision.

Compared to ANY SUV bigger than a CRV, a Mercedes four cylinder is a miserly automobile indeed. Even the six, and some V-8's are economical compared to a full sized SUV.

Doing the math on carrying capacity? Hhhmm. A C230 driving in city traffic get's about 9.0-9.5L/100km's in "normal" urban driving. My neighbour's Expedition gets about 20L/100km's in city driving when taking it easy. We could drive TWO C230's carrying 8-10 people and use LESS fuel than the Expedition. And most of the time, that behemoth is carrying one person, and it's capacity is wasted. If you need to carry 7 people ALL the time, it might make sense. Using two highly efficient cars allows greater flexibility. We can leave one at home when we don't need it.

A Prius is a good choice, but does not work well for enthusiast drivers. It handles poorly, and lacks many of the safety features of the Mercedes. It is not capable of effortlessly climbing a steep mountain pass or passing a long line of cars. A Mercedes four-cylinder car can do those things. However, for an urban-only car, a Prius would be an excellent choice.

As I said before, just dare to mention that you would actually make a conscious decision to consume less fuel, and be prepared to be slammed.

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

If anyone is really concerned with the quality of the air and/or the eventual depletion of the world's oil resources(won't be very long to go), why don't you go out and get yourself a solar powered car and if there isn't one ready yet, get this started by forming some company to start it going before we all languish in poverty, unemployment and economic disaster? This is really magic, the last couple of days I was racing down the freeway(in my Toyota 2.2ltr) with a bunch of University sponsored solar powered cars in a challenge race here fully escorted by back up cars, news cars, police on motorbikes and hazard-warning vehicles. They can go pretty fast like close to 60kph and maybe more like 80kph. However, they have to be extremely light, one person car with lots of roof space for the very expensive quick converter solar panels(they look like UFOs). What more can you ask? No need for fossil fuels, no emmissions, very quiet without exhausts, just keep it under the sun thats all! Problem is they cannot go up steeper slopes and may need charging up overnight and its got to be sunny for it to work. Sorry, you cannot win all the time! I drive a Euro C180 and the gas mileage is fantastic. The 4cyl of the 1994 model sounds a bit "agricultural" , but the later upgrades like the 1998 is very smooth and quieter. Maybe mine needs an overhaul its 191,000kms.

Some people really like to take simple things into an extreme.

The poor guy asked a simple question on which M.B. would serve best for his interest on the environment. I know, the 4 cylinder issue is a total misconception, but fuel economy (although an important factor on polution) is not the ONLY issue on being eco-friendly.

That is why in Europe car manufactures are now required to print the car's polution factor along with its fuel economy.

Certainly an S600 V-12 is not as green-friendly as a C180, BUT a new technology C320 V6 is certainly less poluting than an older tech 230 (W123) 4-cylinder.

Just my 2 cents...

__________________
A. Rosich
CL 500, 1998
S 500 L, 1998
E 320 T, 1995 [Sadly sold ]

I've asked three separate Toyota service departments and no one can tell me the life expectancy of a Prius battery pack. Admittedly my purpose is to find out how it affects cost of ownership more than to find out what a dead battery pack means to the environment.

Sixto
91 300SE
87 300SDL
83 300SD

"SUV's with 4L+ engines should completely disappear from this earth IMHO "

An automaker whose biggest engine is 3.5L will be very glad to hear this.

But this is not likely going to happen IMHO. If my family can only keep one car, my Ford Explorer will be the one. Yes, my Mercedes 400E is a nice car, I personally like it the most, but to be realistic, my family can live without it, but without our SUV, my family has to sadly change our life style.

I will be missing all its conveniences, I can no longer easily do home DIY project, I have to rent a truck for fishing trips, I have to rent a truck to tow tent trail, owning boat will be impossible. when it snows heavily, I can no longer drive without shoveling my driveway in the early morning, I will worry about my wife being stuck everytime snowstorm comes. I need a real truck, I need a truck with 4WD, with at least 4L engine and 5000 lb towing capacity, it should take the abuse, not an unibody FWD platform Honda pilot that can tow only 3000 lb, which is the same as my last Volvo.

And most of all, I can not afford to own 3 vehicles, it will be costly if we use 2 cars as daily drive and park the SUV at home, only use it when absolutely necessary.

__________________
99 BMW 540i 6-speed 110K Km
03 SAAB 9-5 wagon 80K Km
92 400E (Sold) 245K km
Still missing the days with the Benz, it kept me busy.

The chemicals and heavy metals used to manufacture solar cells and the storage batteries in hybrid cars makes gasoline and diesel look like mother's milk.

__________________
Even a broken clock is right twice a day.

'84 380SE
'66 MGB Roadster
'85 Mazda RX7
'91 Chevy P/U

Rato brings up a great point. There is NO perfect solution.

Todays cars are SO much more efficient and environmentally friendly than those of 15 or 20 years ago it's unreal. It was not that long ago that carburetors and extra weight made for MUCH dirtier and more fuel hungry cars. 20 MPG was a really economical car unless it was very small. NOW our moderate sized SUV's, such as my wifes 4Runner get 20MPG. Nowdays 20MPG is almost considered a fuel hog. The emmissions from this car are a small percentage of those emmitted from a similar vehicle of 20 years ago.

We have taken great strides in fuel efficiency and emmissions control. But, there are laws of physics that prevent drastic improvements without moving to newer technology. That technology is coming, just be patient.

In the meantime, let's not consider someone the AntiChrist because they choose to spend the extra money to own and operate a larger vehicle. This is America where we all have the right to do what we please as long as it is legal.

Have a great day,

"I live in Silicon Valley, and the sight of thousands of SUV's (with a single driver in each of them) stuck in terrible traffic jams makes me feel really bad for the way human beings wastefully consume our Earth's precious resources. "

One of the moderators should probably move this thread to a different forum, but as long as it's here...

The key in the above statement is what you relegated to parentheses. When this country gets serious about resource conservation, mass transit will become the more attractive alternative. Trying to force folks into driving in jammed up traffic every day in a vehicle in which they feel unsafe in a mishap is just not going to happen on a scale to mean anything.

I too hate seeing all those SUVs, because I'm in a car, and I can't see around the $&%#%' s. I retaliate once every couple of weeks or so by driving my 5.7l carbureted '83 class-C motorhome into work. In that I see just fine, and everyone else can fret.

Steve