For the 2002 ML320, the fuel economy is listed as 15/19, while for all the previous models, it was 17/21. I pointed this out to a salesman at the dealer, and he looked at me as if I was from Mars (obviously he hadn't even noticed it).

My question - The engine is the same, the transmission is the same, then why is the 2002 ML listed with lower economy figures? Probably the 2002 and previous model years owners could resolve this by posting the mileage that they ACTUALLY get out of their MLs.