# E250 BT versus 535d comparo. E250 is a joke



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

E250 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-mercedes-benz-e250-bluetec-4matic-test-review



> PRICE AS TESTED: $64,245 (base price: $54,825)
> 
> C/D TEST RESULTS:
> *Zero to 60 mph: 7.8 sec
> ...


535d http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-bmw-535d-diesel-test-review



> PRICE AS TESTED: $66,425 (base price: $57,525)
> 
> C/D TEST RESULTS:
> *Zero to 60 mph: 5.6 sec*
> ...


Recent comparisons from C&D. The 4 cylinder diesel in such a large car is a huge waste of money. The 535d is faster, more powerful, about the same price, brakes better, and above all, more economical than the 4 cylinder.

:thumbup:


----------



## tonyspumoni (May 23, 2010)

wow. thanks for consolidating that info. wish we could get the M550d here 


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

Joke?

E-class cars are well known for their thorough design and thoughtful features that go well beyond simple comparisons.

According to the BMW website, a 535d gets an EPA rating of 26/38 mpg while the E250 (non-4wd) gets 28/45. The 4-matic E250 BTW gets 27/42 mpg not 24/38.

According to www.zeroto60times.com:
2014 BMW 535d 0-60 mph 5.4 Quarter Mile 14.0
2014 Mercedes E250 BlueTec Diesel 0-60 mph 7.0 Quarter Mile 15.1

Similarly equipped with leather, heated seats/steering wheel, HK stereo, sport/M suspension, and premium 1 package (Mercedes), a 535d lists out at $63,050 while the E250 Bluetec is $59,225 and you get the rear-view camera, collision prevention/attention assist, as well as Sirius/XM as part of the deal. With the BMW you get service for 4 years/50,000 miles.

I can probably get the Merc at $200 over invoice. Not so likely for the 535d. The 328d is more likely the cheap alternative to the E250.

I wonder what the E-class feels like compared to the newly numbed and bloated-look 5 series. As far as 0-60 times, they are for stop light racers, so the 2.1 liter may actually do better at full load/avoiding carbon buildup in real life driving, which might not be as aggressive as C/D tests them. It remains to be seen whether BMW has solved this issue, which doesn't seem to plague Mercedes.

We shall see who gets the last laugh in the sales numbers. Its probably a matter of preference at what price one is willing to pay.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

Pierre Louis said:


> According to the BMW website, a 535d gets an EPA rating of 26/38 mpg while the E250 (non-4wd) gets 28/45. The 4-matic E250 BTW gets 27/42 mpg not 24/38.


EPA ratings don't mean anything if it can't reproduce them. The BMW is coming much closer to the EPA ratings than the E250 for C&D



> Similarly equipped with leather, heated seats/steering wheel, HK stereo, sport/M suspension, and premium 1 package (Mercedes), a 535d lists out at $63,050 while the E250 Bluetec is $59,225 and you get the rear-view camera, collision prevention/attention assist, as well as Sirius/XM as part of the deal. With the BMW you get service for 4 years/50,000 miles.
> 
> I can probably get the Merc at $200 over invoice. Not so likely for the 535d. The 328d is more likely the cheap alternative to the E250.


You can get a 5 series for invoice or under invoice (BMW loyalty.)

The fact that Mercedes' diesel maintenance is overpriced makes the BMW a better buy. Whatever you "save" is wiped out by how overpriced diesel service costs.

My brother paid $3,100 for the 50k mile pre-paid service on his GLK250. AudiCare on a A6/Q5/A8/Q7 TDI (up to 45k miles) is only $850.



> We shall see who gets the last laugh in the sales numbers. Its probably a matter of preference at what price one is willing to pay.


http://www.bimmerfest.com/forums/showthread.php?t=742890

If sales were a measure of how good a car was, then the Toyota Camry is the best car in the US. :thumbup:


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

AutoUnion said:


> EPA ratings don't mean anything if it can't reproduce them. The BMW is coming much closer to the EPA ratings than the E250 for C&D
> 
> You can get a 5 series for invoice or under invoice (BMW loyalty.)
> 
> ...


Gee, I thought only the F30 was competing with the Camry for feel with its new electrically assisted steering!

I do my own service on Mercedes, even under warranty, but your point is clear: its more a preference. Erroneous numbers by C/D aside, especially when you compare a 4wd Mercedes to a 2wd BMW in "real life."

It seems the E-class is outselling the 5 series. No surprise.


----------



## GreekboyD (Jan 25, 2012)

I find it hard to believe that the 535d will deliver better mileage than the 4 CYL E250.

I also agree that the 5 series seems a little stale. 535d doesn't interest me at all.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

GreekboyD said:


> I find it hard to believe that the 535d will deliver better mileage than the 4 CYL E250.
> 
> I also agree that the 5 series seems a little stale. 535d doesn't interest me at all.


The invoice price for the E would also be 4-6K lower. The comparison is valid on the basis of power alone, where you get more power at a price.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

Tried to do a price comparo

Kept options about the same. LED headlights, NAV, parking sensors, cameras, leather, heated seats/wheel, AWD

E250 4M









535xd









Invoice (Estimates off Edmunds)

Mercedes: ~$61,XXX
BMW: $63,175

Once you factor in the $3,100 maintenance (50k miles) for the Mercedes, it's basically the exact same price.


----------



## DBV (Sep 21, 2008)

I have test driven the E250 and the BMW 535d extensively and really the prefer the E250. It is very solid, surprising fast and smooth and gets great mpg. I am not sure how C/D only got 30 mpg, as I have been in the low to mid 40's and this is in the colder weather with mostly freeway driving. The BMW 535d did not even come close to that. I was not expecting to be impressed with the E250 as it is a 4 cylinder, but it had plenty of power when you need it. My father did not even think it was a diesel or a 4 cylinder. As, I wrote in another thread, I prefer BMW's, but the 535d feels bloated and floaty on the road. Almost too big compared to the E250. The E250 can be purchased for $10k plus off this month, whereas the 535d can not come close to that price in similarly equipped cars. 

As AutoUnion pointed out, Mercedes maintenance is total rip off though (if you are buying the car). Leasing it is not nearly as bad.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

AutoUnion said:


> Tried to do a price comparo
> 
> Kept options about the same. LED headlights, NAV, parking sensors, cameras, leather, heated seats/wheel, AWD
> 
> ...


No doubt you padded the "entertainment and convenience" as well as the "performance and safety" areas - something most would not order. But I guess you need to prove something. The fact remains, a similarly equipped E250 Bluetec is less expensive, without the pricey options which catapult it into 535d territory without the performance boost. One reason I like BMW is it is somewhat restrained on the cost of options compared to Porsche and Mercedes. Only somewhat. The cost of prepaid maintenance at Mercedes on its diesels IS a joke, IMO.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

Pierre Louis said:


> No doubt you padded the "entertainment and convenience" as well as the "performance and safety" areas - something most would not order. But I guess you need to prove something.


What are you talking about? All I'm getting is that you're arguing for the sake of arguing. *Option for option, on a well-equipped model, they are about the same. * Your theory of a similarly equipped E250 being cheaper is complete BS. The base E250 has no nav, halogens, and vinyl MB-tex. Trying to merely match a base 535d (includes Bi-Xenons, leather, NAV) makes the E250 more expensive. (MSRP).

Entertainment & Convenience

Prem. 1 Pkg (nav, HK audio, sirius, heated seats): $3870
Electric Trunk Closer $560
Keyless-Go: $640
Split-Folding Rear Seats: $440
$115 AC power port: $115

Performance and Safety

4MATIC $2,500 (added this because of my region. The xDrive markup is $2,300)
Park Assist Pkg (surround view cameras + parktronic): $1,290

There is no "padding" of options here. I added the basic packages on the BMW (minus the lines, individual, DHP, lux seating, B&O, night vision, etc).

What kind of E Class owner doesn't order the P1 pkg? Keyless Go, etc? Same with the parking sensors and cameras?

One would have to be a complete cheapskate to not order these simple options.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

DBV said:


> I have test driven the E250 and the BMW 535d extensively and really the prefer the E250. It is very solid, surprising fast and smooth and gets great mpg. I am not sure how C/D only got 30 mpg, as I have been in the low to mid 40's and this is in the colder weather with mostly freeway driving. The BMW 535d did not even come close to that. I was not expecting to be impressed with the E250 as it is a 4 cylinder, but it had plenty of power when you need it. My father did not even think it was a diesel or a 4 cylinder. As, I wrote in another thread, I prefer BMW's, but the 535d feels bloated and floaty on the road. Almost too big compared to the E250. The E250 can be purchased for $10k plus off this month, whereas the 535d can not come close to that price in similarly equipped cars.
> 
> As AutoUnion pointed out, Mercedes maintenance is total rip off though (if you are buying the car). Leasing it is not nearly as bad.


Thanks for the first hand reports!

I wish one of the auto rags would a three-way comparo between the diesel sedans. Maybe even throw in the GS hybrid.

What I'm getting from them is that you seriously can't go wrong with any of them. MB is artificially showing us a lower MSRP by leaving out key features, such as Xenon's, leather, and NAV. All standard on the 535d and A6 TDI.

They're about the same price, unless you want prem. leather, night vision, HUD, etc, then the BMW and Audi get pricey.

- Sent from Galaxy S4


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

Yes, the two cars are equivalent when you option them up to the hilt, but the Mercedes is easier on the wallet when you don't, even if you just order the premium 1 package compared to the BMW, which is what I did, not compare the base prices. You would be lucky to find a fully optioned car on a typical Mercedes lot - from my experience they usually just have the Premium 1 package and a small number of other options. The fully optioned ones are usually special ordered.

And yes, its likely the Mercedes "outclasses" the BMW in unmeasurable ways, including the way it drives. This is not new as BMW's best was always the 3 series while Mercedes' best was the E-class, and that included reliability save for a few exceptions in either case.

Both are close enough to make this a non-argument, which you started by calling the E-class "a joke" which certainly it isn't. Both sedans are too pricey to laugh much about.


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

I looked at an E350 Diesel before I got my 335d.

I just didn't like the way it felt like an "older guy" car and I am nearly 50. 

Plus where I live the E Class Mercedes is like a Honda Accord. I mean they are everywhere.

I'd take an M-Sport 3 or 5 series diesel over the E class any day.

The key here is M-Sport.


----------



## FredoinSF (Nov 29, 2009)

I don't know that I would refer to the E as a joke, but in the land where cylinders are status symbols, it was a bold move for Mercedes Benz to put a 4 cylinder in the E class in the US, especially in light of direct competitive offerings. 
I am not fond of the F10, and while the 535d offers good performance and mileage on paper, I was underwhelmed by its interior and driving feel. It does not feel as a BMW of this category used to feel, maybe it would if more options were checked but it's sad. Honestly, if I were in the market for a German mid size diesel sedan, I'd go for the A6 TDI. It looks better (subjective area, this is my opinion), the interior is beautiful and feels special (also subjective but most will agree to that), and it's priced lower than a 535d with equivalent equipment.


Sent from BimmerApp mobile app


----------



## DBV (Sep 21, 2008)

I would like to see a 3 way comparison too. I am just happy that we have choices in sedan diesels this year. The 328d is another fine choice. Much better than 0 choices last year. 



AutoUnion said:


> Thanks for the first hand reports!
> 
> I wish one of the auto rags would a three-way comparo between the diesel sedans. Maybe even throw in the GS hybrid.
> 
> ...


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

DaveN007 said:


> I looked at an E350 Diesel before I got my 335d.
> 
> I just didn't like the way it felt like an "older guy" car and I am nearly 50.
> 
> ...


I too was underwhelmed by the E350 Bluetec. But around here, F10's are everywhere in comparison.

The revised look of the E250 as well as the more economical engine make it more appealing, especially perhaps with the performance suspension, but I haven't looked at or driven one yet.

The comparison test was done, but on gassers, by C/D and the Audi 6 won, with the Mercedes coming in behind the Cadillac CTS and the BMW F10 was last.


----------



## rmorin49 (Jan 7, 2007)

+1 on the A6. I cross shopped a 528xdrive and chose the A6 2.0T Quattro with Premium Plus. I love the interior and exterior design, some consider the exterior bland, but I like it, understated perhaps but I consider it classy. I easily get 32 mpg on the highway even with 87-89 octane fuel. I bought the Audi Care package for $850. Covers all maintenance for up to 5 years or 45K miles.


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

Pierre Louis said:


> I too was underwhelmed by the E350 Bluetec. But around here, F10's are everywhere in comparison.
> 
> The revised look of the E250 as well as the more economical engine make it more appealing, especially perhaps with the performance suspension, but I haven't looked at or driven one yet.
> 
> The comparison test was done, but on gassers, by C/D and the Audi 6 won, with the Mercedes coming in behind the Cadillac CTS and the BMW F10 was last.


The difference, in my opinion, is the M-Sport package. It makes a huge difference in appearance.

Even with just a small dose of "M" the car is "special". :thumb up:

I see more Teslas where I live than cars like mine.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

DaveN007 said:


> The difference, in my opinion, is the M-Sport package. It makes a huge difference in appearance.
> 
> Even with just a small dose of "M" the car is "special". :thumb up:
> 
> I see more Teslas where I live than cars like mine.


Car and Driver did not like the suspension in the F10 535i xDrive w/M sport at all, saying it was too harsh, giving only the engine/drivetrain high marks. The CTS had the best handling, the Mercedes the best ride, while the Audi the best compromise between ride and handling.


----------



## mason (Jun 8, 2006)

I will pick BMW. I've owned both brands. MB interior and electronics are sub-par compared to BMW. BMW 8-speed transmission beat MB 7-speed too. The only thing MB better is body construction.


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

Pierre Louis said:


> Car and Driver did not like the suspension in the F10 535i xDrive w/M sport at all, saying it was too harsh, giving only the engine/drivetrain high marks. The CTS had the best handling, the Mercedes the best ride, while the Audi the best compromise between ride and handling.


"Too harsh" is obviously subjective, as is "best ride".

I'd rather drive an Accord than an E-class. Might as well completely give up *all* passion and save the money.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

DaveN007 said:


> "Too harsh" is obviously subjective, as is "best ride".
> 
> I'd rather drive an Accord than an E-class. Might as well completely give up *all* passion and save the money.


Some of us with opinions, including I believe Car and Driver, have reasonable experience and thought as well as data/facts to back them up.

I've lived with a 2005 E-class for over 200,000 miles and found it to be a great car, but it wasn't a sports car, so I bought my next car the 335d looking for something different. The engineering details and thought put into the design and execution of the E were worth it to me, and superior to that in the BMW or Honda lineup at the time. While different folks do look at things differently, C/D usually doesn't place Mercedes anywhere near BMW in its ratings, as they are historically big BMW fans. But this time the E as well as the Audi and Cadillac did better.


----------



## DBV (Sep 21, 2008)

That is a hilarious statement. The new E is much better than an Accord - no contest and in my opinion as good of a drive as a 535.



DaveN007 said:


> "Too harsh" is obviously subjective, as is "best ride".
> 
> I'd rather drive an Accord than an E-class. Might as well completely give up *all* passion and save the money.


----------



## 335dFan (Nov 8, 2012)

DaveN007 said:


> "Too harsh" is obviously subjective, as is "best ride".
> 
> I'd rather drive an Accord than an E-class. Might as well completely give up *all* passion and save the money.


Let me give a slightly different take on what DaveN007 said. If one is going to spend a lot of money on a car, and one's value metric is performance, then the E class that he was familiar with was not going to deliver that value metric to him. Ergo, why waste the money if it isn't buying you what you value. That assessment is clearly up to each person's own judgement.

I guess I ought to take a test drive in the newer E-class, the Audis, and the Caddies. I have driven a 535xi loaner in the last couple of months, and for me it was too big and not worth the money. But that was just my own judgement. I rode shotgun in a new Caddie last June, don't recall if it was an ATS or CTS, but it felt nice from the passenger seat.


----------



## GreekboyD (Jan 25, 2012)

Happy335dOwner said:


> Let me give a slightly different take on what DaveN007 said. If one is going to spend a lot of money on a car, and one's value metric is performance, then the E class that he was familiar with was not going to deliver that value metric to him. Ergo, why waste the money if it isn't buying you what you value. That assessment is clearly up to each person's own judgement.
> 
> I guess I ought to take a test drive in the newer E-class, the Audis, and the Caddies. I have driven a 535xi loaner in the last couple of months, and for me it was too big and not worth the money. But that was just my own judgement. I rode shotgun in a new Caddie last June, don't recall if it was an ATS or CTS, but it felt nice from the passenger seat.


Really curious to see what they bring with the ATS-V. My buddy has an ATS and that thing seemed pretty much track ready right out of the showroom.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

DBV said:


> That is a hilarious statement. The new E is much better than an Accord - no contest and in my opinion as good of a drive as a 535.


Yeah, there's a bit of hyperbole. While the E is a bore to drive, it is no BMW/Audi killer. The other Germans have higher quality interiors, better in-car tech (HUD, etc), and COMMAND feels archaic. In terms of power trains, Audi and BMW beat out MB too. The E350 is no match for a 535i or A6 3.0T.

Even a base F10 (while it is no E60 in terms of driving dynamics) is still sportier than the E. Once you get an M Sport model with all the dynamic goodies, it's no competition.

However, what's interesting is that the E63 is a better drive than the M5. I've driven them both. The E63 has a better ride, steering feel, driving dynamics, and performance. It's a shame some of this didn't creep into a regular E.

- Sent from Galaxy S4


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

I've always said that "performance" is properly looked at with the inclusion of other factors. Not just power and acceleration, which as the saying goes, is the first thing that you get used to/take for granted in a car. Its no surprise that carmakers like Porsche when improving a engine family seemed to always improve efficiency along with power, handling, comfort and everything else expected of a true "performance" vehicle. That is one reason the diesels of today are generally appealing. The elephant in the room? The inline 6 of the 535d deserves a better body/chassis that is more like the previous generation 5 (without the Bangle butt of course).


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

Pierre Louis said:


> Some of us with opinions, including I believe Car and Driver, have reasonable experience and thought as well as data/facts to back them up.


This is not something that "facts or data" have anything to do with.

I have owned 7 Mercedes vehicles and I had an E350 Diesel for 2 days and 200 miles on a test drive. (it was a 2011 CPO). I really wanted to like the car. It was a beautiful metallic light-espresso kind of color. Gorgeous.

During about a 3 month period of time I test drove 12 different cars before I picked my 335d for my daily driver. I had a wide range of criteria and _*for me*_ the 335d was better in its price range. I compared new to used. American, Japanese, German. $35k to $75k.
I test drove a Wrangler Rubicon and a Chrysler 300 in the same day. How is THAT for cross shopping? LOL.

Car magazine test are interesting, but I dare say that _*each of us is an individual.*_

I found a new Accord Touring and a CPO E350 to fall into the same category of car *from my perspective*. How I live, where I live and what motivates me is different than many people here I am sure.

Plenty of people like E class Mercedes cars. I don't think that there are any "facts or data or experience" that make their assessment "wrong". That would be strange.


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

Pierre Louis said:


> I've always said that "performance" is properly looked at with the inclusion of other factors. Not just power and acceleration, which as the saying goes, is the first thing that you get used to/take for granted in a car. Its no surprise that carmakers like Porsche when improving a engine family seemed to always improve efficiency along with power, handling, comfort and everything else expected of a true "performance" vehicle. That is one reason the diesels of today are generally appealing. The elephant in the room? The inline 6 of the 535d deserves a better body/chassis that is more like the previous generation 5 (without the Bangle butt of course).


My brother and I picked up his F10 M5 at The Welt and spent the next 1700 miles driving Top Gear's "Best Roads in The World"  as well as 10 laps on the Nurburgring. Lots of Autobahn in between. He owned the previous M5 (also got it when it was first introduced) and I had the chance to drive that car on race tracks in Northern California as well as on the street.

In a word, I find the F10 to be a brilliant car.

As far as "handling" is concerned, however, these cars are all lumbering brutes. Great for the street, but we shouldn't get carried away. They are not sports cars. My brother and I did a fun little demonstration when his car was delivered to the US to show that his M5 was, in fact, quicker around Laguna Seca than a Tesla Model S. (Long story)

Despite the M5's 230 HP advantage and DOUBLE the torque, watch as he is unable to get away from me in a lighter weight "actual sports car". (My Porsche) We easily posted times faster than what the Tesla test drivers were able to post, by the way.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

The OP subject is the new E vs the new 5, in their diesel offerings. Not whether a 335d is the preferred choice, a subject we seem to agree on. C/D says the A6 is the better car so you might want to argue with them.

I too would enjoy an F10 M5, perhaps better than many other cars. It would be, however, a step backward for me as its fuel economy is only marginal and its cost not very appealing. Nothing wrong with a Honda Accord, but I am spoiled to more of what Audi/BMW/Mercedes/Jaguar/Porsche are trying to sell so the Accord wouldn't spend much time w/me before I wanted something else/better.


----------



## gkr778 (Feb 8, 2013)

AutoUnion said:


> The base E250 has no nav, *halogens,* and vinyl MB-tex. Trying to merely match a base 535d (includes Bi-Xenons, leather, NAV) makes the E250 more expensive.


Base E250 uses LED for low (dipped) beam headlamps; halogen bulbs for high beam. The $1500 Lighting Package adds LED high beams, LED turn signal lamps, active curve illumination, and adaptive high beam assist.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

gkr778 said:


> Base E250 uses LED for low (dipped) beam headlamps; halogen bulbs for high beam. The $1500 Lighting Package adds LED high beams, LED turn signal lamps, active curve illumination, and adaptive high beam assist.


So they're using LED reflectors? That's just pathetic.

- Sent from Galaxy S4


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

AutoUnion said:


> So they're using LED reflectors? That's just pathetic.
> 
> - Sent from Galaxy S4


I suppose to keep the same look as the cars with halogen reflectors.

Its interesting that Xenons are not offered. From the online brochure:



> Industry-leading lighting.
> Standard LED headlamps generate light that's closer to natural daylight than halogen or even Bi-Xenon lamps. Active full-LED headlamps, another Mercedes-Benz first, are optional. Their Active Curve Illumination and Adaptive Highbeam Assist continuously vary the beam pattern to maximize illumination of corners and straightaways, without creating glare for other drivers. LED technology also improves the effectiveness of the Daytime Running Lamps, turn signals, brake lamps and tail lamps.


----------



## quasimodem (Nov 9, 2011)

Pierre Louis said:


> I suppose to keep the same look as the cars with halogen reflectors.
> 
> Its interesting that Xenons are not offered. From the online brochure:


LEDs are quite advanced now. They use less energy than HID/Xenon, are getting near the same brightness, don't get so hot, and are cheaper.


----------



## AutoUnion (Apr 11, 2005)

Pierre Louis said:


> I suppose to keep the same look as the cars with halogen reflectors.
> 
> Its interesting that Xenons are not offered. From the online brochure:


It's also interesting that they actually took the time to make two diff't LED headlights. Why not just offer Bi-Xenons base and LED upgrade, like everyone else these days (BMW/Audi/Lexus, etc)

The reflectors look terrible on a luxury car. I took a drive thru my local Mercedes lot just now. Out of the ~80 Es they had, *five* had the optional lighting pkg. 3 of those were $100k+ E63 AMGs, 1 was an E550, and 1 was an E350 wagon.


----------



## Pierre Louis (Oct 23, 2011)

AutoUnion said:


> It's also interesting that they actually took the time to make two diff't LED headlights. Why not just offer Bi-Xenons base and LED upgrade, like everyone else these days (BMW/Audi/Lexus, etc)
> 
> The reflectors look terrible on a luxury car. I took a drive thru my local Mercedes lot just now. Out of the ~80 Es they had, *five* had the optional lighting pkg. 3 of those were $100k+ E63 AMGs, 1 was an E550, and 1 was an E350 wagon.


I ordered my 2005 E320 CDI w/Xenons and they were great. The high beam, I think, was still Halogen but seemed to light up everything really well. This may have been due to the design of the reflector, I don't know. I also was under the impression that the Xenons and the Senso-tronic brakes had a higher voltage system for them, something like 44 volts. Wonder if this is also true for the LED's. Having standard LED low beams seems to me a good idea.


----------



## UncleJ (May 7, 2006)

Dave it would have been interesting to see how your Porsche performed against the Tesla Roadster at Laguna Seca?


----------



## EdCT (Mar 14, 2002)

AutoUnion said:


> E250 http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-mercedes-benz-e250-bluetec-4matic-test-review
> 
> 535d http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-bmw-535d-diesel-test-review
> 
> ...


Just admit it, you're a fanboy - BMW could probably roll fenders out of crushed kittens and you'd praise them :rofl:


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

UncleJ said:


> Dave it would have been interesting to see how your Porsche performed against the Tesla Roadster at Laguna Seca?


The Roadster isn't quite as quick as the Model S (performance model), and since it is air-cooled it has a bad habit of going into limp mode after a lap or two. Track driving is hard on cars. Zipping around on the street just doesn't put the same levels of stress on a car.

I experienced this first hand at Thunderhill when Tesla brought a couple of cars out and let us drive them. Amazing acceleration. Until it overheated. :roll eyes:

My car gets 7 or 8mpg on the track. It gets 27mpg on the highway. I point this out because that gives me a "range" of 120 miles on the track. Versus 400 miles under ideal conditions. It is therefore completely understandable that a Roadster is pretty much dead after 50-60 miles on the track. 2 or 3 sessions. 

Of course you need to actually get to the track and get home. 

My brother was at Infineon when a guy arrived with his Roadster on a flatbed along with a massive diesel generator. He would put the car on the generator between sessions. It allowed him to run the full day's worth of sessions. Almost. Not exactly as "green" as people think. LOL.

*My *best at Laguna is 3 seconds faster than the record for both the Roadster and Model S.

If those same drivers were in my car the difference would likely be closer to 7-8 seconds, which is massive. I am an "advanced" driver, but not a race car driver. Big difference. 

I do a 1:45 at Laguna. Professional drivers do 1:41's in my car showroom trim.

The 2014 SRT Viper TA has done a 1:33. That is the record for a production car.


----------



## DaveN007 (Oct 4, 2013)

I drive 150 miles to the office at least once a week. During non commute hours it would be perfectly safe to cruise at 100 ( most are doing 80 ) IF people maintained lane discipline. The problem is that they don't. I would get an hour of my life back on each trip. A Valentine One and laser shifters are spoor substitute, but seem a good compromise.


----------



## Snipe656 (Oct 22, 2009)

I used to drive from Humble to Sugar Land daily and was around 110 miles round trip. Back then it would not be uncommon for around half the trip to maintain triple digit speeds. No longer possible these days if I were still doing that commute due to just how many more people live around this city now and how congested it gets.


----------



## UncleJ (May 7, 2006)

In the Bay Area I cannot think of any place that you could safely cruise at 100+ aside from a few stretches of 280 at off hours -- there is just too much congestion here now. I-5 of course is the obvious place, but again even that is getting congested and the pavement has begun to fracture in the right hand lane to the point where it is uncomfortable. Now if our beloved Gov Moonbeam and his merry band of toadies in Sacto would get rid of that stupid train to nowhere in the central valley and use the billions to fix the roads.....but that will never happen I am afraid.


----------



## quasimodem (Nov 9, 2011)

UncleJ said:


> In the Bay Area I cannot think of any place that you could safely cruise at 100+ aside from a few stretches of 280 at off hours -- there is just too much congestion here now. I-5 of course is the obvious place, but again even that is getting congested and the pavement has begun to fracture in the right hand lane to the point where it is uncomfortable. Now if our beloved Gov Moonbeam and his merry band of toadies in Sacto would get rid of that stupid train to nowhere in the central valley and use the billions to fix the roads.....but that will never happen I am afraid.


Yep, and the response to bad roads? Buy SUVs. And the result of buying SUVs -- waste fuel and more pollution.


----------



## A8540TDI (Jan 2, 2011)

I was in Germany a couple of months ago and rented a Volvo S60 with a 4 pot diesel and 6 speed manual. Performance was adequate but not exciting. A couple of times I did see 190kph (approx 118 mph) on the unrestricted Autobahn but acceleration over 160 was lethargic and it needed a lot of road to get to 190. In spite of my lead foot, 32mpg was the average consumption and that included a fair bit of town driving. Wish I'd had the 335d though!


----------



## floydarogers (Oct 11, 2010)

This appeared on the BMWCCA website a couple days ago. FWIW.

https://www.bmwcca.org/node/7203


----------



## kanar200 (Feb 15, 2011)

cool story


----------



## 335dFan (Nov 8, 2012)

floydarogers said:


> This appeared on the BMWCCA website a couple days ago. FWIW.
> 
> https://www.bmwcca.org/node/7203


I'm somewhat happy that driving a very cool diesel is a unique experience. But if drivers would go with an open mind for a test drive on the various diesel options, which unfortunately are still a bit slim here in the USA, we might win some more converts.


----------

