Autocar - Mercedes E250 CDI BlueEfficiency SE

[Merc1]

What is it?

This is the new Mercedes E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency, the big-selling version of the new E-class. It is the one car Mercedes has traditionally relied upon to boost its bottom line. But after more than a decade of niggling quality problems, the E-class’s once-glittering image has become somewhat tarnished.

No surprise, then, that Mercedes is talking up the perceived robustness of the new model – the W212 as it is known internally – describing it has the toughest E-class of all time. It is a bold claim.

Diesel engines traditionally make up 90 per cent of E-class sales in the UK, so it is the 201bhp twin-turbo E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency, the most powerful of the two 2.2-litre four-cylinder turbodiesels in the E-class range, that we test here.

What’s it like?

The Mercedes E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency could never really be described as a performance car. Still, with a 0-62mph time of 8.2sec, it is encouragingly quick off the line and, with a prodigious 368lb ft of torque arriving at just 1600rpm, gathers speed with enthusiasm.

Once the initial rush subsides, the E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency settles into its stride with a less frantic – but still convincing – degree of shove all the way to the 5000rpm red line.

For all this, the E250 CDI’s best work is done while cruising on part throttle. At a constant 75mph, the E250 CDI is barely pulling 2000rpm in fifth gear. And it does this while returning a claimed 47.1mpg in automatic guise which, in turn, provides it with CO2 emissions of 159g/km.

There is, however, a curious weak point in the E250 CDI’s driveline. Mercedes has decided, presumably for cost reasons, to provide all four-cylinder diesel versions of the new E-class with its old five-speed automatic gearbox.

It is an odd move, given the clear focus placed on fuel economy and emissions with the new car. It ultimately fails to operate in quite the same crisp and intuitive fashion as the more modern seven-speed automatic offered on other E-class models.

The Mercedes E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency is a big car, weighing all of 1660kg, but it feels much smaller on challenging roads. It is not quite as agile as the smaller and lighter C-class, but there is not much separating them.

The new E-class also boasts enhanced low-speed manoeuvrability. The variable-ratio steering reduces the amount of lock required around town by almost 15 per cent, and the turning circle has been cut by almost 15cm.

But what about the E-class’s legendary ride? A final appraisal will have to wait until we get to drive the new E-class in the UK, but over the Spanish roads we tested it on there was sufficient evidence to suggest the new suspension, with an extra 5mm of spring travel both front and rear, is at least as cosseting as that of the old model.

The truly impressive thing about the new E-class, though, is the way it isolates its occupants from the outside world. Mercedes has worked hard on aerodynamics and insulation. Indeed, with a drag co-efficient of 0.25 and a specially developed film integrated within the windscreen designed to keep wind buffeting to a minimum, it cruises in a serene and unruffled manner.

The mechanical aspects of the E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency are equally impressive. The engine is barely audible on part-throttle, with typical diesel chatter only evident under hard acceleration.

For those who have spent any time in a recent Mercedes, the dashboard architecture, steering wheel design and general organisation of the secondary controls instantly feel familiar.

Take time to study the individual elements, though, and you discover there is sufficient differentiation to ensure the E-class gets a truly unique interior, even though the materials are not quite to the standard of some rivals.

Access to the rear has been improved by raising the roof line and providing a larger door aperture. The 450-litre boot is also slightly larger than before.
Should I buy one?

It would be difficult not to recommend one. That the new Mercedes E250 CDI SE BlueEfficiency is a tremendously competent car comes as no surprise; for Mercedes to turn out anything less would be a major disappointment.

The true revelation, though, is that it has finally delivered an E-class that is not only fun to drive but also boasts all the apparent solidity you expect of a Mercedes.


Full Story: Autocar - Mercedes E250 CDI BlueEfficiency SE


M

 

[cawimmer430]

Take time to study the individual elements, though, and you discover there is sufficient differentiation to ensure the E-class gets a truly unique interior, even though the materials are not quite to the standard of some rivals.


Oh please.

 

[tennmb]

Good report. Too bad we won't see it here in the USA.

I disagree on the 5-speed. That was a great tranny. The 7-speed has too many quirks. It's never seemed to be a smooth as the 5. And the 5 seems better with the smaller displacement engines.

 

[coolraoul]

I kinda agree. I've practised a lot of these 5 and 7 boxes.
The 7 is incredibly smooth... but every now and then it will "miss" a gear, engaging it quite brutally. Typically, when you let the car ride with no throttle, it will downshift from 2 to 1 with a clonk... Very annoying on my Dad's ML, and no update could really cure that.

However, the ML is known for that jerkiness at slow-speed downshift, maybe it's not the case on other models.

The 5 is not as incredibly smooth, bit slower... but it will never ever make that kind of errors. It's totally harmonious, doesn't have 2-1 issues or things like that.

Overall, I think it's a better box. And I don't see the problem if it has the 5 and not the 7 anyway, I don't think the mpg-benefit are that huge with added gears. 5 is enough unless you drive at 200+ km/h.

The real aim of an auto slushbox is to remain unoticed, so 5 or 7 or 10 speeds... Sounds a bit like marketing to me.

My car has 3 gears... Now that's a little short on high speed. But not that much. It changes to third at around 50km/h, which makes the rpm a bit high at 130km/h, but honestly...

I'm enjoying the noise of the V8 more, it increases the speed sensation which is a good thing, and my car wouldn't be that much more economical with more gears... So 7 or 8 speeds make me laugh.

 

[bmwownage]

Well i guess it's pretty good for fuel consumption if you can do 100km/h at sub 2000 revs.. but then for "smooth", why not just get CVTs? surely smooth! just absolutely feel-less. =D

not a fan of those pics too, the car looks heavy and bland there.

 

[King-B]

Nice car, but the sharp edges of the interior come off a little cold. The materials may be better, but I wouldn't say its better than a 5 series or A6 to look at. And the Jag XF interior kills this!

 

[Gullwing]

I kinda agree. I've practised a lot of these 5 and 7 boxes.
The 7 is incredibly smooth... but every now and then it will "miss" a gear, engaging it quite brutally. Typically, when you let the car ride with no throttle, it will downshift from 2 to 1 with a clonk... Very annoying on my Dad's ML, and no update could really cure that.

There are other "cures" other then software updates. Snap ring replacement and clutch plate replacement...

 

[NarutoRamen]

There are other "cures" other then software updates. Snap ring replacement and clutch plate replacement...

Talkin' like a true MB service tech.

 

[Gullwing]

Talkin' like a true MB service tech.

 

[Untertürkheim]

I kinda agree. I've practised a lot of these 5 and 7 boxes.
The 7 is incredibly smooth... but every now and then it will "miss" a gear, engaging it quite brutally. Typically, when you let the car ride with no throttle, it will downshift from 2 to 1 with a clonk... Very annoying on my Dad's ML, and no update could really cure that.

However, the ML is known for that jerkiness at slow-speed downshift, maybe it's not the case on other models.

The 5 is not as incredibly smooth, bit slower... but it will never ever make that kind of errors. It's totally harmonious, doesn't have 2-1 issues or things like that.

Overall, I think it's a better box. And I don't see the problem if it has the 5 and not the 7 anyway, I don't think the mpg-benefit are that huge with added gears. 5 is enough unless you drive at 200+ km/h.

The real aim of an auto slushbox is to remain unoticed, so 5 or 7 or 10 speeds... Sounds a bit like marketing to me.

My car has 3 gears... Now that's a little short on high speed. But not that much. It changes to third at around 50km/h, which makes the rpm a bit high at 130km/h, but honestly...

I'm enjoying the noise of the V8 more, it increases the speed sensation which is a good thing, and my car wouldn't be that much more economical with more gears... So 7 or 8 speeds make me laugh.

I would beg to differ. On my 560SEC, my RPM is often over 3000 while driving on the freeway, and I would imagine that a 5,6 liter engine with a flat torque curve would benefit from having much lower RPM, perhaps in the 2000 range. In my case, the differential ratio is 2,46 (from what I remember), which is also the final drive ratio. A fifth gear to bring the final drive ratio down to about 2 would make the car much better on the highway without sacrificing drivability.

Likewise, I find the 3,07 final drive ratio on the W126 300SD models sold in the US to be horrible, and something like the 2,46 from the M116/117 models to be more fitting for that diesel.

 

[Gullwing]

My 190E with four speed trans and 3.23 diff runs 4000RPM at 84MPH.
I wish the gearing was different so that it actually used first gear and that the RPM was lower at freeway speed.

 

[NarutoRamen]

My 190E with four speed trans and 3.23 diff runs 4000RPM at 84MPH.
I wish the gearing was different so that it actually used first gear and that the RPM was lower at freeway speed.

That's just like my Audi...but the bad thing is that a little more rpm on my car and I'll be in the turbo range.

 

[coolraoul]

I would beg to differ. On my 560SEC, my RPM is often over 3000 while driving on the freeway, and I would imagine that a 5,6 liter engine with a flat torque curve would benefit from having much lower RPM, perhaps in the 2000 range. In my case, the differential ratio is 2,46 (from what I remember), which is also the final drive ratio. A fifth gear to bring the final drive ratio down to about 2 would make the car much better on the highway without sacrificing drivability.

Likewise, I find the 3,07 final drive ratio on the W126 300SD models sold in the US to be horrible, and something like the 2,46 from the M116/117 models to be more fitting for that diesel.

Yeah, five speeds is just right. 3 or 4 is a bit short.

But I find 7 or 8 speeds to be useless. It's what, 100rpm less in 7th than 6th, and the car always starts in second...

Now that's a thing I never understood: many many MBs are starting in 2nd unless you flatten the throttle.
Why is that? I'd be very interested by any explanation.

 

[Deleted member 182]

Now that's a thing I never understood: many many MBs are starting in 2nd unless you flatten the throttle.
Why is that? I'd be very interested by any explanation.

Might be for better traction. In Volvo V70 the W (as in winter mode) sets the transmission to start with the second gear. It helps a lot during city traffic in snow. Wheels don't spin nearly as much as they would from the first gear up. I bet the issue is even greater when we are talking about RWD which has naturally lower traction in snow than FWD.

 

[Alwing]

Now that's a thing I never understood: many many MBs are starting in 2nd unless you flatten the throttle.
Why is that? I'd be very interested by any explanation.

The reason why some Mercedes cars accelerate from 2nd gear is because it gives a more relaxed, comfortable and smoother off-the-line acceleration for the passengers. The car would build up a steady and almost unnoticeable acceleration off-the-line which gives a 'woosh' kind of feel. A luxury/comfort kind of acceleration, perfect for city driving.
If you put the car in sport mode or full throttle, the first gear will be engaged and the off-the-line acceleration will be more abrupt, responsive, nervous and sudden. Not so relaxing, comfortable and smooth when cruising but gives a better off-the-line start and a sporty acceleration.

 

[coolraoul]

The reason why some Mercedes cars accelerate from 2nd gear is because it gives a more relaxed, comfortable and smoother off-the-line acceleration for the passengers. The car would build up a steady and almost unnoticeable acceleration off-the-line which gives a 'woosh' kind of feel. A luxury/comfort kind of acceleration, perfect for city driving.
If you put the car in sport mode or full throttle, the first gear will be engaged and the off-the-line acceleration will be more abrupt, responsive, nervous and sudden. Not so relaxing, comfortable and smooth when cruising but gives a better off-the-line start and a sporty acceleration.

Yeah that's what i thought too. But it seems a very complicated way of achieving a smooth drive-off.

Wouldn't it be a better solution to have a slighly longer first gear (compromise between urge and smoothness)? 'Cause when you have only four gears, but that the third is not used, you end up with high rpm at cruising speed, for a dubious benefit in terms of comfort when you start.

I thought there might be another explanation, because this one doesn't really convince me. Maybe this also was done for easier trailing with a short first gear?

The trade off seems higher than the benefit for this solution.

Does the 5G start in second? I believe no, unless in Winter mode. The 7G does start in second.

Are the other carmakers also using second-gear start with less-than-6 gearboxes?

 

[Alwing]

Yeah that's what i thought too. But it seems a very complicated way of achieving a smooth drive-off.

Wouldn't it be a better solution to have a slighly longer first gear (compromise between urge and smoothness)? 'Cause when you have only four gears, but that the third is not used, you end up with high rpm at cruising speed, for a dubious benefit in terms of comfort when you start.

I thought there might be another explanation, because this one doesn't really convince me. Maybe this also was done for easier trailing with a short first gear?

The trade off seems higher than the benefit for this solution.

Does the 5G start in second? I believe no, unless in Winter mode. The 7G does start in second.

Are the other carmakers also using second-gear start with less-than-6 gearboxes?

In my opinion it's actually the easier way of achieving a smooth drive especially if you only have an automatic gearbox with only 3 to 4 gears.
You have less room to optimize the gears with the engine power and acceleration.

If you make the first gear a bit longer, then the 2nd, 3rd and 4th gears needs to be adjusted as well so that all the gears in the gearbox are complementary and harmonize with each other. This means that the 2nd, 3rd and 4th gear will be longer, giving a lower rpm when cruising on highway.
However this would give the car a feeling being slow, sluggish concerning acceleration off-the-line and highway overtaking.
And when people buy a car, the performance figures on paper and the overall feel of the car's performance is really something that matters to people even back in the days and presently.

Another reason would be is that the engine back in the old days were all mechanical and not controlled by an ECU.
For some period of time I've owned a 1990 Mercedes-Benz 190E 1.8, manual.
It was a very basic car, almost everything was mechanical even the windows and the car never had let me down once.
A good car but it does not have any punch down low in the rpm. If you are driving and shift the car to 2nd gear or 3rd gear so that the engine only turns slightly below 1500 rpm, the whole car would judder heavily as if it's going to stall.
Then for some time I switched to an 1996 Mercedes-Benz C180, manual. It was quite a difference, the engine was much smoother and more capable. When I accelerated in 2nd gear or 3rd gear below 1500 rpm it was free of judder as if pulling out of the low rpm was no problem at all.
I can't really speak for the larger engined cars back in the days like the SL450 or the 560SEC since I've never driven any of the cars.
But with the same thought in mind, I think that was also the reason why the gearing in the older cars were much shorter than present cars, to prevent the car from stalling by having the engine turning higher rpm's.
Since the engine was controlled mechanically and not electronically by an ECU. Modern engines are more capable turning lower rpm than older engines.

Further we are talking about cars with only 3 to 4 gears meaning we are talking about cars that are at least 20 years old. Aren't almost all cars back in these days have relatively high cruising rpm compared to modern cars. Fuel consumption wasn't really that much of an issue compared to how it is now.

 

[coolraoul]

Well that makes sense for smaller engines, that's right.

But for big ones, I don't think it does.

My car has a 3-gears slushbox, that was replaced some years after by a 4 one (starting in second).

However, the gearbox of my car engages the third at around 50 km/h, not more. And it doesn't feel slow in normal conditions. Only if you are in a real hurry does the gearbox downshift to 2nd.

It means that the car could suffer a real fourth gear with no problem. A gear that would be engaged at around 70 km/h for instance, wouldn't make it a slow pig considering the torque, power and feeling of the car.

Yet the fourth gear of more recent models starts in 2nd, meaning it's no real four-gear IRL. That I don't really understand.

Another thing is that ,back then, the mechanical throttle was much harder to push, and had more course than the current electronical ones. it was easier to dosate, and I never have "brutal" startings when I don't want to, thanks to the ample course and solid feel of the pedal.

So really, on sufficiently powerful models like all the 380, 450, 500 and co, I don't see the point of this second gear start when the gearbox has already quite few gears.

Feels like a spoiled, useless gear to me, that would be much more needed at the other side of the speed range.

Maybe it would 've been too hard to make it reactive enough at higher speed (where you need the gearbox to act fast, on a hill or for an overtaking, while not switching constantly for no apparent reason), while 4 sounds much better than 3 where all manual gearboxes have 5 speeds, despite the fact that it in fact feels like a 3-gears? The softwares were much simpler back then than now, where 7 or 8 speeds are no problem from an electronic/software PoV?

 

[Gullwing]

Does the 5G start in second? I believe no, unless in Winter mode. The 7G does start in second.

5G starts in first or second depending on the W/S C/S switch.
7G starts in first or second depending on the C/S switch.

 

[coolraoul]

Yeah, if I remeber well the 5G starts in 1st unless you put it in Winter mode, whereas the 7G starts in second unless put in sports mode, is that right?