New Mercedes-Benz 4.7 Twin-Turbo V8 and New 3.5 V6

[HighestOfHigh]

Official Details On Mercedes' More Powerful, Efficient V-8, V-6 Engines

As the fuel economy wars take over from the horsepower wars, more and more carmakers are working to deliver the goods while staying green. Power isn't out of the equation, it's just no longer the only element. To that end, Mercedes-Benz has unveiled a pair of new engines to boost both performance and economy, posting gains of 38 horsepower and 24 percent fuel economy in the 3.5-liter V-6.

The V-8 doesn't do too shabby, either, boosting output by 43 horsepower and gaining 22 percent economy. Those increases put the new 3.5-liter V-6 at 306 horsepower/272 pound-feet and the new 4.7-liter twin-turbo V-8 at 435 horsepower/516 pound-feet. The current 3.5-liter V-6 and naturally aspirated 5.5-liter V-8 generate 268- and 382-horsepower, respectively. In hard figures, that means the V-6 will be good for 30.9 mpg, and the V-8 will manage 24.7 mpg. Those numbers are likely EU combined figures, but Mercedes didn't specify in the release. They'll be quick, too, especially the V-8: 442 pound-feet of torque is available from 1,600 rpm and full torque comes on at 1,800 rpm. The V-6 holds its max torque from 3,500-5,250 rpm.

So how does Mercedes get both power and efficiency out of its upgraded engines? Direct injection, for one. The new twin-turbo V-8's forced induction also adds a bump to both performance and economy, while the V-6 sheds its 90-degree layout for a new 60-degree V. Multiple injection and multiple ignition also help improve the thermal efficiency of the engines. But the real trick up Mercedes' sleeve is stop-start.

Unfortunately for Mercedes, U.S. EPA testing doesn't take much advantage of stop-start systems in determining its fuel economy ratings, meaning you may not see a huge jump in official figures despite saving a lot more at the pump. The V-8 is expected to arrive first in the S-Class and CL-Class later this year, and while the V-6 isn't confirmed for any models yet, we'd expect it to show up in the new E-Class pretty quickly, including the sedan, coupe, wagon and cabrio models, as that's one of Mercedes' biggest bread-and-butter badges.

The new mainstream V-8 and V-6 engines join Mercedes' already-announced new M157 AMG 5.5-liter twin-turbo V-8 (pictured), which leverages the same core technologies to deliver a brutal 571 horsepower and 664 pound-feet of torque while still achieving over 22 mpg. It will make its debut in the S63 AMG this year.

- Official Details On Mercedes' More Powerful, Efficient V-8, V-6 Engines - MotorAuthority

 

[Zafiro]

BMW´s V8 TT debuted in X6 back in early 2008, two years doesn´t seem a very long reign.

Its a long time and a engine to compete with 335i is even a longer time. But whats that to argue about, its here now. Better late than never

 

[jackywhatever]

New engine spec! V6 V8

V6: NA, 3499CC, 225kW (300hp) at 6500rpm, 370Nm (273lbft) from 3500-5250rpm
V8: Twin-turbo, 4633CC, 320kW (430hp) at 5250rpm, 700Nm (516lbft) from 1800-3500rpm

the V8 is particularly impressive, better than BMW in terms of torque and horsepower just that it arrived late IMO
no news regarding the V12 though


Mercedes-Benz sets benchmarks: Innovative technology makes V6 and V8 engines economical and fit for the future The World Of Mercedes-Benz /////AMG

 

[Floydian]

The comparison is baseless and invalid. The M3 V8 is a screamer, high-rpm hp generator, not a torque maker. The new Mercedes 4.7L V8 is a turbo for lower revs, low consumption and for effortless torque.

The 4.7L V8 here is going into a luxury sedan, not a sports coupe, torque is what it is designed for and 435hp is more than enough.

Two different engine concepts. The Mercedes engine that most compares to the M3 V8 is the 6.2L AMG V8, and even then torque as well as hp is the emphasis, not reach for the sky, per liter hp.


M

Fuel economy in a 4.7Lt. twinturbo V8. Yeah right What are MB diesels for? Some even have more torque. People who want 'fuel economy' would just buy those.

I compared the M3's engine with it because it is meaningless to do fuel economy in a 4.7Lt Twinturbo V8. It has no point.

As for the 6.2Lt AMG a M3 still is faster round the same track.

 

[Merc1]

Fuel economy in a 4.7Lt. twinturbo V8. Yeah right What are MB diesels for? Some even have more torque. People who want 'fuel economy' would just buy those.

I compared the M3's engine with it because it is meaningless to do fuel economy in a 4.7Lt Twinturbo V8. It has no point.

As for the 6.2Lt AMG a M3 still is faster round the same track.

Fuel economy for its class...genius.

Diesel has nothing to do with this discussion.


M3 is faster around a track, who cares....what does that have to do with the engine concept?

Guy, you're lost.....do you know what you're talking about? Are you paying attention at all?

Downsizing and turbos are the trend now which is what Mercedes is doing. Diesels are still a non-starter in the mainstream U.S. market. Totally irrelevant in regards to the new turbo V8. If everyone wanted a diesel then Mercedes and everyone else wouldn't continue to petrol engines.


M

 

[Floydian]

Fuel economy for its class...genius.

Diesel has nothing to do with this discussion.


M3 is faster around a track, who cares....what does that have to do with the engine concept?

Guy, you're lost.....do you know what you're talking about? Are you paying attention at all?

Downsizing and turbos are the trend now which is what Mercedes is doing. Diesels are still a non-starter in the mainstream U.S. market. Totally irrelevant in regards to the new turbo V8. If everyone wanted a diesel then Mercedes and everyone else wouldn't continue to petrol engines.


M

Fuel economy for it's class? Why this one where there are diesels that can do twice as mpg and have more torque at the same time? Is it 'uncool' to have a diesel in the U.S?

If fuel economy is in the discussion then diesel definitely is. Diesel is to make fuel economy. Twin-turbo V8 aren't. Twin-turbo V8 s are made for performance not fuel economy. Wake up

Everyone does'nt want a diesel. The ones that want fuel economy want a diesel. Don't get it wrong.

I dont know about the U.S but in the UK and in most of Europe diesel sales are getting more and more compared to their petrol rivals everyday.

Yes, downsizing and turbos are a trend but high-tech diesels are also.

Did Mercedes create this twin turbo only for the U.S or have I got it wrong? Anyway, who cares about the U.S market, it's totally different and irrelevant to the rest of the world.

 

[Nicks]

is it me stupid or there is no connection between this new engines and m3 track time?

 

[coolraoul]

Fuel economy for it's class? Why this one where there are diesels that can do twice as mpg and have more torque at the same time? Is it 'uncool' to have a diesel in the U.S?

If fuel economy is in the discussion then diesel definitely is. Diesel is to make fuel economy. Twin-turbo V8 aren't. Twin-turbo V8 s are made for performance not fuel economy. Wake up

Everyone does'nt want a diesel. The ones that want fuel economy want a diesel. Don't get it wrong.

I dont know about the U.S but in the UK and in most of Europe diesel sales are getting more and more compared to their petrol rivals everyday.

Yes, downsizing and turbos are a trend but high-tech diesels are also.

Did Mercedes create this twin turbo only for the U.S or have I got it wrong? Anyway, who cares about the U.S market, it's totally different and irrelevant to the rest of the world.

So for you,

- people who want fuel economy drive diesel only (even if there is very few diesel pumps available and everybody in your country thinks diesel is only for heavy-duty trucks)
- people who buy petrol-V8s are happy to achieve the lowest possible mpg figures
- nobody can buy a nice, refined, vibration-free, pleasing to the hears V8 but still be happy to consume less petrol
-nobody can buy anything else than a diesel if he's even only looking at the consumption figures?

I have a V8 in my car, it's thirsty and I'd be glad to see it consuming a bit less than my 14l/100kms. Yet I'd never buy a diesel because I know what a diesel is and for me it's a no-way. It's just not my type of engines. I love my V8, but a better fuel economy wouldn't hurt. At all.

Today, mpg/consumption figures are on the top of the priorities for every kind of engines.

Why do you think your beloved M3 just got a start-stop system, tell me? because the added weight of the system improves the handling, or because it's gonna improve the mpg? So the M3 should get diesel, right, as it seems BMW cares about mpg??

Back on topic... It seems the architecture of the V6 has switched from 90 to 60°, this is gonna improve the refinement big time. And with those mpg improvements, I expect this to be a very great engine.
The V8 seems a huge updating of the old block, including lowered displacement, but the torque is insane. The car better have solid rear tyres...

I hope those engines will deliver IRL as they do on the paper!

 

[klier]

Why is this thread moved to the S class forum???

 

[Giannis]

I don't know. Moved to "The Mercedes-Benz Lounge".

 

[Floydian]

So for you,

- people who want fuel economy drive diesel only (even if there is very few diesel pumps available and everybody in your country thinks diesel is only for heavy-duty trucks)
- people who buy petrol-V8s are happy to achieve the lowest possible mpg figures
- nobody can buy a nice, refined, vibration-free, pleasing to the hears V8 but still be happy to consume less petrol
-nobody can buy anything else than a diesel if he's even only looking at the consumption figures?

1. People who want fuel economy should drive a diesel. Its far more economical this is a fact.

2. People who buy petrol V8 petrol engines are not going to get more 25mpg are they?

3. People can buy a 'nice, refined, vibration-free, pleasing to hears V8' but it won't be economical as much as their diesel rivals Example: This V6 MB achieves 30mpg combined. You can easily achieve 40mpg in a 4.2TDI A8 (And this is far more powerful and has more torque as well)

 

[coolraoul]

Yeah, so what? You can't have multiple criterias when choosing a car? You can't be attracted by the beauty of a petrol V8, and still be pleased by the less gargantuan consumption?
Nobody's happy to consume a lot, therefore it's always an interesting bonus to have a more fuel efficient engine, regardless of the type of engine.

Enough off-topic on the matter. If you want to continue to discuss it further, you can open a new topic about that debate.

 

[Merc1]

Fuel economy for it's class? Why this one where there are diesels that can do twice as mpg and have more torque at the same time? Is it 'uncool' to have a diesel in the U.S?

If fuel economy is in the discussion then diesel definitely is. Diesel is to make fuel economy. Twin-turbo V8 aren't. Twin-turbo V8 s are made for performance not fuel economy. Wake up

Everyone does'nt want a diesel. The ones that want fuel economy want a diesel. Don't get it wrong.

I dont know about the U.S but in the UK and in most of Europe diesel sales are getting more and more compared to their petrol rivals everyday.

Yes, downsizing and turbos are a trend but high-tech diesels are also.

Did Mercedes create this twin turbo only for the U.S or have I got it wrong? Anyway, who cares about the U.S market, it's totally different and irrelevant to the rest of the world.

You're so far off in left field I'm not sure if this response is even worth it.

Diesels have nothing to do with this discussion.

Mercedes developed a new V8 for better fuel economy within the gasoline V8, luxury class.

Whether or not a diesel is better isn't the topic or the issue. Is that any clearer for you?

Again, nobody said that twin-turbo V8s are made specifically for better fuel economy.

That part you can't seem to grasp here is that a smaller displacement, twin-turbo V8 is supposed to get better fuel economy and emit less pollution than a larger naturally aspirated V8. Why else would Mercedes go from 5.5L to 4.7L? Adding turbos makes up for lost displacement as does direct-injection. Hence the new 4.7L V8 is cleaner and more powerful than the 5.5L unit.

Again, this has nothing to do with a diesel or is a statement as to why one is better than the other; diesel v petrol, this about why a small, turbo V8 was created within the gasoline V8 luxury class.


If you can't grasp that then I can't help you.


Who cares about the British market, its smaller and less relevant than the U.S. anyway. Great logic isn't it?

Apparently Mercedes did create the new gasoline V8 with the U.S. (and other markets) in mind since in the U.K. diesels are the order of the day.


M

 

[cawimmer430]

That simply isn't true Chris. I'd buy one. More than a few W211 E-Class owners over on MBWorld didn't feel that the new W212 E350 was worth trading their W211 E350 for, mainly because of no engine upgrades. It may not matter in Europe but it does here.

People who hang out in car forums are generally more passionate or enthusiastic about cars.

The average luxury shopper Joe will look beyond the current 268-hp output of the E350. If we're realistic, the E350 offers a very appealing package. It's safe, comfortable, drives well, comes well-equipped, the price didn't rise to drastically and it's a Mercedes. To many people this is what matters, not how much power is under the hood.

Also, on a Honda forum I saw a comparison between the current V6 Cadillac CTS, Acura RL and the new Mercedes E350. To my surprise, the guy who testdrove these cars said that the Mercedes E350, with 268-hp, felt the fastest whereas the RL felt sluggish and so did the Cadillac. A few people even agreed with him (those that have driven the RL and E350). Obviously this doesn't mean much since the E350 is more often compared to the GS350, 535i and A6 V6 but even against those cars, it doesn't perform bad in the sense that it can hang with them. It won't beat them in straightline performance, but it can keep up. But this doesn't matter to most people. The people who buy E350's don't care about drag racing.

This is true, but also luxury cars are slaves to marketing. I guess you'd have to live here to understand this. On paper, which is how a lot of luxury car buyers shop, a 268hp C350 or E350 just looks hopeless in a class of which every single competitor has 300hp or more. Its just that simple, whether its warranted or not.

On paper this figure looks uncompetitive, but the reality is that the C350 and E350, even with 268-hp, perform rather well. They won't beat their competition in a drag race, but they certainly can hang with them.

Also, what many people don't seem to realize is that the C-Class and E-Class formula has always worked for Mercedes in the past - with average powered engines. These cars are first and foremost bought for enjoyment and luxury, not drag racing and raw performance. Even the C-Class seems to be bought by rather conservative folks, not 20-year-old speedfreaks for whom 0-60, 1/4 mile and horsepower are everything.

That said, Mercedes being Mercedes usually at the front of most things shouldn't be behind in engines just by sheer being. The 3L and 3.5L V6s are simply not as efficient as they should be considering their lack of power.

Which is why we have this new V6 engine with 306-horsepower. And as I said before, I speculated that this engine was designed with better fuel economy and emissions in mind. And it shows.

This new V6 releases 177 g/km. For comparison, a Lexus IS350 releases 278 g/km - big difference. I wish people would stop discriminating against Mercedes and this new engine based on the 306-hp figure. Fuel economy and emissions are the thing to worry about now, not performance. The output of this motor us already "overpowered" if we're realistic. I just hope the fuel economy ratings will turn out to be good so the haters will shut up.

I realize you'd like Mercedes to still be building the W123, and I the W124, but Mercedes has to move with the times. Even with the 268hp V6 W212 E350s are everywhere, imagine how many sales they'll pick up be now being class competitive. Maybe now people will start buying the C350 Sport more too. Our U.S. market C300 is in desperate need of a engine update also, its not so much that it is underpowered, but its too thirsty for just 228hp and these are not EPA figures I'm going by, but real world obeservations.

Yeah, that's the biggest drawbacks for the C300 and C350. I still somewhere hope it is because of the way they're driven. No offense, but the impression I get is that most Americans don't drive "looking ahead" (German: vorrauschauendfahren). This means for example that when you're approaching a red light from afar, you still keep your foot on the gas pedal and literally brake a few meters in front of the red light. In Europe, at least in Germany, we are taught in driving school to remove our foot from the gas pedal in such a situation and let the car roll towards the light. Do you get what I mean? Again, NO OFFENSE. It's an impression I have based on some of the Americans I have ridden with here in Germany.

Using the technique of vorrauschauendfahren our E320 with 224-hp can attain superb mileage. MB claimed it needed 11.2 L / 100 km, yet on average we always get 8.2 or 9 L / 100 km which is an amazing mileage for a 1.7-ton car. And we don't necessarily drive it like a grandma would all the time. I do spice up the ride with a mixture of normal and sporty driving and the fuel economy results are always the same. Not trusting the computer, we computed the fuel mileage results at the gas station by checking the A-Trip mileage and the amount of gas we put into the tank - it works out. The computer wasn't lying.

 

[cawimmer430]

Well it sort of is unimpressive in the sense that they are catching up more then anything.

I don't view this as catch-up at all. This engine, as I suspected, was engineered for better fuel economy and lower emissions. 306-horsepower were deemed adequate for improved performance. Could MB have extracted more? You bet. Why didn't they? Perhaps it would have harmed the operating characteristics of the motor. Perhaps more horsepower would have ensured less efficiency, a higher fuel consumption and more emissions. If you ask me, this horsepower output is the optimum for the motor to work as it was intended to work.

Also, look at the emission figure for this new V6: 177 g/km. As I told Marcus, a Lexus IS350 releases 278 g/km. That's a 99 g/km difference - and that's huge.

Who's playing catch-up now? Mercedes or Lexus?


And let's not forget durability. Less wear and tear since the engine won't be overstressed. Here's a quote from a guy who seems to know a bit more about mechanics than me. Hopefully some people here (Monster?) can confirm this:


All of these criticisms of M-B's new engines may be ignoring a few crucial considerations: BMW and Audi (my presonal favorite) rely on turbo- and supercharging, respectively, to boost their 3.0 liter engines to the 300 HP mark. Lexus and Infiniti have high-compression engines of 11.8:1 and 11.0:1, respectively, to put their V-6s over the 300HP threshold. Along with other gains in efficiency, M-B sets its new 3.5 liter V-6 at 10.5:1 which makes for a less stressed engine which will hold up better over the long term. At that compression ratio, it could conceiveably be tuned to handle 89 or even 87 octane gas. (Alright, that last part is a pipe dream.) Very likely, the engine is also lighter, which will also help its performance. It appears to me that the boys and girls at Stuttgart have built an engine that makes more power on less with less complexity. How is this a problem?

 

[tennmb]

Fuel economy is a huge issue. Look at the fines MB paid last year because of the problems with fuel efficiency across their product line.

Going from a 5.5 to a 4.7 turbo is a way MB can maintain performance and avoid gas guxxler taxes, and penalties.

MB has already given the thumbs up to bring in several products below the C-class when they hit the market. Another effort to balance CAFE standards.
CAFE standards don't look at automakers as luxury and economy. They just look at the brand. MB needed to do something drastic, and it looks like they did it, and managed to improve performance at the same time. Kudos. It's long overdue. They've been behind the curve on this one.

1. People who want fuel economy should drive a diesel. Its far more economical this is a fact.

Sure, they SHOULD. People should obey the speed limits as well. They don't. Your statement completely ignores the facts. U.S. buyers don't like diesel. Period, end of story. Diesel prices are crazy high compared with petrol.

 

[Wolfgang]

Here's a plot of horsepower per liter (light blue) and fuel economy per liter (dark blue),
comparing the new V6 engine to previous generations. The figures look good.

From: Mercedes-Benz Passion eBlog - The international Blog driven by Mercedes-Benz News.

By the way, is the S400 HYBRID obsolete now? It consumes 0.3 liter more than the new S350.

 

[cawimmer430]

What really bothers me are the BS comments about these new engines all over the Internet. Nobody seems to pay attention to the new and innovative technology and features in them. Nobody praises the low CO2 emissions. Everyone is pissing on the horsepower output. One guy on another forum said the new 4.7 twin-turbo engine is "crap" because "435-horsepower" is nothing impressive from a biturbo V8.

Pathetic.

What do these morons want? 470-hp from 4.7-l twin-turbos? 500-hp? 560-hp? People need to cut the bullshit and realize that horsepower isn't everything. There are more important factors such as emissions and gas mileage (these days) and of course engine reliability/durability. With 435-hp, the engine will be less stressed than with 470-hp+.

Don't believe this BS about 1,200-hp Supra engines being reliable as daily drivers. It's a myth. High performance engines are high maintenance. Period.

The same argument about horsepower output applies to the new V6. 306-horsepower are overpowered and sufficient. The fact that this engine delivers very low CO2 emissions is what we should be finding impressive and talking about, not the horsepower output. And Mercedes clients are typically not interested in performance driving. If they are, they'll go for an AMG or have another more sports-oriented car in their garage. Very friggin simple.

Oh, and the new press release mentioned that this new V6 engine has a modular design and adding a turbo won't be a problem. Rest assured that there may very likely be a more powerful version of this V6 in the future, either N/A or turbo'd.

 

[Merc1]

People who hang out in car forums are generally more passionate or enthusiastic about cars.

The average luxury shopper Joe will look beyond the current 268-hp output of the E350. If we're realistic, the E350 offers a very appealing package. It's safe, comfortable, drives well, comes well-equipped, the price didn't rise to drastically and it's a Mercedes. To many people this is what matters, not how much power is under the hood.

Also, on a Honda forum I saw a comparison between the current V6 Cadillac CTS, Acura RL and the new Mercedes E350. To my surprise, the guy who testdrove these cars said that the Mercedes E350, with 268-hp, felt the fastest whereas the RL felt sluggish and so did the Cadillac. A few people even agreed with him (those that have driven the RL and E350). Obviously this doesn't mean much since the E350 is more often compared to the GS350, 535i and A6 V6 but even against those cars, it doesn't perform bad in the sense that it can hang with them. It won't beat them in straightline performance, but it can keep up. But this doesn't matter to most people. The people who buy E350's don't care about drag racing.

On paper this figure looks uncompetitive, but the reality is that the C350 and E350, even with 268-hp, perform rather well. They won't beat their competition in a drag race, but they certainly can hang with them.

Also, what many people don't seem to realize is that the C-Class and E-Class formula has always worked for Mercedes in the past - with average powered engines. These cars are first and foremost bought for enjoyment and luxury, not drag racing and raw performance. Even the C-Class seems to be bought by rather conservative folks, not 20-year-old speedfreaks for whom 0-60, 1/4 mile and horsepower are everything.

I'm sorry Chris but you're making excuses for Mercedes. The bottom line is that the E350 and C350 are outperformed by nearly every other car in their classes. No matter who hangs out where or who is passionate about what, 268hp just doesn't cut it anymore. People who hang out in forums are buyers also, again I quote buyers on MBWorld with W211 E350's who didn't buy a W212 E350 because they wanted more power, some of them switched to BMW others just kept their W211 E350s.

Sure the badge snob won't care whats under the hood, but that isn't the only type of person who buys these cars. Some of these buyers know what their car has and what it doesn't, again take a look on MBWorld.

The E350 can't hang with the 535i, the XF (which has a 300hp V8), or A6 3.0T, Car and Driver proved that when the new E came out and got beat by all those cars.

Acura and GM/Cadillac just don't build as efficient drivetrains as the Germans do. Acura's 5-speed automatic is one of the oldest designs on the market as is the car. The CTS just doesn't put its 306hp down as well as the 268hp Benz does. I've driven the C350 many times now and its pretty fast so yes in reality for most people that is enough, but what I'm saying is that:

1. For buyers who want more Mercedes is lacking. Such buyers do exists. Clearly.
2. Mercedes-Benz shouldn't be this far behind in engine development or in the V6 class. Their V8s aren't.

You and I wouldn't cut Mercedes any slack for such a glaring lack of safety engineering would we? Of course not, we expect them to be on the leading edge of the field.

Which is why we have this new V6 engine with 306-horsepower. And as I said before, I speculated that this engine was designed with better fuel economy and emissions in mind. And it shows.

This new V6 releases 177 g/km. For comparison, a Lexus IS350 releases 278 g/km - big difference. I wish people would stop discriminating against Mercedes and this new engine based on the 306-hp figure. Fuel economy and emissions are the thing to worry about now, not performance. The output of this motor us already "overpowered" if we're realistic. I just hope the fuel economy ratings will turn out to be good so the haters will shut up.

Yes I'm all for the new engines. I won't say anything about it until I've tried it in the C or E-Classes. If Mercedes matches the class on performance, and beats them on fuel efficiency and emissions then they'll have done themselves proud.

Yeah, that's the biggest drawbacks for the C300 and C350. I still somewhere hope it is because of the way they're driven. No offense, but the impression I get is that most Americans don't drive "looking ahead" (German: vorrauschauendfahren). This means for example that when you're approaching a red light from afar, you still keep your foot on the gas pedal and literally brake a few meters in front of the red light. In Europe, at least in Germany, we are taught in driving school to remove our foot from the gas pedal in such a situation and let the car roll towards the light. Do you get what I mean? Again, NO OFFENSE. It's an impression I have based on some of the Americans I have ridden with here in Germany.

Oh I get what you mean exactly, but unfortunately most Americans don't drive worth squat. Still though the C350 and C350 are just too thirsty in real world driving, what that is I don't know. Particularly the C300. For a V6 its pretty thirsty.



M

 

[Merc1]

All of these criticisms of M-B's new engines may be ignoring a few crucial considerations: BMW and Audi (my presonal favorite) rely on turbo- and supercharging, respectively, to boost their 3.0 liter engines to the 300 HP mark. Lexus and Infiniti have high-compression engines of 11.8:1 and 11.0:1, respectively, to put their V-6s over the 300HP threshold. Along with other gains in efficiency, M-B sets its new 3.5 liter V-6 at 10.5:1 which makes for a less stressed engine which will hold up better over the long term. At that compression ratio, it could conceiveably be tuned to handle 89 or even 87 octane gas. (Alright, that last part is a pipe dream.) Very likely, the engine is also lighter, which will also help its performance. It appears to me that the boys and girls at Stuttgart have built an engine that makes more power on less with less complexity. How is this a problem?

Now this I agree with completely and you're right. When you look at it the new V6 starts to look better and better.


M