TRDFantasy

That's a loud of rubbish, the torque range. The peak torque *supposedly* is available in the range of 3000 - 5100 RPM. Now you don't have to be an engineer to know that peak torque cannot be sustained over such an RPM range. For all we know, peak torque could be occuring at 3000 RPM, or it could be occuring at 5100 RPM. We don't know yet until we see the torque curve.

What we DO know about the IS350's engine is that is has a broad, flat torque curve, and torque remains pretty high even near redline.

Benz, not to mention Porsche and Audi all like to provide their torque ratings in the form of a range, but I think that's purely for marketing reasons. It's confusing and does not tell you exactly where the peak torque occurs.

As well, fuel economy cannot be compared yet accurately.

9.1L per 100km is more accurate than mpg, and we don't know how the testing was done. If you go by Canadian fuel economy figures, the IS350 has a combined fuel economy of 9.2L per 100km. But Canadian testing differs from European testing.

You also seem to be mixing things up. The CLS is going to get this engine, not the C Class. The current CLS does not have a V6 available here in North America.

If you want to talk about the C350, then that's a different story. It has a curb weight of 3495 for the auto, not 3750lbs. The IS350 weights 3527, slightly more than the C350.

http://www.mbusa.com/models/features...350WZ&class=06

The current C350 also gets 20/29 economy with the auto tranny, which about equal to the IS350. Slightly higher rated in highway, slightly lower rated in city. Having a 7 speed auto definitely helps economy.

It also trails the IS350 in performance, as it makes 268HP @ 6000 RPM, and 258 lb-ft torque, again provided at a vague range of 2400 - 5000 RPM.

We don't know the performance, power, or economy that this CLS350 with the new engine would have here in North America, or if its even coming to North America.

newr

If they are saying xxx torque is available from A to B, isn't that mean it's pretty much a flat torque curve from A to B?

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

correct, its probably not EXACT but very close

jrock65

The torque range is not a load of rubbish. See post above.

I'm not mixing things up. The C350 (as well as the E350, R350, ML350, SLK350, etc.) are certain to get this engine. I'm using the C350 because it is the competitor to the IS350, the only car right now that has the 306 hp GR engine in the US.

newr

There you go TRDFantasy. It's not confusing or vague. You don't have to wait and see a torque curve... it is FLAT...Nguyen confirmed it. BTW ,the article did not say that was peak torque.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

lot of euro cars tune their engines to have this plateau of torque, been going on for years

TRDFantasy

The C350 recently got a facelift and an engine upgrade, so I'm not sure that MB would do another engine change so soon. If it does get it, then it may be in a few years.

Gojirra99

I think we will see a new redesigned C class for 2008MY next year, so the new model should get this new 3.5 engine . . .

TRDFantasy

And so is the 2GR-FSE's torque curve, but you don't see Toyota using a range for it.



Between 2000 - 4000 RPM, the 2GR-FSE's torque remains almost flat, and due to dual VVT-i, as well as dual fuel injection, the engine gets a torque boost above 4000 RPM, and then torque again remains quite flat above 6000 RPM.

I understand that the range is meant to signify that the torque is near peak, but it's still vague.

How hard is it to give an exact number for torque? Why do other manufacturers do it, yet German makers feel the need for a range?

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

and i wish car companies didnt give pointless torque @ rpm figures and instead gave a torque curve

TRDFantasy

Uhh, you mean like the one I posted above? Some automakers, again for marketing reasons, aren't willing to do that.

Anyways, it makes no difference what sort of figures German makers provide, because dyno charts will tell where the power really lies and how it's spread out.

newr

They can't use/claim the range because the graph is not FLAT (the left graph). They use PEAK torque value instead
Again, they did not use range, they use peak value. Had they used range, the torque # would be LOWER.

Like the example above, most auto makers claim PEAK torque. Why? it's for marketing reason and that is the highest number they can claim and most people fall for that. German makers claim torque range, which to me is more infornational because it's more useful. Everybody wants a FLAT torque curve.

newr

Don't think so.. different dyno machine gives different result depend on many factors like temp, elev, humidity.. etc...and etc..

STIG

are you confuse MB with ACURA? lol

They dont need a V8. They already have plently of V8. i mean supercharged V8s, N/A V8s, etc. They also have V12 and V12 biturbos. So it's MB we are talking about here. Not ACURA

spwolf

lol, so how do you know if torque curve is correct? Doesnt that mean that different dyno machine will also show different torque curve?

All modern V6 engines have pretty flat torque curves. GR engine series has pretty nice torque curve. You get an nice graph from Toyota so you can conclude that yourself. Based on that curve, Toyota could have said 3.5 GR-FSE engine develops 95% of torque from 1900 rpm :-). Same thing, just marketing spin.