The new 292hp 3.5L V6 from MB premieres at Geneva
#16
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by jrock65
Lexus 306 hp V6 v. MB 292 hp V6
It's hard to say at this point which is the superior engine at this point. The Lexus engine has 14 more hp, but only 7 more torque. Plus, the max torque for the MB engine is available at a lower RPM (3000 rpm v. 4800 rpm).
The 3530 lb. IS350 gets 24.5 mpg. The 3750 lb. CLS350 gets 25.8 mpg. So it would probably be about a 2 mpg difference if they put this engine in the lighter 3495 lb. C350.
I would take a 2 mpg advantage any day for 14 less hp and 7 less torque.
All of this is preliminary so we'll have to wait to see what happens in the real word.
It's hard to say at this point which is the superior engine at this point. The Lexus engine has 14 more hp, but only 7 more torque. Plus, the max torque for the MB engine is available at a lower RPM (3000 rpm v. 4800 rpm).
The 3530 lb. IS350 gets 24.5 mpg. The 3750 lb. CLS350 gets 25.8 mpg. So it would probably be about a 2 mpg difference if they put this engine in the lighter 3495 lb. C350.
I would take a 2 mpg advantage any day for 14 less hp and 7 less torque.
All of this is preliminary so we'll have to wait to see what happens in the real word.
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.
#19
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: None
Posts: 1,169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
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.
#20
Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
correct, its probably not EXACT but very close
#22
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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.
#24
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 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.
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?
#26
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by 4TehNguyen
and i wish car companies didnt give pointless torque @ rpm figures and instead gave a torque curve
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.
#27
Originally Posted by TRDFantasy
And so is the 2GR-FSE's torque curve, but you don't see Toyota using a range for it.
Originally Posted by TRDFantasy
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.
Originally Posted by TRDFantasy
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?
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?
#28
Originally Posted by TRDFantasy
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.
#29
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF
Posts: 6,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by EDGE2
no disrespect to MB but a MB needs a V8
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
#30
Originally Posted by newr
Don't think so.. different dyno machine gives different result depend on many factors like temp, elev, humidity.. etc...and etc..
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.