RE: Driven: Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG 4Matic

[braddo]

Alucidnation said:

Interesting info...thanks.

So, bearing that in mind, i dont recall seeing an Audi 4wd system failure so have Mercedes got it right enough to match?

After all, out of warranty, it could be one hell of a cost to fix, and MB have not been known for their 4WD 'cars'.

I would have thought the gearbox weakness that A8s and RS6s are known for is a direct result of the AWD drivetrain (and that the gearbox is an intrinsic part of an AWD drivetrain).

In other words, there are loads of Audi 4wd system failures.

[NomduJour]

r129sl said:

Mercedes has been manufacturing 4wd cars since 1987

Even earlier:

[r129sl]

NomduJour said:

r129sl said:

Mercedes has been manufacturing 4wd cars since 1987

Even earlier:

Everyone knows that's the last "proper" model. The bean counters moved in after that one.

[Alucidnation]

braddo said:

Alucidnation said:

Interesting info...thanks.

So, bearing that in mind, i dont recall seeing an Audi 4wd system failure so have Mercedes got it right enough to match?

After all, out of warranty, it could be one hell of a cost to fix, and MB have not been known for their 4WD 'cars'.

I would have thought the gearbox weakness that A8s and RS6s are known for is a direct result of the AWD drivetrain (and that the gearbox is an intrinsic part of an AWD drivetrain).

In other words, there are loads of Audi 4wd system failures.

But would that not be down to the gearbox weakness, rather than 4wd?

[cheddar]

r129sl said:

NomduJour said:

r129sl said:

Mercedes has been manufacturing 4wd cars since 1987

Even earlier:

Everyone knows that's the last "proper" model. The bean counters moved in after that one.

Made me chuckle.

[Bezza1969]

Wills2 said:

With 300bhp/tonne, 4wd and launch control I don't see anything fanciful about that 3.6sec to 62 time.

Me neither, the Porsche Panamera Turbo was clocked at 3.6 secs to the 60 back in 2009 by at least one UK mag (Performance car I think) and that had "only" 493 BHP yet still weighed 1900kgs odd....

The 0-100 time seems crazy...7.6 secs,,really? What, quicker than an SLS that is about 300 kgs lighter??

[cheddar]

Bezza1969 said:

Wills2 said:

With 300bhp/tonne, 4wd and launch control I don't see anything fanciful about that 3.6sec to 62 time.

Me neither, the Porsche Panamera Turbo was clocked at 3.6 secs to the 60 back in 2009 by at least one UK mag (Performance car I think) and that had "only" 493 BHP yet still weighed 1900kgs odd....

The 0-100mph time seems crazy...7.6 secs,,really? What, quicker than an SLS that is about 300 kgs lighter??

Crazy? I thought so too, not long ago 10's and 11's to 100mph were considered properly quick for anything.

Now a two ton estate car does it in a completely bonkers 7.6sec.

Not an optomistic manufacturers claim either, test figures linked somewhere above.

[Nors]

braddo said:

In other words, there are loads of Audi 4wd system failures.

I've had them since the late 80's and not had 1 single issue with the quattro system accross many diffent models/timeframes and I know loads of others with the same experience.

quattro failures, whilst entirely possible/probable, I would suggest is in the vast minority.

[dvs_dave]

Alucidnation said:

braddo said:

Alucidnation said:

Interesting info...thanks.

So, bearing that in mind, i dont recall seeing an Audi 4wd system failure so have Mercedes got it right enough to match?

After all, out of warranty, it could be one hell of a cost to fix, and MB have not been known for their 4WD 'cars'.

I would have thought the gearbox weakness that A8s and RS6s are known for is a direct result of the AWD drivetrain (and that the gearbox is an intrinsic part of an AWD drivetrain).

In other words, there are loads of Audi 4wd system failures.

But would that not be down to the gearbox weakness, rather than 4wd?

Yes, it was the ZF 5HP gearboxes used in late 90's to early 00's Audi's (and many other manufacturers for that matter) that were problematic, not the 4wd system. Newer versions using the 6HP are far more robust.

[toppstuff]

dvs_dave said:

Yes, it was the ZF 5HP gearboxes used in late 90's to early 00's Audi's (and many other manufacturers for that matter) that were problematic, not the 4wd system. Newer versions using the 6HP are far more robust.

Don't mention multitronic gearboxes on non quattro Audi's...

If ever there was something to burst the bubble of perceived quality it is that..

Vorsprung durch technik, my arse.

[Chris944_S2]

r129sl said:

Mercedes has been manufacturing 4wd cars since 1987, when it first offered 4matic as an option on 124 saloons and estates. It is worth noting that Mercedes' expertise in the design and manufacture of transmissions (4wd being a fancy transmission system) is probably superior to that of any other vehicle manufacturer, most of whom buy them in.

MB didn't devellop it, the system was designed and develloped by Magna Steyr. Magna however probably have the best expertise when it comes to 4wd, even Land Rover (design of transfer cases) and Jeep (manufacturing of vehicles) who are experts in 4wd make use of Magna's engineering & manufacturing services.

Magna also manufactured several generation of E classes with 4matic transmission for MB, as well as develloped the Puch Gelanderwagen rebadged as the MB G class. They have very close ties with MB, they were even part of the Daimler empire at one point, but the 4wd expertise is by no means in-house at MB.

[C36 Nico]

Wills2 said:

With 300bhp/tonne

No need for that sort of language

[Wills2]

C36 Nico said:

Wills2 said:

With 300bhp/tonne

No need for that sort of language