GL 350 CDI vs Gl 420 CDI

[rmaGL]

HI Guys, just wanted to get your thoughts on the above two cars - ive got a GL 420 CDI at the moment - an 08 model with 51k on the clock. Looking at the new shape GL350 on a lease which is coming out pretty cheap (6+23 at 375+vat).

My only hesitation is whether there is a perceptible drop in power/performance between the 420 cdi 2008 and a 2013 350 CDI. Any thoughts on this would be much appreciated.

Also havent really researched values on the GL 420 CDI but with the current lease scenario i presume it would be better to sell off the current GL privately?

[Aeroresh]

Sorry cant help with your dilema but could you say who's the GL lease deal with?

Cheers

[Max M4X WW]

Looks like it will be slightly slower, but if you will feel it I'm not sure. 10+mpg gain..

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

[rmaGL]

Max M4X WW said:

Looks like it will be slightly slower, but if you will feel it I'm not sure. 10+mpg gain..

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

Thanks for the figures max, your right, 0.2 seconds doesn't seem like much at all. Do you think the hp would make a difference in acceleration?

http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/reviews/facts-and-fi...

[rmaGL]

http://www.contracthireandleasing.com/car-leasing-...

Aeroresh said:

Sorry cant help with your dilema but could you say who's the GL lease deal with?

Cheers

[Max M4X WW]

rmaGL said:

Do you think the hp would make a difference in acceleration?

Yes, as proven by the figures? Best bet is to drive one.

[DJRC]

The major thing with the 420 unit was the sheer mid-range grunt. You put the hammer down and the big motors just fly. I have the 420 in the ML and was gutted at Geneva last yr when Merc said they were not replacing it in the new ML.

The +10mpg though would be welcome, we struggle to see more than 24mpg most of the time unless on a run and it gets upto 27.

[Mosdef]

DJRC said:

The major thing with the 420 unit was the sheer mid-range grunt. You put the hammer down and the big motors just fly. I have the 420 in the ML and was gutted at Geneva last yr when Merc said they were not replacing it in the new ML.

The +10mpg though would be welcome, we struggle to see more than 24mpg most of the time unless on a run and it gets upto 27.

Drove my parents GL 350 on the motorway for a 100 mile trip at a very steady 70mph and got 27mpg - the same as I can get on a run from my CLK63!!! This was on snow tyres but it also involved a 10 mile run down a mountain road at the beginning. Not sure that a 350 is much more economical.

In mixed driving they don't get much more than 23-24mpg either!

[rmaGL]

Mosdef said:

DJRC said:

The major thing with the 420 unit was the sheer mid-range grunt. You put the hammer down and the big motors just fly. I have the 420 in the ML and was gutted at Geneva last yr when Merc said they were not replacing it in the new ML.

The +10mpg though would be welcome, we struggle to see more than 24mpg most of the time unless on a run and it gets upto 27.

Drove my parents GL 350 on the motorway for a 100 mile trip at a very steady 70mph and got 27mpg - the same as I can get on a run from my CLK63!!! This was on snow tyres but it also involved a 10 mile run down a mountain road at the beginning. Not sure that a 350 is much more economical.

In mixed driving they don't get much more than 23-24mpg either!

With an extremely light foot in london (peak rush hour traffic) i get about 17mpg, no traffic - 22mpg. Terrible traffic and its down to 14-15mpg. that 350 is beginning to sound much more attractive!

[Mosdef]

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

DJRC said:

The major thing with the 420 unit was the sheer mid-range grunt. You put the hammer down and the big motors just fly. I have the 420 in the ML and was gutted at Geneva last yr when Merc said they were not replacing it in the new ML.

The +10mpg though would be welcome, we struggle to see more than 24mpg most of the time unless on a run and it gets upto 27.

Drove my parents GL 350 on the motorway for a 100 mile trip at a very steady 70mph and got 27mpg - the same as I can get on a run from my CLK63!!! This was on snow tyres but it also involved a 10 mile run down a mountain road at the beginning. Not sure that a 350 is much more economical.

In mixed driving they don't get much more than 23-24mpg either!

With an extremely light foot in london (peak rush hour traffic) i get about 17mpg, no traffic - 22mpg. Terrible traffic and its down to 14-15mpg. that 350 is beginning to sound much more attractive!

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

[rmaGL]

Mosdef said:

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

Well that was one of the main reasons i opted for a 420 vs a 320 but unfortunately as DJRC said above theyve scrapped the mid range option. Gutted! its either a 350cdi or a GL63. Now as much as i would love a GL63, no way can i afford either the insurance, petrol or cost of one of those!

[Mosdef]

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

DJRC said:

The major thing with the 420 unit was the sheer mid-range grunt. You put the hammer down and the big motors just fly. I have the 420 in the ML and was gutted at Geneva last yr when Merc said they were not replacing it in the new ML.

The +10mpg though would be welcome, we struggle to see more than 24mpg most of the time unless on a run and it gets upto 27.

Drove my parents GL 350 on the motorway for a 100 mile trip at a very steady 70mph and got 27mpg - the same as I can get on a run from my CLK63!!! This was on snow tyres but it also involved a 10 mile run down a mountain road at the beginning. Not sure that a 350 is much more economical.

In mixed driving they don't get much more than 23-24mpg either!

With an extremely light foot in london (peak rush hour traffic) i get about 17mpg, no traffic - 22mpg. Terrible traffic and its down to 14-15mpg. that 350 is beginning to sound much more attractive!

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

[DJRC]

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

Well that was one of the main reasons i opted for a 420 vs a 320 but unfortunately as DJRC said above theyve scrapped the mid range option. Gutted! its either a 350cdi or a GL63. Now as much as i would love a GL63, no way can i afford either the insurance, petrol or cost of one of those!

Now you see Im secretly hoping the 63 being a newer generation engine, stop/start, etc will have the same fuel economy as the 420. That way we upgrade wit no downside!

Right....?

[Mosdef]

DJRC said:

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

Well that was one of the main reasons i opted for a 420 vs a 320 but unfortunately as DJRC said above theyve scrapped the mid range option. Gutted! its either a 350cdi or a GL63. Now as much as i would love a GL63, no way can i afford either the insurance, petrol or cost of one of those!

Now you see Im secretly hoping the 63 being a newer generation engine, stop/start, etc will have the same fuel economy as the 420. That way we upgrade wit no downside!

Right....?

There has to be some kind of man maths you can adopt for this - petrol's cheaper than diesel and as you say, it will be a newer, more efficient engine. You might even get better residuals..........maybe.

What about the new G Wagen 6x6?!

[Mosdef]

DJRC said:

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

Well that was one of the main reasons i opted for a 420 vs a 320 but unfortunately as DJRC said above theyve scrapped the mid range option. Gutted! its either a 350cdi or a GL63. Now as much as i would love a GL63, no way can i afford either the insurance, petrol or cost of one of those!

Now you see Im secretly hoping the 63 being a newer generation engine, stop/start, etc will have the same fuel economy as the 420. That way we upgrade wit no downside!

Right....?

There has to be some kind of man maths you can adopt for this - petrol's cheaper than diesel and as you say, it will be a newer, more efficient engine. You might even get better residuals..........maybe.

What about the new G Wagen 6x6?!

[Mosdef]

DJRC said:

rmaGL said:

Mosdef said:

I am not that sure a 420 is much worse - in my parents' 350 and with mixed driving around the countryside with no traffic, 23-24mpg is the best I've seen, and that's with a light foot. I've not driven it in London or any other city but I expect the efficiency gains would be marginal.

Well that was one of the main reasons i opted for a 420 vs a 320 but unfortunately as DJRC said above theyve scrapped the mid range option. Gutted! its either a 350cdi or a GL63. Now as much as i would love a GL63, no way can i afford either the insurance, petrol or cost of one of those!

Now you see Im secretly hoping the 63 being a newer generation engine, stop/start, etc will have the same fuel economy as the 420. That way we upgrade wit no downside!

Right....?

There has to be some kind of man maths you can adopt for this - petrol's cheaper than diesel and as you say, it will be a newer, more efficient engine. You might even get better residuals..........maybe.

What about the new G Wagen 6x6?!