Mercedes-Benz has released a new generation of V-engines, and revisions start from the basic construction with the use of lightweight aluminium crankcases, pistons and cylinder heads while the crankshaft, connecting rods and valves are now of special forged steel.
Other improvements to the V8 and V6 include multi-spark ignition and a third generation direct fuel injection system with spray-guided combustion and piezo-electric injectors that increase fuel efficiency. This creates a homogeneous combustion in the V8 and stratified combustion in the V6 for a leaner burn. Add in start stop technology, shift point adjustment, specific friction reducing measures and overall fuel consumption is reduced by more than 20%.
The new V8 (non AMG, to power ‘500’ badged Mercs) comes with two turbochargers for 700 Nm of torque at 1,800 rpm. Although the 4,663 cc unit sees a 15% decrease in engine displacement, it produces 12% more power than before – 435 bhp versus 388 bhp – and that headline grabbing 700 Nm is 32% more than the previous 530 Nm. Stuttgart says that the power available at low revs is similar to that of a naturally aspirated 7.0-litre engine.
Fuel consumption has seen a drop too. The CL500 previously did 12.3 litres per 100 km; with the new engine the big coupe manages 9.3 litres for every 100km, which is significant. CO2 figures are down to 224 g/km from 288 g/km.
The most notable change to the naturally aspirated V6 is the shifting of the V angle between the cylinder banks from 90 degrees to 60 degrees. Mercedes has future proofed this unit by designing it to accommodate future turbocharging applications with the help of a modular design concept. This in turn allows the balancer shaft to counter primary vibrations for better smoothness.
While the 3.5-litre size is unchanged, the V6 gets a new intake and exhaust gas system with a variable-resonance intake manifold and optimised airflow. These combine for increased power (from 272 bhp to 306 bhp) and torque (from 350 Nm to 370 Nm). With it, the S350 achieves 7.6 litres per 100 kilometres and 177 g/km of CO2, a big improvement from the engine it replaces.
Look after the jump for more images of the engine.
[zenphotopress number=999 album=1116]
Looking to sell your car? Sell it with Carro.
better engines, all around. but then again, i expect no less from a company who’s founder invented the car, and has been in business for more than a hundred years.
“The CL500 previously did 12.3 litres per 100 km; with the new engine the big coupe manages 9.3 litres for every 100km,”
Hehe interestingly the new satria neo automatics have similar fuel consumption figures.
Just saying.
wow… getting more and more efficient engine.
I don’t mean to offend M.Benz’s fans here but honestly, the new V6 3.5 engine isn’t very outstanding compared to other 3.5L engines from the japanese rivals.
Lexus’ 2GR-FSE has managed to achieve exactly the same number of horsepower 2 years ago, with the introduction of the GS350. Furthermore, the Lexus engine has more torque at 37.9kgm.
Nissan/ Infiniti’s VQ35HR is even stronger, 311hp.
So what’s M.Benz trying to tell us?
Anyway, the turbo V8 is strong though. :)
Interesting, What are their FC like?
The 2GR-FSE has 12 fuel injectors, a DI injector and a port injector for each of the engine’s six cylinders, fuel consumption improves about 4% compared with a comparable DI-only engine, and start-up emissions are reduced by about 20%.
At 306 hp, the 2GR-FSE is one of the highest specific-output normally aspirated V-6s available, combined-cycle fuel consumption is rated at 9.8L/100km. M.Benz’s is rated 7.6L, sounds impressive but is it City fuel consumption or highway or combined? The 2GR-FSE’s highway fuel consumption is rated 8L/100 km.
The 2GR-FSE was already on the Ward’s 10 Best Engines list for 2006, 2007, 2008 and 2009, now only M.Benz introduce something similar in performance. :(
And, the updated 2GR-FSE has 311hp and 38.1kgm of torque.
N/A engine always have their own limit and toyota is on that limit. If Mercedes by any chance intro a Turbocharger on the V6 any sooner, they will smoke whatever records that Toyota held on that engine. So, just wait for it. I think they are very conscious about FC but at the same time still not forgetting Power.
It’s a sure thing that every (type) engine has its own limits, advantages and disadvantages but as mentioned by you, both are N/A engines so we’re talking bout performances among these N/A engines, and it’s a different story if M.Benz introduces turbochargers into the engine. They wouldn’t be in the same category anymore, am i not right? :) Btw, i believe Toyota would be able to tune a force-induction engine properly, wouldn’t they? The legendary Supra is the best example. :)
But, since this M.Benz engine is a new engine using newer technologies, as proclaimed by themselves, why is the performance still the same as a 5-year-old engine from engine? What i meant was this engine should have higher power rates as well as fuel consumption figure. Nothing personal, take it easy. :)
5-year-old engine from Lexus*
I think it’s the issue with fine tuning. Like you said, it’s a new engine, it’ll need a few years before they get it to it’s max potential. No, not really offended. I do hope Toyota really starts to introduce standard road going turbo series. In terms of development, they seem to be lacking behind (almost all the JDMs are lacking)
Force induction engines seem to be the trend now, just like dual clutch transmission but repairing costs and maintainance costs for a force-induction engine is much higher compared to N/A engine, the repairing work will also be more difficult as well.
And, in a recent report which has been posted by Paul quite some time ago, it was stated that the ‘life span’ for force-induction engines are shorter compared to that of N/A engines.
Toyota as well as their engines have long been known to be easy-to-maintain, low maintainance fee, less problems compared to others, reliable and durable. Force induction technology has improved much compared to the old times but we actually have very little knowledge bout them. Perhaps Toyota as well as other Japs companies are still developing the technology in house. Who knows they might suddenly come out one day and shock us again with a highly efficient and powerful force induction technology, like what they did with the Hybrid Synergy Drive?…haha
joe, the consumption is the catch here. 7.6 litres in the combined cycle vs. 9.8 in the combined cycle, is what separates these two engines. Fuel efficiency is the most difficult part in designing a combustion engine these days, and the new thermodynamic, dynamic and mechanical features in the new MB engines obviously make it more efficient than the “old” Lexus engine, while also returning respectable power and torque figures almost on par with the Lexus mill.
The Lexus isn’t exactly old technology, either, with its DI and stuff and mileage isn’t too bad, but behind these abbreviations there’s on ongoing evolution taking place with ever-increassing rail pressures, piezo-electric nozzles and so on.
I believe it will overwhelm the japanese when it goes turbo and it will… soon.
“with the new engine the big coupe manages 9.3 litres for every 100km, which is significant. ”
Wow!! Even my Waja CPS FC is about 9 liters/ 100km……….wake up Proton.
Very cool…..Wondering which model will this engine be placed into…….
Miss the in line 6 that used to power the E240. If only they upgraded the in line 6 like what BMW did.
Sadly, now Mercs (here) are powered by the 1.8L supercharged engines.
Mercs no longer uses in line 6 engines after the W210 is updated. E240 uses a V6 engine.
And no more 1.8 supercharged engines too. Now is all 1.8 turbo engines.
Thx for the clarification
`Wait till u try 300E in-line 6. LOL
Good. Technology is getting better in maintaining balance of fuel consumption, power and exhaust gas production.
The 2.6 litre V6 in the E240 isn’t very frugal
Ya. Good tech. Good fuel consumption figures.
But merc and beemers cant make a reliable car. Or anything as reliable as mitsubishi engines or honda engines.
My 2007 merc breaks down often enough. And it seems to be an accepted fact that continentals are a lot less reliable than jap marques.