ML diesel v ML V6

[Gucci]

Well I remain utterly convinced that I'll be getting an ML (thanks for all the feedback and advice). Now, I know the obvious pros and cons of diesel - namely diesel costs less to run. BUT, man o man does the V6 sound soooo much better . I only do about 5000 miles a year tops...with a couple of Cornwall runs a year in that. So, would I be 'a mental' to go for the V6 (which cost £2000 less aswell) OR be more angelic and get the diesel? How much would the difference be in the real world?

 

[glojo]

Your post made me smile as the latest ML diesel is a........ V6?

If your talking older ML's and appreciated the noise of a gas guzzler, then it is a no brainer to go for the ML55AMG. It has a sound to die for, but what about depreciation. If your happy to live with the costs of fuel, the alarming depreciation of the petrol version, then of course the 4x4 image, go for the 55AMG

 

[Gucci]

Ah yes the old ML was what I was on about. As for depreciation, having looked at some prices £14,000 for low mileage 2003 ML500 V8.... much of that depreciation has happened. I guess the worry is how long it would take to sell on....oh and what Livingstone and Brown have in store for nice cars... gits.

 

[Rose Chap]

With such a low mileage I'd definitely go for the biggest petrol engine in your price bracket. You'll get more toys, a better soundtrack, and vastly improved performance.

 

[grober]

One reason for getting a late 5 cylinder diesel model is that it was more than likely built at the GRATZ plant in AUSTRIA and not in the USA. The build quality was reckoned to be better on those. From the HONEST JOHN WEBSITE http://www.honestjohn.co.uk/index.php?url=/carbycar/index.htm

"Eclipsed in the snob stakes by the BMW X5. American build quality not quite up to Stuttgart's (Austrian build better than American) and some structural build quality problems emerged, such as missing spot welds. . Hideous optional external rear wheel carrier that blots out rearward vision from the interior mirror.Quite a few complaints about the inability of MB dealers to rectify faults. Isolated complaints of failures of 6-speed manual gearboxes fitted to 270CDI. Parts slow coming through for the steering recall. Multi section sliding steel sunroof is highly prone to failure. If the motor on one side fails, the other motor skews the panels and the whole thing seizes up and costs a fortune to fix. 5th from bottom out of 137 models in 2003 Top Gear survey. New second generation model from summer 2005. Cat converter casings on R to X reg prone to splitting and MB wants £1,000 each for replacements. Came 3rd = from bottom in 2005 JD Power/What Car Survey of 23,000 cars reg Sep 2002 to Aug 2003 with satisfaction score of 71.2%."

 

[Gucci]

mmmm good point, although i did have the american built Z3... this suffered from the US build trademark....flimsy glovebox. mmmm the chin scratching goes on.

 

[glojo]

.Quite a few complaints about the inability of MB dealers to rectify faults. Isolated complaints of failures of 6-speed manual gearboxes fitted to 270CDI.

Crikey,
I never knew they had a six speed manual?

Buy the AMG

Regards,
John the curious

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I've seen several ML55 between £12k and £14k BUY IT NOW on ebay, but they seem to be a good chunk more on Autotrader.co.uk

Given your mileage it might make more sense to save some money on the purchase price, and offset that against the higher running costs.

And as long as you can afford to run the car of your choice, don't worry about Gordy and Ken's antics. They'd try and screw us for every penny if we all switched to G-Wiz and push bikes. In fact I wonder if the next election campaign strapline will be "Show me the money!".

Disclaimer: I don't think any other party would have a different approach should they ever get in power. Regardless of whether red, blue, green or yellow, if they're in Government then they must all raise taxes, and the motorist is teh source of easy money.

Sorry - back to topic...

 

[Bobby Dazzler]

I never knew they had a six speed manual?

Certainly few and far between. I believe the Oxford English Dictionary shows a photo of a manual ML to explain the meaning of hens teeth.

IIRC Blassberg had the 6-speed and that did 100k+ without drama.

 

[hawk20]

Ah yes the old ML was what I was on about. As for depreciation, having looked at some prices £14,000 for low mileage 2003 ML500 V8.... much of that depreciation has happened. I guess the worry is how long it would take to sell on....oh and what Livingstone and Brown have in store for nice cars... gits.

If you go to the DVLA website you will see that Band G (the top emissions band that Ken will clobber with a £25 per day Congestion Charge and which attracts higher road tax (vehicle excise duty) does not include the 5 litre V8 you would like to buy. The logic is sound. The car has already been built and the decision to buy was made before recent announcements. What is done is done, and cannot be undone. If you don't buy it someone else will. The higher band applies to cars bought and registered after march 2006 because the new band could affect their decision. So you are safe to buy what you like up to March 2006 reg. Good luck. And by the way you can't save the planet. See posting 103 in this thread: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?t=21921&page=11

Nothing Britain does will make a blind bit of difference to the life of the world. We are 60 million people out of 6 billion on earth. A mere 1% of the long-term problem. Go through misery and cut our emissions by 20% and then you have cut the world's problem to 99.8% of its size. Oh good! Even if long-term you think we will use twice our share of energy, then we are 2% of the problem and 20% off what we consume will cut the problem to 99.6% of its size. Useless tokenism.

The real problem is that the world's population was 1 billion when Mrs Thatcher was born and is now 6 billion as we near the end of her one long lifetime. SIXFOLD in one lifetime. Roll forward another long lifetime. Could there be 36 billion people. Our present population will be only one sixth of one per cent of the total and even if we cut our consumption to zero it will not make a blind bit of difference. Not one fig, one jot, not one iota of difference.

On emissions, we need to persuade the US, India and China or nothing else matters. Only CND types think unilateral disarmament works. The only argument that seems to work is 'I will, if you will, so will I.' Do it when they do it. Then you have some bargaining chips, then you get invited to the talks.

But even with them on board, unless we all address the galloping population problem, it will not be possible to even stop emissions growing -let alone cut them. If population doubles every 30-40 years, are we going to HALVE our emissions per head in the same period???????

EVEN if we do, that will leave emissions just as high as they are now.

Really want to do something. Tell the Catholic church to shut up about birth control (nothing in the Bible supports their position anyway) and to stop leaning on US presidents to take the population problem off every world conference on the environment. Then dish out the Pill 'free' to all you can get to take it.

If not; say goodnight Fred.

 

[BenzComander]

If you go to the DVLA website you will see that Band G (the top emissions band that Ken will clobber with a £25 per day Congestion Charge and which attracts higher road tax (vehicle excise duty) does not include the 5 litre V8 you would like to buy. The logic is sound. The car has already been built and the decision to buy was made before recent announcements. What is done is done, and cannot be undone. If you don't buy it someone else will. The higher band applies to cars bought and registered after march 2006 because the new band could affect their decision. So you are safe to buy what you like up to March 2006 reg. Good luck. And by the way you can't save the planet. See posting 103 in this thread: -
http://forums.mercedesclub.org.uk/showthread.php?t=21921&page=11

Nothing Britain does will make a blind bit of difference to the life of the world. We are 60 million people out of 6 billion on earth. A mere 1% of the long-term problem. Go through misery and cut our emissions by 20% and then you have cut the world's problem to 99.8% of its size. Oh good! Even if long-term you think we will use twice our share of energy, then we are 2% of the problem and 20% off what we consume will cut the problem to 99.6% of its size. Useless tokenism.

The real problem is that the world's population was 1 billion when Mrs Thatcher was born and is now 6 billion as we near the end of her one long lifetime. SIXFOLD in one lifetime. Roll forward another long lifetime. Could there be 36 billion people. Our present population will be only one sixth of one per cent of the total and even if we cut our consumption to zero it will not make a blind bit of difference. Not one fig, one jot, not one iota of difference.

On emissions, we need to persuade the US, India and China or nothing else matters. Only CND types think unilateral disarmament works. The only argument that seems to work is 'I will, if you will, so will I.' Do it when they do it. Then you have some bargaining chips, then you get invited to the talks.

But even with them on board, unless we all address the galloping population problem, it will not be possible to even stop emissions growing -let alone cut them. If population doubles every 30-40 years, are we going to HALVE our emissions per head in the same period???????

EVEN if we do, that will leave emissions just as high as they are now.

Really want to do something. Tell the Catholic church to shut up about birth control (nothing in the Bible supports their position anyway) and to stop leaning on US presidents to take the population problem off every world conference on the environment. Then dish out the Pill 'free' to all you can get to take it.

If not; say goodnight Fred.

:bannana: :bannana: Hawk20 for President

 

[splang]

Thanks for this post!

I have been reading with interest and note my car tax should be £190....

I told my post office this at the end of last year as my vehicle was registered on 11.2003 but they said "oh no, its gone up to £210 in the budget!"

Refund on its way i reckon...
Steve

 

[Gucci]

HUGE round of applause for Hawk20. Very satisfying to hear some common sense and rational thinking. And whilst we're hearing the politicians saying we have to act now...what they really mean, is to tax anyone not in sandals to breaking point. And how much of that revenue goes into 'environmental causes?' mmmm, more like getting the books to balance after Iraq war.

ML V8...pass the cheque book. :bannana:

 

[grober]

a graph and a couple of questions!

Who do you think "consumes" the products of the new Indian and Chinese industrial growth? And why do you think the USA invaded IRAQ? you can download the latest BP energy review 2006 here
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_int...l_review_of_world_energy_full_report_2006.pdf

 

[Dieselman]

Gober, Thanks for the post above.
I was going to say that apparently the US makes something like 25% of the World greenhouse pollution, Western Europe about 10% and hte rest of the World the rest.
Isn't it so that a Western Europe citizen creates something like 20x the pollution of someone in the third world?

So if good old USA and Western Europe reduce their emmissions to that of the third world then the reduction would be about 30%. Isn't the UK supposed to be one of the worst polluters in Western Europe? Hmm...

 

[Dieselman]

:bannana: :bannana: Hawk20 for President

Whilst I think you are joking, this just goes to show how the general population is misled by "rational" argument.

 

[hawk20]

Gober, Thanks for the post above.
I was going to say that apparently the US makes something like 25% of the World greenhouse pollution, Western Europe about 10% and hte rest of the World the rest.
Isn't it so that a Western Europe citizen creates something like 20x the pollution of someone in the third world?

So if good old USA and Western Europe reduce their emmissions to that of the third world then the reduction would be about 30%. Isn't the UK supposed to be one of the worst polluters in Western Europe? Hmm...

Dieselman this 'sounds' impressive but it isn't. Just take the aircraft problem. We must stop taking holidays abroad, some say, tax all flights says Gordon and so on and so on. So I looked up the figures. All world aircraft travel is 1.6% of CO2 emissions. What's that about a year or two of growth from China?

Yes IF the US and ALL Europe reduce emissions together that would make a dent in today's problem BUT TWO PROBLEMS: -
1. The US and ALL Europe aren't reducing emisssions together and we do not run them and cannot make them. That was my point. No use us suffering alone unless we get the big polluters to do it too. No point at all.
2. And unless we tackle population growth our efforts will be in vain. And nobody is even talking about that problem, let alone tackling it.