2009 Mercedes-benz Gl320 Bluetec on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This or That: Mercedes S-Class 350SD vs. 2003 Jaguar XJR [w/poll]

Budget. It's a wretched word, whether you're going out to eat, shipping for a new outfit or, more relevant to today's discussion, buying a car. Massive marketing machines have convinced us, as a population, to buy the best you can afford, repercussions be damned – If you've saved up some money, spend it! All of it, on whatever it is that currently sits atop your personal Amazon wishlist, be it a Timex that takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin', a $17,000 Gold Apple Watch or a $60,000 Rolex Cosmograph Daytona. But what if the best you can afford is... say, $12,815? For that price, you can buy a brand-new 2015 Nissan Versa (including destination), assuming you're happy with zero options and a manual transmission. For that price, you'll get standard air conditioning, a CD player and... well, a warranty. Pretty sensible choice, Captain Frugal. But also ridiculously uninspired. And so that brings us to today's edition of This or That, in which two Autoblog editors pick differing sides of an argument and duke it out to see which one of us can convince you, dear reader, is better. Or at least less wrong. You be the judge. As a refresher, I'm two-and-two on these challenges, having lost the first and second editions before storming back in rounds three and four. Today, as alluded to above, we decided to throw our collective brainpower (oh lord, what have we done?) at what may be the single most difficult question currently confounding the best minds our planet has to offer: What is the best used used luxury car you can buy for the price of a 2015 Nissan Versa? Shall we meet our contenders? Allow me to introduce you to the most perfect luxury car money can buy (assuming the amount of money you're holding is equal to the amount of the cheapest new car currently sold in America, the Nissan Versa). My pick is the 1991 Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Not just any S-Class, but the legendary W126, which was produced between 1979 and 1992. And not just any W126, either, but one powered by a 3.5-liter turbodiesel engine. And with that, I send the argument to my esteemed colleague, Associate Editor Chris Bruce. Bruce: Jeremy, we had over $12,000 to budget for this challenge, and the best you can manage is a 24-year-old diesel Mercedes? I love oil-burners as much as any other auto writer with their mountains of torque and huge cruising range, but you're making this too easy on me. Also, you're really choosing a brown, diesel, German luxury sedan?

Mercedes-Benz C-Class scores well in TUV lifecycle analysis

Mercedes-Benz drivers and treehuggers don't always go hand in hand, but, like a lot of other companies, the German automaker is looking to boost its green cred. This time, it's all about the car's lifecycle carbon footprint. The Daimler AG unit is using its new C-Class sedan as an example of how it's making progress in that department. Mercedes-Benz, citing the inspection authority TUV Sud, says the 2015 C-Class has a 10-percent lower lifecycle carbon footprint than its 2014 predecessor, based on driving about 125,000 miles over the life of the car. About 95 percent of the car (by weight) is recyclable, slightly higher than the average for most vehicles, and the model has upped its amount of recyclable materials up by 23 percent and increased its use of "natural materials" by 55 percent. Better aerodynamics also helps things out on the fuel-economy front, Benz says. Taking a longer view, the 2015 C-Class's carbon footprint is 28 percent better than the 2007 version that launched the vehicle line. The 2015 C-Class hasn't received a fuel-economy rating from the US Environmental Protection Agency, which tagged the 2014 C350 with a combined fuel-efficiency rating of 24 miles per gallon from its 3.5-liter 6-cylinder engine. Check out Mercedes-Benz's press release below and find the Autoblog First Drive impressions here. TUV Environmental Certificate: The new C-Class makes its mark with an exemplary life cycle assessment Stuttgart, Mar 28, 2014 The C-Class sets efficiency benchmarks for its class, helped by an intelligent lightweight concept, excellent aerodynamics and new, frugal engines. The neutral inspectors from the TUV Sud technical inspection authority have confirmed the high level of environmental compatibility of the new Mercedes-Benz C-Class. Besides a sensuous, clean-cut design, a top-class interior and a host of technical innovations, the premium saloon also boasts an exemplary life cycle assessment, which is why it has been awarded the Environmental Certificate in accordance with the ISO 14062 standard. Professor Dr. Herbert Kohler, Chief Environmental Officer at Daimler AG: "Our engineers have pulled out all the stops in an effort to lower fuel consumption while at the same time further accentuating the car's sporty character. By employing an intelligent lightweight design with a high proportion of aluminium, for example, it has been possible to make the new C-Class up to 100 kilograms lighter than its predecessor.

Race recap: 2016 Monaco Grand Prix gets very wet, a little wild

More than at any other race, the Monaco Grand Prix question is: which combination of demolition derby, Safety Cars, and bad pit strategy will decide the podium? Last year Lewis Hamilton's late, confounding pit stop cost him victory. The year before, Nico Rosberg's qualifying "mistake" put him on pole and Mercedes-AMG Petronas' pit strategy sealed his win – good for Nico, bad for Hamilton and the rest of the field. In 2013 Hamilton dropped from second to fourth when he lollygagged in the pits. In all three years, Rosberg won. The new X factor for 2016: a Red Bull resurgence that helped Daniel Ricciardo clinch his first career pole. Nevertheless, bad pit strategy had its say in the results. Ricciardo built up a 13-second lead by Lap 15 in spite of heavy rains that forced the Safety Car to lead the first eight laps of the race. Ricciardo stopped on Lap 23 to switch to intermediate tires for the drying track, ceding the lead to Hamilton. Hamilton pitted from the lead on Lap 31 for softs, then Red Bull pulled Ricciardo in again on Lap 32 and made a snap decision to put him on ultra softs, but the tires weren't ready when Ricciardo reached his pit box. What should have been a three-second pit stop turned into a 13.6-second pit stop. Ricciardo left the pits as Hamilton came down the straight and the Aussie lost the lead into the first corner. Despite two attempts to pass later in the race, Hamilton finished first, the Aussie second. It's the second race in a row where pit strategy cost Ricciardo a near-certain win. Conversely, Force India nailed both tire strategy and pit timing with Sergio Perez. The Mexican started in eighth but got into third before half the race was done, passing four cars in the pits, and finished on the podium's final step. Otherwise the order barely changed from about half distance, with Ferrari driver Sebatian Vettel in fourth, followed by Fernando Alonso in the McLaren, Nico Hulkenberg in the second Force India, Rosberg in the second Mercedes, Carlos Sainz for Toro Rosso, Jenson Button in the second McLaren, and Felipe Massa taking the final point for tenth for Williams. Storms didn't only hover over the area, though – dark clouds hung around several teams and drivers. Mercedes' reliability is no longer so reliable. The Silver Arrows suffered engine issues on both cars in qualifying, and Hamilton's problem almost kept him from setting a time in Q3.