E500

Hi,

I have been offered a great deal I think. There are a couple of concerns I have....

Its a 1994 E500 with 70 k on the clock. Bodywork and performance are both excellent. Actually the performance is outstanding.

My first concern is fuel economy?? What is it like? The seller would obviously say it was ok (I live in UK... 82 pence a litre, I think that works out to be around $1.35).

Parts?? I have a E320 coupe currently. Is there a big difference in cost??

Thanks

Bhoona

Reply to
Bhoona
Loading thread data ...

Fuel economy should be similiar to a 1994 SL500. The basic engine is the same but as I recall, the E500 does have some changes to it's fuel injection which will decrease fuel economy even further. You might look at the U.S. EPA fuel economy numbers on a '94 SL500. I don't think they tested the E500. The EPA website is . I've read elsewhere that the mileage is something like 15 mpg. At $1.35 per litre, you're looking at $5.13/gallon. How much do you intend to drive the car? And many parts prices are much higher than for your E320.

Reply to
VCopelan

I average 20+MPG with my '94 SL500 (composite mileage romping around suburban roads with short burst or two on the highway every now, pinning myself to the seatback for yuks). Not that anyone contemplating an MB... with a 5.0 liter engine none-the-less, should be overly concerned about mileage... it's performance, performance, performance baby, and we only go through this life but once (maybe! :o)

Cheers,

Paul

PS: I love that car, and will likely keep it for many more years!

---

formatting link
---

Reply to
Paul Hyndman

You need to be careful asking this is an international forum. The US gallon is substantially different to the Imperial gallon. This means you can get what looks like VERY scary mpg comments popping up! Mike

Reply to
Just Mike

I have a 2002 SL500 and typically get 20 MPG in mixed driving and up to 24MPG on the highway (that's to a U.S. gallon).

I used to have a 98 SL500 and it did slightly better on mileage, however the newer SL has wider, lower profile tires which probably extracts a mileage penalty. The SL is a heavier car than the E500 so I would think the E500 might do as well or better on mileage.

Reply to
jav

Yes, the U.S. gallon is only 3.8 liters so the EPA numbers are somewhat misleading. The Imperial gallon is 4.55 liters. My comment was that $1.35 per liter was $5.13 per gallon (those are U.S. gallons). Conversion from liters to Imperial gallons would result in an even higher price per gallon ($6.14 USD per Imperial gallon). U.S. mpg numbers are pretty scary but so are fuel prices above $6 per gallon and the net cost per mile remains the same.

Reply to
VCopelan

"Bhoona" haute in die Tasten:

Expect the fuel consumption to be 16 to 18 litres per 100 km/h, depending on the way you drive, which would be some 15-20% more than your E320 burns

Yes, I think so. The E500 was more or less handmade by Porsche mating SL500 drivetrain and axles to a W124 body. So many parts had to be customized to fit to a E500. These cars are not ultra-rare, but they are rare. If one of the special parts breaks, do not expect to find a replacement on a salvation yard.

OTOH I once drove an E500 for half an hour - and I still dream about completely going crazy and buy one somewhere in the future. What a car!

Frank

Reply to
Frank Kemper

Well, you can take the first step by acquiring a Merc...

Maybe something fairly modest like Juergen's W123 from Anno Dazumal...

Then just upgrade the engine...

:-) DAS

Reply to
Dori A Schmetterling

Ah Dori, remeber the link I posted a while back:

formatting link
Summary:

  1. Get a W124 300TE
  2. Get a slightly damaged 560SEL
  3. Transplant engine (and then some...)
  4. Enjoy!

;-)

Cheers, WS

Reply to
Lee Wei Shun

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.