Tom, I did a calc several years ago and came up with '99 E300 has 3.46 and the E320 has a 3.07 rear. What does the 98 model have?
Anyone know why the US '98 E300 gets only 34 mpg while the '99 gets 36 on
> the highway? The weight/HP of the two are identical so I'm thinking it's
> the final drive ratio. But, I only have the '98 spec for that. Anyone have
> the '99?
>
>
According to the sales literature for the '98, it is the same - 3.46:1 for the e300 and 3.07:1 for the e320. I just test drove the '98 and get about
2600-2700 rpm at 70 mph but haven't had the opportunity to drive a '99 yet.since the rear ends are the same for '98 and '99, where did you get the information that the '99 gets better mileage? On a 2000 mile trip recently, my mpg was between 33 - 37 with an average for
34 overall. I suspect that the variation was due to the fill-ups, i.e did not top off.
I was quoting the EPA ratings. Maybe they changed their methodology between
98 and 99. The site appears to be down right now, but here are the links:1999
Have something to add? Share your thoughts — no account required.
Ask the community — no account required