The 'diesel dog' name came from a smart-ass coworker a while back... pure jealousy, I know. I thought it was funny in the same way a red-head gets the nickname 'bluey'...
and it pops out once in a while! It's actually a term of endearment!
It's also known as 'The Beast' around home too... for it's voracious appetite for asphalt, not uncivilized tendencies!
My V6 seems to be a little more fuel-hungry than the older inline-six models (according to what I've noted on Fuelly),
but with the additional smog requirements that come about each year, I'm not really surprised.
Still better than a gas-powered model and having owned diesel cars since the last century, I'd be hard-pressed to go back.
Only those who drive the MB diesels understand... those that haven't can't really judge!
So true indeed.
As you say 'Only those who drive the MB diesels understand'. Others don't for the most part believe us when we say the truth.
I have had now eleven MBZ diesels beginning with the first, a used '61 190 D/B in 1966.
Beginning in 2007, all diesels in N A got the 'DPF treatment' which is a restriction on the exhaust.
Could be one of the reasons the 2007 and later V6s don't get as good fuel economy.
With the seven speed transmission, you have a taller top gear. (1.9345 vs 2.1995).
Mine turns 1772 RPMs at 60 mph. What are you turning at 96 kph? Should be a little bit less. Say 1560 RPMs?
Speaking of fuel economy, the 2010s and later do worse. The W-212s are heavier than yours and wider and the engineers lowered the rear-end ratio to compensate.
The EPA says that they only get one mpg better than the gas V6 does.
Plus they need AdBlue which does away with your spare tire and jack.
Oh well . . . That's progrees I guess. That's why I will run this 'old dog' forever!
Only at 136K miles now and just getting well broken in.