Volkswagen Touareg R50 & Mercedes Benz ML500 review
June 12, 2008 by Paul Maric
David Twomey – Mercedes Benz ML500:
The Mercedes-Benz ML500 you see here will set you back a total of $133,680, which is a lot of money for an off-road vehicle that’s major challenge is probably going to be the speed-humps in the local supermarket car park.
Having gotten that off my chest I think the only other serious objection you can have to the ML500 is the question of how do you justify a 5.5-litre V8 engine in these days of sky-rocketing fuel prices.
In truth, you don’t, because the 3.2-litre V6 diesel option in the ML320 CDI makes a lot more sense and offers similar torque to the V8, but again it’s a matter of choice and this is a free country.
It must be said that the new 5.5-litre, 90-degree, V8, which can also be found in a number of other Mercedes-Benz vehicles, is also more fuel efficient than its predecessor.
The engine also delivers a huge power gain of more than 60kW and now punches out 285kW at 6000rpm, which is enough to punch the 2.2 tonne ML500 from zero to 100km/h in a claimed 5.8 seconds.
We did not have the opportunity to test that claim but have to say that give a hefty dab on the throttle, the ML500 feels quick, and there is that delightful V8 burble from the twin exhaust pipes, which I suspect is part of the reason most owners buy the car.
Torque is also up by an impressive 70Nm for a total of 530Nm that’s available from 2800rpm to 4800rpm.
Coupled with the latest Mercedes-Benz seven-speed automatic gearbox this means the drive is always smooth and the ML feels like it would pull all day if one was able to give the throttle its full head – oh for a German autobahn!
Mercedes-Benz lists the ADR combined cycles fuel consumption for the ML500 at 13.4 litres per 100km, down slightly from the previous model, and over the period of our test, which took in both city and country driving in almost equal proportions, we found the vehicle used an average of 13.9L/100km.
However, some enthusiastic driving on twisty mountain roads soon saw that figure scoot up into the 18L/100km and a little beyond for short periods.
Given the size and weight of the ML500, and the fact that sports type driving in the mountains is not what it’s primarily designed for, nor is it the typical use expected of a typical owner, then the fuel figures are actually pretty good.
So given that there is only a 0.3L per 100 km difference in fuel consumption the ML500 would be cheaper to run given the current 20c per litre Diesel commands. And the ML500 is quicker in the 0-100 sprint. And in my opinion much better looking. I know the V10 diesel in a techno tour de force, but isn’t it a bit of overkill? It would be more at home under the bonnet of a 10 tonne truck.
^^agreed
I’m surprised that VW have a V10 in their lineup, as the price is up there in Audi territory. Also considering the Tiguan is competing against vehicles like the Rav4 and CRV, it is a big step up to the Touareg. This vehicle really should be rivaling Klugers and CX-9s, not M-Class’ and X5s.
^agreed.
Also forgetting about the price differences but when making such a comparison between these two vehicles, shouldn’t you be comparing it against the AMG model, given that the VW is a R50?
^ Agreed, however when you take cost into account they are direct competitors…
But then again VW is the bargain basement german automaker…
But then again you can’t compare it to CX-9 nor Kluger either, those entries are far too poor to even consider.
Even tho one is an SUV and one is a Large 4×4, I’d say the only Toyota you could compare the R50 to is the new Landcruiser 200 series with twin turbo V8 diesel, closer in price, power and offroad capability.
Certainly the new BMW X5 sd would have been a better car to compare to? With twin turbo performance from the diesel 6 and economy to make a Prius blush?
Still love that ML tho, gimmie the euro V8 diesel please!!!
^Yes, but the price here is almost identical, and as such its probably the most relevent comparison. And the 375kW AMG ML63 is in a totally different league. Perhaps a Twin Turbo Diesel X5 would be a better comparison.
^^Just to be clear, I’m not blaming Caradvice for comparing this to the M-Class, I’m saying VW in the first place, should have made this car rival with much cheaper 4WD/SUVs. As it seems a bit out there in the Volkswagen lineup and is positioned and priced in Audi territory.
Having been lucky enough to experience the “normal” Touareg TT V10 previously, I can only imagine the R50 model would be quite a weapon.
I dare say it has the edge looks wise over the MB too.
I guess at the end of the day it comes down to personal choice really – id happily own either as a tourer to eat up those country KM’s.
Dlr1, you are WRONG about the 20c price difference.
In Melbourne yesterday, ULP was 1.669, Dsl was 1.760, and 98ron PULP was 1.799.
Can’t for the life of me see where the 20 cents is.
You always compare Dsl with 91ron, where you should only compare it with 98ron since all the euro petrol engines want 98.
Performance wise both don’t better the FPV Territory F6X with it’s 270kw/550nm. Whilst the fixtures and fittings will probobly be better in both these vehicles the engineering of the FPV is up to the level of these performance suv’s and practicality of the FPV for a family is second to none. Mind you purchasing decisions for these two vehicles is as much about ego than economic considerations – My two Territory Ghia’s cost less than my mate’s ML350 (and are better vehicles) but don’t the Merc drivers look down their noses at the rest of us.
Good review guys and nice pics, keep the comparison articles coming! They’re every bit as good a read as the stand alone ones. Thanks.
Reckless1, 3 days ago in NSW the difference was up to 30c at some servos. The average has been around 20cpl. Today ULP 166.9, DSL 186.9, 98RON 174.9. I’m not saying that its 20c per litre every day. Sometimes more sometimes less. Do you take every comment so literally? Certainly your diesel price is quite cheap compared to what I was forced to pay earlier this week.
Good read, and well balanced report. I would like to see a comparison between the R50 , BMW X5 SDi, and Porsche GTS. There needs to be an equalisation of price exercise as well. The R50 is very, very well equipped standard compared to the others. I did the numbers and added almost $40k to the BMW. VW also offered a 5 year warranty the others didnt. As for the price of Diesel Vs. Petrol – spot on. Little difference as it is recommended to run 98 octaine. For the pureists historically, a Diesel powered vehicle has a premium resale vale compared to the same model in Petrol. 15% is the Industry benchmark.
I really don’t think they can compare the R50 to the ML500.. I think the VW competitor for the ML500 is the standard V10 model of the Touareg.
Keep the sports models together (R50 with ML63). Even though I know the ML is 1.8 secs faster.
AGREE Maca:
I’ve noticed that aradvice have some bizzare comparisons with vehicles from different sub-segments, engine comparisons variations (Diesel and petrol competitor road tests) and spec levels.
How are readers meant to compare similar vehicle types within a particular segment when the tested vehicles have so much variation?
In the close up of the centre stack, there is clearly a button of a sports suspension setting.
the VW would make an awesome tow car 4 my drag car all the torque