From March 1995 - Road & Track, Elite Eights Comparison Road Test
[B/]
About this article - I own/drive both a 92Q and a 92 400e MBZ (similar to the e420 in the comparison, the e420 only has minor cosmetic changes as well as a bit more tweaked engine managment vs my 92, dispite this the 400e420 still is SLOW off the line)
They rated the gearboxes as being equal (both 8.5 scores) NOT the MBZ gearbox SUCKS vs the Q's quick response. They claimed that the MBZ had interior noise of 66db while the Q was 65db. NHV is SUPERIOR in the Q. Driving position - again the MBZ came in ahead of the Q. The Q's ergos are SUPERIOR - the MBZ doesn't even have a tilt wheel! The AC is noisy enough on a hot day to really fatigue the driver and it's analog interface is slow to change air temp. You only have 2 selectable speed settings on the fan - low and hi and it's up to the "auto" setting to get anything in between. Bottom line is that the MBZ lacks refinement, which was not discussed in this article. If the price weren't so high it might excuse the shortcomings.
True the MBZ is more of a drivers car, but I think R&T's analysis was unfaily biased towards the MBZ.
I should ad that in 400e is a much costlier vehicle to own. Thank God I didn't pay full retail or I'd be PISSED!
AZhitman - check out this website
http://web.tampabay.rr.com/actionfit/home.html