Mercedes-AMG Unveils the AMG GLB 35

I think this looks really good. It's probably smaller than I'd ever want to go again but it's probably a a pretty kickass daily for somebody who likely doesn't need a ton of space too often. 

That third row looks tight...for small kids only

Will say this is probably the best looking CUV from MB today. Actually looks like a CUV and not a coupe.

39 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I think this looks really good. It's probably smaller than I'd ever want to go again but it's probably a a pretty kickass daily for somebody who likely doesn't need a ton of space too often. 

28 minutes ago, Robert Hall said:

That third row looks tight...for small kids only

Maybe Mercedes should have done what Cadillac did with the XT5: ditch the third row entirely for trunk space.  Those third-row seats should be used for storage, not passengers.

4 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Will say this is probably the best looking CUV from MB today. Actually looks like a CUV and not a coupe.

And they have the GLA for a 2 row w/ more of a coupe profile.

1 minute ago, riviera74 said:

 

Maybe Mercedes should have done what Cadillac did with the XT5: ditch the third row entirely for trunk space.  Those third-row seats should be used for storage, not passengers.

Well, they already have a couple compact 2 row models--the GLA and GLC...

25 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

 

Maybe Mercedes should have done what Cadillac did with the XT5: ditch the third row entirely for trunk space.  Those third-row seats should be used for storage, not passengers.

The third row is an option.

58 minutes ago, riviera74 said:

Maybe Mercedes should have done what Cadillac did with the XT5: ditch the third row entirely for trunk space.  Those third-row seats should be used for storage, not passengers.

Most third rows in vehicles can be folded flat. I would only assume something this size with a third row would have the rear seats fold-able so the hatch space can actually be used. 

8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Most third rows in vehicles can be folded flat. I would only assume something this size with a third row would have the rear seats fold-able so the hatch space can actually be used. 

Just hope it is truly engineered to minimize taking that cargo space, forgot which CUV I saw recently that had a fold flat 3rd row, but it was terribly implemented and ate up interior cargo space.

9 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Just hope it is truly engineered to minimize taking that cargo space, forgot which CUV I saw recently that had a fold flat 3rd row, but it was terribly implemented and ate up interior cargo space.

Definitely.

It has to be pretty damn close to flat to appeal to me. Perfectly flat isn't necessary but it has to be damn close and it isn't so much needing the extra space but laying things flat that I just bought or am transporting is the concern. 

We are debating 3rd row seats and cargo room of a 182 inch long vehicle.  The people buying this aren’t buying it for 3rd row, that 3rd row is there for the 3 times a year they need to carry a couple extra people and they can stick the kids back there.  If seating for 7 adults and cargo capacity is most important for $40k they are probably buying a minivan.

I think 300 hp is the sweet spot for this size SUV,  221 seems boring and 400 is probably pointless in a subcompact SUV.  They will sell a lot of these.

No, we're debating on the foldability of the 3rd row for the reasons you mentioned, people won't be sitting there often. 

...less torque than my MKC... 

16 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

We are debating 3rd row seats and cargo room of a 182 inch long vehicle.  The people buying this aren’t buying it for 3rd row, that 3rd row is there for the 3 times a year they need to carry a couple extra people and they can stick the kids back there.  If seating for 7 adults and cargo capacity is most important for $40k they are probably buying a minivan.

I think 300 hp is the sweet spot for this size SUV,  221 seems boring and 400 is probably pointless in a subcompact SUV.  They will sell a lot of these.

The GLB is a compact, not a sub-compact. The GLA is a sub-compact. 

Having looked at the pics of the third row I’m assuming that any kids that have to go back there are double leg amputees. I’ve said it before, if you need a third row for ANY reason, get a suitable size vehicle. Ones this size are purely a marketing gimmick IMO and a bad one at that. 

As I posted, this is probably one of the best looking CUVs MB has made in a while, yet is far from perfect and I have been looking at the pictures over and over and it finally dawned on me what makes this look cheap. Interiors are personal choice and I really do not have any big issue with it at this time as nothing stands out as glaring.

OUTSIDE, Big issue with the following two things. The bloody CHEAP looking black fake plastic Gills on the front end with the black plastic mold around the wheel wells and bottom of doors and the back bumper and the second issue is that ugly silver painted after thought on the black rear bumper wrapping around the dual exhuast.

To me, MB as a luxury auto company should have done something better than this as well as AMG is missing the flare on this model. To me this looks more like a top end regular CUV from MB.

I think it looks good, maybe just a little narrow.

6 hours ago, ccap41 said:

No, we're debating on the foldability of the 3rd row for the reasons you mentioned, people won't be sitting there often. 

...less torque than my MKC... 

Except an MKC 2.3 Ecoboost does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and a GLB 35 does it in 5.1.  This GLB is faster than an Ecoboost Mustang or V6 Camaro, and it is compact crossover.  This is the slowest AMG product and it is still pretty quick.  Plus it looks good, plus it is in the biggest growth segment, plus I suspect this will start around $45k, they'll sell lots.

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Except an MKC 2.3 Ecoboost does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and a GLB 35 does it in 5.1.  This GLB is faster than an Ecoboost Mustang or V6 Camaro, and it is compact crossover.  This is the slowest AMG product and it is still pretty quick.  Plus it looks good, plus it is in the biggest growth segment, plus I suspect this will start around $45k, they'll sell lots.

It still has less torque than a Lincoln and at higher RPM. Pathetic Mercedes. 

The GLB hasn't been tested by a 3rd party yet. I think it is safe to assume that we don't know what it is and isn't quicker than yet. 

If it happens to be quicker than a 2.3 Mustang and V6 Camaro, it should as it's nearly twice the price. FWIW, the V6 Camaro has actually tested at 0-60 in 5.1 seconds. 

14 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Except an MKC 2.3 Ecoboost does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and a GLB 35 does it in 5.1.  This GLB is faster than an Ecoboost Mustang or V6 Camaro, and it is compact crossover.  This is the slowest AMG product and it is still pretty quick.  Plus it looks good, plus it is in the biggest growth segment, plus I suspect this will start around $45k, they'll sell lots.

Non-sequitor.  There is no point in comparing a compact CUV with a Camaro or Mustang.  Different niche, different buyers.

Not to mention; no one is drag racing CUVs so 0-60 times are meaningless.

7 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Not to mention; no one is drag racing CUVs so 0-60 times are meaningless.

Exactly.  Only journos and brand obsessives care about such nonsense.

I honestly would rather have them quote 45 to 60 time as a more meaningful time representing passing, getting up to freeway speed from the on ramp. I am sure there are far better ways we could think up quickness to represent real world driving than the 0 to 60 time.

I've been over the 0-60 time for awhile now.

I know it isn't as realistic but I feel like it hits more points and that's the 1/4 mile time and mph. I feel like you get an idea of the initial grip, mid range power, high end power, and multiple shift changes. I know the overall measurement itself is pretty meaningless but it gives you an idea of a few different measures that you may be interested in. 

2 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

Non-sequitor.  There is no point in comparing a compact CUV with a Camaro or Mustang.  Different niche, different buyers.

Compact SUV is replacing sports sedans and coupes in the market.  3-series sales are half what they used to be because of the X3.  Camaro and Mustang are down, Camaro won’t even be here in 5 years because people will buy SUVs instead.

22 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Compact SUV is replacing sports sedans and coupes in the market.  3-series sales are half what they used to be because of the X3.  Camaro and Mustang are down, Camaro won’t even be here in 5 years because people will buy SUVs instead.

This thing is just a CUV, though, not an SUV...it's on a transverse FWD  platform..just another generic CUV, not unlike the Acadia and others from GM..lease appliances...

It looks like what a modern Dodge Colt Vista might look like. 

Can't even lie, I really like this little thing. Can't wait to try one out.

5 hours ago, Robert Hall said:

This thing is just a CUV, though, not an SUV...it's on a transverse FWD  platform..just another generic CUV, not unlike the Acadia and others from GM..lease appliances...

This might be the fastest transverse mount SUV out there aside from the AMG 45’s which would be the fastest for sure.  There is a GLB 45 coming with 416 hp.  Audi SQ3 would be up there.

On 8/30/2019 at 5:52 PM, smk4565 said:

This might be the fastest transverse mount SUV out there aside from the AMG 45’s which would be the fastest for sure.  There is a GLB 45 coming with 416 hp.  Audi SQ3 would be up there.

Funny how years of you harping on transverse mounted engines (especially ones over 300 hp) changes into "teh best evarrr!"

28 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

Funny how years of you harping on transverse mounted engines (especially ones over 300 hp) changes into "teh best evarrr!"

Longitudinal mount is better.  I think over 300 hp in front drive is pointless but this is all wheel drive with a 50-50 split.  For a compact crossover this is great performance.  For better performance there is the V8 GLC.

Just now, smk4565 said:

Longitudinal mount is better.  I think over 300 hp in front drive is pointless but this is all wheel drive with a 50-50 split.  For a compact crossover this is great performance.  For better performance there is the V8 GLC.

The XTS and XTS V-Sport could send 90% of the torque to the rear, but you never gave it credit for that. Just another example of you moving the goal posts around to support your favorite brand. 

4 hours ago, Drew Dowdell said:

The XTS and XTS V-Sport could send 90% of the torque to the rear, but you never gave it credit for that. Just another example of you moving the goal posts around to support your favorite brand. 

The XTS was never a very competitive car to begin with, and compare it to an E-Class or 5-series or a full size luxury car.   XTS was front drive in a rear drive segment, which is why it is dead and the Continental will be dead.

The GLB is competing with the NX, XT4, X1, XC40, etc.  There is no performance benchmark in that segment and no one has rear drive.  Really is it what the hot hatch segment is going to turn into as most of the hot hatches aside from the Golf are dead and those fwd/awd hot hatch crowd will probably trade into compact “hot” crossover.

Most of the segment is AWD, not front or rear.
'Hot hatch' is another dead segment, and there'll be no 'hot crossover' segment upcoming.

Hot crossover is already upon us.  AMG, M, Audi SQ, Alfa Stelvio, Jeep GC Trackhawk, Porsche has 2 SUV, Lamborghini has one, Ferrari and Aston Martin will have one next year, Tesla will have a 2nd.  

There are probably 20 crossovers on sale now with what was deemed sports car performance just a few years ago.

11 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Hot crossover is already upon us.  AMG, M, Audi SQ, Alfa Stelvio, Jeep GC Trackhawk, Porsche has 2 SUV, Lamborghini has one, Ferrari and Aston Martin will have one next year, Tesla will have a 2nd.  

There are probably 20 crossovers on sale now with what was deemed sports car performance just a few years ago.

So when will GM build their own hot hatch crossover?  GM could use an Escalade as the base for one, maybe even a Camaro as the base for one.

I would bet money that if GM made a Corvette SUV that was rear drive/awd, 495 hp and same price as the C8, it would outsell the C8 by a wide margin.  Performance SUV is a hot growing segment.

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

I would bet money that if GM made a Corvette SUV that was rear drive/awd, 495 hp and same price as the C8, it would outsell the C8 by a wide margin.  Performance SUV is a hot growing segment.

Care to provide some actual numbers of “hot hatches” sold versus the standard fare of said models?

46 minutes ago, surreal1272 said:

Care to provide some actual numbers of “hot hatches” sold versus the standard fare of said models?

The only place you could probably point to for valid numbers would be Porsche. Otherwise, while there are those of us that want hot SUVs. I think it is a much smaller number than @smk4565 realizes.

Would love a new SS suv to replace the Trailblazer SS.  

1 hour ago, dfelt said:

The only place you could probably point to for valid numbers would be Porsche. Otherwise, while there are those of us that want hot SUVs. I think it is a much smaller number than @smk4565 realizes.

Would love a new SS suv to replace the Trailblazer SS.  

Kind of what I’m getting at. Regardless of how many different makes there are out there currently, they are all niche at best. 

Even Lincoln is seeing the need for a 500 hp Aviator, even though they aren't aiming to be a performance vehicle.  But we can all watch the Germans and Tesla see rise in SUV sales while Cadillac and Acura die on the vine with their range topper 305 hp V6 3-row crossovers.

58 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

Even Lincoln is seeing the need for a 500 hp Aviator, even though they aren't aiming to be a performance vehicle.  But we can all watch the Germans and Tesla see rise in SUV sales while Cadillac and Acura die on the vine with their range topper 305 hp V6 3-row crossovers.

And? That doesn’t mean they sell. That just means it is a fad more than anything else. Still looking for any sales figures regarding these “hot hatches”. 

1 hour ago, smk4565 said:

Even Lincoln is seeing the need for a 500 hp Aviator, even though they aren't aiming to be a performance vehicle.  But we can all watch the Germans and Tesla see rise in SUV sales while Cadillac and Acura die on the vine with their range topper 305 hp V6 3-row crossovers.

ASSumption!!!

That is what your making here and you made it about the SRX, XT5 and they both have outsold the MB products.

Try again Waldo!

XT6 will be dead on arrival.  I see XT5 sales hitting a slump and that isn't that old a product so it will be a while before GM replaces it.  The Lexus RX is the only SUV they have that sells, the rest a sales dogs because they are either a glorified RAV4, 4Runner or Tundra, and they aren't getting it done.

On 8/29/2019 at 7:06 PM, smk4565 said:

Except an MKC 2.3 Ecoboost does 0-60 in 6.5 seconds and a GLB 35 does it in 5.1.  This GLB is faster than an Ecoboost Mustang or V6 Camaro, and it is compact crossover.  This is the slowest AMG product and it is still pretty quick.  Plus it looks good, plus it is in the biggest growth segment, plus I suspect this will start around $45k, they'll sell lots.

Not thinking lots.......

2 hours ago, smk4565 said:

XT6 will be dead on arrival.  I see XT5 sales hitting a slump and that isn't that old a product so it will be a while before GM replaces it.  The Lexus RX is the only SUV they have that sells, the rest a sales dogs because they are either a glorified RAV4, 4Runner or Tundra, and they aren't getting it done.

As boring as the XT6 is, it will sell plenty to the masses who don’t give a squat about 500HP “hot hatches”. These are family CUVs and family sells better than niche. 

These are screenshots from June sales (done that months because of quarterly reporting by GM). You know what I see? Down numbers on both GM CUVs and Benz yet funny that you only point out the XT5 being down. This hard trolling even by your “standards”. 

10 hours ago, surreal1272 said:

As boring as the XT6 is, it will sell plenty to the masses who don’t give a squat about 500HP “hot hatches”. These are family CUVs and family sells better than niche. 

 

These are screenshots from June sales (done that months because of quarterly reporting by GM). You know what I see? Down numbers on both GM CUVs and Benz yet funny that you only point out the XT5 being down. This hard trolling even by your “standards”. 

 

 

 

Mercedes COMBINED sold a total of 14,517 CUV/SUV autos for June.

Mercedes COMBINED sold a total of 14,647 CUV/SUV autos for May.

Mercedes COMBINED sold a total of 11,938 CUV/SUV autos for April.

Mercedes has a COMBINED total of 41,102 CUV/SUV autos for the Quarter.

Cadillac XT5 by itself sold 13,118 for the quarter.

Yet if we combine all of Cadillac sales, we get 29,704 for the quarter.

Apple to Apple comparison of a sales period does show MB selling more CUV/SUVs than Cadillac, yet MB has 5 models to Cadillac which had 3 up till the month of June when their 4th model came out and sold 74 units. That means that Cadillac still outsold MB when you consider the 29,630 units sold by 3 models.

Another way to put this is that MB with 5 models sold on average of 8,220.4 per model where Cadillac sold 9,876.666 units per model. Clearly if we had full sales for 2 more models, that would mean Cadillac for the quarter would have sold 49,383 CUV/SUV for the quarter to MB 41,102.

@smk4565 How is Cadillac failing to move less metal than MB with less models?

On 9/1/2019 at 3:11 PM, Drew Dowdell said:

The XTS and XTS V-Sport could send 90% of the torque to the rear, but you never gave it credit for that. Just another example of you moving the goal posts around to support your favorite brand. 

In all fairness, those are really ugly in comparison... 

9 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

In all fairness, those are really ugly in comparison... 

beside the point. Subjective aesthetics aside, he long criticized the XTS for being transverse engined and ignored the fact that it could send 90% of the torque to the rear wheels.  Here he is praising the AMG for having a 50/50 split and is looking forward to the even more powerful AMG 45.   

Well, we can do a little calculating and get a pretty good estimate of how many AMG SUV's Mercedes is selling. Or, as some would call them, hot hatches. 

First, Mercedes last said in 2017 that AMG sales make up 10% of sales.

https://www.thedrive.com/sheetmetal/17048/amg-makes-up-10-percent-of-us-sales-for-mercedes-benz

Next, let's look at their SUV sales.

2018 GLC sales: 69, 729 - 10%: 6,973 AMGs

2018 GLE sales: 46,010 - 10%: 4,601 AMGs

2018 GLS sales: 21,973 - 10%: 2,197 AMGs

That's roughly 13,771 "hot hatches". Not a negligible number considering the cheapest of those START at $70,800(GLC 63). FWIW GLE 63's start at $110,200 and GLS 63's start at $126,150. 

On a down year the Vette sold 18,791 units in 2018.

Personally, I see that as a "hot hatch" market to go after. SUVs are hot and performance SUVs are selling and selling at huge dollar amounts. 

5 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

beside the point. Subjective aesthetics aside, he long criticized the XTS for being transverse engined and ignored the fact that it could send 90% of the torque to the rear wheels.  Here he is praising the AMG for having a 50/50 split and is looking forward to the even more powerful AMG 45.   

I know I know.. I'm just giving hell to one of those vehicles I dislike oh so much. 

33 minutes ago, Drew Dowdell said:

beside the point. Subjective aesthetics aside, he long criticized the XTS for being transverse engined and ignored the fact that it could send 90% of the torque to the rear wheels.  Here he is praising the AMG for having a 50/50 split and is looking forward to the even more powerful AMG 45.   

I am not praising it but the GLB looks good and even in 35 trim will be faster than the competition even more so in 45 trim.  I have also said in the past that under $50k you can get away with front drive and in small cars you can also.   No one does rear drive in this segment, even in the segment above only half of them use rear drive.  

XTS was full size and over $50k, that doesn’t work with front drive.

A FIFTY THOUSAND DOLLAR front wheel drive vehicle? Hell. No. 

The X1 was RWD...