Quick Drive: 2014 Mercedes-Benz S63 AMG 4Matic

So how would you rate their air suspension to Cadillac Magnetic ride suspension?

15 MPG is pretty awful, but mercedes has over a dozen cars getting in the mid teens in the city.

Should really have at least a 9-speed trans if not a 10, this is seriously behind the times. I'd like to see a 12-spd box for ultimate bragging rights... because you know this segment of car buyers like to get together, pull out their owner's manuals and talk about how many gears they have.  

Let's see, with a sticker of $164K, one can probably grab one new off the lot for $130K or so. Or wait 12 months and get one for the average sticker price of a new S470.

It's pretty tough to kiss more dollars goodbye due to depreciation on any other car.

I agree that this is one of the better looking S-classes in a while probably since the W126 model. The previous one had sort of an imposing look, but the wheel fenders were a bit tacky as time went on.   I'm not a fan of black wheels or red brake calipers, those are options I'd leave behind for sure.  I have wondered how much better Active Body Control makes it, and I've read and seen reviews that with the road scanning suspension that the car basically glides over anything without feeling it.  My car has Airmatic which is great for ride quality but I can see how ABC would help take out any body roll or lean.

I myself thought they would have used the 9-speed, but perhaps they didn't want to risk a new model with a new transmission, but 2015 S-classes still have the 7-speed.  The 2015 CLS will be the first to get the 9-speed, then it will spread to other models, that should help fuel efficiency.  But the S63 still gets better mileage than a CTS-V or BMW M5 despite being larger and more powerful than both of them, and having AWD which hurts fuel economy.

I agree that this is one of the better looking S-classes in a while probably since the W126 model. The previous one had sort of an imposing look, but the wheel fenders were a bit tacky as time went on.   I'm not a fan of black wheels or red brake calipers, those are options I'd leave behind for sure.  I have wondered how much better Active Body Control makes it, and I've read and seen reviews that with the road scanning suspension that the car basically glides over anything without feeling it.  My car has Airmatic which is great for ride quality but I can see how ABC would help take out any body roll or lean.

 

I myself thought they would have used the 9-speed, but perhaps they didn't want to risk a new model with a new transmission, but 2015 S-classes still have the 7-speed.  The 2015 CLS will be the first to get the 9-speed, then it will spread to other models, that should help fuel efficiency.  But the S63 still gets better mileage than a CTS-V or BMW M5 despite being larger and more powerful than both of them, and having AWD which hurts fuel economy.

Me thinks you have been hitting the Giggle Weed a bit too much. The CTS-V does much better on MPG than this over rated S.

For what is being asked here dollar wise, you get better value and I feel a better over all auto than this S63.

Even Car and Driver could not get better than 16mpg combined for the S63.

http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/2014-mercedes-benz-s63-amg-first-drive-review

This in comparison to friends who have CTS-V's and get 16-18 city driving and 21-24 highway. so a combined 18-20.

Well the EPA rates the CTS-V lower than the S63 so I was going off that.  But Car and Driver in 2 different comparison tests with a CTS-V, one in 2009 and one in 2011 got 11 mpg each time.  So if they got 16 mpg on an S63, that is pretty good.

That must have been beating on the CTS-V then.

A neat car but wildly more than I would spend. Sweet but not my style. Cadillac or Audi for me please.

I'd imagine most that can afford this can afford and S65, even though the S63 is quicker 0-60, I'd want an S65 to have the V12.  Once you get into this price strata, why wouldn't you get the V12.

Even greater landslide depreciation??

Interestingly I read a book about actual millionaires. It suggested people with real wealth often live modestly. I could afford to drive a much more expensive car and choose not to.

Actually, were I a multi millionaire the Impala is as expensive a car as I would want. And I would prefer a VW GTI to an S class, personally.

...and it is hard for me to like most modern luxury cars. Nothing Infinity builds comes close to a 72 Olds Cutlass visually. Why would I spend 60 grand on a car that looks worse than a car I lusted after in high school?

Even greater landslide depreciation??

Luxury cars and McMansions are keeping the upper middle class broke and in debt. Don't want to get political, but the USA is a debtor nation to Mexico for Christ sake. We need to invest/save more as a society and spend less on frivolous crap (s class perhaps?). IMHO.

A friend & client of mine is a multi-millionaire. He once had a 1916 Case steam traction engine, just because. 
He had a new S430, traded it in on a loaded Tahoe LTZ (had 2 in a row). Currently, he has a hyundai sante fe.

Of course, the iffy reliability, poor dealer service and 8-months long wait for parts on the mercedes might have had something to do with the initial move to Chevy.

Also just plain simple and much lower maintenance on American built auto's. While not rich, I consider myself middle income class and saved up 3yrs to buy my Escalade.

Biggest problem is those that want instant gratification without working hard, saving and then buying it. So many people are going in debt without really being ready.

A friend & client of mine is a multi-millionaire. He once had a 1916 Case steam traction engine, just because. 

He had a new S430, traded it in on a loaded Tahoe LTZ (had 2 in a row). Currently, he has a hyundai sante fe.

 

Of course, the iffy reliability, poor dealer service and 8-months long wait for parts on the mercedes might have had something to do with the initial move to Chevy.

MB profoundly has its head up its ass when it comes to taking care of customers.

Also just plain simple and much lower maintenance on American built auto's. While not rich, I consider myself middle income class and saved up 3yrs to buy my Escalade.

 

Biggest problem is those that want instant gratification without working hard, saving and then buying it. So many people are going in debt without really being ready.

Absolutely.  And if you had it....wouldn't you really rather have a Buick and money in mutual funds or real estate.  I mean....seriously?

 

A friend & client of mine is a multi-millionaire. He once had a 1916 Case steam traction engine, just because. 

He had a new S430, traded it in on a loaded Tahoe LTZ (had 2 in a row). Currently, he has a hyundai sante fe.

 

Of course, the iffy reliability, poor dealer service and 8-months long wait for parts on the mercedes might have had something to do with the initial move to Chevy.

 

 

MB profoundly has its head up its ass when it comes to taking care of customers.

 

Also just plain simple and much lower maintenance on American built auto's. While not rich, I consider myself middle income class and saved up 3yrs to buy my Escalade.

 

Biggest problem is those that want instant gratification without working hard, saving and then buying it. So many people are going in debt without really being ready.

 

 

Absolutely.  And if you had it....wouldn't you really rather have a Buick and money in mutual funds or real estate.  I mean....seriously?

 

Buick has some great auto's, just have not found one that really fits my Shrek size. One reason I still only drive Full Size SUV's.

...and it is hard for me to like most modern luxury cars. Nothing Infinity builds comes close to a 72 Olds Cutlass visually. Why would I spend 60 grand on a car that looks worse than a car I lusted after in high school?

That was the exact reasoning behind my buying my '81 Oldsmobile instead of making payments on a new car.

As much as I make fun of MB as Chevroletdes Benz - my problem with these cars is the economics and longevity. MB for a long time has been bulwark of reliable machines while offering solid build after even 50 years of existence of those machines and there is no denying. I admired those qualities of MB. And given a choice I would like to own the old MB diesels, which I have respect for.

MB has now become a consumer electronics builder with automobiles as secondary objective. And it reflects.

While I was shopping for a car in 2012, the price of a CPO 2008 S600 with 29,000 miles custom Designo interior was $65,000. The car retailed brand new for $147,000. That is hell of a depreciation. A comparable mileage Escalade Platinum Edition or Z06 depreciated by only 35 - 40%.

Besides that, if I buy a used S class, once the warranty runs out, the costs of fixing tech related stuff are astronomical. For e.g. LCD screen in the dashboard - $4,400. You now have a powertrain which is bulletproof saddled by shoddy electronics. Good luck keeping them on road for even 15 years like the past S classes did, because electronics will be outdated and once dead they are gone. MB is not going to supply those old parts as the technology would have advanced.

The MB cars are thus becoming nothing more than glorified appliances. Unfortunately, trying to out-do the Germans the others are following this route. The automobile industry has reached its core-technological peak, now its grasping for crumbs through diversification of non-essential goals.

Gone are the days when S class used to be easy to maintain and practically impossible to destroy. Judging by my BMW 330, great driving car with horrible electronics, my guess is S class will not be too different since it has hundreds of patents boasting how electronically advanced the car is.

How many of us are still using Iphone 1 or Galaxy S1?

While I was shopping for a car in 2012, the price of a CPO 2008 S600 with 29,000 miles custom Designo interior was $65,000. The car retailed brand new for $147,000. That is hell of a depreciation.

4 years of ownership and the depreciation ALONE costs you $82,000 !!

Nothing quite says 'I'm dumber than dirt" than buying a top-shelf mercedes.

Continually striving for ever-increased production and heavy downmarket pushing is NOT going to help Mercedes in any other way than to thin out the top of the lineup.

 

While I was shopping for a car in 2012, the price of a CPO 2008 S600 with 29,000 miles custom Designo interior was $65,000. The car retailed brand new for $147,000. That is hell of a depreciation.

4 years of ownership and the depreciation ALONE costs you $82,000 !!

Nothing quite says 'I'm dumber than dirt" than buying a top-shelf mercedes.

Continually striving for ever-increased production and heavy downmarket pushing is NOT going to help Mercedes in any other way than to thin out the top of the lineup.

 

Not that I was interested in buying it, I wanted for $hits and Giggles see what was the cost of owning a V12. A 2007 CPO CL600 at the same dealership was $55,000.

A 2007 is a borderline 8 year old car now.  Most cars at 7 or 8 years old are only going to hold 1/3 of their original value.  I have seen 2008 CTS for $15k, so 1/3 what is what new.  An S600 has to depreciate because there aren't many people on the used market that can afford to run a V12.  Only crazy rich people can pay that kind of cost, and they can afford a new one.  The S-class is still the best car in this class, has the most engine options and they have a coupe and soon to have a convertible.

Continually striving for ever-increased production and heavy downmarket pushing is NOT going to help Mercedes in any other way than to thin out the top of the lineup.

 

Cadillac is planning a car below the ATS to compete with the Audi A3 and Mercedes CLA.  If the ATS is $33k, then you gotta figure $28-29k for the new smaller Caddy.  They are copying the Germans at every turn, so GM must think the German strategy works.

A 2007 is a borderline 8 year old car now.  Most cars at 7 or 8 years old are only going to hold 1/3 of their original value.  I have seen 2008 CTS for $15k, so 1/3 what is what new.  An S600 has to depreciate because there aren't many people on the used market that can afford to run a V12.  Only crazy rich people can pay that kind of cost, and they can afford a new one.  The S-class is still the best car in this class, has the most engine options and they have a coupe and soon to have a convertible.

Did you read my prior post? It was two years ago, specifically March 2012. In fact CL is one of the highest depreciating cars on the market. And why can't someone afford to own a CPO V12 instead of a V8? Let us hear your logical reasoning. Does it give like 2 mpg that people cannot afford to pay gas? Is it more expensive to maintain? Kinda confirms my notion of the S class being a outrageously priced appliance if you follow your own reasoning.

First, 2008 CTS started at 32,000 and topped off at 45,000 and you are now talking about a seven year old model, which I will agree with the price you mention.

If the S-class was overpriced, it wouldn't be a market share god all over the world.  Every competitor undercuts the S-class by about $20,000 and it still outsells the BMW, Lexus, Audi and Jaguar combined.  If the S-class price was too high, buyers would go to cheaper alternatives.  The S-class is almost good value, it is a better car than what you get from a Flying Spur or a Ghost, and those cost over $200,000.

ATS was out before the CLA, so here it was mercedes copying. Add to that they undercut the ATS's price and cheapened the car with such appliance features as FWD.

Cadillac is not currently planning a 'sub-ATS' car; that is idle talk by the new guy trying to make his mark. Such a vehicle would be a huge mistake, as it is for MB in everything except the reason it was released; revenue generator.

S-class price IS too high, as proven by the fact that mercedes has such huge discounts on the bottom line. But we've deciphered that here already. IMO, I believe a lot of the s-class's reason for selling in high numbers is that it is perceived as a bargain, IE; it is stickered at prices that no one pays, allowing the buyers to feel they've gotten a 'deal'. Very likely the huge incentives/discounts are torpedo'ing resale. Gee, who does that sound like its patterned after?

None of this addresses the fact that there's no excuse for the supposed 'king' of the segment to cost the owners over $80,000 in depreciation; it should do far better than that if it were as amazing as some believe. That's a horrible downside to ownership. 

If the S-class was overpriced, it wouldn't be a market share god all over the world.  Every competitor undercuts the S-class by about $20,000 and it still outsells the BMW, Lexus, Audi and Jaguar combined.  If the S-class price was too high, buyers would go to cheaper alternatives.  The S-class is almost good value, it is a better car than what you get from a Flying Spur or a Ghost, and those cost over $200,000.

Disprove my numbers; don't use hyperbole and grandiose statements.

If it is a good value how the heck it depreciates to 40% of its value in 4 years? An average vehicle depreciates up to 50% of its value in that time frame. S is inline if not worse with depreciation of all the other luxury sedans it outsells combined. In fact it rivals with the Cobalt and Rio for the depreciation.

As of today there are 7 2010 S600s listed for sale around the country. The highest is 139,000 (good luck) and the lowest does not have a list price. If you ignore those 2 outliers, the median is $65,000. The prices vary for other 5 cars from $69,000 to $55,800. The brand new S600 was priced at $149,000 in 2010 without any options. Oh SMK thy please tell me where thou seeketh the value in the higher level appliance?

If S is market share God then by your logic so are Camry and Corolla. Just like your S class is, till recently, Toyota was undercut by brands like Hyundai, Americans, etc who had cheaper cars and/or huge incentives. Do you think they are the best? At least the two Toyotas can claim to have a 60% value during the same 4 year time period. Using your logic, those two Toyotas are the best vehicles, even better than your market share God because they not only have sales numbers to prove but also have tremendous appliance values.

Your notion of S class being a tremendous value is stuck in the neutral with W222, which to me was the last best S Class when it came to durability, longevity and value. The successors are high level appliances living on the legacy of the past. Bring yourself to 2014 reality.

Cadillac has a sub-ATS car... it's called the Verano and it's found at Buick dealerships.

ATS was out before the CLA, so here it was mercedes copying. Add to that they undercut the ATS's price and cheapened the car with such appliance features as FWD.

 

Cadillac is not currently planning a 'sub-ATS' car; that is idle talk by the new guy trying to make his mark. Such a vehicle would be a huge mistake, as it is for MB in everything except the reason it was released; revenue generator.

 

S-class price IS too high, as proven by the fact that mercedes has such huge discounts on the bottom line. But we've deciphered that here already. IMO, I believe a lot of the s-class's reason for selling in high numbers is that it is perceived as a bargain, IE; it is stickered at prices that no one pays, allowing the buyers to feel they've gotten a 'deal'. Very likely the huge incentives/discounts are torpedo'ing resale. Gee, who does that sound like its patterned after?

 

None of this addresses the fact that there's no excuse for the supposed 'king' of the segment to cost the owners over $80,000 in depreciation; it should do far better than that if it were as amazing as some believe. That's a horrible downside to ownership. 

I would venture that on top of all of the discounting, that most S-Classes are leased on their first transaction out the door and that the lease payments are deducted from someone's taxes somewhere.  When you discount a lot off MSRP yet keep the lease buyout price the same, the lease payment magically gets a lot lower.

Excuses, excuses though, why can't BMw Lexus or Audi compete with the S-cpass then? Infiniti, Acura and Cadillac don't even try although at least Cadillac is taking a shot at it. And you think a $100,000 Cadillac sedan won't depreciate fast?

None of the others sell their cars at taxis at the rate Mercedes does. It's a great way to cover fixed costs and subsidized leasing that Lexus and Jaguar don't stoop to.

Excuses, excuses though, why can't BMw Lexus or Audi compete with the S-cpass then? Infiniti, Acura and Cadillac don't even try although at least Cadillac is taking a shot at it. And you think a $100,000 Cadillac sedan won't depreciate fast?

That is all you have? Another rhetoric? That's right, there are no numbers to prove otherwise.

LOL at some of the comments on MBWorld Forum. Sure SMK you go there to practice your MB cheerleading skills.

 

Bought my first new AMG in '05,a C55. Traded it in for a E55..traded that for a CLS55...

Then I paid $90k for my new E63 in '07,sold it this past December&took a $55k hit in depreciation&the car was mint.

I will NEVER buy another new AMG,lease or CPO only from here on

 

Agree that year 1 and 2 depreciation are pretty awful, but it's really not so bad after that.

 

Keep up the good work AMG! It allows me to buy cars like my CLS at half the cost with only 19000 miles! Love it! Best kept secret!

 

My W220 2006 S65 was 176K sticker in 2006 and purchased in 2010 as a CPO car for 60K! Love that depreciation. I love the car too.

Do you want me to keep going? Or may be your ADHD will kick in before you read this sentence.

None of the others sell their cars at taxis at the rate Mercedes does. It's a great way to cover fixed costs and subsidized leasing that Lexus and Jaguar don't stoop to.

But Mercedes isn't selling S-class taxis in the US, and it clobbers the competition in sales here.  Maybe fleet/government/taxi sales help in Europe, but the S-class beats anything else by over 2-1 margin.  And in China, Audi is the fleet/government brand of choice, and the S-class outsells the A8 there.  Even if 50% of the S-class sales were fleet, they are still outselling anyone else on retail.

Bottom line is the S-class is a profit machine for Daimler, it generates more total profit than any other car line, only the Big 3 pickups create more total profit and they need to sell 500-600,000 a year to do that.   These other automakers underestimate the S-class, other than maybe BMW who is looking at carbon fiber to cut 600-700 lbs off the 7-series and to do a 600 hp M7, I think at least they realize they need to step it up, but the others might as well die on the vine.

If depreciation was the only metric that we use, a 65 GTO and a 70 Cutlass 442 were god awful cars when I was a sophomore in high school, because you could find them for dirt cheap. There are cars I love like the fist gen RX7 that can be picked up for fifteen hundred, and cars I love like the Tucker that will bring a million and a half.

However, a 65 GTO, 70 442, first gen RX7 and the tucker all have a sense of style and add something unique to the time period they were new, something the top of the line Benz does not do.

Would an S class be available at the same price as a CTS, I would still prefer the CTS. I just like it better. And I really don't care if MB sells an S class to every rice farmer in Vietnam or every lawyer in Boston. As Z06 said, if sales volume was everything, the Corolla would be the worlds best car.

 

None of the others sell their cars at taxis at the rate Mercedes does. It's a great way to cover fixed costs and subsidized leasing that Lexus and Jaguar don't stoop to.

But Mercedes isn't selling S-class taxis in the US, and it clobbers the competition in sales here.  Maybe fleet/government/taxi sales help in Europe, but the S-class beats anything else by over 2-1 margin.  And in China, Audi is the fleet/government brand of choice, and the S-class outsells the A8 there.  Even if 50% of the S-class sales were fleet, they are still outselling anyone else on retail.

 

Bottom line is the S-class is a profit machine for Daimler, it generates more total profit than any other car line, only the Big 3 pickups create more total profit and they need to sell 500-600,000 a year to do that.   These other automakers underestimate the S-class, other than maybe BMW who is looking at carbon fiber to cut 600-700 lbs off the 7-series and to do a 600 hp M7, I think at least they realize they need to step it up, but the others might as well die on the vine.

 

It doesn't matter where the taxis are sold as long as they are sold somewhere and bring in the dough to keep the lights on in the factory.  If we take away S-Class fleet sales, does the S-class number get cut in half? by 2/3s?  Most of the S-Class sales in the world are not full zoot retail US MSRP.  So stop comparing the inflated US MSRP and combining it with inflated worldwide taxi sales....

If depreciation was the only metric that we use, a 65 GTO and a 70 Cutlass 442 were god awful cars when I was a sophomore in high school, because you could find them for dirt cheap. There are cars I love like the fist gen RX7 that can be picked up for fifteen hundred, and cars I love like the Tucker that will bring a million and a half.

However, a 65 GTO, 70 442, first gen RX7 and the tucker all have a sense of style and add something unique to the time period they were new, something the top of the line Benz does not do.

Would an S class be available at the same price as a CTS, I would still prefer the CTS. I just like it better. And I really don't care if MB sells an S class to every rice farmer in Vietnam or every lawyer in Boston. As Z06 said, if sales volume was everything, the Corolla would be the worlds best car.

 

None of the others sell their cars at taxis at the rate Mercedes does. It's a great way to cover fixed costs and subsidized leasing that Lexus and Jaguar don't stoop to.

   These other automakers underestimate the S-class, other than maybe BMW who is looking at carbon fiber to cut 600-700 lbs off the 7-series and to do a 600 hp M7, I think at least they realize they need to step it up, but the others might as well die on the vine.

 

Talk about fixing the wrong problem.  The problem is NOT the weight nor the lack of an M7.  The problem is the extremely dated looking interior in spite of the up to date tech.

1998:

2014:

Again, the 2014 does not IMHO have even the style or distinction of even the sixties Benzes. If anything, its just a little awkward.

...and Balthazar, methinks the depreciation is a badge of Honor for these folks. How else could one explain perhaps a Brabus 6x6 G63 G class that costs the better part of a million dollars and has actual gold on the intake? Conspicuous consumption is how these richer folks differentiate between themselves and guys like us who actually have to put tools in our hands to make a living.

I will say BMW interiors lack imagination, and they have looked basically the same for a long time but BMW owners like that look.  The 7-series gets beat in every measure by the S-class, making the 7 lighter and adding an M version are probably just a couple fixes they are working on, they will have to work on the interior also.

The S-class line is about to expand though to add the Maybach model and the convertible, the others in this segment can't offer so many body style variants.  I guess the others will never admit defeat and back out of the segment, but you wonder how much money is Audi or BMW willing to put into a car that probably won't sell that well.  Same for Cadillac, think they are going to spend $2 billion on the LTS for it to be a slow seller, I doubt it.

A convertible would be cool!

I will say BMW interiors lack imagination, and they have looked basically the same for a long time but BMW owners like that look.  The 7-series gets beat in every measure by the S-class, making the 7 lighter and adding an M version are probably just a couple fixes they are working on, they will have to work on the interior also.

 

The S-class line is about to expand though to add the Maybach model and the convertible, the others in this segment can't offer so many body style variants.  I guess the others will never admit defeat and back out of the segment, but you wonder how much money is Audi or BMW willing to put into a car that probably won't sell that well.  Same for Cadillac, think they are going to spend $2 billion on the LTS for it to be a slow seller, I doubt it.

Let mercedes follow Chevrolet & toyota in continually pushing global sales (at the expense of perception).

Cadillac can stay truly exclusive. Cadillac has no need to challenge anyone on sales volume, that's low-level pedestrian brand territory. Mercedes has no choice.

I will be watching maybach 2.0- other than a longer WB, it's not another body style, just a stretched version of the existing.

What will really be interesting is the perception of failure around maybach 1.0 and how will that effect sales. I predict it flops again & gets pulled inside of 5 years.

MB is willing to blow more billions on this trim package, yet the CLAh is FWD.

Mercedes has no lack of perception. The Germans own the global luxury market and Mercedes probably has the strongest image of the 3.

...now.

But they JUST introduced a FWD econosedan priced under the median new car price, in their most important market in the world (AND killed off their top-shelf lux sedan to boot).
They are definitely changing course...

The Germans do own the luxury market. But they do some dumb things, things so stupid they make me question the future of the human gene pool. VW for one is planning on bringing back the Phaeton, after selling something like 3000 over three years the first time it flopped.

Nothing says dumber than a box of rocks like failing to learn from your mistakes, and no one fails to learn with more certainty than the Germans. The Cubs will win a world series before the Germans get the slightest effing clue.

Maybach will be a laughingstock.

Mercedes has no lack of perception. The Germans own the global luxury market and Mercedes probably has the strongest image of the 3.

But other than the quality of the interior materials and decent diesels, they have nothing to offer, really. And they are bone crushingly expensive to repair. An SCCA buddy of mine runs an indie shop that often services Benzes. A recent A/C repair on a fairly new Benz cost more than my car is worth, due mostly to the cost of OEM parts.

^ ...when they finally come in.

 

Mercedes has no lack of perception. The Germans own the global luxury market and Mercedes probably has the strongest image of the 3.

But other than the quality of the interior materials and decent diesels, they have nothing to offer, really. And they are bone crushingly expensive to repair. An SCCA buddy of mine runs an indie shop that often services Benzes. A recent A/C repair on a fairly new Benz cost more than my car is worth, due mostly to the cost of OEM parts.

 

Mercedes makes more 400 hp cars than any other car maker, and they make more 500 hp cars than anyone else also.  They also make 4 convertibles and are adding 2 more (although the SLS is going away and the AMG GT may not get a convertible).  BMW and Audi each have 3, Lexus has 1, Cadillac none.  So if you want power or open air motoring, they have plenty to offer.

Audi and BMW have high repair costs too, and they don't have Mercedes reliability or longevity.  Lexus probably is cheapest to own as far as repairs, but that is to be expected since it is just a glorified Toyota with a V6 from 2008.

 

 

Mercedes has no lack of perception. The Germans own the global luxury market and Mercedes probably has the strongest image of the 3.

But other than the quality of the interior materials and decent diesels, they have nothing to offer, really. And they are bone crushingly expensive to repair. An SCCA buddy of mine runs an indie shop that often services Benzes. A recent A/C repair on a fairly new Benz cost more than my car is worth, due mostly to the cost of OEM parts.

 

Mercedes makes more 400 hp cars than any other car maker, and they make more 500 hp cars than anyone else also.  They also make 4 convertibles and are adding 2 more (although the SLS is going away and the AMG GT may not get a convertible).  BMW and Audi each have 3, Lexus has 1, Cadillac none.  So if you want power or open air motoring, they have plenty to offer.

 

Audi and BMW have high repair costs too, and they don't have Mercedes reliability or longevity.  Lexus probably is cheapest to own as far as repairs, but that is to be expected since it is just a glorified Toyota with a V6 from 2008.

 

Thank you, You just proved the point that MB is watering down their image and brand and are headed into the same idiot territory that GM used to occupy with way to many product lines. Here MB is now having way to many versions so watering down their exclusive nature to just being a appliance seller!