Mercedez Benz News Mercedes Plans On Adding Ten AMG Models This Year

[William Maley]

Mercedes is going a bit overboard with the number of AMG models it offers. At the moment, you have a choice of 38 models that have gone through the AMG treatment. But Tobias Moers, chairman of Mercedes-AMG says more are coming.

 

"We're going to expand our portfolio to 48 different models by the end of the year," Moers told Automotive News.

 

The obvious question is 'WHY?' It comes down to growth. Sales of AMG models rose 40 percent to 68,875 vehicles. This is most likely due to the introduction of less-expensive models such as the CLA45 and GLA45.

 

We wouldn't be surprised if there are '43' models such as the C43 Coupe and E43 that are part of these expansion plans.

 

Source: Automotive News (Subscription Required)

View full article

[Cmicasa the Great]

They have officially whored out the AMG name.. IMO, completely making it less special. I see AMG models all time. Nothing to see in fact

[smk4565]

I like their commitment to power and performance. I still think I favor E450 vs E43, but it is the same car, and in a way giving it the AMG treatment for styling and suspension and steering set up makes more sense.  This also lets them batle BMW and S4, S6, S7 Audis, because Audi has RS cars too.

 

48 models sounds like a lot until you think C43, C63, C63 S and apply that to sedan, coupe, convertible.  That is 9 "models" but all a C-class. 

[G. David Felt]

Stupid MB has truly decided to become a CHEAP ASS auto company, no different than a Ford or Chevy. Just turned their product line into a mass crapo series of style numbing stupidity.

 

Where is the luxury auto maker that MB used to be, clearly not that now.

[regfootball]

AMG=SS

 

cobalt SS, MAlibu SS, etc.

 

Germany's model proliferation will come back to bite them in the butt

[smk4565]

They became "cheap ass" by offering more high trim and higher cost models?  First the CLA and GLA were too cheap and hurting the brand, so they roll out 10 premium trim models and that hurts them.

 

Every model they have has an AMG trim that adds $20,000 or more to the price of a base car.  The "43" models aren't priced yet, but I'd imagine a C43 will start around $50k, an E43 around $65k, so they are still pushing prices up.

 

Mercedes is making use of an advantage they have.  Their crossovers are built on rwd chassis, their architectures are flexible, and made for different body styles and to fit 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engines.  Lexus can't put a GS-F engine in an NX crossover, Cadillac can't put a CTS-V engine in an XT5.  Lincoln, Acura, Cadillac, Lexus all chose to buld their crossovers on fwd sedan platforms, now they are going to get hammered with horsepower and be irrelevant in the performance crossover market.

[Suaviloquent]

It's adapting to customer desires.

 

People want the intangible of having the AMG badge from the factory.

 

Now the thing is Mercedes brand equity is probably very high, and for the time being - they have convinced people attracted to Mercedes that them going downmarket isn't hurting them too much. And they are pilfering sales from BMW at the top-end.

 

I think what they're doing is printing money, which luxury carmakers aspire to do.

 

Cadillac is already doing the same - heck people ask about why XT5 VSport isn't a thing or an Escalade-V isn't here. 

[G. David Felt]

They became "cheap ass" by offering more high trim and higher cost models?  First the CLA and GLA were too cheap and hurting the brand, so they roll out 10 premium trim models and that hurts them.

 

Every model they have has an AMG trim that adds $20,000 or more to the price of a base car.  The "43" models aren't priced yet, but I'd imagine a C43 will start around $50k, an E43 around $65k, so they are still pushing prices up.

 

Mercedes is making use of an advantage they have.  Their crossovers are built on rwd chassis, their architectures are flexible, and made for different body styles and to fit 4, 6 or 8 cylinder engines.  Lexus can't put a GS-F engine in an NX crossover, Cadillac can't put a CTS-V engine in an XT5.  Lincoln, Acura, Cadillac, Lexus all chose to buld their crossovers on fwd sedan platforms, now they are going to get hammered with horsepower and be irrelevant in the performance crossover market.

And that is why you see crazy discounts on all their products including the HUGE discounts on S class.

[surreal1272]

I like their commitment to power and performance. I still think I favor E450 vs E43, but it is the same car, and in a way giving it the AMG treatment for styling and suspension and steering set up makes more sense.  This also lets them batle BMW and S4, S6, S7 Audis, because Audi has RS cars too.

 

48 models sounds like a lot until you think C43, C63, C63 S and apply that to sedan, coupe, convertible.  That is 9 "models" but all a C-class.

It is a lot no matter how you try to sugarcoat it and it just dilutes the AMG branding.

[Robert Hall]

Maybe they will do an AMG Sprinter and AMG Metris.

[Suaviloquent]

Maybe they will do an AMG Sprinter and AMG Metris.

 

Shut up and take my money.

[balthazar]

Problem for the brand (mercedes) is, AMGs traditionally top all lists for the worst depreciation on the market.

A CL55 AMG from the early 2000s ends up costing you $100,000 in depreciation after 10 years! That's 85%.

Maybach 1.0 costs you $200,000 in 10 years!!

 

By making everything available as a 'AMG' (and I just read that in India, MB discontinued the 4.7L V8 in the s-class…. unless you pony up for the mercedes-maybach trim level), it's going to skew MB's average value retention.

 

It's just the typical Corporate mindset: Revenue Above All Else.

[Suaviloquent]

I don`t see any issue with milking the cash cow. Every company does this.

 

I bet if GM or Ford were in this situation no one would complain, they`d just say it`s good business, and smart move.

 

Except Mercedes-Pretendz. Get that garbage outta here....

[Robert Hall]

I doubt if very many M-B owners keep them 10 years or care about depreciation after 10 years...lease them for 2-3 years, get a new one..

Edited April 3, 2016 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[balthazar]

I dunno about that. 
Previous gen S-class was around for 8 years before getting replaced, there's no incentive (out-of-warranty repair bills aside) to get a new one if it's the same car.
I'll have to ask my one customer what year her's is- I believe it's at least 5 years old.

Anyway, owners who do buy are seeing whatever slice of the massive depreciation, still running well into the 10s of thousands of dollars at the AMG level.

 

I just find it interesting that the top trim levels fall faster than anything else.

[smk4565]

Problem for the brand (mercedes) is, AMGs traditionally top all lists for the worst depreciation on the market.

A CL55 AMG from the early 2000s ends up costing you $100,000 in depreciation after 10 years! That's 85%.

Maybach 1.0 costs you $200,000 in 10 years!!

 

By making everything available as a 'AMG' (and I just read that in India, MB discontinued the 4.7L V8 in the s-class…. unless you pony up for the mercedes-maybach trim level), it's going to skew MB's average value retention.

 

It's just the typical Corporate mindset: Revenue Above All Else.

AMG doesn't hurt resale value, in most cases that would help it.  Cars that cost $200,000 new are going to have $150,000 in depreciation in 5 years.  Mercedes actually has one of the better residual values by % among luxury brands.  And Mercedes also doesn't have a lack of demand for their V12 cars that tank in value.  The people buying them have more money than sense, and last year they actually made a move to increase V12 engine production.  

 

Daimler's corporate mindset is not revenue above all else, the mission of the past couple years has been to get Mercedes operating margin to 10%, because that is where BMW and Audi are.  

[smk4565]

I dunno about that. 

Previous gen S-class was around for 8 years before getting replaced, there's no incentive (out-of-warranty repair bills aside) to get a new one if it's the same car.

I'll have to ask my one customer what year her's is- I believe it's at least 5 years old.

Anyway, owners who do buy are seeing whatever slice of the massive depreciation, still running well into the 10s of thousands of dollars at the AMG level.

 

I just find it interesting that the top trim levels fall faster than anything else.

Mercedes cars are on a 7 year life cycle with a refresh after 4.   The Corvette is on an 8 year cycle, the C4 ran for 15 years.  The Silverado and F150 7-10 years before a new model comes out, yet people are still buying them.   Most of the industry has cars on 6-8 year cycles, yet people still trade in for new, some people keep a car 10 years.  Depends on the buyer's preference.  If they lease, they will trade it in after 3 years, if they buy they'll probably keep it 10 years.  That could hold as true for a Ford Focus as it does for an S-class.

[balthazar]

Retaining 40% of $50,000 costs you $30,000. Retaining 60% of $150,000 costs you $60,000.

 

'Percentages' is a 'feel good' metric. What matters is the bottom line, the 'number on the check'.

In the above example, one would be a fool to brag about their 60% value retention.

 

Fact is, AMG cars top lists of the worst depreciation models- they cost you MORE to own, not less.

[smk4565]

By that logic, a Chevy Spark is a better car to buy than an Escalade.  And Escalade will lose $54,000 in depreciation in 5 years.  The Escalade has a 5 year cost to own of $87,000 according to NADA guides.  Yet it is Cadillac's number 2 seller and GM's #1 profitable car.   Why are people buying Escalades?    If depreciation is so bad and driving customers away, they should just stop making the Escalade by that logic.  

 

Which of course makes no sense, they will keep building Escalades as long as there are people willing to pay for them.  And GM will take their money and laugh all the way to the bank.

[Suaviloquent]

Luxury buyers buy excess and also pay for excess at the trade-in.

 

But then again, that's why leasing is king in luxury.

[balthazar]

Leasing = a lifetime of monthly payments.
Proof that money can't buy you 2 fiscal cents to rub together.

[surreal1272]

By that logic, a Chevy Spark is a better car to buy than an Escalade.  And Escalade will lose $54,000 in depreciation in 5 years.  The Escalade has a 5 year cost to own of $87,000 according to NADA guides.  Yet it is Cadillac's number 2 seller and GM's #1 profitable car.   Why are people buying Escalades?    If depreciation is so bad and driving customers away, they should just stop making the Escalade by that logic.  

 

Which of course makes no sense, they will keep building Escalades as long as there are people willing to pay for them.  And GM will take their money and laugh all the way to the bank.

That is nowhere even close to comparable to what Balthazaar is talking about and you know it. And your Escalade logic can be easily applied to the fools who continue to buy the fifty year old G-Wagon. I'm sure MB gets a good chuckle on their way to the bank each day, as a result. 

Edited April 3, 2016 by surreal1272

[Suaviloquent]

The reason why the poor residuals are benefitting the German makes is that buyout is something the luxury buyer rarely does.

 

Or in the case of a trade-in, they win there as well.

 

People have different ownership styles, and some people want the own the latest and greatest for a fixed time period, not until the car physically breaks down because of age and wear.

 

Ultimately, it's nonsensical to not cater to those buyers - not everyone wants a nice small Chevy or Ford that they can make one lump sum on.

 

And no, wealthy people leasing an S-Class or AMG vehicle is nothing like leasing a CLA.

 

And have you seen these ATS leases? It is irrefutable. Cadillac intends to fully compete against the German makes, their top brass is a pack of Germans, and saying it isn't so is stupid.

 

And Cadillac ATPs, again, is a weighted average. However, the majority of future Cadillac growth will come from models lower in their range. Things such as an XT3 and CT3. The ATPs will take a plunge, maybe not in America - because small Cadillacs are an unproven paradigm, but absolutely over the world.

[smk4565]

 

By that logic, a Chevy Spark is a better car to buy than an Escalade.  And Escalade will lose $54,000 in depreciation in 5 years.  The Escalade has a 5 year cost to own of $87,000 according to NADA guides.  Yet it is Cadillac's number 2 seller and GM's #1 profitable car.   Why are people buying Escalades?    If depreciation is so bad and driving customers away, they should just stop making the Escalade by that logic.  

 

Which of course makes no sense, they will keep building Escalades as long as there are people willing to pay for them.  And GM will take their money and laugh all the way to the bank.

That is nowhere even close to comparable to what Balthazaar is talking about and you know it. And your Escalade logic can be easily applied to the fools who continue to buy the fifty year old G-Wagon. I'm sure MB gets a good chuckle on their way to the bank each day, as a result. 

 

His original point is how AMG cars depreciate fast, and cost $50,000 or more in depreciation.  

 

So let's compare 2 cars using NADA projections.   An S550 with a $97,400 MSRP depreciates $64,299, but an E63 with $101,700 depreciates $56,364.  So the AMG brand car holds higher % of value and loses less total dollars.  That debunks his theory that AMG badges hurt resale value, they help it.

 

An Escalade Platinum 4WD with $91,950 MSRP loses $56,333 in 5 years of depreciation.   Loses 61.2% of value over 5 years.

 

Let's compare to the G550, $115,400 MSRP, depreciation of $62,981.   Loses 54.6% of value over 5 years.  So yes it loses more total dollars, but it costs $24,000 more when new.  

 

Throw in a 3rd vehicle, a 2016 GL550 with MSRP of $91,300, virtually the same as the Escalade Platinum.  The GL550 loses $49,843 over 5 years, over $6,000 less than an Escalade will lose.  Balthazar wanted to say how horrible of a purchase a Mercedes is because it looses a big dollar amount in money, the Escalade is even worse, why not criticize it?

 

That is my counter to the argument,  personally I don't think the people spending $100,000 on a vehicle could care at all how it depreciates.  These are people that have money to burn, they'll spend 1 million on a house, $50,000 a year on property taxes and not really care.   Personally, I also like to buy a used car, after that first 3 years of depreciation has hit.

[balthazar]

Escalade Platinum loses $61% in 5 years?

Mercedes SL loses 41% in ONE year.

SL 65 AMG costs you an average of $15K per year in depreciation. In 10 years that's $140,000 +

 

I know a number of multi-millionaires personally; they care about money just as much as anyone, maybe more. They'll spend it on themselves, but they absolutely care about value.

[Suaviloquent]

Escalade Platinum loses $61% in 5 years?

Mercedes SL loses 41% in ONE year.

SL 65 AMG costs you an average of $15K per year in depreciation. In 10 years that's $140,000 +

 

I know a number of multi-millionaires personally; they care about money just as much as anyone, maybe more. They'll spend it on themselves, but they absolutely care about value.

 

Why are we comparing coupes to SUVs?

[balthazar]

Because someone compared an SUV to coupes.

[Suaviloquent]

Regardless. All luxury brands have piss-poor resale values.

 

And to compare their piss-poor resale is like comparing cockerel sizes. 

 

ZERO-SUM GAME IS WHAT I'M SAYING.

 

And I recall lovely gentleman Mr. Frisky saying that Cadillacs, just like the rest of the industry have piss-poor resales... atleast when it comes to wholesale dealer auctions...

[surreal1272]

 

 

By that logic, a Chevy Spark is a better car to buy than an Escalade.  And Escalade will lose $54,000 in depreciation in 5 years.  The Escalade has a 5 year cost to own of $87,000 according to NADA guides.  Yet it is Cadillac's number 2 seller and GM's #1 profitable car.   Why are people buying Escalades?    If depreciation is so bad and driving customers away, they should just stop making the Escalade by that logic.  

 

Which of course makes no sense, they will keep building Escalades as long as there are people willing to pay for them.  And GM will take their money and laugh all the way to the bank.

That is nowhere even close to comparable to what Balthazaar is talking about and you know it. And your Escalade logic can be easily applied to the fools who continue to buy the fifty year old G-Wagon. I'm sure MB gets a good chuckle on their way to the bank each day, as a result. 

 

His original point is how AMG cars depreciate fast, and cost $50,000 or more in depreciation.  

 

So let's compare 2 cars using NADA projections.   An S550 with a $97,400 MSRP depreciates $64,299, but an E63 with $101,700 depreciates $56,364.  So the AMG brand car holds higher % of value and loses less total dollars.  That debunks his theory that AMG badges hurt resale value, they help it.

 

An Escalade Platinum 4WD with $91,950 MSRP loses $56,333 in 5 years of depreciation.   Loses 61.2% of value over 5 years.

 

Let's compare to the G550, $115,400 MSRP, depreciation of $62,981.   Loses 54.6% of value over 5 years.  So yes it loses more total dollars, but it costs $24,000 more when new.  

 

Throw in a 3rd vehicle, a 2016 GL550 with MSRP of $91,300, virtually the same as the Escalade Platinum.  The GL550 loses $49,843 over 5 years, over $6,000 less than an Escalade will lose.  Balthazar wanted to say how horrible of a purchase a Mercedes is because it looses a big dollar amount in money, the Escalade is even worse, why not criticize it?

 

That is my counter to the argument,  personally I don't think the people spending $100,000 on a vehicle could care at all how it depreciates.  These are people that have money to burn, they'll spend 1 million on a house, $50,000 a year on property taxes and not really care.   Personally, I also like to buy a used car, after that first 3 years of depreciation has hit.

 

I don't care about when and how your "argument" started. You said,

 

"The Escalade has a 5 year cost to own of $87,000 according to NADA guides.  Yet it is Cadillac's number 2 seller and GM's #1 profitable car.   Why are people buying Escalades?    If depreciation is so bad and driving customers away, they should just stop making the Escalade by that logic.  

 

Which of course makes no sense, they will keep building Escalades as long as there are people willing to pay for them.  And GM will take their money and laugh all the way to the bank."

 

 

Which, again, can be applied to the G-Wagon yet you are oddly silent on that and still want to cherry depreciation values while ignoring the fact that the AMG risks further deprecation values because of dilution of the brand. Here's what you need to look at. What was the average depreciation of the AMG brands when there were far fewer choices compared to many choices that exist today and in the future. Look at that if you want to truly understand what is being talked about here. If you don't understand that simple concept, then maybe you just stop trying to argue that particular point.

 

Now, let's see what you pick out next.

[Suaviloquent]

The G-Wagon exists because it's so ridiculous. It's all about being ostentatious. Which is also why it is leased...

 

The thing is... brands are built up so they can be whored out.

 

That's how it works. I mean, there is nothing to do about it.

 

I don't understand why there is so much fervor over 10 more AMG models.

 

As I'm told that once a brand is built the next thing to do is usually build a stable of options to keep customers in your fold.

 

Do we not expect more VSport models? Do we not already see more M Sport trim packages?

 

I mean the model designation is of no consequence - it achieves the same end as a standalone AMG Sport package...

 

I seriously do not understand why there's so much angst against this. Every company is doing this.

 

Heck - Ford is whoring out Ford Performance through not really true performance cars like Explorer Sports and Fusion Sports. 

[balthazar]

I seriously do not understand why there's so much angst against this. Every company is doing this.

Cadillac has 3 VSports and 2 Vs (IIRC).

Mercedes is going to have FORTY-EIGHT AMGs.

 

Do you REALLY not see any difference?

[Suaviloquent]

Different customers have different needs, and different companies - even close competitors will have different market strategies.

 

Comparing the two companies here always boiled down to personal brand preference.

 

And no amount of objective rationalization of brand performance cherry-picked to represent some kind of moral victory will get around that.

 

Now was that so hard to digest? Am I not articulating the heart of the stupid arguments I'm reading from both sides?

[balthazar]

Digest what? You're answering a straight-up numbers point with superlatives and brush-offs.

 

You said you didn't understand the negative opinions. I responded to your 'bah; everyone is doing a money grab so it's OK" by pointing out 48 > 5.

[surreal1272]

Wow Suave. Just wow.

[ccap41]

I'm not a fan of it. AMG models used to be known for their and built engines and signed by said builder and their bonkers amount of torque sent rearward..now AMG means waaaay less in my eyes. With this move they aren't that same brand they used to be. No more bonkers amount of power, no hand built engines, just three useless letters on cars not deserving of them. Yes it's a good financial and Mercedes brand move(not a good AMG brand move) but I don't think it is the greatest long-term decision as I think it will devalue the "real" AMGs from here on out. It might only be a small percentage but I think from here on out unless it is a AMG GT or S63/5 I think it'll bring down the overall value to the E63, C63, CLA45...and so on. 

[ccap41]

 

I seriously do not understand why there's so much angst against this. Every company is doing this.

Cadillac has 3 VSports and 2 Vs (IIRC).

Mercedes is going to have FORTY-EIGHT AMGs.

 

Do you REALLY not see any difference?

 

Well MB also has like ten thousand more vehicles than Cadillac so the % is probably about the same lol.

 

Actually, it probably is if you "level off" by using the sprinters and work vehicles under the Mercedes name. 

Edited April 4, 2016 by ccap41

[Suaviloquent]

You know the same customer was previously served by an AMG Sport package on say like a E550.

 

It's just a trim reorganization. And you get multiple replication of the same underlying car.

 

In reality AMG has maybe 10 distinct models. And then you have the variants.

 

Sheesh, I think people would understand body styles of the same car on the same platform are treated as the same model.

[ccap41]

You know the same customer was previously served by an AMG Sport package on say like a E550.

 

It's just a trim reorganization. And you get multiple replication of the same underlying car.

 

In reality AMG has maybe 10 distinct models. And then you have the variants.

 

Sheesh, I think people would understand body styles of the same car on the same platform are treated as the same model.

Yeah it was still an E550 with an AMG Sport box to check. Now it will be an E43 AMG..minus the real AMG touches. It's essentially a Faux AMG. Sweet. Exactly what the badge snobs ordered, more expensive badges.

 

Same underlying car? Like the same platform? 

 

AMG has an infinite number of models now that they are willing to slap a badge on everything that comes off the line. Who cares if it has a hand built engine and specifically tuned suspension and more torque than a freight train, throw a badge on it! 

 

You get an AMG!

 

You get an AMG!

 

You get an AMG!

 

EVERYBODY GETS AMGs!! 

[Suaviloquent]

Which if it's what customers want - I mean these AMG models are no slouches - they will get the same performance of AMG models perhaps 2-3 generations ago - but with a similar price point and much improved technologies.

 

It's a different strategy.

 

It's one thing to not like it.

 

It's another thing to pretend that's it's inferior to whatever standard someone wants to bring out as reference. Because as of now Mercedes is pulling ahead of everyone. I'm not saying I like Mercedes, I don't like their CLA or GLA.

 

But I don't see any underlying issue with this. AMG models are still a very low fraction of their sales. 

 

And the E550 was gone because of compliance reasons. Unfortunate, and of course certainly not the mid-level V8 we want. But then again, that's what everyone is doing. Now the mid level engine is a boosted six of some kind. That's the way it is.

[ccap41]

It is a brand correct? That brand once stood for something, correct? People see that brand and knew it had a meaning, correct? It was a symbol that meant something. Now, it means less because it is on lesser and lesser cars. 

 

They are inferior to the real AMG's though. Just like the bull$h! M-Sport crap. (see even this having to say "real AMGs" is ridiculous in my mind.) AMG and M once stood for the pinnacle of 4 door sedans and SUVs, yes, coupes as well. And within reason..let's be honest..we're not talking about 200,000 sedans unless you're talking about the S65 but that's just kind of it's own thing. 

 

Now, AMG is just a really quick "X" Class but not special.

 

Also, the M and RS(Audi) at least haven't watered down their brands by putting it in the vehicle's title. You might buy some S-Line or M Sport package but at least it isn't in the name of the vehicle. I think that's what irks me the most and makes it feel watered down with "average". 

[smk4565]

 

I seriously do not understand why there's so much angst against this. Every company is doing this.

Cadillac has 3 VSports and 2 Vs (IIRC).

Mercedes is going to have FORTY-EIGHT AMGs.

 

Do you REALLY not see any difference?

 

Because Cadillac is weak.  As are Infiniti, Lexus, Acura, etc.  Mercedes for years has been the best at smooth ride, bank vault solid luxury.  So now they decided to be the best at performance too.  This is about sticking it to BMW and Porsche.  They don't want people going to the former Ultimate driving machine or to Porsche for their performance luxury car, they want them.  These are big spenders that Porsche conning to spend $1,000 on leather trim air vents.  Now these people will buy superior Mercedes-AMG's.

[G. David Felt]

 

 

I seriously do not understand why there's so much angst against this. Every company is doing this.

Cadillac has 3 VSports and 2 Vs (IIRC).

Mercedes is going to have FORTY-EIGHT AMGs.

 

Do you REALLY not see any difference?

 

Because Cadillac is weak.  As are Infiniti, Lexus, Acura, etc.  Mercedes for years has been the best at smooth ride, bank vault solid luxury.  So now they decided to be the best at performance too.  This is about sticking it to BMW and Porsche.  They don't want people going to the former Ultimate driving machine or to Porsche for their performance luxury car, they want them.  These are big spenders that Porsche conning to spend $1,000 on leather trim air vents.  Now these people will buy superior Mercedes-AMG's.

 

 

I have seen plenty of examples of MB being anything but bank vault solid luxury, but for sake of argument, they are and you are OK with them leaving the Luxury department and becoming another version of Chevy or Ford with all their models?

[oldshurst442]

Im on the fence with this....

 

On one hand, too many AMG variants cheapen out the effect...

On the other, if all these AMG variants are truly legit AMG cars....then I dont see the problem...

 

Chevrolet whored out the "SS" badge...

 

A Cobalt SS WAS worthy of the "SS" badging.

 

But was a Malibu SS?  Even if it was a MAXX?

 

I mean, what made the MAXX special?

 

Or even the W-Body Impala SS cars?

 

Both the 3.8 supercharged and the 5.3 liter V8 one...

 

If Mercedes-Benz just does an engine upgrade and slaps a badge on it, it aint exactly very special...

Both Impalas pictured....were just engine swaps...the V8 one was cool, but the Pontiac and Buick W-Body versions both had better suspension set-ups...

 

If M-B wants to cash in on the AMG badge without the merit, they will soon find out that consumers HATE being duped...

[G. David Felt]

That is my point exactly. I love my Trailblazer SS AWD, but hated that they slapped SS on every product line and most were terrible. You just cannot put a bigger or more powerful engine in an auto and think it will be fine.

 

MB can live off their history but whoring out everything and selling from base entry level eco box to top of the line will come back to hurt them.

[smk4565]

You know the same customer was previously served by an AMG Sport package on say like a E550.

 

It's just a trim reorganization. And you get multiple replication of the same underlying car.

 

In reality AMG has maybe 10 distinct models. And then you have the variants.

 

Sheesh, I think people would understand body styles of the same car on the same platform are treated as the same model.

I have a 2008 E550 with the AMG sport package, the car has 7 AMG badges on it (4 wheels, 2 exhaust tips, 1 trunk).  So I agree with your point, they basically already made this car, but now call it Mercedes-AMG E43 rather than Mercedes-Benz E550.   All they did was go from E350, E550, E63 to E300, E43, E63.  It is still a 3 step engine lineup, aside from the diesel which they usually offer.

[ccap41]

But they put the damn AMG name on the title to a car that clearly isn't an AMG if it is just an E550 with a sport package.

E550 + sport package = AMG now?

[smk4565]

The AMG cars have transmission, steering and suspension tuned for performance, the AWD system is more rear biased as well, so there is more mechanical enhancement than just more horsepower and some wheels and sporty front facia.

 

And you have to remember a C43 or E43 has a 0-60 time of 4.5 seconds.  That is still pretty fast.  And it isn't like they took away the hand built 500 hp engines, they are still there.  

[ccap41]

I know the REAL AMGs are a completely reworked car, which is why I think slapping an AMG badge on an E550 with a sport package is a joke.

I LOVE the AMG cars MB puts out. I've been a huge fan for quite awhile but I don't like abusing the brand image that the true AMG cars have built up.

[balthazar]

WHat mercedes should look into is cracking down on un-licensed sellers of 'AMG' labels, which I've seen on a BMW or 2 to date.

[Robert Hall]

WHat mercedes should look into is cracking down on un-licensed sellers of 'AMG' labels, which I've seen on a BMW or 2 to date.

Saw AMG M3 V HEMI badging on the back of a Prius a while back...badging is easy to procure on eBay.

Edited April 8, 2016 by Cubical-aka-Moltar