Keep your friends rich and your enemies rich and then tell apart which is which!

[Suaviloquent]

TRY NOT TO LOOK AT THE LICENCE PLATES PLS. YOU'RE GONNA DO IT ANYWAYS.

 

EXHIBIT A:

 

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT B:

 

 

 

 

 

EXHIBIT C:

 

 

 

[balthazar]

This is a very real problem for MB- all their cars look too much alike. Especially egregious considering the price spread of $66K….

[Suaviloquent]

The long wheelbase E-Class is like just another nose job that Mercedes does from it's packages.

[Suaviloquent]

I think that it is a tactical move. MB prolly think that anyone with the means to buy the S-Class would buy the S-Class anyways.

 

Anyone else that wants the prestige of MB, but now including the look of the S for all sedans...I think the E-Class LWB and S look alright on their own. Parked next to each other...it might be a shocker to the S owner seeing an E being such a close match.

 

Then again...this is the new paradigm of design. Find one look, claim it, stake the whole brand on it, and then figure out how to make it wider, lower, shorter taller...

[balthazar]

It worked when numerous models were built off of one basic shell (Biscayne, Bel Air, Impala, Caprice), but Chevy didn't find it necessary to put the same nose on the Chevelle/Malibu, Chevy II, and Corvette at the same time, did they? This is the same nose across different (ALL) model lines. I don't get the lack of effort. Your $96K sedan should NOT be a twin to your $29K sedan. 

[Suaviloquent]

No, the S-Class is not a twin of the CLA. That's one that just isn't true. The S-Class grille is bigger, has slats instead of the mesh on the CLA, and it always has hood ornament for its sedan versions, and it has longer dash to axle. The CLA is a sedan version of the A-Class hatch that has been selling in Europe since 1997.  Bringing it over stateside was something they could have done long ago, making a sedan version is also something they could have done long ago.

 

And besides... what's done is done. Do the vehicles look like what I'd expect anyways? That I'd say yeah...it's a Mercedes and it looks like one. The CT6 is a clone of the CTS as well, just a grille that is wider, not as tall, and then some basic headlight differences and voila. Now the price spread isn't so vast. Look at all of BMW. Every single Audi. What Ford has done to all their sedans. 

 

However, GM having Buick and Chevy to deal with CLA and B Class... Mercedes needed the CLA for compliance for CAFE, and I'm pretty sure they made the compromise of form over function without hesitating so they could market it as a styling equivalent of the CLS. 

 

I don't think it's a lack of effort either. Mercedes WANTS this. They want the whole lineup to be one sausage of different lengths. And not every single brand has to be all kinds of different for each model line. The other German brands are practically at this doorstep.

 

HELL, every single Porsche is the same thing from the front. 

 

But I wouldn't care, but I do like the idea of a LWB E-Class - but it's come invariably from China so NOPE. That's a car that I could perhaps really like. Would I aspire for that? Maybe. But do I want that? Not as the SWB.

 

So CT6 and Continental it is.

[smk4565]

I wish the E-class went back to a split headlight set up to look different from the S and C classes, at least they put the vertical LED bars in.  Most luxury brands are doing the similar look styling now, because they want brand continuity.   Sauv is correct, that Mercedes wants a uniform look in every car.

 

On a similar note, they did refresh the SL roadster to make it looks better, but the 2013-2016 version looked awful.  But now the SL looks too similar to the AMG GT.  They should make the SL have round headlights and look more like the 1950s car.  The G-waggen is retro Mercedes and people love it.  The SL could use a little retro Mercedes too.

[balthazar]

G-wagon is a sales flop in the U.S., so all the "love" must be from other countries.

 

MB wants 'brand continuity'? I know what they could do- as the sole retro purveyor of the 1970s hallmark, the stand-up hood ornament..., just put a larger, light-up stand-up on the hood of everything. That'd be distinctive.

[surreal1272]

No, the S-Class is not a twin of the CLA. That's one that just isn't true. The S-Class grille is bigger, has slats instead of the mesh on the CLA, and it always has hood ornament for its sedan versions, and it has longer dash to axle. The CLA is a sedan version of the A-Class hatch that has been selling in Europe since 1997. Bringing it over stateside was something they could have done long ago, making a sedan version is also something they could have done long ago.

And besides... what's done is done. Do the vehicles look like what I'd expect anyways? That I'd say yeah...it's a Mercedes and it looks like one. The CT6 is a clone of the CTS as well, just a grille that is wider, not as tall, and then some basic headlight differences and voila. Now the price spread isn't so vast. Look at all of BMW. Every single Audi. What Ford has done to all their sedans.

However, GM having Buick and Chevy to deal with CLA and B Class... Mercedes needed the CLA for compliance for CAFE, and I'm pretty sure they made the compromise of form over function without hesitating so they could market it as a styling equivalent of the CLS.

I don't think it's a lack of effort either. Mercedes WANTS this. They want the whole lineup to be one sausage of different lengths. And not every single brand has to be all kinds of different for each model line. The other German brands are practically at this doorstep.

HELL, every single Porsche is the same thing from the front.

But I wouldn't care, but I do like the idea of a LWB E-Class - but it's come invariably from China so NOPE. That's a car that I could perhaps really like. Would I aspire for that? Maybe. But do I want that? Not as the SWB.

So CT6 and Continental it is.

The S Class grill looks bigger because the S Class is a bigger car. They share the same basic design now across at four different models. Balthazaar is right. Edited July 3, 2016 by surreal1272

[balthazar]

MB S-Coupe uses the same grid-like grille texture, same LACK of fog lamps, same gaping holes in the lower corners, same hood contouring/lines as the CLA. They fiddled for 2 minutes with the headlights, but coming at you head-on, you can't tell if the person spent $29K or $129K. It's a mere 3" wider than the bottom-feeder CLA, so size (again; coming straight at you) isn't at all readily apparent.

 

"Get the look of our $100K+ car for only $29,995!!"

 

Edited July 3, 2016 by balthazar

[G. David Felt]

Guess MB is taking a page from GM of the 80's with make it all the same from bottom Value auto to top rape you of your life savings auto and still have them all look the same so you cannot tell how much one spent just like Balthazar has stated.

 

So then next up for MB is to drop like a rock and then bankrupt and reorganize and rebuild like GM did is what history is teaching us.

[Suaviloquent]

But you're someone who would never consider Mercedes or any import. I mentioned above what I think of the E-Class LWB. The only Mercedes I would consider, because it reminds me of the CT6, but more luxo interior.

 

I'm not calling out bias. What I'm saying is...right now Cadillac is still the underdog, and Mercedes having one cheap car to comply with FE standard does NOT UNDO EVERYTHING else they have on the high end. And if all of the top end of Mercedes is so fickle and generic... WTF is Cadillac waiting for, 20 years to wait to get up there? I've said myself, bring the Elmiraj sexyness to life, like how Lexus brought the LF-LC to life as a very near concept execution of the production car.

 

And Mercedes is a profit hungry machine. What makes you think Cadillac is on a path any different? I'm fine with Cadillac making sausage length cars, I wish the ATS though had a smaller badge and a thinner grille like the CT6. And that does mean I want them to just blatantly copy a model line formula that is supposedly "Germanic".

[Suaviloquent]

Maybe I'm projecting some kind of practicality or mindset over efficiency over these luxury cars.

 

But my argument is this...if it is a good design, a fairly distinct design, then there is nothing wrong to propagate it to to the rest of the lineup.

 

I don't think Mercedes S-class buyers really care that the CLA exists, and if anything...it means they either have a backbone or ego that can allow such a car to exist and be faithful to the brand. Who knows? We know that when you create a new segment or join a new segment, you have the chance to split sales.

 

What do I mean? Well, when the ATS came out, and the CTS then followed...net sales increased barely over just the standalone CTS GEN 2 sales. ATPs were split, but customers now had a choice of 2 different sizes compared to one tweener.

 

The CLA probably had that effect on the C-Class. People only wanted a C-Class had the car move much more upmarket, into the most luxo car in its class. The CLA became just the new entry level (it's still a pretty $h!ty car for the price, but it's the got a badge worth more than the sum of the parts of the car).

 

If GM built a $100k+ flagship (the CT6 V8 model should do that) and the CT2 or 3, the sub-ats model is a shrink wrap of the same wrapper, I'll be expecting from you Balth the same opinion levied against them.

[balthazar]

I'm already on record, and will restate here : I an vehemently against any 'sub-ATS' @ Cadillac. ATS is small enough, another sedan below it, 6 inches shorter, is a colossal waste of resources. I really don't care how it turns out.

 

That clear enough?

[oldshurst442]

Problem is Suave...

Balthy is ALREADY vocal AGAINST sub-ATS class Cadillacs.

He is CONSTANTLY telling us he HATES this sub-ATS idea and he also tells us that Cadillac needs NOT to chase volume either!

 

Balthy is very consistent in his thought processes.

There are biases of course....but who hasnt got any?

 

I know I do!!!

 

Disclaimer: I try to be as honest and consistent in my thought processes also. My opinions sometimes have bias in them...that is what opinions are for...

 

(That is why I HATE -1 votes without explanations! But I believe I have beat that thing to death!      

 

 

EDIT:

BALTHY beat me to it. I think he could defend himself quite good....he dont need me....he pities the fool that thinks otherwise.

Edited July 3, 2016 by oldshurst442

[smk4565]

G-wagon is a sales flop in the U.S., so all the "love" must be from other countries.

 

MB wants 'brand continuity'? I know what they could do- as the sole retro purveyor of the 1970s hallmark, the stand-up hood ornament..., just put a larger, light-up stand-up on the hood of everything. That'd be distinctive.

I think the G-wagon is the #1 selling vehicle in the USA with a base price over $100,000.

[smk4565]

But you're someone who would never consider Mercedes or any import. I mentioned above what I think of the E-Class LWB. The only Mercedes I would consider, because it reminds me of the CT6, but more luxo interior.

 

I'm not calling out bias. What I'm saying is...right now Cadillac is still the underdog, and Mercedes having one cheap car to comply with FE standard does NOT UNDO EVERYTHING else they have on the high end. And if all of the top end of Mercedes is so fickle and generic... WTF is Cadillac waiting for, 20 years to wait to get up there? I've said myself, bring the Elmiraj sexyness to life, like how Lexus brought the LF-LC to life as a very near concept execution of the production car.

 

And Mercedes is a profit hungry machine. What makes you think Cadillac is on a path any different? I'm fine with Cadillac making sausage length cars, I wish the ATS though had a smaller badge and a thinner grille like the CT6. And that does mean I want them to just blatantly copy a model line formula that is supposedly "Germanic".

Good post.  

 

I'd go beyond Cadillac and throw in Lexus, Infiniti, Lincoln, and Acura.  None of them have really jumped into that $100k territory to challenge Mercedes, or the Italian supercars, or Porsche or the Bentley and Rolls Royces of the world.    And every car company wants to maximize profits, that is why they exist.

[balthazar]

It only moves between 200-300/month. It's too ancient to get any sales momentum.

 

Mercedes sells FAR more S-series cars over $100K than it does g-wagoons over $100K.

[smk4565]

It only moves between 200-300/month. It's too ancient to get any sales momentum.

 

Mercedes sells FAR more S-series cars over $100K than it does g-wagoons over $100K.

Well the S-class is the #1 selling car over $95,000, and by a wide margin.  But a G-wagen starts at $115,000 and 2/3 of them sold are AMG models that are $140,000.  When you compare a G-wagen to BMW i8, Audi R8, or Bentley sales, the G-wagen sales look pretty good.  And G-wagen sales are up this year, and they were up in 2015 over 2014.  The sales keep rising, and this for a vehicle that Mercedes was going to end production on in 2006.  But the fans wanted them to keep making, and they listened to their fan base.

 

G-wagen sales were up 17% in 2015, and are up 23.8% this year.

Edited July 4, 2016 by smk4565

[oldshurst442]

Makes you think had GM still kept building Hummer H1s, H2s and H3s...and expanded with the HX concept...

[balthazar]

G-wagen sales were up 17% in 2015, and are up 23.8% this year.

They sold like 340 last month. Whoopie$h!.

 

MB should leverage the G-wagon by expanding the line. Daimler should offer a

2.0TT i4 with 250 HP

3.0TT V6 with 325 HP

a diesel V6T

all with hybrid plug-in capability (including the V8s). Anything to get it away from the 13 MPG it barely gets.

Also; lower the 6000 lb curb wight by 2000 lbs with extensive aluminum and triple the trim variants. They could also offer a 'chopped top' version like the range rover. All these wonderful ideas could really raise the sales & revenue TEMENDOUSLY- it could out-revenue the s-class, properly handled. 

 

Unfortunately, Daimler squanders the opportunity and lets it rot on the vine for decades with no changes, then wonders why they only sell a few hundred/mnth in the U.S.

 

Edited July 4, 2016 by balthazar

[surreal1272]

It only moves between 200-300/month. It's too ancient to get any sales momentum.

 

Mercedes sells FAR more S-series cars over $100K than it does g-wagoons over $100K.

Well the S-class is the #1 selling car over $95,000, and by a wide margin.  But a G-wagen starts at $115,000 and 2/3 of them sold are AMG models that are $140,000.  When you compare a G-wagen to BMW i8, Audi R8, or Bentley sales, the G-wagen sales look pretty good.  And G-wagen sales are up this year, and they were up in 2015 over 2014.  The sales keep rising, and this for a vehicle that Mercedes was going to end production on in 2006.  But the fans wanted them to keep making, and they listened to their fan base.

 

G-wagen sales were up 17% in 2015, and are up 23.8% this year.

It's easy to go up when you only sell 260 at the same time last year LOL.

[smk4565]

No one would buy a V6 G-wagen here, there is a diesel version in Europe. The G550 only has a 40% take rate, 60% of G wagens are AMG. The people buying it want the bigger engine.

Mercedes sells a GLE with 4 and 6 cylinder and hybrid versions for people that want a mid size SUV that isn't crazy thirsty.

The fans don't want them to change the G-wagen, it sells because they haven't changed the look since 1979. The Jeep Wrangler has looked the same since 1943, and it is FCA's most iconic vehicle.

[balthazar]

But Jeep sold 225,000 Wranglers last year. 

 

Fact is, g-wagoon doesn't sell, the numbers are terrible. Daimler makes like $75,000 profit on each one, but they are wasting the potential to vastly increase sales by limiting the trims, by having laughably-outdated construction/ dated hardware, and not offering hybrid, plug-in and non-13 MPG variants. There are potential 'fans' out there that don't buy it because it's such a one-trick dinosaur. Daimler could sell 1000/mnth in the U.S. if they made it more appealing to more people.

 

And, you know, blow up the assembly plant and build something new. This is going on 5 years old already :

[smk4565]

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive.  When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad.  For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume.  

 

They did just put a new for 2016 4.0 liter V8 in the G-wagen.  Rumor is next year they are going to do an overhaul on the G-class, use aluminum to cut 400 lbs, and add a 360 hp inline six engine and 9-speed automatic.  There will be updates, but they don't want to mess with a winning formula.  No reason to fix a vehicle that gets more and more popular over time.

[surreal1272]

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive. When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad. For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume.

They did just put a new for 2016 4.0 liter V8 in the G-wagen. Rumor is next year they are going to do an overhaul on the G-class, use aluminum to cut 400 lbs, and add a 360 hp inline six engine and 9-speed automatic. There will be updates, but they don't want to mess with a winning formula. No reason to fix a vehicle that gets more and more popular over time.

Name one Cadillac that sells in such low numbers, and is still for sale today, over the course of the last twenty years? Example of what I'm talking about? When the ELR sold jack squat, Cadillac killed it after barely a year. The G wagon has sold in paltry numbers for years so show us a Cadillac that was sold for that long in such low numbers.

And in sorry but if I'm Mercedes Benz, selling 3000 of a vehicle that has had basically the same form factor and look since 1972 isn't exactly in line with what they have done with everything else they have ever made. It is clear that this exists purely to bilk a clueless customer by selling on some mysterious prestige.

Edited July 4, 2016 by surreal1272

[balthazar]

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive.  When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad.  For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume. 

I'm just taking a similar trac WRT MB as you do WRT Cadillac, so you can see how it comes off.

Because, you know, that filter is seeming broken.

 

Besides, you are doing the VERY SAME THING; you constantly trumpet MB sales records & rates, yet you're excusing the lousy sales of the g-wagoon. 

 

 

Odd.

[surreal1272]

 

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive.  When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad.  For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume. 

I'm just taking a similar trac WRT MB as you do WRT Cadillac, so you can see how it comes off.

Because, you know, that filter is seeming broken.

 

Besides, you are doing the VERY SAME THING; you constantly trumpet MB sales records & rates, yet you're excusing the lousy sales of the g-wagoon. 

 

 

Odd.

 

But Balth, they sold more than 3,000 last year after having only sold barely 1,000 for years. That clearly shows a demand LOL and justifies MB milking it for all it's worth.

[smk4565]

 

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive. When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad. For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume.

They did just put a new for 2016 4.0 liter V8 in the G-wagen. Rumor is next year they are going to do an overhaul on the G-class, use aluminum to cut 400 lbs, and add a 360 hp inline six engine and 9-speed automatic. There will be updates, but they don't want to mess with a winning formula. No reason to fix a vehicle that gets more and more popular over time.

Name one Cadillac that sells in such low numbers, and is still for sale today, over the course of the last twenty years? Example of what I'm talking about? When the ELR sold jack squat, Cadillac killed it after barely a year. The G wagon has sold in paltry numbers for years so show us a Cadillac that was sold for that long in such low numbers.

And in sorry but if I'm Mercedes Benz, selling 3000 of a vehicle that has had basically the same form factor and look since 1972 isn't exactly in line with what they have done with everything else they have ever made. It is clear that this exists purely to bilk a clueless customer by selling on some mysterious prestige.

 

Name one Cadillac with an average transaction price of $145,000.

[balthazar]

Bugatti Veyron MSRP is 1.7 million.

 

- - - - - 

I dunno; I thought that was easily as relevant….

[surreal1272]

So when Cadillac has low sales numbers, it is a good thing because they are keeping their cars exclusive. When Mercedes has a vehicle with low sales it is bad. For someone who always criticizes Mercedes for chasing volume, odd that you want to criticize them for also not chasing volume.

They did just put a new for 2016 4.0 liter V8 in the G-wagen. Rumor is next year they are going to do an overhaul on the G-class, use aluminum to cut 400 lbs, and add a 360 hp inline six engine and 9-speed automatic. There will be updates, but they don't want to mess with a winning formula. No reason to fix a vehicle that gets more and more popular over time.

Name one Cadillac that sells in such low numbers, and is still for sale today, over the course of the last twenty years? Example of what I'm talking about? When the ELR sold jack squat, Cadillac killed it after barely a year. The G wagon has sold in paltry numbers for years so show us a Cadillac that was sold for that long in such low numbers.

And in sorry but if I'm Mercedes Benz, selling 3000 of a vehicle that has had basically the same form factor and look since 1972 isn't exactly in line with what they have done with everything else they have ever made. It is clear that this exists purely to bilk a clueless customer by selling on some mysterious prestige.

Name one Cadillac with an average transaction price of $145,000.

Not the point and there are more advanced cars that sell in better numbers and a higher price so that kind of "logic" can be applied to Benz as well. You do understand that right?

Care to actually answer the original question?

[Suaviloquent]

Well, MB makes money from the G Wagon, so that takes care of it itself. 

 

Every car company has at one point had some kind of low volume car that isn't particularly outstanding, but is iconic or can be one trick pony.

 

But remember, by 2050 - it will have to be electric or it will be gone.

 

It being a low volume car, there's a lot of prestige tied to ownership. It's not mysterious to me - you get to be one of the few to strut the look and the badge. I would not buy one, but that's because I'm poor and I can't have a garage of more that 2 cars anyways.

 

The G Wagon is like cult, like the Mercedes continuation of the E Wagon in America.

 

I will never understand their appeal, but competition for the E Wagon for the E300 will be there from the Volvo V90.

[smk4565]

The G wagon sells well for its segment, in fact it is pretty much alone in its segment. If a car like the ATS sells 1500 compared to 4,000 Lexus IS, 3000 Infiniti Q50, 13,000 3/4 series, 6,000 C-class, etc. Then the ATS is struggling in its segment.

G-wagon isn't struggling, for its price point it sells well. There is also a new G-wagon coming next year.

[Suaviloquent]

It's a weird target, because it's not like the G-Wagon is known at all to be a highly advanced vehicle.

 

It's the simplicity and tank like construction of the thing that makes it very capable off-road.

 

But most are not taken off-road, they're chosen for their unique style.

 

I think MB themselves are flabbergasted at why they still sell it, but it's not a huge part of their fleet, and it's built by a subcontractor, so they never have a production hiccup due to it's own unique manufacturing processes.

[ccap41]

G-wagon is a sales flop in the U.S., so all the "love" must be from other countries.

 

MB wants 'brand continuity'? I know what they could do- as the sole retro purveyor of the 1970s hallmark, the stand-up hood ornament..., just put a larger, light-up stand-up on the hood of everything. That'd be distinctive.

Sales flop? They sell every one they produce and at that they START at 120k. I don't remember the ratio but it's something insane like well over half of G Wagens produced are AMGs and those start at 140k. 

 

Yeah they aren't selling a ton but they are as old school as a vehicle gets as not much has changed in all of the years being for sale here. They've changed engines and transmissions and that's basically it.. All of the bones and chassis are the same. They're making a $h! ton of money of the G Wagen with only a few thousand a year selling. 

[ccap41]

It only moves between 200-300/month. It's too ancient to get any sales momentum.

 

Mercedes sells FAR more S-series cars over $100K than it does g-wagoons over $100K.

The cost to engineer and update the S waaaaaaaya out due the G Wagen though. It has to be 10 times if not more than the G. S Class has WORLD leading technology inside and out and the G is basically the same thing that came over here but with new engines and transmissions with fancy leather and infotainment. I can't imagine the difference in development cost of a 2016 S Class vs a 2016 G Wagen. 

[ccap41]

But Jeep sold 225,000 Wranglers last year. 

 

Fact is, g-wagoon doesn't sell, the numbers are terrible. Daimler makes like $75,000 profit on each one, but they are wasting the potential to vastly increase sales by limiting the trims, by having laughably-outdated construction/ dated hardware, and not offering hybrid, plug-in and non-13 MPG variants. There are potential 'fans' out there that don't buy it because it's such a one-trick dinosaur. Daimler could sell 1000/mnth in the U.S. if they made it more appealing to more people.

 

And, you know, blow up the assembly plant and build something new. This is going on 5 years old already :

 

Mercedes already has their cheapo cars for volume. They clearly don't want a large volume out of their hand built G. People splurging 120k on a brick could care less about 13mpg or 16mpg. 

 

If you want something softer just go to the other end of Mercedes' showroom and they'll sell you a GLE or GLS that fits exactly what you're asking for out of the G. 

[balthazar]

Agreed- it can't take more than $20K to build the G, EVERYTHING has been paid for developmentally decades ago. It's just material costs. Like I said; I'd guess that at $100K, $75K is profit. What's surprising is, as money-grubbing as Daimler is, they ignore the G completely. It's like 20 years overdue for replacement… not sure 'better late than never' still works in this scenario...

 

People splurging 120k on a brick could care less about 13mpg or 16mpg.

Read my posts; I'm not saying pitch to those buyers, but the buyers they turn away because : 13 MPG.

Edited July 5, 2016 by balthazar

[ccap41]

People don't want it to change though.

 

Somebody who wants a changed G basically want an ML/GLE. So go buy one of those... If you want something that's different, unique, doesn't give a crap about mpg and a soft, cushy ride but it would put it to a wrangler on the trails (OEM vs OEM) all while wrapped in leather with heated seats... you buy a G. Yeah yeah yeah probably one tenth of 1% even brush the grass along their driveway let alone see a track but that doesn't mean it isn't made for it and can do it. They're off road monsters if you don't get the 20+ inch wheels.

[balthazar]

Off road capability is pointless- they don't get taken off road.

 

But those other SUVs aren't the G and don't command it's prices. Undoubtedly there are those who prefer/like the G and don't care for the overwrought plastic-ness of the others, but don't want to stop @ every other gas station on the way to Starbucks (not the the other MB SUVs are great on mileage, either, but they're better).

 
I know smk would support this, it's a way to BOOST SALES and INCREASE REVENUE, the mercedes brand's sole purpose as a marketer.

It's no different than bemoaning there aren't higher trims on the Escalade that can bring in more money/sales.

 

Either this line of thinking is legitimate, or it's not/unproven. I'm just trying to talk these scenarios out…

[ccap41]

Agreed- it can't take more than $20K to build the G, EVERYTHING has been paid for developmentally decades ago. It's just material costs. Like I said; I'd guess that at $100K, $75K is profit. What's surprising is, as money-grubbing as Daimler is, they ignore the G completely. It's like 20 years overdue for replacement… not sure 'better late than never' still works in this scenario...

 

 

 

People splurging 120k on a brick could care less about 13mpg or 16mpg.

Read my posts; I'm not saying pitch to those buyers, but the buyers they turn away because : 13 MPG.

And G Wagens aren't rotting on lots either so they likely don't care about the minuscule handful of people walking away from a 13mpg G Wagen because if mpg is of a concern at a Mercedes dealership then they can walk over to the GLE and magically its everything modern that you said you want out of an updated vehicle... AMGs, hybrids, diesels, gassers and mpgs to your liking. 

 

I could see offering a diesel G Wagen but it would have to be something awesome like a 6.7 Cummins or 6.7 PowerStroke making something bonkers like 850+ lb-ft of tq. 

[smk4565]

People don't want it to change though.

 

Somebody who wants a changed G basically want an ML/GLE. So go buy one of those... If you want something that's different, unique, doesn't give a crap about mpg and a soft, cushy ride but it would put it to a wrangler on the trails (OEM vs OEM) all while wrapped in leather with heated seats... you buy a G. Yeah yeah yeah probably one tenth of 1% even brush the grass along their driveway let alone see a track but that doesn't mean it isn't made for it and can do it. They're off road monsters if you don't get the 20+ inch wheels.

I would agree that people don't want it to change.  The customers buying the G-wagen like it the way it is.  I also don't think they need a lower priced model, the V8 is the entry level model, the AMG versions are 60% of sales, so you have an AMG V8 and a V12 as 2 step ups from the V8.   Rumor is they will add an inline six turbo with 360 hp, maybe that comes in around $110,000 base.

 

But like ccap said, a GLE is the roughly the same size a a G-wagen and gets better mileage and isn't a tank.  So Mercedes is already giving customers the option of softer SUV with better mileage.  Here are the spy photos for the new G-wagen, doesn't look like much is changing.

 

 

[balthazar]

I wonder if it's really going to keep those same, clunky, non-integrated, U.S. Mail-jeep turn indicators, plopped on the top of the fenders with thick exposed rubber gaskets.

Or, are those one of the features the SO SO MANY buyers don't want to change?

 

WHERE'S THE CONCEPT VEHICLE??? 

[smk4565]

No concept, straight to production.  It will probably look exactly the same, but the new chassis cuts 440 lbs and lets them put in the new engines and transmissions.

 

For those who want a cheaper, more fuel efficient SUV and integrated turn signals, they also have the 2018 GLE coming.  

[surreal1272]

So this is confirmation that Mercedes is bilking their customers?

"Hey we have this modern SUV with everything you need for less that $60K or you can buy our $140K SUV that offers none of those things except worse gas mileage and a four wheel drive system than 99.99999999% of you will never use."

Got to give them credit though. Their sheep eat that up but it doesn't speak well to their buying intelligence.

[balthazar]

No concept, straight to production.  It will probably look exactly the same, but the new chassis cuts 440 lbs and lets them put in the new engines and transmissions.

No dingus; the concept vehicle from 2011 or so, the one I posted on the prior page.

I wonder if the "all new" G is going to be just like the prior gen Silverado, where people stand off to one side and ponder if its any different.

 

And how is it the current chassis, which is all V8s, can't handle a V6 or 4T??

 

For those who want a cheaper, more fuel efficient SUV and integrated turn signals, they also have the 2018 GLE coming.

This answer doesn't answer the question. People who buy the G aren't looking at the other melted plastic SUVs at MB.

So why don't G shoppers get any choice on their vehicle, which is supposed to be the (SUV) flagship?? It's the oldest, least techy, least modern and most restricted SUV in the catalog.

Pretty piss poor flagship.

 

From the camo shots, looks like they are still being denied entry to the 21st century.

[smk4565]

I don't see a 4 or 6 cylinder in the Escalade.  Or a 2.0T in the Corvette.  Because buyers of those cars want a V8.  The current G-wagon is so heavy, a V6 isn't enough.  There is a turbo V6 diesel in Europe, but the current weight is around 5800 lbs or something, if they take 440 pounds out then the turbo 6 becomes a more viable option.  However that would have a low take rate still, the people buying a G-wagon want a V8, or V12 even. 

 

They also aren't bilking customers, they are giving the customers what they want.  The people buying G-wagons want a 560 hp V8 retro off road tank.  The G is unique vehicle with no rival really, that is why people pay top dollar for it, and sales keep climbing.   

 

 

It's the oldest, least techy, least modern and most restricted SUV in the catalog.

 

That is why it sells.  The more outdated it is, the better it sells.

[balthazar]

• Then why update any of the cars?? Why not still sell the 1985 S-class, the one with the giant 'any color as long as its black' rubber bus steering wheel, with the horrendous pleather n plastic interior and 150 HP? 

 

• The reason G buyers buy the gas V8 is because THATS ALL THERE IS. You guys still aren't getting where I'm coming from; there could be MORE G buyers with MORE options. Right now there's NO options.

 

And holding the Escalade up is invalid- you know that SUV has a myriad of problems.

[surreal1272]

I don't see a 4 or 6 cylinder in the Escalade. Or a 2.0T in the Corvette. Because buyers of those cars want a V8. The current G-wagon is so heavy, a V6 isn't enough. There is a turbo V6 diesel in Europe, but the current weight is around 5800 lbs or something, if they take 440 pounds out then the turbo 6 becomes a more viable option. However that would have a low take rate still, the people buying a G-wagon want a V8, or V12 even.

They also aren't bilking customers, they are giving the customers what they want. The people buying G-wagons want a 560 hp V8 retro off road tank. The G is unique vehicle with no rival really, that is why people pay top dollar for it, and sales keep climbing.

It's the oldest, least techy, least modern and most restricted SUV in the catalog.

That is why it sells. The more outdated it is, the better it sells.

No they are not. They are only selling 3000 a year when they could be selling 9000 a year by just actually updating it while keeping the V8 you allege they love.

And again, no one outside of the Sahara desert is taking one of those off road.

Do you see the fault in your reasoning while you dog other makes for doing the same thing?

Edited July 6, 2016 by surreal1272

[ccap41]

So this is confirmation that Mercedes is bilking their customers?

"Hey we have this modern SUV with everything you need for less that $60K or you can buy our $140K SUV that offers none of those things except worse gas mileage and a four wheel drive system than 99.99999999% of you will never use."

Got to give them credit though. Their sheep eat that up but it doesn't speak well to their buying intelligence.

No it's giving the customers who want a G...a G. They sell every one they make, they're hand made still.

99.99% never touch 200mph in their exotics but it's something they need to do.

People buying cars like this or a 458 aren't buying the car to DO what it can do. They're buying the capability to do it and frankly to say, " hey my car can do this."

Personally, I don't understand the hatred towards the G because of how capable and tank-like that they are. They're a modern old school like the Toyota (I forgot the name of the one they're making a retro version of) that everybody freakin loves. If they got rid of it people would ask, "why can't we get a vehicle to do XXX?" So they just never stopped making it as opposed to most that make soemthing super awesome and get rid of it a few years later. Like the Chevy SS. Its the almost perfect enthusiast car, 6.2 Chevy V8, manual transmission, sedan(because as adults coupes just aren't practical) and it's leaving us already. I just hope I can score a used one in a few years.