August 2017: General Motors Co.

[oldshurst442]

This is what I dont get...

Does @smk4565 really think this was a compelling automobile for the North American market?

(Euro market is different for Mercedes)

The Oldsmobile Aurora he owned....which was about the same years this M-B was offered in North America...

Was that Benz shytebox below or above the Olds Aurora?

And you know....the CLA is just a better marketed version of that C230 Coupe...OK....SLIGHTLY better packaged as well....but the CLA aint winning any battles for supremacy...anybody that has gotten close to that car sees it for what it really is....a poor attempt to put lipstick on an econobox pig...

Cadillac got roasted for the Cimarron by Eurosnobs...

It seems weird to me that they dont hold the same standards for Mercedes Benz when its clear that Mercedes Benz has plenty of times screwed their market base with shyte and poorly thought out cars...(yes the CLA is poorly thought out)...Cadillac only gave us the Cimarron a LIFETIME ago...

The C230 Coupe was barely 15 years ago while the CLA is a RECENT offering...

From TOPGEAR UK...

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/mercedes-benz/cla

Quote

 

Not what Merc should be doing. Focus on engineering, not trying to invent another niche

 

 

Quote

 

As we said, it’s based on the A-Class so shares the platform, engines, transmission and interior, but gains a droopy new back end. For added high-performance thrills, there’s the AMG CLA 45. 

All well and good, apart from the styling. From certain angles it looks great: we love the side-profile, very junior CLS. But from others it looks compromised: a little too tall, a little too narrow, a bit too stubby to be a truly svelte coupe. That’s not the only compromise either.

 

 

Quote

 

On paper, the CLA looks fine. The two main engine choices offer decent-ish poke – either a 168bhp diesel or a 120bhp petrol – and they will do 0-62mph in 8.2secs or 9.3secs respectively. The CLA is front-wheel drive, but that shouldn’t be a drawback.

Yet somehow it is. The CLA doesn’t drive particularly well, and is neither comfortable nor refined. You initially want sport suspension because it lowers the car by 15mm so looks a lot better, but this also makes it too stiff, so then you don’t. The engines grumble at low revs too much and the twin clutch gearbox makes a politician look decisive. It all adds up to a car that is relying on its badge far too much. And then there’s the AMG version. 355bhp, four-wheel drive traction… and still a bit unexciting.

 

 

Quote

B-pillar back, though, and things take a turn for the worse. The rear seats are cramped – very cramped, in a way you don’t expect from a modern car. Headroom is so tight that even our 5’9” tester struggled to sit upright. Blame the coupe lines for that. And the boot is also tiny, compounding the practicality issues. Want a more practical Merc? Buy an A-Class. Want a betterlooking Merc? Buy the C-Class Coupe. In both cases, you’ll be disappointed if you choose a CLA.

 

 

Quote

 

1. Overview 2. Driving 3. On the inside 4. Owning 5. Our verdict

Verdict

Final thoughts and pick of the range

"Odd-looking CLA is more flawed than we'd ever expect from Merc in 2016"

 

 

From EUROPEAN reviewers where Mercedes is COMFORTABLY GOOD in selling MAINSTREAM machines and Mercedes has a DUAL personality equally IMPORTANT in Europe as a MAINSTREAM ECONOBOX maker and LUXURY brand...

[G. David Felt]

Clearly Mercedes is not happy enough being a Luxury auto company, they want to follow old Cadillac down the road into garbage badge engineering. Pathetic. 

As to why they are no different than GM, FORD, Toyota. An auto company that is trying to be far too many things to everyone.

[ccap41]

What is Mercedes badge engineering? 

What's so bad about the CLA that people seem to love to hate on? It's a smaller Mercedes.. so..? It's probably very similar in size to the ATS. 

[G. David Felt]

1 minute ago, ccap41 said:

What is Mercedes badge engineering? 

Yes MB does not take the same lousy auto and put a different brand name on it, they create new garbage labels under the same mb label.

Take an A class car, create a new badge CLA and throw it on the same garbage auto with a new body kit and a few tweaks no matter how it bad it is. We saw this with GM, Toyota, etc.

Toyota seems to be doing it the worst right now with their Camry badged Lexus IS250 garbage.

[ccap41]

So they're replacing a Mercedes with a Mercedes and that's wrong? They just renamed it for a different market. 

That isn't the same as Lincoln(premium) using Ford(non-premium) for a base. It's Mercedes using a Mercedes chassis. 

[Robert Hall]

12 minutes ago, dfelt said:

 

Toyota seems to be doing it the worst right now with their Camry badged Lexus IS250 garbage.

???  Your facts are uncoordinated.  The IS has nothing to do with the Camry...it is a compact RWD model.    Maybe you are thinking of the ES, which is related to the Camry and Avalon, but that's no different than GM with the Malibu and Regal being related. 

Edited September 8, 2017 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Cmicasa the Great]

17 hours ago, smk4565 said:

Buick doesn't have a car the size of the CLA or C-class, the Regal in ever dimension is within 1 inch of the E-class.   The Mercedes of similar size to the LaCrosse is the S-class, and the Mercedes of similar size to Enclave is GLS.  Buick is a far cry from Benz on those.

If Buick was competing with Mercedes (Audi, BMW, Lexus too) then GM wouldn't need Cadillac.  But Cadillac is better than Buick and can't topple the Germans or Lexus.  I have wished for years that Cadillac was on the up, Cadillac was my favorite luxury brand until around the 2008ish time frame when the 2nd Gen CTS I didn't care for much, the STS got a watered down refresh, the XLR-V was under-powered, SRX went to front drive.  And the competition kept improving.

I have always liked Jaguars too, I always liked the styling and I liked the old style Jags with loads of wood trim, the new XE and XF are black plastic city inside them.

But they did. Buick discontinued it because of the changing tide to CUVs.. The ENCORE's success... already eclipsing to the top sales years for the Verano (46K in '13) is already at 56K units, up 15%, this year with Sept, Oct, Nov, and Dec to go. That's more sales of the Encore than the CLA, GLA, and GLC combined.. granted they are more expensive but the point is SALES from each brands point of view yields profits based on the costs. I'm willing to bet that the Encore is more profitable than those vehicles simply because of GM larger influence and country of origin. And before U say it.. the Encore is a world vehicle as the Trax and Mokka.. not to mention the Sonic, Spark, Barina, Onix etc. 

Now.. GOOGLE these words :  - mercedes brings cla to buick verano  - Look at the fact that were plenty of people over at Benz forums talking about buying the Buick over that POS.

Realize that the Verano was constantly cited as the reason why the heads of Benz decided to bring the CLA tothe U.S. in the first place.. because when the Verano showed them that a compact FWD car could sell 42K+ each year.. they figured why not. Plenty of writers spoke of this in 2013 when the "Ugly lil Kraut Bitch" showed upon our shores.

The new Enclave vs the GLS.. U win on a few points but not all. The New Enclave as a luxury vehicle is quite a nice CUV. Granted the GLS has a more potent engine.. the larger picture shows that GM has the Denali on the same lot/sales channel and the Cadillac's Escalade to really deal with that duty if the details are nitpicked. Then.. new ball game. BUICK is a luxury brand in its own right.. but has historically and continues to be a healthy alternative to Cadillac, Benz etc. In fact.. couple in Denali with the Buick.. as they are sold on the same floor, share the same general manager, share the same sales budget.. and one might look at BUICK-GMC DENALI in the same light as Jag-LROVER

[Cmicasa the Great]

23 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Clearly Mercedes is not happy enough being a Luxury auto company, they want to follow old Cadillac down the road into garbage badge engineering. Pathetic. 

As to why they are no different than GM, FORD, Toyota. An auto company that is trying to be far too many things to everyone.

They get away with the badge engineering in the U.S. simply because we are walled in to the point of not caring or knowing what is on sale in other countries. American arrogance and geography (meaning we have plenty of beautiful vacation spots without ever really leaving the United States or Territories) is used to the German's advantage. To Mercedes.. their "Chevy vehicles" floating around every part of he world are then sent over here with slightly better leather and weee bit more sound deadening and viola.. the new CLA, GLA etc. Problem is.. U can not cover up mediocrity for long. Eventually.. with the CLA for instance.. the evidence of shitty build comes out in about 8-10K miles

 

[G. David Felt]

22 minutes ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

They get away with the badge engineering in the U.S. simply because we are walled in to the point of not caring or knowing what is on sale in other countries. American arrogance and geography (meaning we have plenty of beautiful vacation spots without ever really leaving the United States or Territories) is used to the German's advantage. To Mercedes.. their "Chevy vehicles" floating around every part of he world are then sent over here with slightly better leather and weee bit more sound deadening and viola.. the new CLA, GLA etc. Problem is.. U can not cover up mediocrity for long. Eventually.. with the CLA for instance.. the evidence of shitty build comes out in about 8-10K miles

 

OUCH OUCH OUCH, This just proves EVERYTHING I have seen and heard from coworkers and friends who have left MB. They have clearly duplicated Pre-Bankruptcy Cadillac to the Tee!

 

WOW, What an Ending, Want a superior car, buy a BMW, Lexus or better yet Mazda. Don't Buy a CLA!

Would love to hear his take on Cadillac. Good or bad, it would be entertaining.  

[G. David Felt]

32 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

???  Your facts are uncoordinated.  The IS has nothing to do with the Camry...it is a compact RWD model.    Maybe you are thinking of the ES, which is related to the Camry and Avalon, but that's no different than GM with the Malibu and Regal being related. 

Thank you, yea have not been impressed with anything Lexus, but the ES. Friend of the wife has one and he wishes he did not. He thought he was getting a luxury car and instead got a badge job.

Agree that you can have them even in GM, but GM has truly worked hard to make them different. Lexus and Toyota not so much.

[Cmicasa the Great]

8 minutes ago, dfelt said:

OUCH OUCH OUCH, This just proves EVERYTHING I have seen and heard from coworkers and friends who have left MB. They have clearly duplicated Pre-Bankruptcy Cadillac to the Tee!

 

WOW, What an Ending, Want a superior car, buy a BMW, Lexus or better yet Mazda. Don't Buy a CLA!

Would love to hear his take on Cadillac. Good or bad, it would be entertaining.  

Cadillac is right in line with OZ's needs these days. Give them a V and shiiiiiiiiid.. I think they would be very happy

 

[Cmicasa the Great]

3 minutes ago, dfelt said:

Thank you, yea have not been impressed with anything Lexus, but the ES. Friend of the wife has one and he wishes he did not. He thought he was getting a luxury car and instead got a badge job.

Agree that you can have them even in GM, but GM has truly worked hard to make them different. Lexus and Toyota not so much.

Absolutely.. I have a thread somewhere from May where my neighbor basically replaced his ES with a an Acadia.

GM, even with the Escalade and XTS has done an exemplary job with its engineering and differences in the platform mates. The Escalade seriously comes off as a different vehicle than the Tahoe.. sorry doubters.. it does. The XTS, if I didn't know.. there is no way I'd relate it to the LaX or Impala. Not visually anyway. Believe me I've gotten into arguments with people who were not "car people" about how their XTS was pretty much the same as my Impala.

[smk4565]

The C230 hatch/coupe was a bad car, looked ugly, cheap interior.

[Robert Hall]

4 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The C230 hatch/coupe was a bad car, looked ugly, cheap interior.

A long forgotten mistake...BMW did a similar model in the 90s with the 318ti hatchback..also long forgotten. 

[oldshurst442]

Long forgotten for both German flops....yet Cadillac still gets roasted for the Cimarron...

The Cimarron ended its life in 1987.  

The BMW 318ti in the year 2000...  1993-2000

The C230 in 2008...    2000-2008

@ccap41

read that article...from a European perspective with NO AMERICAN BIAS such as Chevy, Buick, Cadillac car comparisons or just plain 'Merica Phoque yeah attitudes!

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/mercedes-benz/cla

 

Common dude!

I know you like to rustle some feathers from time to time...go against the grain

and try to use badge engineering when you GOD DAMN WELL KNOW that Mercedes Benz is JUST ONE PHOQUING brand as opposed to GENERAL MOTORS when ALL GENERAL MOTORS EVER WAS SINCE ITS BEGINNING WAS JUST A HOLDING COMPANY FOUNDED BY DURANT IN 1908 BY BUYING OTHER AUTOMOTIVE COMPANIES SUCH AS OLDSMOBILE AND SAAB AND OTHER NON-AUTOMOBILE RELATED COMPANIES SUCH AS FRIGIDAIRE...so yeah...GM RISKS IN HAVING MORE BADGE ENGINEERED VEHICLES IN ITS LINE-UP...

THAT IN ITSELF IS NOT A BAD THING!!!

A shytty vehicle passing off as "entry level" luxury no matter who builds it and where it came from, regardless if badge engineered or bespoke, is still a shytty phoquing vehicle from where I am standing...

And a CLA is a piss poor attempt at a FWD car in ANY price point or marketing niche whether an attempt for it to be an econobox mainstream European arket car or "entry level" marketing innuendo brainwashing bullshyte car for the North American market!

Edited September 8, 2017 by oldshurst442

[balthazar]

3 hours ago, ccap41 said:

What's so bad about the CLA that people seem to love to hate on? It's a smaller Mercedes.. so..? It's probably very similar in size to the ATS. 

Same exact overall length but NINE inches less total legroom. Really poor packaging.

[Robert Hall]

The C-class is more the ATS competitor since both are RWD...the CLA is just an entry level FWD appliance. 

[ccap41]

16 minutes ago, balthazar said:

Same exact overall length but NINE inches less total legroom. Really poor packaging.

Every measurement is within 1 inch OTHER THAN rear leg room.. and the trunk is 3 cubic foot larger in the ATS. 

Edited September 8, 2017 by ccap41

[surreal1272]

2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

So they're replacing a Mercedes with a Mercedes and that's wrong? They just renamed it for a different market. 

That isn't the same as Lincoln(premium) using Ford(non-premium) for a base. It's Mercedes using a Mercedes chassis. 

Except that the A Class, that the CLA is based off of, is also coming to our shores creating that GM like FWD redundancy. It's classic bottom feeding tactics by a company that calls itself "The best or nothing". 

[balthazar]

I didn't realize the CLA and c-lcass are practically the exact same size.

Didn't I read criticism about Cadillac having 2 sedans the same size?

[ccap41]

3 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

The C-class is more the ATS competitor since both are RWD...the CLA is just an entry level FWD appliance. 

You'd think if you didn't look at their sizes. ATS more or less splits the difference between the two.  

CLA: 182.3 inches long X 70.0 inches wide

ATS: 182.8 inches long X 71.1 inches wide

C Class: 184.5 inches long X 71.3 inches wide

[oldshurst442]

14 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

OTHER THAN rear leg room

Yeah....lets just omit that...

PS: The ATS gets CONSTANT negative feed back for that...and the CLA is WORSE than the ATS...

Go figure!

[ccap41]

29 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

read that article...from a European perspective with NO AMERICAN BIAS such as Chevy, Buick, Cadillac car comparisons or just plain 'Merica Phoque yeah attitudes!

They really seemed to hate it, didn't they? 

"Up front, all good. The dash is neat – the eyeball vents look especially good – and the switchgear feels solid and premium. The steering wheel is sporty and the seating position is pretty good, too. The only minor blemish is the sat nav screen that sticks out of the top of the dash, and seems like a bit of an afterthought."

(engines and transmissions aren't the same we got here so no real comparison)

"As we said, it’s based on the A-Class so shares the platform, engines, transmission and interior, but gains a droopy new back end. For added high-performance thrills, there’s the AMG CLA 45. 

All well and good, apart from the styling."

"Merc’s residual values are usually strong, and the CLA shouldn’t be any different."

They finished saying it is more flawed then expected but they didn't seem to hate it. It really just lost a lot on the rear seating space, which people defend to their blue in the face with the ATS so you'd think that's moot, right? I think it's a real issue for both cars as I've sat in an ATS and the back is tight and at 5'8" it shouldn't be tight and the CLA's even smaller rear seats would be terrible. 

2 minutes ago, oldshurst442 said:

Yeah....lets just omit that...

PS: The ATS gets CONSTANT negative feed back for that...and the CLA is WORSE than the ATS...

Go figure!

Who'd think the smaller class of car has a smaller, more cramped rear seating area? CRAAAAAZY! 

[Robert Hall]

9 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

You'd think if you didn't look at their sizes. ATS more or less splits the difference between the two.  

CLA: 182.3 inches long X 70.0 inches wide

ATS: 182.8 inches long X 71.1 inches wide

C Class: 184.5 inches long X 71.3 inches wide

If you compare wheelbase the ATS splits them also.. 

CLA:  106.3

ATS:  109.3

C-class:  111.8

Not sure about interior volume and legroom, etc. though. 

[oldshurst442]

@ccap41

At the very beginning.

The title

Quote

Not what Merc should be doing. Focus on engineering, not trying to invent another niche

At the very end

 

Quote

 

Against: 

Impractical rear, A-Class is cheaper and better, styling from all the other angles

 

 

I got a COMPLETELY different vibe than you! The only reason why they liked it its because it is unique and CERTAIN angles of it is nice...other angles..they think its odd looking...

 

Quote

 

For: 

Unique offering, styling from certain angles

 

 

Quote

All well and good, apart from the styling. From certain angles it looks great: we love the side-profile, very junior CLS. But from others it looks compromised: a little too tall, a little too narrow, a bit too stubby to be a truly svelte coupe. That’s not the only compromise either. 

 

Edited September 8, 2017 by oldshurst442

[ccap41]

9 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

If you compare wheelbase the ATS splits them also.. 

CLA:  106.3

ATS:  109.3

C-class:  111.8

Not sure about interior volume and legroom, etc. though. 

Yeah the CLA being FWD is going to have a pretty short wheelbase. I didn't expect those to be too close. 

The ATS and CLA are within an inch about everywhere inside outside of rear leg room which the CLA is pretty dang tight. 

[Robert Hall]

The CLA suffers from the usual FWD styling weakness of the front wheel being too close to the front door (too short dash-to-axle length) and the front being too tall above the front wheels.   The C-class has much better RWD proportions with the front wheels further forward and appropriate dash-to-axle length. 

Edited September 8, 2017 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[ccap41]

Styling is 99% subjective though so while some say it's ugly, some also think it's very attractive. I think the ATS and C Class look better with their RWD proportions but it is in no way a genuinely ugly vehicle. The only other real compromise is that damn rear leg room. 

Reaching 0.23 drag coefficient isn't great engineering? In the article they said that's the lowest of any production vehicle. Along with a DCT that Cadillac is yet to make.. And we know not all DCT are created equally(drive a Focus like mine then a GTI). 

[oldshurst442]

6 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Styling is 99% subjective though so while some say it's ugly, some also think it's very attractive. I think the ATS and C Class look better with their RWD proportions but it is in no way a genuinely ugly vehicle.

 

True that styling is subjective...

But...you dont find it a genuinely ugly vehicle for reasons...

To which I say this:

 

And the reasons are...like that playboy broad on top...hidden agendas...

For you:

to prove an internet point...

However...I dont put too much into what you may or may not think is attractive...

I just see right through the BS...

 

 

[ccap41]

What BS? It sells. That means it can't be "genuinely ugly" otherwise people wouldn't buy it. 

[oldshurst442]

Like the pic with the playboy broad...the size of the wallet makes that dude attractive...and Im sure he is a wonderful human being too...

The power of the badge...makes people look the other way...

Unless of course it involves a Cadillac.

 

PS: the BS part was for you...

To prove an internet argument...you wanna go balls out and outta your way to tell us you see nothing wrong with the CLA...in looks and in execution...

[ccap41]

Out of my way? You mean google searching the dimensions of 3 cars and reading a review that you posted? If that's "balls out and outta my way" then yes, yes I did. I hope your employees go harder than "balls out" at work for you otherwise you won't be in business much longer.
 

I started by just asking how it was a badge job because I still don't understand how some say it's essentially just a big turd laid down by MB. The only thing that makes it a "turd" is that it isn't a cheap turd. If it was priced like the Malibu nobody would give a $h!. It just gets to people knowing that a luxury company can get away with making smaller cars and charging a premium for them. It's no less luxurious than a 1 Series or a A3 that it competes with. 

[oldshurst442]

2 hours ago, oldshurst442 said:

@ccap41

At the very beginning.

The title

At the very end

 

 

I got a COMPLETELY different vibe than you! The only reason why they liked it its because it is unique and CERTAIN angles of it is nice...other angles..they think its odd looking...

 

 

 

@ccap41

Here is a post that I made for you after the fact you CHERRY PICKED your point of view of not seeing how the CLA is SHYTE!!!

 

Then you finally admit to it its a turd yet still wanna defend it slightly by saying if it was priced as a....

 

And yes...YOU are going outta your way to TROLL!!!

Why else do you wanna include  my restaurant and my employees?

I called you out on your BS...DEAL WITH IT!!!

[ccap41]

Jesus Christ.. What did I cherry pick? People said it was a badge job. It's a Mercedes built on older Mercedes bones. Then I read ppl say it was small and I said, it's about the size of an ATS, which it is. 

I'm not even saying it is a turd. I'm saying this car upsets ppl like you and casa because it isn't cheap yet it's small. 

How is this even trolling? I didn't bring up the CLA in this thread. I asked a simple question and got answers and videos. You're the only one going nuts over it. I included your restaurant and employees(and I thought this was obvious) because you're exaggerating on how "outta of my way" and that I'm going "balls out". The joke was that I'm not going "balls out" because I'm not working hard and I would hope your employees would actually go balls out for you.

[oldshurst442]

16 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

I still don't understand how some say it's essentially just a big turd laid down by MB.

Not my opinion...European reviewers...

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/mercedes-benz/cla

 

Quote

 

Not what Merc should be doing. Focus on engineering, not trying to invent another niche

 

Quote

 

All well and good, apart from the styling. From certain angles it looks great: we love the side-profile, very junior CLS. But from others it looks compromised: a little too tall, a little too narrow, a bit too stubby to be a truly svelte coupe. That’s not the only compromise either. 

 

Quote

 

The CLA is front-wheel drive, but that shouldn’t be a drawback.

Yet somehow it is. The CLA doesn’t drive particularly well, and is neither comfortable nor refined. You initially want sport suspension because it lowers the car by 15mm so looks a lot better, but this also makes it too stiff, so then you don’t. The engines grumble at low revs too much and the twin clutch gearbox makes a politician look decisive. It all adds up to a car that is relying on its badge far too much. And then there’s the AMG version. 355bhp, four-wheel drive traction… and still a bit unexciting.

 

Quote

The rear seats are cramped – very cramped, in a way you don’t expect from a modern car. Headroom is so tight that even our 5’9” tester struggled to sit upright. Blame the coupe lines for that. And the boot is also tiny, compounding the practicality issues. Want a more practical Merc? Buy an A-Class. Want a betterlooking Merc? Buy the C-Class Coupe. In both cases, you’ll be disappointed if you choose a CLA.

 

And that is just for starters....

 

So yeah....

Not my opinion....

I dont really care what you like or dont like...

YOU asked a question...I answered it...YOU ignored it...

Like what a true troll does....

And deflects and says to the other person that he is the one flipping out...

I aint flipping out...but you a trollin'

[balthazar]

2 hours ago, ccap41 said:

Reaching 0.23 drag coefficient isn't great engineering?

If it's actually that. Mercedes has been caught more than once fudging their .cd numbers.

I don't find the CLA unattractive- but that's not really enough for an entry (whoops- soon to be ex-entry) level model.

Edited September 8, 2017 by balthazar

[ccap41]

6 hours ago, ccap41 said:

What is Mercedes badge engineering? 

What's so bad about the CLA that people seem to love to hate on? It's a smaller Mercedes.. so..? It's probably very similar in size to the ATS. 

This is literally what I asked and because I did not agree with you I'm trolling? The article you posted isn't as harsh as you're trying to make it out to be. People are knocking the cheapness of the interior on the car..well that's one place they didn't have an issue. They said it "feels solid and premium". 

A car built 100% by Mercedes can't really be a badge engineer job for...Mercedes... Now if you wanted to get on their new truck that's built on Nissan bones..that would make more sense. 

But it is funny that this is the only vehicle in Mercedes lineup that can be ragged on. Everything else it pretty much spot on where it should be with engines they should have and offer. This is the only thing that comes remotely close to being an overpriced POS. 

8 minutes ago, balthazar said:

If it's actually that. Mercedes has been caught more than once fudging their .cd numbers.

I don't find the CLA unattractive- but that's not really enough for an entry (whoops- soon to be ex-entry) level model.

Yeah they definitely should NOT go BELOW the CLA size-wise. It's asking for too many compromises from a luxury automaker and I would wager good money it would not be very luxurious.

I hadn't heard they've reported fudged .cd numbers in the past.. I don't really put much past any automaker when it comes to fudging numbers anymore..sadly..

Fun little read: https://drivemag.com/news/the-most-aerodynamic-cars-you-can-buy-right-now 

Edited September 8, 2017 by ccap41

[smk4565]

The Aurora was mentioned earlier, which was like entry-lux, the thing the Aurora had going for it was full size, Cadillac derived V8, and it actually handled better than a STS or DTS of that time.  But the Aurora was no 3-series or C230 competitor, it was Lexus ES competitor maybe, or Lincoln Continental of the day.  I liked my Aurora, but it was a bit too big, I prefer a smaller car to that.

 

I'd rather the CLA get killed off, and they do an A-class sedan (and maybe hatchback) for the US market.  I think that is a stronger play and 4-door coupe is way over done anyway. 

[oldshurst442]

8 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

The article you posted isn't as harsh as you're trying to make it out to be.

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/mercedes-benz/cla

 

Quote

 

Not what Merc should be doing. Focus on engineering, not trying to invent another niche

 

 

 

Quote

 

For: 

Unique offering, styling from certain angles

Against: 

Impractical rear, A-Class is cheaper and better, styling from all the other angles

 

 

Quote

All well and good, apart from the styling. From certain angles it looks great: we love the side-profile, very junior CLS. But from others it looks compromised: a little too tall, a little too narrow, a bit too stubby to be a truly svelte coupe. That’s not the only compromise either. 

Quote

 

The CLA is front-wheel drive, but that shouldn’t be a drawback.

Yet somehow it is. The CLA doesn’t drive particularly well, and is neither comfortable nor refined. You initially want sport suspension because it lowers the car by 15mm so looks a lot better, but this also makes it too stiff, so then you don’t. The engines grumble at low revs too much and the twin clutch gearbox makes a politician look decisive. It all adds up to a car that is relying on its badge far too much. And then there’s the AMG version. 355bhp, four-wheel drive traction… and still a bit unexciting.

 

Quote

 

Up front, all good. The dash is neat – the eyeball vents look especially good – and the switchgear feels solid and premium. The steering wheel is sporty and the seating position is pretty good, too. The only minor blemish is the sat nav screen that sticks out of the top of the dash, and seems like a bit of an afterthought.

B-pillar back, though, and things take a turn for the worse. The rear seats are cramped – very cramped, in a way you don’t expect from a modern car. Headroom is so tight that even our 5’9” tester struggled to sit upright. Blame the coupe lines for that. And the boot is also tiny, compounding the practicality issues. Want a more practical Merc? Buy an A-Class. Want a betterlooking Merc? Buy the C-Class Coupe. In both cases, you’ll be disappointed if you choose a CLA.

 

 

Quote

 

1. Overview 2. Driving 3. On the inside 4. Owning 5. Our verdict

Verdict

Final thoughts and pick of the range

Odd-looking CLA is more flawed than we'd ever expect from Merc in 2016

 

 

[ccap41]

Apparently one man's opinion should be it is every man's opinion. 

Give me 10 negative reviews for a good professional consensus that its bad. 

[oldshurst442]

18 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

But it is funny that this is the only vehicle in Mercedes lineup that can be ragged on. Everything else it pretty much spot on where it should be with engines they should have and offer. This is the only thing that comes remotely close to being an overpriced POS. 

But this is your problem...

You wanna wear your superman cape and defend the CLA...because YOU deem it to be the ONLY Mercedes product to be able to be ragged on...

20 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

This is the only thing that comes remotely close to being an overpriced POS. 

And yet...you ALMOST wanna admit that it is truly a POS...but you have trolled on and blamed me for flippin' out...yet the truth comes out with a few sentences...

 

Yet I stayed pretty darned straight in why and how I thought the CLA was a shyte car...

No trying to be superman and hiding my true feelings...

 

Like I said....YOU had a hidden agenda...like that playboy broad pic I posted...

23 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

But it is funny that this is the only vehicle in Mercedes lineup that can be ragged on.

So....you dont understand why people pick on the CLA?

25 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

What's so bad about the CLA that people seem to love to hate on? It's a smaller Mercedes.. so..? It's probably very similar in size to the ATS. 

I answered you...yet you still felt the need to troll me!

3 minutes ago, ccap41 said:

Apparently one man's opinion should be it is every man's opinion. 

Give me 10 negative reviews for a good professional consensus that its bad. 

TROLL!

[oldshurst442]

42 minutes ago, smk4565 said:

The Aurora was mentioned earlier, which was like entry-lux, the thing the Aurora had going for it was full size, Cadillac derived V8, and it actually handled better than a STS or DTS of that time.  But the Aurora was no 3-series or C230 competitor, it was Lexus ES competitor maybe, or Lincoln Continental of the day.  I liked my Aurora, but it was a bit too big, I prefer a smaller car to that.

 

I'd rather the CLA get killed off, and they do an A-class sedan (and maybe hatchback) for the US market.  I think that is a stronger play and 4-door coupe is way over done anyway. 

That would be me.

Thank-you for answering me.

And thank-you for being honest about the Olds Aurora and the CLA.

[smk4565]

The CLA isn't a bad car, it just isn't as good as an E-class, and that is probably why people dump on it.    The Malibu can't perform like a Corvette, doesn't mean the Malibu is crap.  

I still would like to see them dump the 4-door coupe, dump the CLA name and go with A-class, just like they go with C-class and E-class.  And an A sedan would be roomier and more practical than the fake coupe CLA.  And really the best looking A-class is the hatchback, bring that here if they want to appeal to millennials.

[Cmicasa the Great]

9 hours ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

If you compare wheelbase the ATS splits them also.. 

CLA:  106.3

ATS:  109.3

C-class:  111.8

Not sure about interior volume and legroom, etc. though. 

To all of U comparing the NEW C-Class's Wheel base and length.. to the ATS's which was put on the market in 2012.. come the fuck on. The C-Class at that time.. and for 5 more years had a WB of 108.7 to 108.9. 

2019 comes its replacement. And to @ccap41 U now have to see why I very seldom get into a CAR ENTHUSIAST conversation with U.. I can't believe anyone outside of Smk is defending a fuckin CLA

[Cmicasa the Great]

6 hours ago, smk4565 said:

The CLA isn't a bad car, it just isn't as good as an E-class, and that is probably why people dump on it.    The Malibu can't perform like a Corvette, doesn't mean the Malibu is crap.  

I still would like to see them dump the 4-door coupe, dump the CLA name and go with A-class, just like they go with C-class and E-class.  And an A sedan would be roomier and more practical than the fake coupe CLA.  And really the best looking A-class is the hatchback, bring that here if they want to appeal to millennials.

Sad day when I say that if someone offered me the keys of a MERCEDES CLA.. a MERCEDES.. and the keys of the Chevy Cruze Hatch... and told me to choose.. I'd take the Chevy in a heartbeat (excuse the pun)

[Robert Hall]

9 hours ago, Cmicasa the Great said:

To all of U comparing the NEW C-Class's Wheel base and length.. to the ATS's which was put on the market in 2012.. come the fuck on. The C-Class at that time.. and for 5 more years had a WB of 108.7 to 108.9. 

2019 comes its replacement. And to @ccap41 U now have to see why I very seldom get into a CAR ENTHUSIAST conversation with U.. I can't believe anyone outside of Smk is defending a fuckin CLA

Wheelbases, overall length, width, interior volume are all standard measurements used in comparing cars..nothing unusual about that.   And what is with the 'U'?   That's something kids use when texting...

Edited September 9, 2017 by Cubical-aka-Moltar

[Cmicasa the Great]

25 minutes ago, Cubical-aka-Moltar said:

Wheelbases, overall length, width, interior volume are all standard measurements used in comparing cars..nothing unusual about that.   And what is with the 'U'?   That's something kids use when texting...

the point is that U are comparing a car at the end of its life cycle to one that is brand new. 

I have used U for a long as I've been on forums. Before texting was a thing. Fuck I care if U.. U... U.. don't like it. 

[Robert Hall]

Just now, Cmicasa the Great said:

the point is that you are comparing a car at the end of its life cycle to one that is brand new. 

 

Nothing wrong with making those comparisons, though.   All 3 are model year 2017 products.  When they first came out is irrelevant. 

[balthazar]

If you are out shopping new cars this weekend, it's relevant. Otherwise, the fact that the c-class all along was in the same wheelbase for the purposes of design discussion IS relevant. MB bumped the c-class up to make more room for the bottom feeder CLA. In that the CLA's been getting lackluster reviews and isn't selling like an entry level car should, perhaps cutting the c-class price a bit and not bloating size-wise would have been a better strategy.

[Robert Hall]

IIRC, there was talk recently about M-B adding another sedan below the CLA for the US, an A-class sedan without the 'coupe' styling. 

Edited September 9, 2017 by Cubical-aka-Moltar