You are here: Forums Future Vehicles Mercedes-Benz: Future Models

Mercedes-Benz: Future Models

441 messages,  Last post on Sep 15, 2007 at 9:01 PM

You are in the Future Vehicles Forum. Your Host is kirstie_h

What is this discussion about? Mercedes-Benz CLS-Class, Mercedes-Benz R-Class

Messages Page 3 of 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 44 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#21 of 441 I don't understand all of this by steven2 Jun 23, 2004 (6:17 pm)
What Mercedes needs is a full-size SUV that competes with Lexus, Lincoln, Caddy and Infiniti. Possibly the next G-wagen???   It's weird how Mercedes is offering all of these wagon choices, yet wondering why people like companies like Nissan/Infiniti (no wagons), Toyota/Lexus (Matrix, the only one other than the Scions) and Honda/Acura (Civic is it)   Why?
#22 of 441 by merc1 Jun 23, 2004 (10:54 pm)
I really don't see where Mercedes is doing anything different from any other luxury brand when it comes to SUV/Crossovers. BMW has 2, Lexus has 3 so why shouldn't Mercedes grab a piece of this market? Three different models, R-Class, M-Class and G-Class with varying purposes. Makes sense to me.   The 2007 G-Class should however be a true Range Rover competitor, no doubt.   M
#23 of 441 by benzman1 Jun 24, 2004 (10:20 am)
I currently own a '02 S430, and I look forward to the new CLS500. This adds excitement to the line up without spending $95M for an SL.
#24 of 441 merc1 by steven2 Jun 24, 2004 (11:35 am)
But these new mercedes models are more wagonish, and BMW and Audi are pushing the X7 (probably) and A7 (done deal). Other than to redesign the M, Mercedes hasn't addresed their SUV lineup   Look at it this way. Think how many Navigator and Tahoe buyers the GX and LX have taken away. G Class buyers aren't really in that price range. Wouldn't Mercedes sell more luxury, 7 pass. SUV for 60-70K than a wagon model when they would new wagons, when there's already the E and C classes to choose from?
#25 of 441 steven2 by merc1 Jun 25, 2004 (12:41 am)
You have a point, no argument from me there. There are different ways to look at it though.   They'll have a mainstream SUV...the ML, then a crossover the R-Class and then an upper SUV the G-Class. I just don't see Mercedes, BMW or any other German company building a Tahoe/LX470 sized vehicle.   M
#26 of 441 merc1 by saugatak Jun 25, 2004 (1:06 am)
Good stuff.   The DC merger really got off on the wrong foot, but after checking out some of Chrysler's new products, I am REALLY impressed.   I think MB, in addition to broadening its product line, has to figure out how to coordinate its product (platforms, engines and trannies) with Dodge and Chrysler.   Otherwise, they'll end up like GM, which has some good looking cars with great engines, some good looking cars with old dunger engines, some low quality cars with great engines, and too many low quality cars with low quality engines.   I agree with you 100% that MB should dump below $30k cars. That's what Chrysler and Dodge are for.   I also agree with you that MB should expand into any luxury niches its weak on, but I think they need to coordinate this effort with Chrysler and Dodge.   Here's how I'd organize the product line.   Dodge would get a few RWD performance cars, but the main lineup would be economy FWD cars, FWD minivans and small to midsize FWD SUVs. Dodge would also get a few large RWD SUVs. Also trucks.   Chrysler would get cheaper versions of MB's RWD cars and upscale versions of Dodge SUVs. Less luxurious, different design. Engines would be same as MB engines (to save costs), except the v8 would be Hemis instead of expensive DOHC v8s. The MB v6s in Chrysler's would be the same as MB's, except that even though MB's v6s would be high compression, they would be detuned to run on regular gas only in order to cheaply differentiate them from the premium MB v6s.   MB would get the premium engines (DOHC v8s instead of the Hemi, or hell, maybe even a bigger and badder Hemi) and go with upscale, luxurious cars all the way. MB would get the funky hi-tech transmissions that MB is famous for also, whereas Chrysler and Dodge get standard, cheaper (but maybe more reliable) low tech transmissions.
#27 of 441 by merc1 Jun 25, 2004 (1:41 am)
Interesting post. Instead of me just saying whether or not I agree or disagree I'll give you visuals...lol.   "I think MB, in addition to broadening its product line, has to figure out how to coordinate its product (platforms, engines and trannies) with Dodge and Chrysler."   Picture me standing on my desk here at work jumping up and down in protest. NO! This would destroy Mercedes-Benz.   "I also agree with you that MB should expand into any luxury niches its weak on, but I think they need to coordinate this effort with Chrysler and Dodge."   I'm not sure what niche they could enter with help from those two brands.   "MB would get the premium engines (DOHC v8s instead of the Hemi, or hell, maybe even a bigger and badder Hemi) and go with upscale, luxurious cars all the way. MB would get the funky hi-tech transmissions that MB is famous for also, whereas Chrysler and Dodge get standard, cheaper (but maybe more reliable) low tech transmissions."   Well every transmission should be reliable.   Overall I guess I still get nauseous when I think about a Chrysler and Mercedes sharing a jointly developed platform. So far this hasn't happened. Yes the Crossfire is a rebodied SLK, but the SLK will be all new in 2 months. The 300/Magnums have Mercedes inspired suspension design and some previous E-Class parts (seats, steering columns etc.), but not the entire platform.   I think they should share parts where it doesn't affect the character of the respective brands. People aren't going to buy a 80K S-Class if they know there is a Chrysler equivalent running around. They can't ever share platforms in the way Ford/Jaguar does say with their S-Type/Linc LS. They can share alternators, seat tracks, and various nuts and bolts, but the stuff that makes a Mercedes a Mercedes can't be jointly developed on a platform intended for use in a new Chrysler and Mercedes at the same time. It won't work.   So far I think they've done the right things and the Chrysler side of the house is starting to show signs of a turnaround, but it is way too early to say anything about it yet.   I think for this union to work both Mercedes and Chrysler has to be left to do what they do best and work together in areas that will save them both money and R&D time without messing up the character of each brand. In short only get what they need from each other and nothing more. The boys in Germany should just give the boys in Detroit technical, purchasing and R&D support, not tell them what kind of cars to build and certainly vice versa (like that would ever happen anyway).   M
#28 of 441 merc by saugatak Jun 25, 2004 (3:05 am)
Picture me standing on my desk here at work jumping up and down in protest. NO! This would destroy Mercedes-Benz.   LOL   Overall I guess I still get nauseous when I think about a Chrysler and Mercedes sharing a jointly developed platform. So far this hasn't happened. Yes the Crossfire is a rebodied SLK, but the SLK will be all new in 2 months. The 300/Magnums have Mercedes inspired suspension design and some previous E-Class parts (seats, steering columns etc.), but not the entire platform.   Well, I know how you feel about MB, but honestly, part and platform sharing are going to happen with increasing frequency, whether you like it or not. And it's not like MB is really lowering itself. There are stripper MB taxis all over Germany after all.   I like the idea of using old Benz platforms and parts for Chrysler and possibly Dodge as well. That's a good way to increase ROI on old plant and equipment, and it won't devalue MB b/c MB will get the latest and greatest.   I think platform sharing can work under the following circumstances:   1. different interior and exterior parts so that the cars look different, with the better stuff going in the upscale model.   2. better, more powerful engine in the upscale model.   If it's just badge engineering (which it unfortunatley too frequently is) then it'll devalue MB.   I think for this union to work both Mercedes and Chrysler has to be left to do what they do best and work together in areas that will save them both money and R&D time without messing up the character of each brand. In short only get what they need from each other and nothing more.   I hear where you're coming from. Esthetically I agree with you, but dollarswise, I don't think it's going to happen the way you want it to.
#29 of 441 by wale_bate1 Jun 25, 2004 (7:27 am)
Easy saugatak, can't you see that artery throbbing in merc's neck? }-]   I don't think we'll see much reverse osmosis from Chrysler to Benz (much to the everlasting relief of our friend here) anytime real soon. Personally I think Merc has a valid point in that there's not much to gain yet.   Yet.   OTOH, there is a measure of adapability inherent in the culture in Auburn Hills that I don't think really exists in the Benz boardroom, and there are learnings there that would be helpful to a mfr looking for a true global presence and a shot a dominance.   You guys go harp on the under 30 product all you want; I, for one, would very much be interested in a B hatch with some amenities and a smokin' plant. Cars in this size range interest me greatly, and as I like my cockpit trimmed in leather with some comfy features and as little NVH as possible, having an alternative to the typical econobox applications is right up my alley and down my freeway! That's how I ended up in what I drive now, and that's why things like an A3 Sportback (or an S4 Avant) look good for my future. Don't need bigger and roomier. If I wanted to go that way, I'd have seized on the '03 540iT and the outrageous lease I was offered like a Pit Bull on a lamb shank (prettiest wagon I ever done seen and a pip to drive)!   C'mon, bring a B and make it hot!
#30 of 441 wale_bate by saugatak Jun 25, 2004 (11:01 am)
Ah Merc can handle it   I don't think we'll see much reverse osmosis from Chrysler to Benz (much to the everlasting relief of our friend here) anytime real soon. Personally I think Merc has a valid point in that there's not much to gain yet.   I'm wondering if MB will put the upcoming 6.1L Hemi in any of their model lines.   I, for one, would very much be interested in a B hatch with some amenities and a smokin' plant.   Dodge Magnum with a Hemi? It might not have the amenities you want but it's a smokin' wagon.

Messages Page 3 of 44 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 44 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

You are here: Forums Future Vehicles Mercedes-Benz: Future Models