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 2 of 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 45 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

#4 of 441 by merc1 Mar 28, 2004 (9:39 pm)
I can see where you all would think that Mercedes is doing too much here and I agree - somewhat.   I don't think they had any other niche to go for so they are trying to create one themselves. They already have more Coupes and Convertibles than any other luxury makers, so they decided to do something different. I'm not totally sold on the styling of the CLS, but it shouldnt' take away from the S or E Classes sales due to the CLS having a very impractical backseat arrangement and the price will be right in between the E and S. The CLS will also be a big profit maker, which Mercedes needs right now. The car didn't cost much to develop because it uses so much off-the-shelf E-Class hardware. On the body and some interior pieces are new. The new direct injection V6 will be used in every, and I mean every Mercedes model over the next 2 model years.   Now the GST (supposed to be R-Class) will be a runaway hit I'm betting. Crossovers are hot and Mercedes is currently completly absent in this segment. I agree with the earlier post, Mercedes needs a RR/LX470 competititor. Maybe the next G-Class? Not sure.   Mercedes basically had no choice but to expand. The old 1990's business model (from everything I've read and been told by the business-minded people here) just wouldn't have worked anymore. The Japanese forced the issue so Mercedes has to compete wherever they can and spread the costs out over more cars. Just think about it 10 years ago there was only a C, E, S and SL.   Its about survival now, even Porsche had to do a "different" kind of product to ensure their survival.   Three things Mercedes needs to do: improve reliability, stop with the under 30K model plans and never make and ugly car or veer off in a strange styling direction like BMW.   M
#5 of 441 by sphinx99 Apr 03, 2004 (7:29 pm)
Well, count me amongst the confused. It started back when AMG started going crazy, and you couldn't figure out whether the supercharged V8 model of the normally aspirated V12 model was the flagship. Then they started twin-turboing some models too. Now you really have no idea. Hmm. Do I want a CL500, a CL55, a CL600, a CL65, ...? It's like the Eminem song. "Will the real Mercedes Benz please stand up?"   Having no choice is bad. Having some choice is good. Having too much choice becomes bad again. Mercedes is starting to act more and more American with each passing year. Too many choices, overlapping and confusing, and precious development and assembly resources being sucked away to accommodate a breadth of lower quality products when it probably should be spent focusing on a smaller but higher quality portfolio. And all this for the sake of maintaining or increasing market share, at all costs. This is silly, because the CLS isn't going to do what MB is looking for it to do, whereas Smart...
#6 of 441 by merc1 Apr 04, 2004 (10:09 pm)
What exactly do you think they're looking for the CLS to do for them?   M
#7 of 441 response to merc1 by steven2 Apr 05, 2004 (4:16 pm)
"Three things Mercedes needs to do: improve reliability, stop with the under 30K model plans and never make and ugly car or veer off in a strange styling direction like BMW."   Wouldn't it be great if all of these luxury companies could improve their reliability? Unfortunately, only Lexus and Infiniti can say they have above-average reliability, and Lexus's arent "cool" enough for some and nobody buys the upper-end Infinitis. In my opinion, that's why people would by an MDX over a VW Touareg   Also, why not have a below- 30,000 dollar car? Many people buy the C-Class, even though its a terrible car. Fix it up, and have it compete with the 330's of the world.   Speaking of 330's, why not style like BMW? They are the best compact luxury car, ahead of the TL and G35. Plus, The average person would readily buy a 330-like car under the MB nameplate and not know it was a poorer version of a BMW if the price was right. Keep in mind, most buyers DON'T use Edmunds.com or Consumer Reports to purchase, so by targeting the clueless drivers they'd be selling to the majority.   The new wagon should have a partner sedan to go with it, to replace the poor C-class, and the new G-class, as merc1 suggested, should be styled more efficiently and should have an under 70K price tag.
#8 of 441 but of course by steven2 Apr 05, 2004 (4:18 pm)
Mercedes would never think that logically...they'd just come out with another convertible model.
#9 of 441 by sphinx99 Apr 05, 2004 (9:31 pm)
"What exactly do you think they're looking for the CLS to do for them?"   I think they're looking for it to maintain or increase market share for the overall brand. I don't think it'll do so, it'll merely present yet another option to those who already are sold on the brand, and in the process add yet more complexity (read: cost) to the design and manufacturing processes to support the product lineup.
#10 of 441 Main question not being adressed by steven2 Apr 06, 2004 (6:11 pm)
The main question or concern is, however:   Will this model bring in new customers, or customers who would not have bought a MB in the first place? Or will it take away from C, E, and even M class buyers? Inevitably it will lower not boost sales.   Can someone tell me what MB does not have that would sell very well and that they should have, seeing how the other luxury models have it? (Hint: Full-size, practical luxury SUV. I understand BMW has one in the makes, joining RR, LX470 and QX56) Replies to this message: benzsalesman (Feb 07, 2006 1:05 pm) merc1 (Feb 07, 2006 9:39 pm)
#11 of 441 steven2 by merc1 Apr 06, 2004 (8:44 pm)
Good points..... Yes I agree the CLS has the potential to take away buyers of both the E and S-Class, but also the CL or CLK, but I don't think it will. For one it looks like no other Mercedes and that should draw buyers into the MB fold that wouldn't have bought one before. The rear seat of the CLS is very impractical (2 pass) compared to the S or E-Classes, but it should provide more room than Mercedes' true "coupes".   I agree totally about the large SUV thing. I've wanted a Range Rover competitor since the day the M-Class was announced. Mercedes knows they want to build a 75-100K truck anyway, but they sold their souls to the volume market with the ML with disastrous (quality) results.   BTW, the 2005 C-Class is much improved in the area that it needed it the most, interior. Hopefully all those things under the skin that were unreliable have been dealt with also. Mercedes' philosophy about how a car should drive will never allow them to out-sport the 3-Series, so they need to give up trying to out-sport this car, just make the C-Class a reliable, high-quality, fun to drive car that can keep up with the 3-Series in that area, but make it more luxurious. That is correct the Mercedes formula.   sphinx99,   I don't think they're expecting it to do much for market share worldwide at just 50K units a year, which is a small drop in the Mercedes bucket. I think they did it honestly for more profit as the CLS uses mostly off-the-shelf E-Class parts (chassis, engine etc) with only the body and a very select few interior pieces being truly "new". I would imagine the CLS didn't cost much to develop.   M
#12 of 441 sphinx99 by merc1 Apr 06, 2004 (9:46 pm)
And it don't stop...lol.   http://www.mbusa.com/brand/aboutus/news/newsFrame2004.jsp   M

Messages Page 2 of 45 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 ... 45 Prev Next Last

Go To Msg # Search This Discussion

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