Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Cadillac XLR vs. Mercedes-Benz SL
63 messages, Last post on Mar 07, 2009 at 4:51 AM
You are in the Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Forum. Your Host is claires
Compare and contrast the features of the Cadillac XLR/XLR-V with those of the Mercedes-Benz SL-Class models.
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Sep 12, 2006 11:28 pm) Put aside who won what for a moment and just look at what is being said about the handling between the two cars. Your weight advantage theory just hasn't held water. Sure the SL is heavier and could stand to be lighter, but if you can't see the effort that MB put into making the car drive smaller than it really is then there is no point it talking to me about how light a Cadillac is either. The SL's weight has been dealt with using their ABC active suspension and they've done a superior job at it. Now as to what feels more agile that is arguable for sure, but this nonsense about the SL not beng able to handle or that is someone this poor handler and the Cadillac is so much better is just plain BS, regardless as to which car won the overall comparo. All the while you seem to have forgotten that this class of car isn't decided upon by dynamics like sports cars are, that is why even if the XLR were a superior handler (which it isn't) it still wouldn't top the SL. The XLR is cheaply made and doesn't come anywhere near feeling like a 100K car. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Sep 12, 2006 11:41 pm) The GM active suspension is at least the equal of MB's, so no points for DCX, especially since the GM method is simpler, lighter and more elegant from an engineering point of view. I never said the MB doesn't handle or can't put up the numbers. I said the experience is degraded by the weight and that ruins the kinetics from the driver's perspective, relative to the Caddy. Yes, the SL keeps the tires planted. No, it doesn't feel as composed doing it. The only small definciency that Caddy V has experientially is the very slight sideways bump in a potholed or bumpy curve, which is a characteristic of every Corvette with a transverse-glass-leaf suspension. I kinda like it. Feels fun and doesn't actually disturb the car's stability. I'll take that over a car you can feel fighting to manage its own mass. This class of car is certainly a sporting class of cars and dynamics in motion are among the criteria for success. Certainly very high for me and others who own the V. If I only cared about cruising, there are Buicks to buy along with the myriad Mercedes choices. How about a Buick with a V8? As I said, I am still waiting for this allegation of cheap build to evidence itself in my V. Relative to everything else that costs $100K, the V feels like a hundred Large to me. The Jag XKR doesn't handle well enough for $100K. The Aston V8 Vantage isn't quick enough for its price. The Mercedes SL feels too ponderous and pretentious. The wonderful Maserati Grand Sport's clunky transmission undermines its price with every shift. Uh...let's see.....the XLR-v has leather, wood and plastic inside just like everything else put to shame by the Italians. And none of it seems to be wearing in the slightest. It runs in the 4s right out of the box. stops and turns on a dime. Stone cold reliable. Gets as much attention as any car I see here in L.A. at any price. Comfortable. Sports car dynamics. But the plastic surrounding the nav screen and a few buttons come up short in some people's eyes? Hmmm....in a world where every competing car is imperfect in a meaningful way, I think I can hack the 6 square inches of untextured plastic and enjoy my car while Cadillac revises the cabin on v2.0. Phil
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Sep 12, 2006 11:33 pm) Didn't I cover the mags? I'll cite them for people who seem to respect them. I won't for people who don't use them as "evidence." I've explained how a writer gets my respect and attention, and it isn't the conclusion but how they get to it and whether they are holistically evaluating the car in question. I also never said the XLR-v is "superior in every way." I've said it is on balance the best car of its car in its class. Nobody in the class has a perfect polar graph of selection attributes. The Maserati has easily the most beautiful interior in the class, the loveliest paint, and it has a fab naturally-aspriated Ferrari-derived engine (my preference over supercharging), but it also has a cloth top, a clunky tranny, a strange driving position, and spotty service distribution. I almost bought one. The Jag and Aston have the second best leather in the class, lightweight aluminum structures, and rich British interiors but both are down on power, handling is too soft, and structural rigidity on convertibles (which are cloth tops) trails the Cadillac. The Lexus loses in every respect. There isn't a single redeeming aspect of the car I'd prefer over the XLR-v. The Mercedes SL55 has more displacement and a large torque advantage set in a dated but torsionally-stiff architecture with long overhangs, short wheelbase, and a quarter ton of excess weight that reflects a lack of design imagination. Interior materials are high quality. Interior design is overwrought and functions are obscured by poor ergonomics. Its suspension technology is the only one in the class to approach GM's in efficacy. The Mercedes is monstrously overpriced and is common as dirt where I live. The SL550 shares the traits of the 55 AMG, but sheds some ponderous weight though it is not engineered to drive as sharply as the AMG. Both have a nice transmission. On balance, the V's only area of real, common, criticism relative to the class is the interior. I don't agree it is meaningfully deficient, and I am here to tell you it works and wears just fine, and makes the right impression on people who get in the car. Let Maserati loose on the V interior, and all the carping about the car would go away in a flash. The V's interior ain't a reason not to choose the car now, however. No doubt the next version will be better still. And by the way, other people do agree with me. The XLR/XLRv owner boards are full of people who bought the car for the same reasons I did, after having owned MB, Lexus, Jag, et al. And most of them never owned a Cadillac before, many never having previously owned an American car, either Phil |
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Sep 13, 2006 12:06 am) Well that is IYO, and it doesn't give the XLR any advantage in handling either. If this was true, that suspension combined with the weight savings should enable the XLR-V to run rings around the competition and it doesn't. Period. No points for GM and the handling advantage still winds up on the competitor's car. I never said the MB doesn't handle or can't put up the numbers. I said the experience is degraded by the weight and that ruins the kinetics from the driver's perspective, relative to the Caddy. Yes, the SL keeps the tires planted. No, it doesn't feel as composed doing it. The only small definciency that Caddy V has experientially is the very slight sideways bump in a potholed or bumpy curve, which is a characteristic of every Corvette with a transverse-glass-leaf suspension. I kinda like it. Feels fun and doesn't actually disturb the car's stability. I'll take that over a car you can feel fighting to manage its own mass. And what I'm telling you is that no one has found anything to support this advantage you keep talking about. These are professional drivers who have been testing cars for years and they all say the same thing regarding the handling of the SL and the XLR, one is good and the other is better, the latter being the SL. This nonsense about how the XLR feels and what not isn't enough to put it over the SL and the others in this class because the rest of the car is lacking. This class of car is certainly a sporting class of cars and dynamics in motion are among the criteria for success. Certainly very high for me and others who own the V. If I only cared about cruising, there are Buicks to buy along with the myriad Mercedes choices. How about a Buick with a V8? Here we go again, you're missing the point. Of course dynamics are a point of reference in this class, but the XLR falls down on its face in other areas which you'll all of sudden dismiss. The feel of the materials, design and quality of the XLR/V say cheap GM car, not 100K blueblood. That is why the XLR-V could have the best handling in the world and still come up short, heck it already outrun the SL550, 650i, and XK yet that didn't carry as much weight as the details, which is where GM is clueless still. As I said, I am still waiting for this allegation of cheap build to evidence itself in my V. Relative to everything else that costs $100K, the V feels like a hundred Large to me. The Jag XKR doesn't handle well enough for $100K. The Aston V8 Vantage isn't quick enough for its price. The Mercedes SL feels too ponderous and pretentious. The wonderful Maserati Grand Sport's clunky transmission undermines its price with every shift. Uh...let's see.....the XLR-v has leather, wood and plastic inside just like everything else put to shame by the Italians. And none of it seems to be wearing in the slightest. It runs in the 4s right out of the box. stops and turns on a dime. Stone cold reliable. Gets as much attention as any car I see here in L.A. at any price. Comfortable. Sports car dynamics. But the plastic surrounding the nav screen and a few buttons come up short in some people's eyes? Hmmm....in a world where every competing car is imperfect in a meaningful way, I think I can hack the 6 square inches of untextured plastic and enjoy my car while Cadillac revises the cabin on v2.0. Yeah let me guess, every other car has flaws except the XLR? Right? You kill me with all this about other cars yet you can't see the glaring cheapness of the XLR's interior. Driving the car for 8K miles doesn't prove anything IMO, any 100K can stand up to 8K miles of use. You've got to be kidding if you think that 8K is some type of milestone that proves quality! Now wait a minute, you've driven the XKR to know that it doesn't handle well enough for 100K or are you going by something you've read? I honestly feel for you if you think a XLR feels like a 100K car. M
|
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Sep 13, 2006 12:36 am) Yet the SL gets the nod in handling. Go figure. Either someone is harping about nothing or the entire industry doesn't know what they're talking about. The Lexus loses in every respect. There isn't a single redeeming aspect of the car I'd prefer over the XLR-v. The only thing we agree on! The SC430 is for the pinky-ring set. I also never said the XLR-v is "superior in every way." I've said it is on balance the best car of its car in its class. Nobody in the class has a perfect polar graph of selection attributes. Your last sentence contradicts the first one. The XLR-V isn't even close to being the best car in this class, as it can't even beat a base SL550. The Mercedes SL55 has more displacement and a large torque advantage set in a dated but torsionally-stiff architecture with long overhangs, short wheelbase, and a quarter ton of excess weight that reflects a lack of design imagination. Interior materials are high quality. Interior design is overwrought and functions are obscured by poor ergonomics. Its suspension technology is the only one in the class to approach GM's in efficacy. The Mercedes is monstrously overpriced and is common as dirt where I live. Gotta love personal opinon on design passed off as some type of flaw. Just say you don't like the SL and this would make sense. Again your cited weight advantage hasn't proven squat in handling prowess in favor of the XLR. Gotta love the "common as dirt" comment too, i.e. Cadillac doesn't and can't sell anywhere near as many XLRs so I'll knock the Benz for being a commercial success. I love it when people who champion slow selling cars try to hint or imply that they are somehow more exclusive when the truth of the matter is the car in question is 10 or 10 times a sales dud! Exclusive is when you can sell more, but won't or when you only build a set number and that is it. GM could crank out XLRs all day long if the market warranted, but it doesn't so please spare me the hint or implication that the XLR is somehow exclusive when the reality of the matter is very few people want or would even consider a 75-100K Cadillac. The Caddy name doesn't warrant or carry nearly enough clout to sell a 100K car in any real numbers today. The V's interior ain't a reason not to choose the car now, however. No doubt the next version will be better still. IYO. Wait till next year or next time, a classic GM defense. GM never delivers a complete car, it is always wait until next time, which by then the competition will have moved the goal post. And by the way, other people do agree with me. The XLR/XLRv owner boards are full of people who bought the car for the same reasons I did, after having owned MB, Lexus, Jag, et al. And most of them never owned a Cadillac before, many never having previously owned an American car, either Seeing as how they sunk 75-100K into a market lagging American car they literally have no choice but to tell themselves this, otherwise they'd have the worst case of cognitive dissonance in the recorded history. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Aug 08, 2006 12:57 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Sep 12, 2006 10:50 pm) A sports car is classified as a two seater with rear wheel drive.
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Sep 13, 2006 1:58 am) More to the point, it would be impossible to build a sports car from the SL platform. It's stupidly heavy. Yet the light-for-class XLR-v is built on a platform that with the luxury stuff deleted and bigger stickier rubber added becomes a 3100 lb world-class sports car. The XLR-v comes from the factory tuned to a specific state of compromise. If you want to shift that mix this way or that, it's easy to do, and you'll be doing it with a quarter ton advantage over the porky SL55. Plainly, the XLR-v feels more incisive and gives me more information about the tire-road interface than the SL. Everything about the car is more communicative. It's not my fault if this isn't obvious to magazine jockeys. Want to really make the point? Put Corvette rubber on a V. Drive one, please, before you use someone else's opinion again to justify your own bias. "...because the rest of the car is lacking." This is not my experience. Now, I agree with you that 9,000 miles doesn't prove the long-term reliability of the V. But given the role of infant failure of componentry in gizmo-loaded luxury cars as a class, it's a good harbinger. Having put well over 100,000 miles on a prior generation Corvette, without so much as an upholstery scuff, I have confidence in the long-term stalwartness of the V. The basic durable goodness of the platform is routinely evidenced in harder-driven Corvettes in larger numbers. The long-term questions TBD are in the small-displacement supercharged engine and the top's mechanism. I'm expecting my car to be in my hands well into 6 digits. Haven't driven the new platform XKR (not sure it's shipped yet) but have driven the current XK. Extrapolating from that experience, and having driven the two cars in last gen and knowing that version's R difference, I don't think Jaguar's convertible handles like I expect 100K worth of car to handle. It has other merits to justify its price however. All these cars, even at 100K, are specific compromises. So having driven everything I can think of in this peculiar class of retractable hardtop luxury sporting GTs, plus the ragtop contenders adjacent to this category, every one is imperfect and every one makes a specific impression. On an absolute basis, none of these cars are worth $100,000, but that's a reflection of prevailing conditions. But in a world where an SLK 55 AMG starts at $61,000, a Lexus SC costs $70K, an XLR is $74K, a Jag is similar, and a Mercedes SL is $92K, yes the XLR-v is worth its price. No one thinks the XLR, XK or SC are too expensive for the market. For another $25K over the those, you get a hand-built semi-racing grade engine with added 123hp, bigger brakes, material upgrades in the interior, better transmission, larger wheels with more aggressive rubber, greater performance in every parameter. Sure, it's worth $100K in that context. Anyone who thinks it isn't worth $100K is essentially saying the brand is their issue, not the car. I don't have a problem with a $100K Cadillac at all. I didn't buy the car to make an obvious point about personal wealth. I bought it for its competence, power, comfort, fit, feel and intrinsic progressive emotion, compared to the other more flawed entries in its class, along with being the most agile performer lacking the ponderous dynamics of the SL and SC. Phil
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Sep 13, 2006 1:58 am) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: 213xlrv (Sep 13, 2006 12:36 am) Anyway, Phil, what kind of real-world mpg are you getting with your V? And thanks for the write up... I think I'm much further away from grabbing my mid-life crisis car as the evil wife has announced that she wants to buy a lakefront home in New Hampshire or Vermont within the next year or two. Actually, so would I. God's Country are the Northern New England states. Dropped my skis off at the shop for a tune up, looking forward to Ma Nature making up for the dearth of snow last winter this year.
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Coupes & Convertibles Cadillac XLR and XLR-V Cadillac XLR vs. Mercedes-Benz SL
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2009 Mercedes-Benz SL-Class
2009 Cadillac XLR-V
2009 Cadillac XLR
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
