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.
|
|
|---|---|
|
Sedan, I mean the SL500 Roadster. Look at Cadillac's competition... SL500 - Overpriced, too many of them around, but established SC430 - Slow, Pudgy, wierd Al interrior, but Lexus 'quality' and very low price Jag XK - big fat (not enough room for its size) and soft top - not in this league BMW 6 - same as Jag, but add ugly. now check out the cadillac - Priced in between SL500 and SC430, made of 3mm thick fiberglass, hardtop by the same people who make the SL's, lighter, faster, based on a true sports car chassis, but in this price range yet unestablished. I think its a good bet that this car has all the right moves. I am too young to remember much of cadillac's 'woes' but i believe it, still looking at today's cadillacs and i think they have more prestige than MB or BMW. This is IMO but i look at the showroom and I don't see 1980's, I see Matrix II, cars that look like they were pulled from the future. The XLR is the perfect icing on this very nice cake. Its also a great car to establish and test the waters of the 70+ K segment for cadillac. They might make a sedan in this range sooner or later. The XLR especially, has exclusivity without that horrible stench of Jaguar quality. Its built better than MB too. You can see the trends now, with MB going down and GM going up.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: exalteddragon1 (Jun 26, 2006 7:48 am) And, really, all MBs are overpriced compared to comparable cars. But, they've earned a reputation, recently tarninshed, but I don't think it's hurt them that much in the US...yet? The SC: Yes, the exterior is just odd from some angles. But, besides the lighter colored wood interior option, I find the interior just lovely. High quality. Jag XK: Gorgeous, still. Haven't seen enough of the '07, but the '97-'06 will always be stunning. Advantage of the soft top is great trunks space, but I'm not interested in a ragtop. BMW 6 I find handsome until you get to that horrible, tacked on, cheap looking, did someone attach the wrong part to the rear of the car trunk lid!!! I really can't stand to look at that trunk, it so ruins the car for me. Plus I'm not a big fan of the new BMW interiors. And I wouldn't use the phrase, "horrible stench of...quality" anywhere near a GM discussion! 
|
|
|
Replying to: exalteddragon1 (Jun 26, 2006 7:48 am) Better made than the SL? Really. No one in the industry has found this to be true, only GM supporters. The gripes about Cadillac's interior quality have been far and wide and in this latest comparo they got knocked on that again. The XLR-V just got trounced by the Jaguar XK and Mercedes SL550. To make matters worse the performance gap between the SL550 and XLR-V isn't nearly as much as it was just a few months ago. The SL550 scored better in handling and the XLR-V's brakes were clearly lacking compared to the 911 and SL550. So much for that "sports car" chassis being an advantage in the luxury class. Mercedes going down and GM going up? In what world is this? GM is dying, that is the trend. It has gotten to the point where others are approaching them to see if they can be of some help, while Mercedes is having a grand year with record sales and one impressive showing after another of various products. I find it very interesting that you don't remember Cadillac's woes, but Jaguar has a stinch? Cadillac and Jaguar were both literally in the same boat during the same period, the 80's and most of the 90's. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Jul 09, 2006 9:23 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: woodlands (Jul 15, 2006 7:19 pm) M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Jul 16, 2006 8:15 pm) I will say that I have never been a big fan of mercs or BMWs. However, I bought a Chrysler Crossfire and became interested in what SLK owners had to say about their cars because of the similarities to the Crossfire. Based on the comments you find it would take a fool to buy a new (or recent model) SLK. Way, way too many problems with every part of the car.
|
|
|
Replying to: woodlands (Aug 07, 2006 5:06 pm) Do we really want to get into finding comments on the net about unhappy owners? GM owners would own the bandwidth on that one! M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Aug 07, 2006 8:31 pm) Mercedes has zero advantage regarding quality and in some cases places behind Cadillac (or other GM brand). I will admit that neither brand comes close to the Japanese competitors. It is interesting that for the 2006 JD Powers initial quality survey, the Chevrolet Corvette and the SL Class tied. If you want to know what owners think of their cars you need to survey 'net sites where owner's talk about the good and bad of vehicles. The Mercedes site says there are problems with the vehicles.
|
|
|
Replying to: woodlands (Aug 08, 2006 9:29 am) The SL and Corvette tied in initial quality - big deal. The SL has been wiping the floor with whatever roadster Cadillac has had for the last 20 years! What this has to do is with you trashing Cadillac, when in fact the ratings (JD Powers) reflect that owners/buyers believe they are as good as Mercedes. Whooptie doo, so they're happy that their Cadillacs aren't falling apart anymore, doesn't mean much when the rest of the car is lacking compared to the competition and getting beat left and right and doesn't sell in good numbers relative to the class. Win one battle, but Cadillac still looses the war big time. Let me know when Cadillac gets their build quality, styling, engineering, and interior plastics above regular GM products and truly worthy of a 100K car. Mercedes has zero advantage regarding quality and in some cases places behind Cadillac (or other GM brand). Yet it doesn't do them any good when compared to the competition! Reliability isn't the same as quality either. GM cars manage not to fall apart of cough up their internals in 90 days, but they're still shoddily built and for that the mis-informed take this as being a better "quality" car. M
|
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Jul 09, 2006 9:23 pm) Crossed 9,000 miles in the XLR-v last week. Dead nuts reliable, feels faster than new, as expected. This car gets more attention than an SL. And the interior materials show no signs of use whatsoever. Very high quality, and not overwrought. A friend and I swapped cars for a few hours -- he has an SL55. Man, do you feel that extra quarter ton in the porky MB. Yeah, they keep the tires planted, but you feel the inertia of that useless mass in every change of direction. I far prefer the more incisive, agile V. Phil
|
|
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
