Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
I'm a huge MB fan and believe if a vehicle sharing the platform of a lower priced ML can't be "built to a price" in the $60-70K range and knock your socks off, then something else in the equation is missing. Not that the R is anything to sneeze at
I find that the E500 Estate better answers the motoring question that the R is now attempting to answer. Sure, the R transports people nicely, but so do their sedans/estates. Maybe the market will verge away from the ML and toward the R... who knows?
Just want to see MB deliver what built their brand in the 1st place. Don't lose focus and make no excuses when it comes to engineering excellence!
I agree that the R is a not a bad product, but it could be a lot better. I don't think it has anything to do with the platform, its the smaller things - details that are off when compared to Mercedes' cars.
The interiors are nice, but not as nice as Mercedes cars of similar prices. The R/M seem as if they're built for ease of assembly like American cars are (or were in some rare cases). Also the design of the interior is less inspired than say the E or CLS.
M
Personally, I think that the timing of the R-Class introduction in the midst of the gasoline spike is unfortunate for MB. I find it irritating what the media and others say about luxury car owners not caring about the price of gas, 'cause we're so rich. :P. I am sure that it will have an impact on sales, at least until the price stabilizes,no matter how much dinero we have to burn (hah.)
Bring on the B-Class!!
My original post of my impressions of the R 350 test drive were not designed to hurt or insult. Just as any writer or reviewer of any product would like to express an honest opinion regarding their impressions.
If you enjoy your new R class vehicle (as you should)- then more power to you.
If you read my review carefully, you'll find that I had almost an equal amount of moderately critical stuff to say about the Pacifica as well as the R class.
Both vehicles aree excellent products by any standard, and I think we're all striving to find the "perfect" vehicle (which of course does not really exist).
I have a few comments about your post however, and please don't take these the wrong way.
Despite the long and mostly impressive history of Mercedes benz and Daimler. they have been known to produce a few less than stellar vehicles. The first generation M class is one example of mediocrity, suspect build quality, and poor reliability. ( The current new generation M is a major improvement.)
Having a classy name is not always a guarantee of of a superior vehicle.
Chrysler products have seen a real improvement in the driving, handling and build quality of their newer products (such as the Pacifica) ever since Daimler took over. Daimler's know how and chassis expertise has definitely filtered down to the new Pacifica, 300/magnum/Charger, and even the Durango and Grand Cherokee. All these vehicles are pretty impressive now, especially when you consider how reasonably priced they are.
Mark, have you ever driven the Pacifica? or 300 RT w/ hemi?
I have, and I was favorably impressed.
I think you would be pleasantly surprised.
Recently, the vaunted NY Times reviewed the Chrysler 300 SRT 8 and said it was every bit as good as a an E Class AMG product that cost a good 30-40K more.
To me there still is a correlation between price and value.
Maybe the R class is a better overall vehicle than the Pacifica, but how do YOU quantify how much more vehicle it really is when they are so similar.
I ask you Mark, IS the R 500 really worth FORTY THOUSAND dollars more than a well equipped Pacifica?
Obviously you feel the vehicle is worth the money and I am not trying to put down your feelings or your new car (van?), but don't you look for value for your money when you buy most anything?
One last item- you mentioned that the R-class is a german-built product. I was under the impression that the R-class was built in Alabama- am I wrong?
If you meant "german-designed" product, well the Pacifica was a german-designed product as well.
By the way, I also own a BMW X-3 which I enjoy driving and is superior in many ways to other smaller SUVs- but I think it is also overpriced by about $5-7K.
(But not $40K)
That is why a non-automotive publication like the NYT should stick to reporting news and not trying to act like they know cars. The 300C SRT-8 is a very good car, but it isn't a E55 AMG. Does it provide a similar experience? Yes. Does it provide much of the same performance? Yes. Does it have as good a ride or is it built as well? No and no.
Is the price difference between a R500 and a Pacifica really 40K?
M
Once again, I am a MB driver and drive a C32 AMG which has been a hoot and I prolly overpaid for it like all my other cars (including Chryslers, Porsche, Fords, GM...). I was on the PR train regarding the R-class all of the way through the process and my PERSONAL feeling is it's ugly, period. I had high hopes after all the hype and my hopes are shot. That's ME talking with regards to my personal feelings and I commend MB for having the skill and vision (remember it carried that monicker for awhile) to produce this vehicle. I also commend all of those who find that this van/suv/people-hauler meets their needs and buys one!
I like the new M class design and once again that is more than likely going to be my next ride. I'm 50 and was looking for something to haul around the family, dog, clients, etc., but I can't see that thing in my driveway. For what it's worth, I'm not a fan of the Pacifica either and thought the R-class would be the bomb! It just isn't working for me. Sorry!
I guess my ultimate frustration is with car makers who could easily introduce a complete vehicle at the outset always seem to make the consumer wait for a year. Lexus sells more SUV's than any of the other luxo brands for a reason. Copy those things and wrap it up in the MB package and make me happy. Give me much better reliability, do not make me feel shortchanged because the vehicle is built in Alabama. Make it clear why I spent 70,000$ and was happy to do it. I do not believe in this incarnation the R class will make enough people smile. The last thing I wanted was an Odyssey but the comparison is not close for my money.(my other vehicles are a 6 speed 540i and a Lexus GX470)
Merc, I beleive the 330 SRT 8 is lot closer to the E55 AMG model than you might suspect. The build quality is not as good, but again would you really expect it to be at such a huge difference in price?
Your other question regarding the $40K difference in price between the Pacifica and the R-500 is a real number. The average Pacifica (very well equipped) lists out in the mid $30K but actual transaction prices between dealer discounts and the $2K rebate hovers at around $30k. The R-500 (well equipped) generally will sticker out in the upper $60K to almost $70K, believe it or not.
That leads me to the value question again, shouldn't a $60-70K vehicle really knock your socks off?
I'm not only talking performance, but shouldn't a vehicle in this price class just blow away the competition with innovations and unique features that no one else has?
Why would I want to shell out this much money for what is essentially a minivan without sliding doors, and without 3rd row seats that fold out of the way for example?
If you are buying the R class for the comfort & utility, then why not look at minivans?
I think the answer is- minivans are not cool right now. (I have a feeling that might change soon, because the guy who was the head of styling on 300/magnum vehicles has been put in charge of a radical new desighn for the Chrysler minivans)
By the way, Mark, I did point out that the R-class was german designed, and I did not mean to imply that building the vehicle in the USA was a negative. in fact many good foreign owned products are now built here with great success and good build quality. But you have to admit that the Pacifica and much of the newer lineup from Chrysler is also german designed as well. You're deluding yourself if you think otherwise.
The Pacifica IS very similar to the R Class precisely because of the influence and design teams from Daimler who have been steering the styling direction of both companies. When I first saw a prototype of the R-Class (I believe it was called the Vision at that time), the first thing that popped into my head and apparently most automotive journalists was- Pacifica!
In fact, most of the Road Tests that I have read in Motor Trend, Car & Driver, and their ilk have consistently compared the R to the Pacifica.
The BMW X3 that I own as I mentioned previously is a superior product to the other smaller SUV's out there, but your stated examples of comparing the X3 to Hyundai's and Kia's is a little silly. A more valid comparison for value would be the Acura MDX, Nissan Pathfinder, or even the Honda Pilot. These are vehicles that cost less than the BMW X3 and give you a good amount of bang for the buck. These are certainly not Korean vehicles. But again the difference in price between the X3 and these other vehicles range in the $5-7K range not $40K.
By the way, I don't believe the X3 is built in Spartanburg (not that there's anything wrong with that (a little Seinfeld humor there....)).
While I was replying I read headcrackers post, and I think essentially he's saying the same thing as I am especially regarding the level of equipment and the perceived value of the R class. There should have been a whole heck of a lot more equipment and innovation in the R for the kind of price strata it inhabits.
I agree with headcracker that even the Honda Odyssey Touring edition is better equipped than the R.
Still, the initial launch of both the ML and R indicate that MB learned from the 1998 ML debacle. Both are good products and well-realized for whom MB believes will buy them... just not sure MB needed this level of diversity. Thank goodness they killed the "scooter" - the C230 coupe MB did not need to go there in the U.S.!
Think the new CDI engines coming from MB will add a new dimension to the R and ML purchase criteria.
Well it isn't. I had the chance to drive the 300C SRT-8 and I've driven the E55 more than a few times since 2003, and let me tell you it ain't so. The NYT is clueless if they think these cars are equal. The 300 is awesome, but the E55 is off the charts, and the only area where the 300 is superior is in handling feel, whereas the E55 is faster, has a better ride, and is better built, among other things. The general refinement of the E55 is a lot better than the 300 also.
Your other question regarding the $40K difference in price between the Pacifica and the R-500 is a real number. The average Pacifica (very well equipped) lists out in the mid $30K but actual transaction prices between dealer discounts and the $2K rebate hovers at around $30k. The R-500 (well equipped) generally will sticker out in the upper $60K to almost $70K, believe it or not.
Well if you're going to go into transaction prices I'm sure that the R500 won't be going for sticker price after the initial hype dies down. Either way a buyer will have to work hard to see a 40K price difference.
Yes the R-Class should be superior in most ways to the Pacifica. I'm not really defending the R-Class because I personally don't like SUV/Crossover things (i.e. anything that isn't a "car") anyway, but some of what I reading here sounds suspect, especially about a 40K price difference.
If you're the equipment type (dvd, leather etc.) that doesn't care or understand the other finer points about the engineering that goes into more expensive vehicles thats fine, but a little reasearch should be in order before blasting a product as being not worth the money. Again, I'm not saying the R is worth 70K, because I don't think it is either, but what Mercedes puts into a vehicle that you can't read on the window sticker accounts or something. Furthermore, a Kia Minivan can be had with most of the same features on the Honda you and others keep mentioning, doesn't mean its the same class of vehicle. Also, just because R&T compare the R with the Pac doesn't mean the Pacifica is in the same league, their comparision centered around the two vehicles sharing the same purpose.
Also, on the subject of "value". Value is what a person sees in a vehicle, its not always the old standby of "I got leather this and DVDs here and what not" either. Luxury SUVs and Crossovers are poor values to start with going by that standard because each and every one of them have a cheaper competitor that will do the same job and in a lot of cases its a platform/badge mate to the luxury SUV/Crossover in question. The R-Class is no different.
M
True, this should happen around this time next year.
I'm not crazy about the R, M or upcoming GL, something is indeed missing compared to Mercedes' cars.
M
Please do not ratchet up the emotional content of your statement with reports of posters blasting the R class.
No my dear sir, most car buyers are paying for content, the equipment which you believe is secondary. They pay for leather instead of cloth, they pay for contrasting piping, for 12 speakers v. 4. Let us also posit that most MB buyers are looking for an overall superior experience. You know the argument "I know it when I see it". Comparing the R class to nothing else, I believe one has a difficult task to show me the objective reasons why it is superior. As in all other things price does not equate with quality, innovation, or a superior experience. Therefore hasten not to a comparison with a Kia for you might find MB wanting. Oh, yeah, tell me again why a car that costs 30,000 less should have more content. The question for me is not finding the cheapest alternative, but being able to justify why I was willing to pay more. This is where we agree, compared to other MB products the R class suffers, and that more than anything else is what irks me about its pricing. MB sells itself on luxury and excellent build quality. This more than any other reason is why the C class has never competed sales wise with the 3 series, because BMW sells itself on a better drive and I can get that in a cheaper package. However, it is also the reason why the 7's will never match the S class. At that price point the driving is not nearly as important as the surroundings and letting others know you can buy the S. The R class, is it a vastly improved minivan-no it is not. Is it exceedingly luxurious- no it is not. I just cannot justify the difference, so for me it is a no go. Will this class of vehicles be successful, I think so. My prediction is the Lexus version, when it does come out in 3-4 years(because you know they will build it)will reign, just like they do the luxo SUV market. The drivers will opt for the BMW( monkey see monkey do), and the new Audi (Q7 or something else) will be ignored as are their other vehicles.
My original point was this. If you're going to knock a vehicle you should know everything about or at least most things, not simply talk about what a vehicle does on doesn't have in the way of things that any vehicle can have. Sure the R-Class isn't hands down superior to the Pacifica (never said it was) but for the extra refinement, safety engineering etc. you'll have to pay more for the Mercedes name, as you put it. Secondly, rear-seat DVD players and cooled seats don't make a Mercedes, but they do make the cheaper vehicles in the minds of most. Apparently that is what is happening here, the R getting knocked for those type of "features" not being present. A loaded R500 may not be a "value" for the value=cheaper shoppers, but its ride, refinement, safety, would be ahead of any of the vehicles its being compared to here. Now whether that is worth the 30K or whatever difference between it an something similar is up to the buyer, but the difference is present.
Is there more tactile feel in a Mini vs. an E class, I dare say there is. Is there more luxury in the E class, I dare say there is. Which is the better engineered car?
Doesn't apply here because a Mini and a E-Class don't compete in any way, nor do they share the same concept.
No, engineering and its finer points are not being discussed because it is unlikely you can tell us how we are to discern the difference.
Thats my point, people either get it or they don't. No one can make a person see or feel something different about a vehicle they aren't trying to see or unable to see. Some people could drive a Mercedes S-Class and call it just another car. There are posts on Edmunds about the 3-Series where the person who drove it didn't feel it handled or drove any better than anything else. This person doesn't get it, and I'm not saying its they're stupid or clueless, its just over their head.
In all fairness you are correct about the R lacking compared to Mercedes cars, as I have stated this also because I can tell just by sitting in one it isn't the same vehicle a CLS/S/E is when it comes to that tactile feel of quality or what most people would deem feeling expensive. That doesn't make it chopped liver either, which is the tone I'm getting here.
The R-Class doesn't have Mercedes' brake by wire system, btw.
No my dear sir, most car buyers are paying for content, the equipment which you believe is secondary. They pay for leather instead of cloth, they pay for contrasting piping, for 12 speakers v. 4. Let us also posit that most MB buyers are looking for an overall superior experience.
True, they are paying for content, which I don't think is "secondary" but they are also paying for the nuances that a luxury product provides. Whether it be styling, a better ride, better performance or more sophisticated engineering like 7-speed transmissions and air suspension. If content was the only thing or such a superior reason for buying a crossover/suv type vehicle there would be no reason to buy any luxury suv/crossover product because they all have much cheaper competitors that do the same things with the same "equipment". This about content being the biggest driving factor on a purchase of something like an R-Class doesn't address the luxury vehicle aspect of it. If content was the end-all there are dozens of ways to transport 6 people with similar or the same "stuff" as the R, all of them being much cheaper. Basic equipment can be had on any vehicle, doesn't mean its done in the same manner or as seamlessly as it is the luxury product. This is why a product of lesser price can have more "content". The Koreans for example are good at this, while they give you all this stuff, the refinement, fit and finish are poor and the driving experience sucks.
The C-Class and 3-Series really have nothing to do with this, but the 2 main reasons why the 3 outsells the C is because BMW has more variants and they've made their name on making a superior sports sedan. Mercedes up until now wasn't even playing the same game as the 3-Series when it came to making the 3-Series sporty. Mercedes' so-called "sport" packages on the C (up until 2005's facelift) were nothing more than an a afterthought. You say that the 3-Series is superior car, well yeah for a person looking for a sports sedan yes, but many find the C to meet their small luxury sedan needs just fine. And the 3-Series is hardly any cheaper than a comparable C-Class, its down to a few hundred dollars for comparable equipped cars now, if that. You can get a 3-Series up to 45K very easily today.
The R-Class isn't trying to be a vastly improved minivan because for one it isn't a minivan. Secondly I don't think its worth E-Class/CLS type money either, but to simply judge it on window sticker features and declare it non-superior in any way is just to simplistic imo. Also, everyone doesn't have the same value = this or that type system. Maybe the poster that has a R500 wanted something different, love it or hate the R is definitely something that. Everyone is going to see this differently.
M
We are just debating the finer points, the plusses and minusses of this new vehicle. It's supposed to be FUN debating, not a chore. No vehicle out there today is going to make everyone happy, nor will it fill everyone's perceived needs. If you enjoy your new R 500 then go ahead and enjoy it, but when you put down others for driving a Honda Odyssey, you're essentially doing what you are accusing others of doing here on this forum.
No one on this Forum is putting YOU down for driving an R class, but you seem to not be able to separate yourself from criticism of a car.
Lighten up.
Merc, as you know, I have actually driven the R 350 (not the 500) and I spent a fair amount of time in a MB dealership going over options & pricing. I agree with you that the actual transaction price of an R 500 will eventually trend lower, but even so, let's say the sticker on most R 500's will average about $68K. Even if the dealers discounts the hell out the vehicle, I can't see it going out the door for less than $62K (unless MB offers rebates or spiffs to the dealers). That still makes for a $32K difference in price between a well-eqipped pacifica & an R 500. That's still a staggering difference.
Ok, you say, lets compare an R 350 future transaction price vs. Pacifica.
Here: Sticker R350- avg. $58K
probable heavy discount : $53K
Still a $23K difference in price with the Pacifica. That $23K buys a lot of dinners at Peter Lugers or Ruth's Chris for you non-nyers.
What will likely happen if MB gets stuck with these, they will offer inflated residual values & very reduced lease money factors to get the monthly lease payment more palatable.
In response to your assertions that there are certain aspects to the design, build & mechanical superiority of MB products- I agree with you, and I made that same point when showing that I thought my X3 was overpriced (but I leased it anyway) but also pointed out that the diifference was only about $5k, not $23K or $32K.
By the way, this is exactly what happened with the BMW X3 I own. When I first looked at the X3, the lease payment averaged in the upper $400- slightly over $500 amonth for a modestly equipped version. When the X3 sat on the lots for a while the money factor & residuals were raised to a point where I leased one for the very low $400's a month. Which leads me to the perceived value argument of headcracker.
I also agree with many of the points that headcracker has made, particularly about the content level of a vehicle IS a major factor in why we buy a particular vehicle. We should expect that if a vehicle is more expensive than another very similar competing vehicle it should, at the very least have as much standard equipment as the lesser vehicle, and at its inflated price, offer at least a modicum of innovation & unique features to help entice you and make you feel you not only got a great superior vehicle, but one that represents value as well.
I just want to remind you guys that in the early 70's the Japanese were just starting to tackle the US market, and they did a very clever thing. They took small cheap cars & dramatically increased the content level. We, at that time were used to driving larger American cars which very often only had power windows, door locks, and other "luxury" equipment included as costly extras. As a result, lots of bread & butter american vehicles at the time had crank windows and push down door locks. The Japanes won over a lot of buyers by using content as a selling tool. Today, even the lowliest vehicles have all the power equipment standard (even power steering).
What I am getting at is that headcracker is right- the bar has been raised- especially by the Japanese manufacturers. We should expect a full complement of the latest features in the most expensive cars, and we should complain about it if MB or other manufacturers don't include them.
Finally, of course no one can ever "win" a debate on whether a product is worth its price or not. Of course it is "worth" whatever someone is willing to pay for it.
I believe that market forces will eventually determine what this R class is "worth" and that MB will be forced to sell it at that price or stop producing it if it doesn't succeed or loses money for them.
And oh yes, Merc- the R-Class IS a minivan, just like the Pacifica.
As it will be with any luxury product if you're going to compare them to regular vehicles. On that basis no luxury product is going to be worth the premium to you.
In response to your assertions that there are certain aspects to the design, build & mechanical superiority of MB products- I agree with you, and I made that same point when showing that I thought my X3 was overpriced (but I leased it anyway) but also pointed out that the diifference was only about $5k, not $23K or $32K.
I'm glad you see my point, but how do you know a X3 isn't worth that much over whatever you were comparing it too? Just looking at the window sticker and counting up features isn't going far enough to justify saying that the X3 isn't worth the premium.
I also agree with many of the points that headcracker has made, particularly about the content level of a vehicle IS a major factor in why we buy a particular vehicle. We should expect that if a vehicle is more expensive than another very similar competing vehicle it should, at the very least have as much standard equipment as the lesser vehicle, and at its inflated price, offer at least a modicum of innovation & unique features to help entice you and make you feel you not only got a great superior vehicle, but one that represents value as well.
Well features are important, but again any vehicle can have the same things, doesn't mean it is the same class of vehicle, that is the point of buying a luxury vehicle in the first place. Its not simply reading the window sticker and counting up what it has or what it doesn't have compared to a much cheaper and lacking in other areas, vehicle. It is the entire package that makes the luxury vehicle just that, plus the features.
The R-Class is not a minivan, and neither is the Pacific. It would seem kinda silly for Chrysler to have both the Town and Country and the Pacifica if they were both minivans. They are crossovers, and they don't have the storage or the awful, boat-like dynamics of minvans either.
M
M
Merc- I don't feel that most luxury vehicles are "worth" their price. Most of our perception of "luxury" usually has a lot more to do with advertising and product image than real VALUE for the dollar. Of course the I recognize that the E-class, S class, and the 5 & 7 series BMW products are generally superior products compared to more plebian products. But are they worth DOUBLE or TRIPLE the prices of comparably sized vehicles- NO!
The fact that we have been essentially hoodwinked by clever advertising and image makers to shell out massively larger bucks for these products in and of itself
is not a kind of proof that there is any intrinsic value there. Believe me, virtually all the major German manufacturers could fairly easily produce & sell their vehicles for prices much closer to what we consider more moderate pricing. After all, once you get past the engineering, the cost of the materials to build these "luxury" vehicles is hardly much more than most convetional vehicles. Certainly not double or triple the cost.
But, being a capitalist. I say more power to these German manufacturers- if they can charge what they want and get it- good for them. i would certainly do the same. After all, thousands of products today are sold on image alone for exorbitant prices.
I just wanted to remind all you guys out there about the origin of the moniker-"SUV".
SUV (Sport Utility Vehicles) - this term goes back to the introduction of the early 80's Chrysler minivans. Originally, the term SUV applied to any & all minivans, 4 wheel drives, etc. The term has wrongly evolved into a term describing All or 4 wheel drive vehicles exclusively. Check, you'll see I'm correct. Why is this an important point?
Because "crossovers" is a term that is falsely behind the curve. The original Chrysler minivans were the first "crossover" vehicles way back in 1983, as they were derived and developed off the K-car chassis. What I am trying to get across is that ALL minivans, 4 wheel drives, and other permutations like the R Class are all actually in the same category. Sure you can pretend that the R-Class is NOT a minivan- but who determined that a minivan HAS to have sliding doors? After all, the Mazda MPV did not originally have sliding doors and it was still considered a minivan. (The MPV also waqs one of the first minivans to be offered in AWD).
Right now, in Japan, the Honda Odyssey also has 4 conventionally opening doors. It's still a minivan though-right? Like the Pacifica & the R-class, it also seats six.
The rules that have been mentioned in these postings don't really hold up in the ever changing world of automobile classification.
Is the Toyota Highlander a 4 wheeler or a minivan?
Is the Honda Pilot a 4 wheeler or a minivan?
I would submit that both of those vehicles ARE minivans with clever packaging and advertising we are convinced they are tougher "SUV's".
If they ever attempted to go off road, both of their undercarraiges and suspensions would quickly be mangled. Hardly what we think of when we think of today's perception of SUV's.
Marc- you might want to one day, just in the interest of experimentation, take a test drive in a 2005-6 Honda Odyssey. I think you will be pleasantly surprised. Not only is the Odyssey powerful (244 Hp), but it also is hardly a flabby handling vehicle, in fact its got pretty sharp handling and steering. The brakes are good, not outstanding, the standard equipment list is impressive, the interior and exterior fit & finish is almost up there with the Germans and the out-the-door price is amazingly low.
Though I fully realize that test track numbers do not tell the whole story, especially when there a number of subjective issues about any vehicle cannot be quantified by numbers alone- but I would like to see the comparison of the performance statistics between an R 350 and a new Honda Odyssey. I would be willing to wager that they are amazingly close.
Thanks for listening, guys
That says a lot. I'm on the table jumping up and down in disagreement with that.... A S-Class or 7-Series is easily worth double the price of any similarly sized "regular" car.
M
Quality and feature differences between brands are much less evident now than even five years ago.
The R does look like a minivan to most who see it. We will see how it sells.
We can talk at length about the pros and cons and just where this vehicle fits in the ever-narrowing niches, but if this thing doesn't sell to the degree of MB's expectations it will have been a lot of effort for naught. It's here!!!! Just doesn't sound like too many were waiting for it...
Mercedes has lost some of their classy styling from the 80's & 90's, and their swoopy Cadillac/Chrysler esque designs have taken a lot of magic away from their product line.
This may be true about their designs now compared to the 80's and 90's SL, E, S-Class etc., but I don't see a thing about a Mercedes that looks anywhere near as bad as the current smoothed over egg crate designs at Cadillac. Cadillac now makes the most unnattractive group of cars in their history. Hard edges and creases and random cut lines, nothing like any Mercedes. If there is any similarity between a Chyrsler and a Mercedes (which I don't see anyhere pas the Crossfire and 300) it is Chrysler that has begun to look like Mercedes, not the other way around...for obvious reasons.
A Mercedes that looks like a Cadillac? No way in the world.
A few negative reactions (posts) about the R's styling doesn't equate to a "lot of people" either, not even. Lets see how it sells and then you'll know what people think.
M
I finally saw one in the flesh at the showroom when I was in for service. It's big all right, but not as big as I expected. I thought it looked fine. Not tempted to trade my E wagon for it though, at least at sticker....
The Caddy SRX is a goofy looking vehicle, IMO. But Caddy buyers are a different crowd, and the big 10,000 discounts help move cars off the lot.
We'll see how the market reacts to the R series.
Just as I had written (and had been criticised for) the article does a lot of comparing to Minivans & the Pacifica specifically.
The article is largely favorable (except the sticker price $70K Merc?? where are you?) but the side bar, which contains alternate opinions from 3 different testers are all mostly negative. They all comment on the price (stratospheric) and the wisdom of this vehicle.
The Test as usual contains bar graphs of similar vehicles in various categories of performance & price, and of course the Pacifica is one of the four compared vehicles. Considering the Pacifica is a 6 cylinder vs. a V-8 equipped R-500, the Pacifica aquits itself surprisingly well, and the differences in performance are relatively small considering the price difference. The handling numbers on the Pacifica were actually superior.
Now I know test numbers are not the same as the actual driving experience, they do give you some sort of basis for comparison.
Also the article makes many of my earlier points about the R Class being a high priced minivan.
One other interesting article in the latest C & D is the comparo between the new Jeep Commander w/ a Hemi and the newly redone Ford Explorer. The reason I bring this article up is the interesting last few paragraphs of the test when C & D says that buyers who might consider these two vehicles (which C & D considered good but not great), a buyer might be better served considering a Honda Minivan which they considered superior in every way!
Kinda what I said in earlier post! :P
You're right numbers don't give the full driving experience. The Pacifica's V6 is no where near as refined as Mercedes' V8 and next year the R500 will get a brand new state of the art 32V 382hp V8. The ongoing comparision to the Pacifica and how it "aquits" itself is beyond silly to me at this point. It isn't the same class of vehicle, not matter how close the "handling numbers" are. "The handling numbers"? What is that? People don't buy either one these vehicles for handling anyway.
M
I will gentleman-bet you that the R-class will be either discounted or will be supported by lease incentives before February of '06. MB will have no choice as they will need to "move 'em out". Let's watch and see together.
You seem to think that I'm under the impression that R-Class is the end all of the people mover segment, well I don't think that. Secondly this tired theme about a even more tired Honda minivan is what I find to be in need of being turned over, as in the case of a broken record. The Honda was mentioned in a SUV comparo not in relation to the R-Class. Now if you think the Honda is superior so be it, but don't tell me about a broken record when this Honda keeps being mentioned by others in the wrong thread in the first place.
M
M
Merc- You have an very interesting way of ignoring the main thrust of what people say on this forum.
Essentially many of the posts (not only mine) have been pointing out that the R-Class is essentially a Minivan & in design & execution is most similar to the Pacifica (which is also a Daimler product, which you always conveniently forget).
Because the R is a minivan (and again a minivan does not have to have sliding doors to be considered a minivan- witness the Odyssey in the rest of the world market) a number of posters pointed out that the Honda Odyssey sold here in the USA might be a somewhat worthy competitor to the R-Class, like it or not.
In a kind of proof of the worthiness of the Odyssey, I thought it was interesting to point out that C & D in the middle of a test of 2 SUV's, took the timre to point out how good the Honda Odyssey was, and how it was a better choice than the 2 vehicles they were testing.
Now Merc, you should write a letter to C & D to complain about how the staff of C & D has the nerve to bring in an unrelated vehicle by basis of comparison when they are testing SUVs?
The point C & D is trying to make is that it has gotten ridiculous out there, that because of a soccer mom stigma & image problem, people are embarrassed to drive Minivans! How silly does it get? C & D goes on to point out that Odyssey still has room for some serious luggage hauling even with all 8 seats in use. While the Explorer, R-Class, Commander, & Pacifica have useless trunks when all seats are in use. You call that good design?
So lets sum up- Odyssey powerful 244 hp V6, good handling, huge cargo capacity, huge number of seating arrangements, power sliding doors, leather interior, decent stereo + 6 cd changer nav & DVD out the door for the low 30's is quite a match for the mediocre equipped V6 R Class. But only for those who are individualistic & don't care what the others say.
I would suggest reading both articles, Merc + the negative sidebars- then tell me what you think.
And one more thing Merc- compare apples to apples- the V6 equipped Pacifica vs. the V6 equipped R350 not the V8 equipped R500.
Questions for cane04: Are you SURE the turning radius for the R is smaller than the Pacifica? Not that its such an important issue, but I know the wheelbase of the R is significantly longer than the Pacifica, and very often longer wheelbases will cause bigger turning circles.
What was the sticker on your R350?
Did you buy or lease?
The residual on the R350 for 3 years is about 64% which is pretty good, but is obviously a guess on the part of MB as this is a completely new model. There are quite a few vehicles in a number of price categories that have similar residuals.
Remember also cane04, that despite the good residual (assuming you leased) the actual market value of a 3 yr old R has yet to be determined.
Also a 64% residual on a 60K vehicle translates into a about a 22K drop in value over 3 years, but my guess that the R if bought new today at about 58-60K will be worth closer to about 28K as a trade-in after 36 months (assuming 12k miles a year). If I'm right, thats not terrible, but it's not great either.
cane04, enjoy your new R, because after all, you only live once. :shades:
The R is not a minivan to me. So we'll have to agree to disagree there. If the R is similar in design and execution to a Pacifica (which it is) then it can't be a minivan because that would mean that Chrysler has two minivans in the same showroom. Doesn't make sense.
Why would I write C&D about the Pacifica when they didn't nearly say the same things about it in relation to the R that you and others here have? It really isn't that big of a deal to me since I wouldn't want either vehicle. You're the one with this need to compare a Honda and Chrylser to the Mercedes (not C&D) and declare that the R is some type of ripoff, which is what you're implying.
You talk about a fair comparo between the R350 and the Pacifica yet the roadtests I've seen so far are about the R500, and a loaded one at that. So why not take your own advice and wait until a R350 is tested and then do your comparo thing instead of calling the R500 overpriced when the Pac/Ody you're so crazy about don't compete with the R500 anyway.
We've been over this time and time again about the Honda and Pac being a competitor to the R-Class. They're all part of the people mover segment so of course they are competitors in that sense, but that is where the similarities end for me. Neither of them is going to drive and/or have some of the different engineering/features of the R-Class. Do I think the R is worth up to 71K for a loaded R500? Nope. Do I think think a Honda minvan or a Pacifica is the same class of vehicle for far less money? Nope. Are they somewhere close or in between? Yes.
M
I think Audi's new Q7 is hands down on the best looking 7 passenger wagon/SUV vehicles in this segment. I'd rather spend my 60k there, but it'll have to wait until the springtime.
Yea... like saying the Aston Martin DB9 (Ford PAG) and Mustang are coupes from the same company, so they must both be "ducks"
Continue to enjoy it and let us know if you encounter any mechanical problems or otherwise. My C32 is now going in for an air pump. This car has had lots of issues and it only has 20,000 miles on it. Oh well...
M
I guess with three kids and occassional visiting in-laws (so that we need 7 seats when we all go out together) my family is definitely NOT in the target demographic for the R class. I like the looks of it and I am sure it functions very well, but it forces too much of a compromise for families like ours.
If it had at least 7 seats, and a deep well behind the third row like the Odyssey for storage, then it would be almost a no-brainer for me. There is NOTHING wrong in wanting the R as a minivan substitute -- but the Odyssey still rules from that perspective and the R is kind of neither here nor there. Just my opinion.
Thanks to chirp & rjlaero, we've got some HUMOR injected here!
(Sorely needed)
Just a couple of thoughts.......
Marc, The problem with your comparing the trunk space of an Expedition to the R is that the Ford can handle 5 passengers and still maintain enormous trunk space.
Comparing the Yukon XL to the R doesn't work vis a vis trunk space in that in the stretch Yukon, there is still substantial luggage space behind the 3rd row with all seats occupied.
The R only compares directly with the Pacifica (don't shoot me) in that both vehicles only seat 6 and even with just 5 passengers aboard, there is relatively little luggage space. 5 passengers in just about any other vehicle in this category would still allow ample luggage space.
Marc, I'll ask again- have you ever driven an (oh no, he's going to say it)Odyssey?
Why? You claim the R is a "performance touring vehicle" (sounds suspiciously like MB's ad campaign for the R), but does it out-perform (oh no, he's going to say it) the Odyssey? (The R-350 of course).
And what is so terrible about being compared to (oh no, he's going to say it again) a Minivan?
When did the (oh no, he's going say it a 4th time) Minivan become persona non grata in our lives?
Isn't it all just a bit silly?