Comments on: Spied: Mercedes-Benz GLK with no camouflage!

By: the sky is falling

the sky is falling — Fri, 26 Sep 2008 07:09:28 +0000

Sweet Forester!

By: zoomzoomr

zoomzoomr — Tue, 18 Dec 2007 19:02:41 +0000

OK.. back to the topic at hand.. the new GLK. Yes, it looks too much like a Tiguan.. yes, it also looks too much like a Liberty/Cherokee. But more importantly..

Which of the Sex In The City girls is going to be driving it? It has California plates, isn’t SITC supposed to be in New York? Maybe one of the girls has moved to Beverly Hills.. LLN is giving us a plot point SPOILER! How EXCITING!!!…

Ahem.. but yeah, it’s really kinda ugly.

By: Impulsive

Impulsive — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 19:26:30 +0000

Dear Lord … who is signing off on these ****ty designs? The other side of the coin … who will buy these ****ty designs?

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 17:15:09 +0000

autonutt: I thought the CX-9 was great, but i liked the enclave more

By: LP640

LP640 — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:15:47 +0000

agreed ricardohead. these days Merc and BMW are just making ugly cars, which although may be very good, are still ugly nonetheless

By: LP640

LP640 — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 16:12:20 +0000

in the second pic, it just looks ugly and retarded. i dont know whats worse, this of the X6

By: autonut

autonut — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 15:20:24 +0000

I think X3 is better looking, but it is of course subjective. Since ML got beefier Benz can use smaller trucklette. They getting popular all over creation, not only in US.

By: Stuart

Stuart — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 13:05:13 +0000

THE Q5 is a volkwagen Taugen. The X3 is just a 3-series estate but with jacked up suspension. This is not bad and probably be the best of all audi’s and BMW equivilant at ride and handling but just buy the
c-class estate. Miles better then everything else.
Recommend the amg version

By: Commodore

Commodore — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:44:29 +0000

I hate the X3, and this doesn’t look any better. Hopefully the Q5 will be better.
I just hate all these mini-SUVs. Yes SUVs are cool when they are big like the Tahoe or the Q7. But when you try to make them several times smaller it just doesn’t work! They don’t look tough anymore, nor can they go offroad, nor do they get any better mileage than the often-better-looking sedans they are based on. I don’t see what is their advantage? Price? This thing will still probably beg for 30k! Just get yourself a sleek, sexy coupe or something. Forget this ****

By: johnnycanuck

johnnycanuck — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 04:13:56 +0000

Sorry RicardoHead, it’s not their sense of taste that’s in question. Ever since Daimler made Chrysler their bitch it’s been their olfactory senses that are in question. In other words, I think they’re convinced their **** doesn’t stink.

By: jonmiles

jonmiles — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 02:49:29 +0000

I second “ricardohead”’s statement

By: Veda

Veda — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:58:53 +0000

Looks like a Suzuki Grand Vitara but worse. With the dawn of CUV’s and their cool sleek designs I wonder why people still buy SUVs. Maybe it’s the macho factor…

By: RicardoHead

RicardoHead — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 01:19:18 +0000

Audi is the only company left in Germany with any taste anymore.

By: F451

F451 — Mon, 17 Dec 2007 00:41:26 +0000

Fugly.

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 18:18:58 +0000

The Nissan Murano and CX-9 are great choices! This whole discussion was started when the existence of softroaders was questioned. I think they have a valid place on the road, and the Murano and CX-9 are great examples.

It appears as if mid-sized off road SUVs will be a thing of the past very soon (aside from Land Rovers and Jeeps). There will always be a place for the big SUVs (towing, large families). The small SUV market will be car based softroaders, but they will need to have some butch SUV-type styling cues to avoid the dreaded “cute-ute” label. Have you ever seen a guy driving a RAV4? So it will be weird for us who know better to see faux skid plates on a M-B GLK knowing it will never go off road.

The next hot ride? Bring on the Volvo XC60!

By: Aston Martin

Aston Martin — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 07:48:36 +0000

At least the CX-7 doesn’t pretend to go off-road, so its not as pretentious as other SUV’s. How about a Nissan Murano?

By: S-60-driver

S-60-driver — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:22:58 +0000

ohh, autonutt… forgot about that Mazda CX-9….. yeah, thats a sweet CUV. It just won Motor Trend CUV of the Year! How about it, MikeFX?? Would u consider checking that one out? Can’t hurt to test drive one.

By: autonutt

autonutt — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:16:08 +0000

Then you could be MikeCX9!

By: autonutt

autonutt — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:15:36 +0000

MIkeFX.. you should take a look at the Mazda CX-9.. it’s quite a step up from the CX-7 as far as interior appointments and power delivery, not to mention the roomiest 3 rows I’ve seen! And it’s way under $40k.

By: S-60-driver

S-60-driver — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 23:05:51 +0000

MikeFX, ha, thats cool. A new S-80. Pretty sweet car!

Yeah, by all means, go ahead and change your screename. Welcome to the volvo club. You can try and put the “driver” in CAPS. Too close together when our screenames are in lower case, you know.

M35X…. man, i forgot about that car!! Awesome looking car and roomy, for sure.

By: mazdaman

mazdaman — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:59:32 +0000

There’s still too much camouflage on it to form any opinions about the styling. A lot of details, nuances, and sculpting are still covered up. It does appear to follow a more traditional, boxy SUV styling language.

Styling aside, I don’t understand some of the negative posts about Mercedes adding another product to their portfolio. Mercedes doesn’t currently have a product in this segment (compact crossover); there is no reason for them not to create/produce one. It’s not like they are following the BMW playbook (attempting to create nonexisting segments). I think it’s much worse to create an elevated 5-door hatchback and call it an “activity coupe” (BMW X6) than to develop a product to fill a segment hole in your lineup (Mercedes GLK).

By: jackjimturkey

jackjimturkey — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 15:56:02 +0000

MikeFX: all datsuns are beautiful

By: Ian

Ian — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 07:25:10 +0000

Merc cars = sex
Merc SUVs = …

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 04:04:44 +0000

S-60: Concerned about Ford’s future, 300 is not a bad choice, Town Car and DTS both just cancelled, Lambdas are nice choices but not ready to trust GM yet, Buick Lucerne and Avalon: I’m only 42 so not ready for these yet, Pilot about to be replaced, Highlander not a bad choice but father-in-law just got one. MKS looks good and Flex also sounds decent, but that Ford thing again…

I actually did go and trade in the FX for a new S80 based on its supposed great mileage (although getting a lousy 17.5MPG). It’s also smaller than I expected, but I then found out that it was part of Volvo’s plan. Keep S80 medium sized, keep S40 small and kill off the redundant S60 in favor of the XC60.

Wife’s lease is up soon, so I’ll give her the S80 and consider a M35x, which may be best of noth worlds (S80 and FX35).

So in the meantime should I change my screen name to S-80-driver, or is it too close to yours?

By: S-60-driver

S-60-driver — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 20:47:48 +0000

^^Mike FX-

hhmmmm, under 45 grand and sedan or crossover with roomy rear seating??—-…. here it is…..
.
of course, all are competely loaded with options– 2008 Ford Taurus and X, Mercury Sable, extended length version of Chrysler 300, Lincoln Town Car, Cadillac DTS, trio of Lambama CUVs, Volvo S-80, Buick Leceaure, Toyota Avalon, Honda Pilot, Toyota Highlander, and etc etc, i can’t think any more….. anybody else??
.
If u can wait, upcoming large 2009 Lincoln MKS, and Ford Flex with, i quote, “limo-like rear seating” with mini refrigerator in the back. (might be nice for ur clients, wink wink)

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 13:20:51 +0000

Having a little utility with a hatch-type back end is helpful those few times a year when you need it. Otherwise, a large gently used sedan sounds like a fine idea.

By: Aston Martin

Aston Martin — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 12:42:58 +0000

True, they have a few miles on them, but such cars, with big engines will only have done easy motorway miles. They will have been well maintained, and S-Classes and A8’s are very well built, so by the time it gets to you, it will still be in exceptional condition for the price.

By: autonutt

autonutt — Sat, 03 Nov 2007 00:47:42 +0000

Just because it competes in the same size class as the Jeep Liberty and Volkswagen Tiguan, does it have to look almost EXACTLY like them? I really hate the thick C-pillar and squared wheel wells.. neither seem appropriate for a M-B.

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:13:43 +0000

Oh, and all softroaders are ugly? Not to be an Infiniti whore, but have you seen the new EX35? Although that really is just a G35 wagon with some lift. I do agree that the X3, what we can see of this GLK, and spy shots of the upcoming Audi Q5 were all hit with the stick.

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 18:10:52 +0000

Aston, I would love to drive a 5-series, but in order to fit with my height, no one over 5 years old can sit behind me. A used S450 (or an A8) would be nice, but by the time I can afford them they have too many miles (and they are both not known for their reliability).

So I drive an Infiniti FX, which gives me great performance, some utility, and I fit, since the seats are higher off the floor than say a G35.

My point is that sometimes these softroaders make some sense for specific people. But now all the brands are getting in the game and some of them just don’t get it right, which makes us wonder WTF is up with these things. The good ones have a valid place in the world, and I look forward to the new FX when it shows up next year.

By: Aston Martin

Aston Martin — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 16:25:32 +0000

Why not buy a nearly new BMW 5-Series or one of its ilk, or a nice, well-maintained, used S-Class (estate or saloon).

MikeFX, what car do you currently own?
And yes, it is ugly, but so are all soft-roaders.

By: The Stig

The Stig — Fri, 02 Nov 2007 01:14:51 +0000

Groan…

By: MikeFX

MikeFX — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 21:25:03 +0000

Aston: I know I represent a small portion of the driving populace, but for me a soft-roader is the only choice. I am well over 6 feet tall, and often have kids and/or clients in the back seat. So for all of us to be comfortable I need either a S-Class sized car/wagon, or an SUV type thing where the seat height is higher (not off the ground, but off the car floor) and the headroom is better. That way I can sit closer to the wheel and leave enough room behind me.

So given a $45,000 budget for a new car, I cannot afford a large sedan/wagon, so I go for the softroaders since I still want some performance along with the extra space. But why buy a big SUV gas pig if you are not towing anything?

Years ago, the FX was the only choice, but now there is more selection and I could not be happier. I challenge someone to find me something aside from a softroader that can do all that: performance, space, height, less than $45K.

Oh, and this GLK is beyond ugly!

By: LP640

LP640 — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:06:40 +0000

YET MORE CROSSOVER CRAP. SOCCER MOMS ARE GOING CRAZY FOR THIS

By: Aston Martin

Aston Martin — Thu, 01 Nov 2007 20:01:57 +0000

Oh yes another Sports Utility Vehicle. Fabulous-I want one. I feel a huge craving for a massive, slow, uneconomical piece of professional idiocy when I could have a saloon which handles better, looks better, is Way less pretentious and far more economical.

I challenge someone to justify buying a soft-roader. Go on. If anyone can give me a good reason I will be genuinely, genuinely impressed.