Mercedes GL Class Unveiled
#19
lol, it looks terrible for what it is... It looks like ML that got bigger with some influences from Toyota, GM and DCX.
There is not enough to make it different enough from ML... they should have called it LWB ML :-).
There is not enough to make it different enough from ML... they should have called it LWB ML :-).
#20
Does the market really need or want the GL class?
Mercedes should cool down on issuing new models. They need to offer fewer models and ones that the public sees as truly "special." There is not a damn thing special about the new GL. Looks exactly like what Mercedes needed 8 years ago, not today.
If I were in charge I would dump the G, the ML and not bother with the GL. I'd make an updated version of the AAVision concept car that the original ML was based on and sllap a V8 hybrid motor in there. The result? A Mercedes that is both unique and relevant in today's marketplace.
Mercedes should cool down on issuing new models. They need to offer fewer models and ones that the public sees as truly "special." There is not a damn thing special about the new GL. Looks exactly like what Mercedes needed 8 years ago, not today.
If I were in charge I would dump the G, the ML and not bother with the GL. I'd make an updated version of the AAVision concept car that the original ML was based on and sllap a V8 hybrid motor in there. The result? A Mercedes that is both unique and relevant in today's marketplace.
#24
Originally Posted by bitkahuna
[Most of] You guys are amazing. This GL fits in with styling of other MB's and it's a state of the art vehicle and you're trashing it. Feeling insecure because it's not a Lexus?
The styling is not distinctive, and this can easily be mistaken for another car. Only the badge makes it look like a Benz.
The interior looks almost identical to the M Class, which is sort of cheap looking and feeling.
This car has too much overlap with the M Class and is a stupid move on MB's part, especially considering the G Class will still be kept around.
#25
This is meant to be their large SUV offering, I believe. The G-class is a different breed of SUV. No overlap. That said, I agree that MB should focus on the C, E, S, and SL classes. At this point, I don't see dropping classes as that important, but I sure hope they improve their bread-and-butter offerings before creating other niche cars like the CLS.
#26
Originally Posted by Incendiary
This is meant to be their large SUV offering, I believe. The G-class is a different breed of SUV. No overlap. That said, I agree that MB should focus on the C, E, S, and SL classes. At this point, I don't see dropping classes as that important, but I sure hope they improve their bread-and-butter offerings before creating other niche cars like the CLS.
And of course, styling that can be mistaken for an M Class also isn't good.
#27
While there are obvious similiarities, visually, to the M-Class, the G-class is aimed at a different niche. It replaces the tanklike Gelandewagen, or G-Wagon, a military-dereived design that was literally built like a bank vault and one of the most hard-core off-roaders on the planet.
#28
Originally Posted by mmarshall
While there are obvious similiarities, visually, to the M-Class, the G-class is aimed at a different niche. It replaces the tanklike Gelandewagen, or G-Wagon, a military-dereived design that was literally built like a bank vault and one of the most hard-core off-roaders on the planet.
#29
Originally Posted by TRDFantasy
This still overlaps with the M-Class. Sharing interiors with the M and R Classes, as well as other mechanical components doesn' help.
And of course, styling that can be mistaken for an M Class also isn't good.
And of course, styling that can be mistaken for an M Class also isn't good.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Vh_Supra26
Car Chat
10
05-29-14 01:37 PM