surreal1272

So why ever buy any BMW/MB over a Corvette, Mustang, Fusion, Impala, Edge,? "dynamics" don't make a car "better". They have less room, less efficient, if one metric is better..like lateral grip.. does that make it better and worth buying over an Impala or Camry? "Better" is an relative term. Better for you is different than better for me. What SUVs do what the G does and does it better? There are only a few SUVs that even compete in the category the G does. Range Rover, Wrangler, Land Cruiser and they are all over the place in comparison to each other. Nobody looking for a Mercedes is thinking of a Jeep or Toyota. Heck those two are slow as balls in comparison to a G550. Maybe the customer wants a Land Cruiser but they want some balls under the hood. If you are buying an luxury SUV for its "balls", then you are buying the wrong type of vehicle. I stand by my assertion, even though I do see what you're getting at but you cannot deny the sheep mentality towards something like that when there are better options. A Land Cruiser has plenty of power and has a far better rep off road and it is unsurpassed in the reliability and high resale department. The drop off on the G wagon after just a few years is insane. Why does it have to be the wrong type of vehicle? Why can't a vehicle run a mid-low 14's in the 1/4(g550) and still be able to rock crawl with a Wrangler off the showroom floor? Sheep will flock to ANYTHING that is rare/exotic with a label to it though. Hell, people are going to buy those nasty GLC Coupes, GLE Coupes, X4's, X6's... I bet A LOT of it is because the brand. But the G Wagen actually has some very impressive capabilities both in straight line performance and off the beaten path. Toyota HANDS DOWN has a great rep for reliability but this Land Cruiser is an 8 seater.. That's a big-ass SUV compared to a G Wagen. Hard to even compare them other than their off-road worthiness. I'm not sure what the resale will be on an 85k Toyota but it'll likely be dog$h! a long with anything else in this price range and up. G Wagens don't have a terrible resale considering. Alright, I randomly KBB'd a 2005 G500 and Land Cruiser @150,000 miles and the only option box I checked was the color and I made them both black. Both to private parties and both "good" condition(middle choise) Land Cruiser: $12,702 G500: $23,283 Same thing for 2010 but 100,000 miles instead. Land Cruiser: $31,746 G550: $44,723 Seems like they both keep roughly the same % away from each other as they depreciate. The Land Cruiser has one of the highest resale values out there. It shames any Mercedes in that category. Sorry but no one is exploiting that 0-60 time or the 1/4 mile with that G Wagon. It only sells because of the badge on the hood, hence my sheep assessment. http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2013/11/18/cars-that-return-top-resale-values/#314f9a98d36f I found this as well which covers the resale value of the G Wagon in a nutshell (while comparing it to the Land Cruiser). "ALG, a company that tracks vehicle residuals, says both the G550 and G63 AMG will retain just 34 percent of their values after five years of ownership. That’s better than a Range Rover (25-30 percent) but well below the Toyota Land Cruiser (41 percent). Research firm Intellichoice, which tracks cost of ownership including depreciation and maintenance, rates the G-Class as “Poor,” saying this SUV will cost well above the class average to own over five years." http://carpreview.com/mercedes-benz/g-class/2015/review

So aside from the V12, Benz is just doing what GM did with the Hummer H1 for years as far as cachet and Hollywood appeal went. How'd that work out for GM btw?

From my perspective, if one can find better options for far less money but only buy the overpriced one because of the badge on the hood, that is the very definition of being a sheep.I understand.. but kind of disagree.. That would put Audi, BMW, MB, Bentley, Rolls... all out of business. Yes, nobody makes cars like Rolls does but "for the money" they are as overpriced as they come because you could buy an Impala and have it all customed to make it uber luxurious for waaaaaay less than the 250k+ or whatever it costs. There is an awkward medium in there. There's no medium here. If there are far better SUVs out there for far less money (and there are) yet your average Benz buyer still flocks to the G? Sheep. So why ever buy any BMW/MB over a Corvette, Mustang, Fusion, Impala, Edge,? "dynamics" don't make a car "better". They have less room, less efficient, if one metric is better..like lateral grip.. does that make it better and worth buying over an Impala or Camry? "Better" is an relative term. Better for you is different than better for me. What SUVs do what the G does and does it better? There are only a few SUVs that even compete in the category the G does. Range Rover, Wrangler, Land Cruiser and they are all over the place in comparison to each other. Nobody looking for a Mercedes is thinking of a Jeep or Toyota. Heck those two are slow as balls in comparison to a G550. Maybe the customer wants a Land Cruiser but they want some balls under the hood. If you are buying an luxury SUV for its "balls", then you are buying the wrong type of vehicle. I stand by my assertion, even though I do see what you're getting at but you cannot deny the sheep mentality towards something like that when there are better options. A Land Cruiser has plenty of power and has a far better rep off road and it is unsurpassed in the reliability and high resale department. The drop off on the G wagon after just a few years is insane.

From my perspective, if one can find better options for far less money but only buy the overpriced one because of the badge on the hood, that is the very definition of being a sheep. I understand.. but kind of disagree.. That would put Audi, BMW, MB, Bentley, Rolls... all out of business. Yes, nobody makes cars like Rolls does but "for the money" they are as overpriced as they come because you could buy an Impala and have it all customed to make it uber luxurious for waaaaaay less than the 250k+ or whatever it costs. There is an awkward medium in there. There's no medium here. If there are far better SUVs out there for far less money (and there are) yet your average Benz buyer still flocks to the G? Sheep.

From my perspective, if one can find better options for far less money but only buy the overpriced one because of the badge on the hood, that is the very definition of being a sheep.

Let's start with everything but the V8 and the 4WD system. It is woefully outdated everywhere quite honestly which makes that $140K price tag even more absurd.

No it's giving the customers who want a G...a G. They sell every one they make, they're hand made still. 99.99% never touch 200mph in their exotics but it's something they need to do. People buying cars like this or a 458 aren't buying the car to DO what it can do. They're buying the capability to do it and frankly to say, " hey my car can do this." Personally, I don't understand the hatred towards the G because of how capable and tank-like that they are. They're a modern old school like the Toyota (I forgot the name of the one they're making a retro version of) that everybody freakin loves. If they got rid of it people would ask, "why can't we get a vehicle to do XXX?" So they just never stopped making it as opposed to most that make soemthing super awesome and get rid of it a few years later. Like the Chevy SS. Its the almost perfect enthusiast car, 6.2 Chevy V8, manual transmission, sedan(because as adults coupes just aren't practical) and it's leaving us already. I just hope I can score a used one in a few years. It's not so much the hatred of a severely outdated brick on wheels as exposing SMKs defense of said brick. Sorry, but if this were from GM or Ford, he would have a 180 degree opinion of this. Oh and all that is being done for $140K+ which is insane for an outdated brick, I don't care how advanced the four wheel drive is or what kind of history it is has. The only history I see is a brick with the same boxy design since 1972. Sorry, but it does nothing for me. But what else can do what it can do straight off of the show room floor? Range Rovers, Wranglers and there's about nothing in between. So for perspective buyers it's either a Rover or a G. After reading a bit prior to posting it appears the Land Cruiser can also handle its own off the beaten path. Not liking it's style is one thing, that's fine. Even though I find it ironic that people say X is bland and Y and bland and then there's something with some actual character and people dislike that too. It's a lose-lose. Bringing up the Land Cruiser brings up an even better point. It can do everything the G Wagon can do, on or off road, and can be had for less than half the price and it also has a V8. Sorry but the G Wagon is one of the biggest examples of bilking clueless sheep buyers when you consider the much better options out there for far less dough. That's relying on your past instead of moving into the future, especially when considering the make involved. The only other options in the luxury 4X4 world are the Land Cruiser and Range Rover though, right? They've updated the interior and driveline multiple times so it isn't like they are completely leaving it stagnant. just the exterior. The next most stagnant exterior out of any vehicle on the road is the Wrangler and people eat that up as well. People just love the unconventional-ness of the G(and Wrangler) It has been using the same basic unpinnings and the same frame for decades. There is no R&D with this one, only a purely profit machine. Now before anyone loses it on that statement, understand that I have no problem with profit. However, a company such as Benz should be moving forward with the G Wagon, not hanging on to the past which is contradictory to every other model they make.

No it's giving the customers who want a G...a G. They sell every one they make, they're hand made still.99.99% never touch 200mph in their exotics but it's something they need to do. People buying cars like this or a 458 aren't buying the car to DO what it can do. They're buying the capability to do it and frankly to say, " hey my car can do this." Personally, I don't understand the hatred towards the G because of how capable and tank-like that they are. They're a modern old school like the Toyota (I forgot the name of the one they're making a retro version of) that everybody freakin loves. If they got rid of it people would ask, "why can't we get a vehicle to do XXX?" So they just never stopped making it as opposed to most that make soemthing super awesome and get rid of it a few years later. Like the Chevy SS. Its the almost perfect enthusiast car, 6.2 Chevy V8, manual transmission, sedan(because as adults coupes just aren't practical) and it's leaving us already. I just hope I can score a used one in a few years. It's not so much the hatred of a severely outdated brick on wheels as exposing SMKs defense of said brick. Sorry, but if this were from GM or Ford, he would have a 180 degree opinion of this.Oh and all that is being done for $140K+ which is insane for an outdated brick, I don't care how advanced the four wheel drive is or what kind of history it is has. The only history I see is a brick with the same boxy design since 1972. Sorry, but it does nothing for me. But what else can do what it can do straight off of the show room floor? Range Rovers, Wranglers and there's about nothing in between. So for perspective buyers it's either a Rover or a G.After reading a bit prior to posting it appears the Land Cruiser can also handle its own off the beaten path. Not liking it's style is one thing, that's fine. Even though I find it ironic that people say X is bland and Y and bland and then there's something with some actual character and people dislike that too. It's a lose-lose. Bringing up the Land Cruiser brings up an even better point. It can do everything the G Wagon can do, on or off road, and can be had for less than half the price and it also has a V8. Sorry but the G Wagon is one of the biggest examples of bilking clueless sheep buyers when you consider the much better options out there for far less dough. That's relying on your past instead of moving into the future, especially when considering the make involved.

No it's giving the customers who want a G...a G. They sell every one they make, they're hand made still. 99.99% never touch 200mph in their exotics but it's something they need to do. People buying cars like this or a 458 aren't buying the car to DO what it can do. They're buying the capability to do it and frankly to say, " hey my car can do this." Personally, I don't understand the hatred towards the G because of how capable and tank-like that they are. They're a modern old school like the Toyota (I forgot the name of the one they're making a retro version of) that everybody freakin loves. If they got rid of it people would ask, "why can't we get a vehicle to do XXX?" So they just never stopped making it as opposed to most that make soemthing super awesome and get rid of it a few years later. Like the Chevy SS. Its the almost perfect enthusiast car, 6.2 Chevy V8, manual transmission, sedan(because as adults coupes just aren't practical) and it's leaving us already. I just hope I can score a used one in a few years. It's not so much the hatred of a severely outdated brick on wheels as exposing SMKs defense of said brick. Sorry, but if this were from GM or Ford, he would have a 180 degree opinion of this.Oh and all that is being done for $140K+ which is insane for an outdated brick, I don't care how advanced the four wheel drive is or what kind of history it is has. The only history I see is a brick with the same boxy design since 1972. Sorry, but it does nothing for me.

That is why it sells. The more outdated it is, the better it sells.No they are not. They are only selling 3000 a year when they could be selling 9000 a year by just actually updating it while keeping the V8 you allege they love. And again, no one outside of the Sahara desert is taking one of those off road. Do you see the fault in your reasoning while you dog other makes for doing the same thing?

So this is confirmation that Mercedes is bilking their customers? "Hey we have this modern SUV with everything you need for less that $60K or you can buy our $140K SUV that offers none of those things except worse gas mileage and a four wheel drive system than 99.99999999% of you will never use." Got to give them credit though. Their sheep eat that up but it doesn't speak well to their buying intelligence.

And while the timing of the stock sell is suspect, maybe you need ask the NHTSA why they waited. Also, given that the stock actually ended up higher kind of contradicts any inside knowledge when there ended up being nothing to gain. And if we are going to bring up stock manipulation, then maybe there needs to be a new thread about it. I have a lot of reference material involving the subject, most of which involves the auto industry.

Again, I promise you that regardless of when Cadillac actually puts it out, they will have similar problems. Who will it look worse upon when that happens? The upstart company that may have been a little early to the game and is having to take some lumps for it or the more than 100 year old company that waited to put the tech out and still had problems? I can tell you right now which one that will look worse upon.

Elon has blamed customer and to be fair he may be correct in some cases and in other not so much. He also has done a lot of distraction. When bad sales are reported he talks the travel tubes. If the rockets crash he introduces a new program for the Tesla. He is a master of making the public look to his right hand as he takes their wallets with his left hand. He does have a masterful way with PR and how to try to keep a positive spin on about anything. That is one reason he has been as successful as he has been. It is not so much what he has done but how he did it. Most of it is in the presentation. The problem is time tends to run out on people like this if they do not show profits. The whole three thing was a spin. Why would you show a car 2-3 years out to pre sell it? Because Tesla needed the money. It was expensive to develop the X model and they were down to 2 billion based on reports. Not good if you are also working to finish the 3 and start up production on it too. While he fooled many with the 3 pre sale he now has to deliver on time which he has not done to this point. The cheap S model offering is a way to buy time but even that will hold limits as Porsche and others come to market with more EV cars. Just look at Toyota and the Prius sales that are tanking right now. People have moved on and at some point many will move on with Elon. He has done a hell of a job to this point but he also has had a lot of things that normally don't go right work. In time they will go wrong and it will be interesting to see if the share holders wait or bolt. Right now they should look into disabling the autopilot for now and wait till things are a little better sorted as the customers are just not going to use it properly. The system will fail the customers at times and you just can't rely on the customers to pull your ass out of the fire every time as a company. As it is now I expect most of the automakers will proceed with caution. They will let these systems assist but they will not be fully auto at least till the sensors can be worked out and maybe some driver defaults to make sure they are still holding a wheel or something similar. Even with the best flight systems in the world we still have two pilots on every plane. The bottom line is the systems are not perfect and the customers are not to be trusted to do the right thing. Sorry but there is a certain irony to criticizing a man for doing the exact same thing as every other company head out in the last 100 years (referring to the claim of Musks slight of hand tactics). Suave is right. The critics are fooling themselves if they think that the old guard companies won't have the same problems as Teslas automation systems, regardless of when they actually put it out. Then the same people here, who ragged on Musk, will vehemently defend their favorite brand when they screw it up too (and they will).

I don't blame the vandals.. I mean taking up 2 spots is one way of being an asshole but essentially taking up 5 spots? Fck that person. And for what? A C class? Anybody can get a loan for a C Class if they really want one. Where I'm from, they would have found four cars parked around all four sides of that Benz. Sorry but if you really cared about your car, you wouldn't park like an elitist asshole.

I'm done bickering. He got exactly what he deserved for his remarks though (not referring to SMK for the record). I disgress though...

Name one Cadillac that sells in such low numbers, and is still for sale today, over the course of the last twenty years? Example of what I'm talking about? When the ELR sold jack squat, Cadillac killed it after barely a year. The G wagon has sold in paltry numbers for years so show us a Cadillac that was sold for that long in such low numbers.And in sorry but if I'm Mercedes Benz, selling 3000 of a vehicle that has had basically the same form factor and look since 1972 isn't exactly in line with what they have done with everything else they have ever made. It is clear that this exists purely to bilk a clueless customer by selling on some mysterious prestige. Name one Cadillac with an average transaction price of $145,000. Not the point and there are more advanced cars that sell in better numbers and a higher price so that kind of "logic" can be applied to Benz as well. You do understand that right? Care to actually answer the original question?

I'm just taking a similar trac WRT MB as you do WRT Cadillac, so you can see how it comes off. Because, you know, that filter is seeming broken. Besides, you are doing the VERY SAME THING; you constantly trumpet MB sales records & rates, yet you're excusing the lousy sales of the g-wagoon. Odd. But Balth, they sold more than 3,000 last year after having only sold barely 1,000 for years. That clearly shows a demand LOL and justifies MB milking it for all it's worth.

Name one Cadillac that sells in such low numbers, and is still for sale today, over the course of the last twenty years? Example of what I'm talking about? When the ELR sold jack squat, Cadillac killed it after barely a year. The G wagon has sold in paltry numbers for years so show us a Cadillac that was sold for that long in such low numbers.And in sorry but if I'm Mercedes Benz, selling 3000 of a vehicle that has had basically the same form factor and look since 1972 isn't exactly in line with what they have done with everything else they have ever made. It is clear that this exists purely to bilk a clueless customer by selling on some mysterious prestige.

Well the S-class is the #1 selling car over $95,000, and by a wide margin. But a G-wagen starts at $115,000 and 2/3 of them sold are AMG models that are $140,000. When you compare a G-wagen to BMW i8, Audi R8, or Bentley sales, the G-wagen sales look pretty good. And G-wagen sales are up this year, and they were up in 2015 over 2014. The sales keep rising, and this for a vehicle that Mercedes was going to end production on in 2006. But the fans wanted them to keep making, and they listened to their fan base. G-wagen sales were up 17% in 2015, and are up 23.8% this year. It's easy to go up when you only sell 260 at the same time last year LOL.

Stop. Just stop. If this were Mercedes, you would be preaching whatever foo foo service they were offering. Regardless of what you think about their product, this a good move by Lincoln.

Nope it is properly priced, $8300+ cheaper than the GLC300 4matic with more features and function and better materials than the MB. This is a way better auto all the way around then MB is currently building and selling with more HP and Torque to boot. If you feel that about the Envision and XT5, then you have to reevaluate the MB CUV lineup that has the same problem and lower quality materials at this point as the Envision has surpassed the build quality of the MB. Let me know when Buick puts a 500 hp V8 in the Envision to compete with what M-B is doing. You mean the 469 HP GLC that isn't out yet? Buick and GM is not concerned with a 469HP CUV that 300 people a year will buy.

Do they service Corvette Z06's at the same place they service $14,000 Sparks and City Express commercial vans? I don't really care what else is serviced where my car is serviced. My original post here was about how Ford probably wants to keep the Lincoln owners separate make it seem like Lincoln is different than Ford. Because in reality those Lincolns have a lot of Ford parts and Ford trim pieces and drive like Fords. If Ford wants to help Lincoln they need to get Lincoln it's own chassis and own bodies. Yeah, that wasn't the defense you were using a few months ago before you got called out in it but that's a discussion for another time. Btw, asking Ford to do that is literally the opposite of how multi-make companies handle that. Ask VW. Ford has also done a better job of making Lincolns look less like their Ford cousins and that is a fact.

I'm not really sure what a "condensing" reply is. Thought it was pretty lengthy myself.

Then I'm about to give you a better reason to down vote me. I defended your favorite brand (something you have complained about my lack of in past) and you down vote me anyway? Here's the reason for you. Go F yourself if you have nothing better to offer here. MT will gladly take your trolling there. I contributed to the damn subject here and you just behave like a twelve year old dick with ears. There. Now you have a legitimate reason for the down vote.