Why or why not Mercedes-Benz?

[andrewg]

In about two years I am planning on getting a new convertible roadster. My desire is to get Mercedes-Benz SLK250. I'd get the 350(6 cyl.), but the cost is out of my budget. In the past I've owned a 2006 Mazda Miata MX5 and VERY much loved the car. An all new model is actually due out late next year. My reasons for wanting the Mercedes over the MX5 are multiple. One, I like the prestige (sounds corny....but I've never owned a car that had any and at my age I'd like to feel that I've at least achieved some level of success). Secondly, and the question I am asking those reading my post, is about Mercedes-Benz quality. Are Mercedes really quality cars? If so....in what way specifically? Are they built in any special way or use any special materials over other cars? I hear that they are 'better'....but I honestly want to know WHY they are....or why they may not be. I know about the reliabilty being perhaps not as good as some asian makes...but that's not my question. And I know why a Rolls-Royce is quality....or Ferrari....but what makes a Mercedes-Benz any better?
Thank you in advance for any help.....and PLEASE...I don't want snide, rude, or insulting remarks to have any part of my thread.

 

[The_Jeff]

The old ones (1970s-80s) were incredible. My 240d w123 had silver plated electrical contacts here and there. The new ones seem to have too much geegaw electronic junk. It's almost a race against BMW in stupid doohickeys, so you can't win for trying.

Compared to a miata, the SLK will be a tank. Working on my 27 year old car I was pleased with how the bolts came apart effortlessly, without corrosion gumming them up. I've had cheaper cars where it's always a struggle because they don't think the metallurgy through or just don't care to spec good materials.

There are some who consider a pie-plate sized Merc symbol prominently mid-grill to be gauche. The older, smaller hood ornaments are where it's at, by this line of thinking.

 

[oiltard]

My "against" argument: The car will continue to cost you more than the new Miata, which I incidentally believe will represent a return to that car's roots and will capture the "soul" of the original better than the recent generations have. Mercedes parts and service cost more. No expert on the quality, but I don't believe the extra bucks you pay for the Mercedes return any additional reliabilty, so you'll need tires and mufflers and whatnot just as often, possibly at several times the price. Non-sequitur: It's too bad the S2000 was discontinued.

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: oiltard
It's too bad the (Honda) S2000 was discontinued.


I agree, the model was almost a decade old..BUT it was still a very viable car, with handling and performance that was still excellent compared to the competition and the costs for manufacturing the car were amortized so Honda was making good profits off this model. I think they made a serious mistake when they stopped production.


I know that a LOT of folks have written to Honda asking for them to start building it again. They could.

Regarding MB today well they are NOT (neither is BMW ) what they were until the early 90s. Solid durable, well made cars. Lots of electronic [censored] lesser hard part quality (although MB has been improving this aspect recently but it probably will never come close to being what it was back then.

 

[HTSS_TR]

The best of "Mercedes-Benz quality" is solidity of the body. My e430 is built like a tank, the body of Lexus LS400 is very solid but not as good as the E430.

The car is 12 years old and 140+k miles, these are the parts that broke in the last few years: EGR, Crankshaft position sensor, front O2 sensor bank 1. Other than those the car needs new tires every 25-35k miles, front pads every 20-25k miles, rear pads every 30-40k miles. Dealer changed coolant once and I did once a couple years ago, it is fairly easy to change too.

Oil and filter are so easy to change with a fluid extractor, and it can be used to change ATF too.

When I bought my S2000 in 2003, the SLK at that time wasn't as good, the newer SLK is much better. Aside from a possible new S2000, if I'm in market for a convertible car I would go with SLK.

Parts and services at dealer can be expensive, but you can find many parts online for less than 1/2-1/3 the price at dealer, and find an indy to repair/replace for you.

 

[crazyoildude]

Stay away from Mercedes years back they were great now they are glorified Chryslers.. And as for prestige anyone can lease one...most are leased. ask the salesman

 

[antiqueshell]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
Stay away from Mercedes years back they were great now they are glorified Chryslers.. And as for prestige anyone can lease one...most are leased. ask the salesman


Not true.

However the MB of today is not that of 1970s-
early 90s. Most of those were literally built like tanks and were generally very durable and reliable, if a bit more expensive to maintain.

They have started to regain some of the vault like body integrity in the latest models, but it probably will never match that of the old products.

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: crazyoildude
Stay away from Mercedes years back they were great now they are glorified Chryslers.. And as for prestige anyone can lease one...most are leased. ask the salesman

I hear what you are saying about that, but to be accurate, not just anybody can AFFORD to lease a Mercedes-Benz. The lowest they pretty much lease for is a low end model for about $450. Anything really nice or an eye catcher is about $700 or much more. Pretty steep lease and not exactly affordable for most.
Can you explain what you mean exactly by 'glorified Chrysler'?

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: eljefino
The old ones (1970s-80s) were incredible. My 240d w123 had silver plated electrical contacts here and there. The new ones seem to have too much geegaw electronic junk. It's almost a race against BMW in stupid doohickeys, so you can't win for trying.

Compared to a miata, the SLK will be a tank. Working on my 27 year old car I was pleased with how the bolts came apart effortlessly, without corrosion gumming them up. I've had cheaper cars where it's always a struggle because they don't think the metallurgy through or just don't care to spec good materials.

There are some who consider a pie-plate sized Merc symbol prominently mid-grill to be gauche. The older, smaller hood ornaments are where it's at, by this line of thinking.

Have you driven a Miata and an SLK to compare?

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: HTSS_TR
The best of "Mercedes-Benz quality" is solidity of the body. My e430 is built like a tank, the body of Lexus LS400 is very solid but not as good as the E430.

The car is 12 years old and 140+k miles, these are the parts that broke in the last few years: EGR, Crankshaft position sensor, front O2 sensor bank 1. Other than those the car needs new tires every 25-35k miles, front pads every 20-25k miles, rear pads every 30-40k miles. Dealer changed coolant once and I did once a couple years ago, it is fairly easy to change too.

Oil and filter are so easy to change with a fluid extractor, and it can be used to change ATF too.

When I bought my S2000 in 2003, the SLK at that time wasn't as good, the newer SLK is much better. Aside from a possible new S2000, if I'm in market for a convertible car I would go with SLK.

Parts and services at dealer can be expensive, but you can find many parts online for less than 1/2-1/3 the price at dealer, and find an indy to repair/replace for you.

The current SLK and the last model before that seem to rate highly as a roadster. I suppose to truly judge the car one would need to drive it of course. I'll be sure to do that. If I'm not impressed with one I'll go drive the new Miata (should be out by then) and make a comparison. I hear what you are saying about parts and service. I also know that the SLK's require premium fuel. Being that this will only be a weekend car I'm not overly concerned.

 

[dparm]

Having owned an S2000, I will tell you it is a phenomenal car but is very spartan.

 

[jkhawaii]

You would know it has better engineering than a Pontiac G6 Converterable at least, what a POS that is!

 

[HTSS_TR]

Originally Posted By: dparm
Having owned an S2000, I will tell you it is a phenomenal car but is very spartan.

The car is designed to be driven (driven hard and especially can be tracked without any modification) not designed to be entertainment. It has minimum knobs and buttons for minimum functions such as A/C and stereo with single Cd player.

I replaced the OEM radio/CD player with aftermarket one (Nakamichi) and upgrade speakers(add a sub and external amp), but most of the times I didn't turn it on. The A/C was rarely used, but I did use heater for winter night driving with top down.

Back to the topic, I did have a test drive with the SLK-350 back in 2007-2008. It was a solid convertible car, but it wasn't as fun to drive as the S2000, mainly because it has only auto transmission. Of all current convertible 2-seaters available I like the Boxter S better.

 

[ag_ghost]

If you're not expecting to run it at track days, it'll be great. My late neighbor had one, kind of like my Galaxie; great on the freeway, not so great on the track; not that I'm comparing those two; just offering a perspective.
My two cents offered with all respect; enjoy.
Good luck,
Kevin

 

[JHZR2]

The main against argument is because you said it is out of your budget. Any "prestige" you are looking to get will be moot because you're buying the car on payments.

What's the problem with your existing miata?

I'd personally get something with a back seat for a few ounces of practicality.

But since it seems that you want a two seater and can't afford the Mercedes, I'd either save until you can, or save as much as you can and then get a new miata in year 2.

 

[SteveSRT8]

Nothing inherently 'wrong' with the car, but it is a stretch to compare it to a Mazda!

They are light years apart. Both in engineering and execution.

But the typical Merc simply costs more per mile. More depreciation. More repairs and maintenance costs. More insurance.

if you want to play you got to be prepared to pay.

 

[simple_gifts]

Quote:

I'd personally get something with a back seat for a few ounces of practicality.

But since it seems that you want a two seater and can't afford the Mercedes, I'd either save until you can, or save as much as you can and then get a new miata in year 2.


+1 on the new Miata.

 

[DuckRyder]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The main against argument is because you said it is out of your budget. ...


Actually I believe what he said was that the SLK350 was out of his budget, but the SLK250 was under consideration. (there is ~ $12,500 difference in base price)

I believe you will find that the SLK is a very different car from a Miata (or S2000). The SLK is more of a grand touring car than a sports car.

The SLK is available with a manual transmission now. The turbo 4 is new in the US at least, I'm not sure if it has been used in other markets, but it bears investigation.

A Mercedes Benz is a value decision. It is going to sound like a cop out answer, but go look at them. Feel the way the doors close. Feel the tactile feel of the switches. Look at the door hinges (and other parts). Take note of the way you are treated. Drive the car, note how it responds and rides. Decide what you like or don't like about those experiences and decide whether it is worth the price of admission TO YOU.

 

[Astro14]

I've owned a couple of MBs - nothing newer than the '92 in my sig. I've driven several newer ones, including a few 2012 models (thank you Hertz!)

They are wonderfully engineered cars, better design, materials and execution than almost anything on the road. The cost of purchase is high, but it's a myth that the cost of parts is high, that really depends on the part. As an example, I bought a head gasket kit, which included seals, intake & exhaust manifold gaskets, and all of the several other gaskets needed for the job. I got it over the counter at the local MB dealer for about $100. That's not out of line with any other make.

But MB parts are where the company really shows how different it is: you can get parts for any MB ever made. Ever. Unlike every other car manufacturer out there, they will always have parts for your car.

So, if you're going to keep it forever (like some owners do), then MB is what you want...

 

[andrewg]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
The main against argument is because you said it is out of your budget. Any "prestige" you are looking to get will be moot because you're buying the car on payments.

What's the problem with your existing miata?

I'd personally get something with a back seat for a few ounces of practicality.

But since it seems that you want a two seater and can't afford the Mercedes, I'd either save until you can, or save as much as you can and then get a new miata in year 2.

I didn't say I could not afford the Mercedes.What I said was that I could not afford the next model up from the SLK250. I'll use the MSRP to illustrate. The SLK250 is about $42,000. The SLK350 is around $55,000. Also, who buys a car over $30k with cash anyway? The wealthy perhaps? Maybe so, but I don't think one loses the prestige factor while making payments...especially if you can afford them.
As for the Miata? I said I USED to own one. If I still had it I would not be thinking about buying another car. But as described in my opening post, I really want a Mercedes. I think it's a beautiful car. My question is basically what makes a Mercedes any better made (or not) than a Miata (as an example).