451/443=EW

HAhahaha.. No im not saying you dont know what 4Matic is. I was saying I did not realize you were talking about a GLK 2wd, thats all. And I would guess if your saying the GLK is not an off roader, well.. you must not get the 4 Matic option were you live. In Canada, the GLK only comes in 4Matic, so we may have had different references to off road ability.

SebringSilver

If BMW ever makes an "M" version of the X5, they could just call it a Miata.

MX5? Get it?





Okay, that was bad.

Rick Hunter

Oh... but they ARE.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IJT1_9sQJ6Q

RLE

You are a Mercedes salesman, correct?

chilledbenz

Let's see if I can hit up some answers in the order they were posted.


Lowering the price of the C considerably will greatly affect the residual of our cars.

What residual? The w204 C class has awful and I mean awful resale, the w203 has better numbers and this economy isn't going to help.

C350 - 3615lbs, 6.1sec 0-60mph
GLK350 - 3926lbs, 6.5sec 0-60mph
The choice is pretty simple... utility or sportiness?

As far as 0-60 times and price..you can't compare the GLK350 with the C350..because you can get the GLK350 cheaper. You have to compare it with the C300 in which case the GLK350 would be faster.

Maybe i am wrong, it has happened in the past once or twice. but by looking at this post and what i have highlighted in bold i was assuming you could get a GLK w/o 4matic. doesnt make sense to me either, maybe its a just a US thing where people buy SUV's and trucks and they never use them for their intended design.

Yes the states can get a GLK without 4matic, hence the really low $33,900k base sticker price.

micropower99

Yea, I also don't see how 0.4 seconds is a big difference? Considering it's the same price as the C300 but is just 0.4 seconds slower than the C350.

C300Sport

Lowering the price of the C considerably will greatly affect the residual of our cars.

What residual? The w204 C class has awful and I mean awful resale, the w203 has better numbers and this economy isn't going to help.

What is going on with the residual anyhow? Benz makes a better car all around (size, performance, reliability, etc, etc) and the values actually fall faster than its predecessor?? I will hopefully have mine for a while but I at least thought my car would have faired better than it has...

Diesel Benz

I'm afraid it would not help a lot for our residuals but the C-class prices in Europe have been raised a bit since the 1/2009 price list.

451/443=EW

Correct,

451/443=EW

The C in 08 had a Resid of 61% it think it was, the 09 has 63%, the GLK also has a 63% resid. Those are very high values on 3yrs lease terms. But they also have higher rates. (It is very typical for a car to have higher rates with higher Resid values). Anyway back to resale values, anyone talking resale right now is not waiting out the 3yr lease and or selling what they financed OR just curious. Remember YOUR car is only worth what someone else will pay for it. That is not determined by MB, only the next buyer. That being said these cars will (IMO) match up very close to the resid values placed by MB at the end of a 3yr lease. In the 1st yr, cars depresiate the most and again in the 2nd but a bit less, and same for the 3rd. This is ture of ANY car made, yes even Honda's. The next buyer will have to pay standard bank rates, the car will have wear on it and will need breaks and tires and so on. Plus warrenty will be down and same for road side. All this has value that is easily overlooked. So the question is a 50K car today, what would you pay for it second hand in 1, 2, or 3 yrs? ( dont forget to factor in a few of the above ).

And yes the current market will play a role, and dont forget you cant reclaim fright and pdi and taxes. So be reasonable. Still one more thing! every yr a car will typicaly get a few more options. Remember how you wanted the sport pack, or AMG wheels, or a very particular color, or rear window blinds, ect.... well the new cars will get more options that your car wont have. So anyone thinking of buying your car is likly thinking NEW aswell.

mac911

You have to remember these cars have different purposes.

I would suspect it would be more comfortable and have a better ride in a C-Class than the GLK, with the GLK money is going into making it a bit larger size car, etc.

I'd rather put my money on the sedan.

I rent cars quite a bit. I would say it's similar to a Toyota Camry and a RAV 4. They are about the same price, but I tell you the ride and quality is certainly better in the Camry, because the money is going into that, whereas with the RAV 4 the money is going to other things.

The C-Class isn't really an entry level sedan since they have A & B Classes elsewhere.

The GLK is an entry level SUV.

I think we should be happy about our W204s.

RLE

The resale of the W204 has been torpedoed by not only "the economy" but by MBUSA and the dealers who in desperation are bailing out of their overstocks which means all those W204s sitting out back. My dealer has about 15 unsold, some '08s & some '09s. So why would they be interested in a used '08 except at a price that they could send to the auction at maybe a tiny profit? Particularly if it's similar in color and equipment to all the orphans they are already paying flooring costs on.

I stop by my dealer weekly for a free cuppa and I see a long lineup of guess what, silver, white, gray and a black or two, all with black MB Tex. Do they want another one with 5000 miles on it which they are going to have to recondition?

I know all this and am ignoring it since I cannot do one damned thing about it. When I paid sticker price for my C300 I knew that I was going to take a hit because I was an early adopter. But, the time had come to bail out of my W203 before it's value sank out of sight. And BTW, W203 used values were LOWER than W202 values, at the time, on comparable models.

I traded my '95 C280 (Garnet Red metallic, Saddle leather (very rare)) chromed factory alloys etc and a street concours car that was sold before I turned it over. I got $18500 for it. The car was six plus years old with about 70K miles.

But, when it was trade time for the 2001 C320 (Obsidian black, Java leather, everything except the phone plus 17" AMG C36 wheels and also a street concours car with almost the same mileage and about the same age, the trade-in was $15000, $3500 less than the '95, after a lot of haggling. And the C320 had been a lot more costly to begin with.

Why the big dip in comparative value? Not the miles or the age or condition.

I blame it on a larger supply of that model, but most of the responsibility lies at the feet of Mercedes. They marketed the W203, a car that turned out to be, along with the early W211 in a lesser sense, the least reliable car in their history and the world knew it.

And the customers paid the price, in the end.

FrankW

any SUV based on the CAR chassi is GARBAGE off-road, period! don't care how good or how ugly they look, they're just glorified WAGONS!

with that said the GLK feels pretty nice sitting inside. The outside's a different story.

btw, is it me or am I seeing $39k msrp for C350 on mbusa.com??? ROFL...no wonder there's more 335i on the road.

chilledbenz

The GLK is the C wagon for the states..and yup $39k for a C350..but the 335i is $40k with a manual trans, add another $1k for the auto...athough the 335i does have the better engine by far.

german-anger

haha the GLK is a cute little car, the fascia (especially the lights) makes it look rather ackwardly happy... now that being said, I'd much rather get a 2nd hand G-class if I wanted something robust and has cargo space. My 2 cents...

FrankW

those are some ridiculous msrps.

RLE

Are you talking about a G-Wagen or a GL?

marakbai

I actually am seriously thinking of giving up my C for a new GLK. Primarily because my wife gets nauseous in the C. All the time! Something about the ride, the seating position etc etc, without fail she's sick.

We drove a GLK for a few days a no issues at all, she's as good as can
be so as much as it's a tough choice because I love my car, it just makes sense.

Now to get rid of my loaded HOT C

Oh, btw the styling of the GLK has grown on me, again one properly configured. And the ride is great. It's only missing the refinements; folding mirrors, sun shade, ambient lighting etc.

FrankW

just an excuse to get you to get rid of the C. most woman hates sedan and rather be in an SUV of some sort because it makes them FEEL safe. lol

loaded C will be hard sell. see what the dealer can offer you before making the decision IMO.

chilledbenz

Yeah those are the sticker window prices..we know that both cars can be had for less than that easily. But it does show that one starts out higher than the other, not to mention that both cars will tend to be much higher as base option cars are hard to find.

UR2SLO

You get the GLK if you want an SUV if you want a bit more room than the average car. The GLK is based on the C Class Wagon. MB lays it out for the same price you choose what you want/need suv or car. When I was going to sell my C (which i did) for the GLK for my it wasnt worth the money I wanted space for the rear seats and inside was basically like the C so I bought a Ml320. As stated above you could negotiate the prices on C's tho but for GLK's not a penny.

FrankW

probably not the 335, but I do see a lot of C350 around with no options or just ipod kit. There was 6 or 7 base C350 to choose from just from one dealership when I got mine late July. granted...they were either gray or gray or black...only 2 white ones. the same time 335 was hard to find at any BMW dealership. they were either very basic or very loaded.

aowhaus

For those who are in the U.S., it's the only way of getting the 3.5L engine with 4matic.
It does sound strangely cheap, as SUVs (well not large ones these days) command a premium over their sedan counterpart (the C).
I saw a couple at the dealership the other day, and I must admit that they look much better in person than in photos. Even though they still look awkwardly proportioned and a bit too chiselled for my taste (looks like a Transformer), it's starting to grow on me. I don't like SUVs and trucks so I'll most likely not consider buying this car.

I'm guessing the low selling price will get people buying the GLK, especially when gas prices are still relatively low. I think it will target younger people with active lifestyles, which MB will hope will move up in the model chain. The C has been doing that too.
If you see what's out there in terms of entry luxury small SUVs, it is a fairly crowded bunch which includes the BMW X3, Infiniti EX35, Acura RDX, Landrover LR2, and the upcoming Volvo XC60 and Audi Q5.

I much prefer the C-class estate, but Americans haven't quite embraced the wagon as much as Europeans, which is too bad as the styling of the C-estate is much more elegant and upscale than the GLK.

I don't know why MB needs another SUV, as they already have the ML, GL, and G. And the only wagon left is the E-class.

451/443=EW

Because there is a market for small car like SUV's

RabbitDad

That's a bit stupid isn't it - why not actually sell the C wagon as the C wagon (if you know what I mean) and leave the GLK to play properly in the SUV niche (by only offering it with 4Matic)?

I reckon it's just marketeers being stupid - they are assuming that people don't want an estate, however I've never heard anyone from the US claiming they didn't like the S204 (that's the technical name for the estate).

Me, I'm a soon to be happy S204 owner (in fact like most C-class buying Europeans under the age of 40, given that sedans are largely considered old people cars over here)...