nsraja

I have 55k miles on my E500. Though I have no intention of selling it, I was looking at the resale value of the car and it is around 16k to 18k. While I was looking for a 2004 Honda Pilot, most of these cars sell for 16k too. Am I missing something? What in the world!! I paid about $68k, and I am sure you could have had a Pilot for $38k, now they are both at the same resale value.

werewolf34

Depreciation is a pain.

Assuming your numbers are right, you're not missing anything.

Pilots hold value extremely well while e-class (particularly the early ones) dont

SZMB

Thanks to the high cost of maintenance and repairs. Not any mom & pop indy shops can fix these babies, especially electrical issues. If you tell the potential buyer that soon or later that all four air shocks in the E500 will eventually give out (probably before crossing the 110k mi mark) and will cost ~$6000 to replace them at the dealer, he'll probably offer you $12k for the car, let alone not mentioning the air springs in the rear, air pump and rear main seal leaks.

wampa

Don't forget the early w211, were also plagued with glycol contamination in the transmission. If the radiator is not changed, and not caught early enough, can lead to a damaged transmission . Which I am sure will be over $10,000 to repair.

nstanford99

i just got my 2004 e class in december for about 22k, but it has pano, keyless go, tint, etc on it..

gaazmon

they quoted me 12k, but hey Starmark paid for it (thank God for CPO. It paid itself off that one day. Should have bought the extra coverage too just for the hell of it).

depreciation sucks. ya, that's why the higher models (S/CL) depreciate the most, way more sh*t to go wrong. But I've never understood why the SL's hold their value.

K-A

SL's are the only Benzes that seem to hold okay value.

All Benzes depreciate like rocks, fact is, owning one of these out of Warranty can be an extreme amount of potential $$$$, so nobody wants to touch them, not to mention high costs for regular maintenance (not as bad as some think, but it's up there), therefore you have these amazingly engineered cars, which cost in the upper half of the pre-$100K's, going for dirt cheap.

C-Classes don't seem to depreciate as scarily as other M-B's, however that's mostly do to the fact that they're relatively cheap to begin with, and are viewed as the more economical car and choice, so less stuff to break.

S-Classes will usually lose about half their value in about 2 years.

gaazmon

ya. the CL's (soon to be S coupes) are nightmares in many cases. i own a 02 CL500 and wonder every day if i should sell it. just too much to go wrong. the E is not that bad. i've been pretty lucky (knock on wood) with the 04.

ya, the C's usually have the least problems. my sister had an 07 c230 for a couple of years (leased) and the only thing that went wrong was the sunroof wouldn't auto close and they fixed it really fast.

i think (from what i can tell) is the SL's have the longest production run (like 12 years or something) so maybe that is why they hold on

werewolf34

At the upper end of the luxury car spectrum, prestige matters more than value. The S class (apples to apples) is a good 5-10-15k more expensive than a BMW 7 or a Lexus. But the S-Class still leads the category. An S says you've made it / you're rich / whatever.

Also you have high running costs for these cars (big engines / complicated and breakable electronics)

This kind of buyer wants new and prestigious so the used market for a S class is pretty small until you hit a certain price point where the value shopper lurks

I think this is why the flagships depreciate like a ****

If MB really thought fixing the gremlins was worth their time, they'd do it (or get rid of Bosch) but they dont b/c they want you in a new S every 3 years.

I think they tried this with the E-class and got spanked for it by the consumer b/c the failures (tranny, SBC) were too serious to inspire loyalty

Alexbenz

are you guys talking about the e500 or does the e320/350 problematic as well?

wampa

I believe it was the MY03-MY04 that were the most problematic, when compared to the later years.

Benz-O-Rama

Because of their complete badassness, that's why.

Same for the CLS, the're just no alternative to these two cars. The SL and the CLS pretty much have the market share for these types of vehicles. The CLS and the E are basically the same car, and yet the same MY CLS will always be worth more, in the same condition, options, etc...

The SL, really doesn't have a peer from say, BMW. Some might say the 6'er, but most won't.

vettdvr

Lets not forget balljoints, ignition switches, moon roof drives,transmission failures/coolant, and the list goes on.

I have had most of these under warranty and with no resale value why not just drive until it just reaches the scrap yard. I have had enough prestige and want reliability built into the luxury car. Apparently many car co's are having difficulty with these concepts. We won't even go into sudden acceleration, jumping into reverse, rollovers,airbags, and on and on.

Quality includes features the customer wants, performance, reliability and cost as part of the total package.

Ok enough ranting sorry.! But all these reasons are why MB doesn't hold value better than Honda. The preception of quality and cost linked drives MB prices down and Honda up.

I test drove a loaded out Honda Accord and it is a nice car. What I don't like is FWD. Good think Honda Accord isn't RWD or I might be driving one next.

K-A

True. The SL is really in a class of its own, and any Manufacturer that's tried to duplicate it (looking at you, Lexus) just couldn't hold a candle. Thing about the SL is, aside from a beautifully executed design that still looks fresh nearing on a decade on the market, the "SL" name is so historic.

I haven't checked up on CLS prices, but they do sell for considerably more than the E-Class when new, so I wonder if the % in drop is equal to, or more-so than an E-Class. Also, the CLS sells a miniscule fraction of what the high volume/see them everywhere E does, so that's gotta help resale a bit.

gaazmon

i see what you mean. it is bad a*s

i wouldn't even compare a 6 to a SL. SL is way more up there. Also, SL is hardtop and has V12 variants (i know M6 is V10, but that is going out).

MercFiveHundred

+1

werewolf34

Check out 2nd gen Lexus. Say 1998-06. Pretty good value for money all-in now

I have a GS400 and have nothing but good things to say

Alexbenz

i just think it's the quality of the car's not the actual car itself.....the feel of the w210 was german but when i first drove a w211 it didn't feel like a mercedes...also where you live can also determine the value cause here is socal there's so many benz's around it prob effects the value

vettdvr

I test drove a new GS350 last month. Nice car. Reliability reports indicated higher warranty claims over last 3 years concerned me. Then the go when wanting to stop and going faster than necessary issues made me reconsider. Is Lexus reliability really there in the new cars. Looks like T is missing the mark while trying to charge full sticker for the cars.

nstanford99

yeah the lexuses arent bad, we just got rid of my moms lx470 and got her a GL450, such an upgrade in car. Also to think about the value in the lexus's are going way down since all the bull**** going on with toyota. So idk about the lexus market right now guys, although i do love the GS, the resale value is going to take a hit after all this.

werewolf34

Topic ****

2nd Gen are better made than the new stuff