K-A

I think someone is due for some English lessons.

gaazmon

We are criticizing the direction of the company and it's decision makers.

I don't care if the the E coupe is actually a C coupe... they should badge it a C coupe, give it a C coupe price range, and it should look like a C. I don't think someone should buy an E and end up actually getting a C.

If the E coupe is made up of mostly C parts, then it shouldn't exist. They should just bring the C coupe here. An E should be an E, nothing less. This is a Mercedes Benz, not a Lexus or Infiniti rebadging their Toyota and Nissan models and just changing cosmetic features. If I didn't care, then I wouldn't be pissed off.

Wig

I take your point gaazmon, but there is another side to the argument. The E-Coupe may be a C underneath in terms of its platform, but is also has a superior 'E-Class' interior, i.e. leather, more wood, better seats, more available technology, etc. So at least on the inside, it is more of an 'E' than a 'C'.

Also, the E-Coupe is available as the E550 with a V8. This is not available in the C-Class.

My other point is that a 'C' platform is not necessarily inferior to an 'E' platform, it is just shorter and (I think) narrower. What rides on that platform is more important than the platform itself.

220S

Don't take it personally. It's just a car.

220S

As just one example of many, the Mazda 3 and the Volvo C30 share the exact same Ford Euro platform (CD1)

Volvo owners freak out when they read that their Swedish car is also a 'Japanese car.' But they are different inside, outside, etc..

Anyway, this is all going to increase further as economy of scale gets even more important in this day and age.

220S

Probably not a native speaker, so try not to be too harsh on language skills.....

K-A

I know, I was just being an ****.

Actually the interior sits right in the middle of "E" and "C" to me, leaning much closer to "C", which is a big turn off for me toward the Coupe. The appointments, Leather, materials here and there, technology, etc. are indeed better, but even the wood looks more like it was plastered onto a C's interior than the E's more natural fit IMO.

Whether the E's chassis is "better" I'm not sure, but considering it's built to a much higher price point, I wouldn't be surprised. Either way I could never justify paying an E-Class price for essentially a C-Class. The fact that M-B calls it an "E" when it's clearly more "C" also would force me to rebel against buying one, were I to even like it.... possibly.

Wig

I'm not convinced that the E chassis is built to a higher price point. If you look at the price differentials between a similarly equipped 'E' and 'C' in Germany, they are much closer than in North America. This may well be because in Europe 'bigger' is not automatically 'better', and so Benz cannot get away with marking up the E much more than the C.

K-A

Perhaps. I'd be interested to know chassis rigidity, etc. facts.

However for past M-B's, it is pretty obvious (when driving different models), that some just seem stiffer/stronger than others, usually the E, being the last of each design language to come out, would have the latest in high strength steels, and development techniques, etc. used. I don't know if these are exclusive from the actual chassis developments though.

gaazmon

In regards to options, these are different in US ie no leather on E350 coupe or sedan standard, we get less word in coupe, the seats are actually narrower in the US. I think the sedan actually gets better technology with the driver assist stuff.

zaxxon

どこのうまのほねともわからぬおとこ........ ばかや-ろう

slammer111

Not sure what the problem is. The new E-coupe is crazy sexy.

I'm not sure why they even split the E-coupe into the CLK a while back, just to bring it together. For the longest time CLK = C-coupe + $20k.

AWESOME commercial. Do they show that on TV, or at dealerships?

Can't believe someone crashed a MY2010. Sucks to be whoever crashes a month-old car!

K-A

That's what I thought it would be too.... Sexy.... However in person, I see it as anything but, somehow it just comes out looking bland and generic.

gaazmon

I saw two today. From the side, it looks like the back is a little too short, almost making the butt of the car none existent. Also, I realized what car it looks like from behind:

Dave.HR

Don't be rediculious, this car's got nothing on the Benz! But the tail is definetly too short.

K-A

^^ I agree on the tail thing, very awkward. I also think the headlights look clunky and immature, on top of not being to proportioned with each other.

Best C-based Coupe M-B has made in recent years IMO is still the first gen CLK, they really nailed that one. The last gen is just blah (however I understand it still to its last days is a big Sales success for the Company) and I have a feeling this new "E" Coupe is going to be looked at in the same light as this outgoing CLK once they start getting out there more.

On a plus tip, I haven't driven the Coupe variation of the new "E"'s, but I've heard from numerous people that it is ridiculously smooth, some even say too smooth and isolated.... Just the way I like it.

lukemcv

I like the new E coupe. It's an E coupe as far as I am concerned. There is nothing wrong with the C platform... if anything it's shorter and lighter. Perfect for a coupe.

As for everything else it offers everything that the E Class offers.

gaazmon

Sorry, I meant just the tail lights. It bothered me what car it looked like until I saw an MKZ last night. Then I realized what the tail lights look like.

K-A, the W208 CLK was a SICK car. The interior of that was just like the W210 and the exterior was almost the same too (that should have been an E coupe). The 55 version of that car was amazing. I love that thing.

victorylap

YIKES!

I finally saw an e-coupe in my neighborhood. Surprisingly, the look is growing on me, but, ouch the pics.

petee1997

Car and Driver had a great review of the E coupe in this month's edition. For all you naysayers,they thought it was a fairly nice car to look at and to drive. But what do they know,they are usually BMW enthusiasts. By the way either they call it a CLK or an E coupe both models were always priced in the E class range,never as a C class. Cars are not priced by size, otherwise an SL should not be twice the price of the E class. Limited production cars are expensive to produce.

tanktube67

It doesn't matter who fix it, it can be the best body shop but to me the car does not feel the same ever again.

gaazmon

+10

That's why I don't get people who get lojack. F*ck, if someone steals my car, I don't want to see it again, God knows the sh*t that those guys do to it. I don't want it back. I have a friend that got lojack on her A5, but wtf, she leased it?!?!? I don't get it how she justifies a $1000 for that.

GGM

It reminds me of a Camry/Lexus ES or Hyundai.

chokaay

I think it's as much the stuff IN the car as the car itself... sometimes cars carry valuable cargo (maybe not in monetary terms, but to the person it's valuable) and maybe they want the best chance get recover that cargo before the thieves unload it (or ditch the vehicle with the cargo still in it). Also, a lojacked vehicle is eligible for insurance discounts (some insurance companies give more than others). Some insurance companies (such as mine) doesn't accept Teleaid for the "tracking system" discount. The discount should pay for the LoJack in less than 10 years or so...

And just because a lojacked vehicle is stolen, doesn't mean you have to CALL IT IN when it's stolen! After you call the police to report the car stolen and obtain a case number, THEN you can call LoJack and have the tracking system turned on... but you don't HAVE to. (Yeah, yeah, sorta defeats the whole purpose of putting the system in in the first place, but whatever, it's your choice! )


EDIT: And yeah, I wouldn't put it in a leased vehicle... unless you're regularly carrying "precious" cargo.

220S

Car and Driver also said: "The angular theme starts at the headlights and spreads rearward to form a chiseled yet still conservative body. The only peculiar and controversial aspect of the design is the upside-down swoosh that runs over the rear fenders. Mercedes tells us that the rear fenders are supposed to recall the ’50s Ponton models; we think Nike’s lawyers might want to take a look." Also in another article by them: "Those creases have drawn some flack for what happens to the rear fender, but photos don’t do the back end justice.

The new design 'issue' in some form or another has been mentioned quite often by auto journalists and laypersons alike. I don't think it's ignorance (or blindness) to mention this obvious point.

Whether one likes it or dislikes it, the fact of the matter is that it's controversial. I'm not sure how many folks here remember when Bangle came on board at BMW. The sh*t really hit the fan. And it's still being talked about and referred to, e.g., "the new F10 is less Bangle-ized."

Design controversy can result in positive or negative rewards. And there's no obvious gauge, other than sales. Yet sales figures aren't definitive (there are other factors in play, always.) Folks who wanted a BMW, bought one anyway, Bangle-butt or not.

That the new design has not been embraced with across the board enthusiasm certainly suggests something. Whether it's 'bad' or 'good' is a subjective and qualitative issue. But we can easily point to the fact that it's indeed controversial.