I am a huge fan of my panoramic roof and have been considering a new E or new CLS for some time now. However, as much as I love the CLS it is not available with pano due to the roof line. My shades are always open and just love the openness and airy feeling of my cabin in this configuration.

The new CLS has many new features and comforts and quality I'm willing to pay for. However, without Pano, all of that just doesn't seem to matter anymore.

Thoughts?

 

I'm not thinking of switching, no, but that was the only other model I tested
while shopping MB, it is very nice, although the new model does not interest me much because of the new lines they have.....
but I, like a few others have mentioned found the cockpit to be a bit tight, and I'm only 6'2"........plus loading and unloading the little one was mcuh easier in the E class....
I also have no pano knowledge, but know they are nice looking, not much help in the ways of a post, but good luck.....

 

While I don't have a CLS to compare to, I'll say that my 2011 E without Pano drives a tad better and handles messy roads slightly better, due to the noticeable added structural integrity and less weight from Pano than my 2010 E with Pano did.

That said, the car feels (interior ambiance and the way the roof looks and operates) and looks about $20K less expensive than my 2010 did with Pano.

As for the CLS, I always wonder why it doesn't come with Pano.

I've checked out several new CLS's, and I agree with Hyperion about the lines, but also, at 6'5, there isn't enough headroom in the front for me to literally fit in there, not to mention the interior is a bit claustrophobic aside from that. So even if I was ready to pop open my Piggy Bank for one, I couldn't get one.

 

Thanks for the insight... So, why did you end up going with a 2011 without Pano?

 

Went to a Dealership to check out a CLS and they pulled the "would you be interested in getting into a new model for the same or cheaper payment than your current car" bit.

I told them I needed a Pano car, but they didn't have one, so I got something loaded enough to be higher priced than my old car, but sans Pano. After lots of me saying that I'm not interested in making a switch for the numbers they threw at me, I settled for a $50 decrease a month, with about $300 drive-off (I just felt that it was irrational to keep my old car because of my bond with it).

I kind of regret the decision, not financially so much as emotionally. However, I think if I wrap the roof in gloss black, I'll get a bit of both worlds. Close to the exterior aesthetic of Pano, and the added structure/less weight of no Pano, and the slightly better headroom of no Pano (so I've noticed).

 

Any actual stats available instead of perceptions? Thanks.

btw, the Pano is 88 lbs (and that's a stat from Mercedes themselves.)

 

88 lbs over your head is enough to be slightly noticeable.

I don't have rigidity stats, but anyone who's researched (anecdotal), or driven a Pano car will know that it lacks a bit in structural integrity. Maybe not in a crash or anything severe (though, I'd assume in that scenario slightly as well), but simple things, like flexing.

For example, going over little sharp "bumps" on roads, I feel like this car stays a bit composed more-so, and the best test to me is by going half-up on driveways. With a Pano car, you hear it creak and groan as the front wheels start to get on the ascending pavement (signaling some flex), which isn't apparent on the non Pano car. Not to mention, some of the horrid stories of higher mileage Pano M-B's/cas becoming creaking groaning nightmares.

I'd still take Pano in a heartbeat, but it isn't without its own sacrifices.

 

Mumbo-jumbo.

I want proof that a "2011 E without Pano drives a tad better and handles messy roads slightly better, due to the noticeable added structural integrity and less weight from Pano." And not a bunch of adjective laden personal perception.

Sorry, but this sort of stuff is rampant on car forums.

It's one thing to have subjective views on design and aesthetics, or how a sound system sounds to one's ears, but this other sort of stuff is simply pure speculation.

 

All the proof I need is what I feel, and what I hear, regarding creaking, groaning and flexing. I'd love for M-B to release some statistics, but I'm sure it'll never happen, and I wouldn't be surprised if that reason was to "scare" people away from Pano.

 

The "creaking and popping, groaning and flexing" is the frame. And it's something you said you never heard in your new W212 anyway, because it seemed "better built" than ever before.

But saying a "2011 E without Pano drives a tad better and handles messy roads slightly better, due to the noticeable added structural integrity and less weight from Pano" is simply your most current perception. Do you know for a fact that the "structural integrity" has been compromised with the pano roof?

 

Of course it's my perception. My perception is all that I have to go by, since M-B hasn't released statistics on structure between a Pano and non Pano. So I either pretend that I don't notice anything, or come to my own conclusions as to why I'm noticing what I'm noticing. Not to mention, even when I did buy my Pano car, my main concern was the decreased efficiency and potential flexing, especially if with long term ownership.

My 2010 was very drum tight, but I also was the one who started the Thread about being disappointed about how my car handled rough roads. And how much stress the frame seemed to take due to the suspensions lack of absorbing harsh stuff as well as it should.

Right before I took it in for my A Service (3 weeks ago), I started noticing some creak/rattle sound, that I thought was coming from the door area (turns out that it was the roof, which I noticed when going up a driveway and hearing it get loader/more apparent), however, I never made a fuss about it because after the service (assuming due to them lubing the area) it seemed to stop. Also, I was noticing some groan from going up driveways for some time, but chalked it up to normal Pano attributes.

 

Psychosomatic. It happens with every new car you own. It makes you feel good about your purchasing decisions.

 

Lol. And you know this how? Have you had 1000 Mile+ seat time in a W212 with and without Pano? Or payed attention to how each sound when going up driveways or ascending/descending surfaces?

And how am I making myself feel better about my new purchase by saying that "Not having Pano makes it look/feel (interior ambiance wise) like it's worth $20K less"? I think I'm being pretty open minded and fair about my perceptions of life with and without Pano.

 

I've driven a pano car and have no idea nore ever thought it lacks stuctural integrity. I do occasionally hear the body flex around the glass, but that's because the body flexes and glass does not. I wouldn't chock it up as to the car is lacking in structural integrity but understand the physics of what's actually happening.

 

I'm picking on you only because you made yourself an easy target.

 

K-A you are doing what most of us do with any purchase. We justify it. I'm sure you actually believe what you are saying but in actual fact, I think both cars drive the same. If you look at the B pillar on the pano roof it goes across between the two interior panels and would most probably have the same rigidity as the regular single panel with only sheet metal. Both cars have the same roof frame otherwise. It is doubtful the 2011 handles better than the 2010 due to perceived improvements. I have both and see no difference.
As far as the price is concerned,the pano roof and the wheel package are a wash. The 2011 price increase is the reason your 2011 is more expensive not because you got more car.
In the end, you lost your pano roof and you are sorry. Now you are going to create a wannabe with plastic to try to correct your error. Best to leave the car stock and say you traded because the deal was to good to pass up.(Your perception)

Next year a dealer may flip you into a 2012 with" pano" for only $50.00 more per month and we wait anxiously for your perceptions on that one.

Good luck.

 

While I have enjoyed this thread thoroughly, you guys are tough on K-A! He's just simply stating his perception of the car with and without pano. He even went as far to say the car looks that much more expensive with pano which to me isn't trying to justify his purchase of an '11. We've all made mistakes in buying and selling cars I'm sure and I think K-A has owned up to it quite well.

I for one just don't think I can give up pano for a more cramped interior that doesn't even have the openness of pano. Looking forward to checking out the 2012 turbo cars. I'm reading that they are screamers!

 

K-A has debated this before. Here is a link to a relevant post in the preceding debate:

https://mbworld.org/forums/e-class-w...regrets-3.html

in which you gave a very good answer! There is also some good info about the type of materials that goes into a glass roof preceding the one I reference.

And experience in two cars driven by someone who, self-admittingly, drives like a grandpa is inconclusive. One of the cars could have been built on a line run by Gunther, who nips Jagermeister while on duty, while the other might have been built on a line run by Helmut, who runs a tight ship. Statistics and engineering analysis are more conclusive. (Just having fun, K-A.)

Without going to the MB site, I do not know if the pano weight of 88 lbs is gross or net. If gross, then one must consider the weight of the metal the pano roof replaces.

 

Well then save me some time from having to come up with these long explanations!

That's true to an extent Petee. I think that my admittance of how I feel of being without a Pano roof, should justify my objectivity when describing how I feel after going from a Pano car, to a non Pano car, in terms of structural/handling feel, and all around driving. There are some fit and finish issues that my 2011 has that my 2010 didn't, and some issues that my last one had that this one doesn't. The Pano effect is just one aspect of my perceptions (and/or knowledge) in their subtle differences).

I admit that I am completely miffed about giving up my Pano car. However, this car does drive a bit better, and feels ever so slightly more solid, also, it doesn't get as messy on crappy roads. Could it be the tires? The Pano? My crazy mind? Who knows, but this is what is apparent to me. Is it night and day? Nope, but when zoning out and finding myself hitting surfaces or roads in this car that I did in my last car, my mind quickly catches on to how it feels slightly a little bit more rigid/compliant.

Also, I realize the price difference. I actually priced my old car and new car on MBUSA, and the new one is about $500 or so more expensive.

Perhaps you are right, and I am not claiming to be an expert on whether Pano is less structurally rigid or not. However, I would wager that it is, if only by a little bit. I do know that going over speed-bumps, etc. will get a Pano to groan, whilst a non Pano will not. Perhaps that factor is what's convincing my mind as to why Pano isn't as rigid, but I don't think that's fully the case.

The 88lb number is *extra weight* from a standard roof car. It is actually perceived to be 100-200 extra lbs, but 220S said that an AMG rep said that it was 88, or something.

And my new car was built by Gunther, if your predictions are correct. My center console is missing some rubber piece that made it wiggle ever so slightly (good thing I'm a detail freak ), my rear taillight had some haze inside it, and my window regulator makes a creaking noise when rolling the window up or down. All have been/are being fixed by Warranty. My only complaint with my old car was that it made some squeak sound behind the dashboard when in idle but in gear (apparently noisy injector lines?), and the Pano or suspension or tires, or whatever started to make the car rougher and more messy on rough surfaces.

Thank you, and right on.

I will give you advice on NOT giving up that Pano E. However, I will also tell you, that I feel that a non-Pano E is a little big tighter, will probably stay a little bit tighter, and might be ever so slightly a better "balanced" driver. Coming from somebody who has had both. Maybe it's just my experience, and even in my maybe objective or maybe not objective experience, I'd still choose a Pano car, unless I planned to keep it for 10+ years and use it as a complete functionality machine, not caring about styling cues or interior ambiance, etc.

 

+1000

My buddy drives the hell out of his 2005 E-500 w/pano. He's also one of those guys that always has to close it or un-tilt it when frequently when he parks. It has 60,000 miles and i've never heard a squeak!

As far as a Pano roof limiting a vehicles performance or it lacking "structural integrity"....idk about that one.

 

It would be interesting the hear your observations after testing a new 11 with Pano comp'd to your 10...

 

It would be hard to tell, but I could probably give a better perception as to how a new Pano '11 feels compared to my '11 non Pano, if I had enough seat time in one.

Also, it is my belief that Pano will start to perhaps show its "wear" quicker, as with my last car, it seemed that the creaks started popping up after some time (not so much initially). There are members on other Threads who say that it isn't a matter of "If Pano will creak", but "WHEN Pano will creak". That said, nobody was referring to a W212 in any of those that I read.

P.S, I heard that my 2010 sold before it ever hit the lot. I did a good job with that car, only to give it away to some lucky MF'er.

 

The lack of Pano roof for the CLS is not due to roofline. If that was the case then the C coupe and E coupe would not have Pano roofs.

The absence of a pano roof is one of the major reasons why I did not purchase a CLS. MB is stupid for not including it as an option for ALL of their vehicles.

 

It's pretty ridiculous as to HOW hot a CLS would look with Pano.

It doesn't matter for me anyway, as at 6'5 I can't fit properly in a CLS with its limited front headroom. The E-Class will have to do, even if it is sans Pano (now).

 

K-A, if you got the 550, you would never have noticied all these squeaks, groans, rattles etc, the V-8 engine would mask all these noises j/k (and not really, the engine nor exhaust is loud enough)
Actually I hear Ferrari's have terrible rattles and such, but nobody cares, it's an effin Ferrari