poll
04-01-2003, 01:46 AM
#1
Newbie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 11
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 ML500
poll
Quick poll:
Do you think that model designations should accurately reflect the engine displacement? For example, the new ML350 is really 3.7 litres, so shouldn't it have been called the ML370?
>Yes, if they choose to use the engine size, it should be accurate
>No, whatever is easier for the manufacturer is fine
>Whatever sounds the best("rollin' in my 5.0" as opposed to "rollin' in my 4.9")
Do you think that model designations should accurately reflect the engine displacement? For example, the new ML350 is really 3.7 litres, so shouldn't it have been called the ML370?
>Yes, if they choose to use the engine size, it should be accurate
>No, whatever is easier for the manufacturer is fine
>Whatever sounds the best("rollin' in my 5.0" as opposed to "rollin' in my 4.9")
04-01-2003, 10:54 AM
#2
MBWorld Fanatic!
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: SoCal
Posts: 2,891
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2002 C230 : 2007 C230
you should make this a real poll.
I would vote: No, it's just a name like Camry LE or Accord LX, C320. They all just identify a model & trim level. Besides, you should be debadging it anyways
I would vote: No, it's just a name like Camry LE or Accord LX, C320. They all just identify a model & trim level. Besides, you should be debadging it anyways
04-01-2003, 08:53 PM
#4
Member
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: NYC
Posts: 249
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
2004 Maserati Coupe
Accuracy
If it were up to me, I would have the number system be as accurate as possible. I like immediately knowing what size engine the car has at a glance. The more rounding and deviating MB does, the less useful this numbering system becomes IMO. If you're using a number system, why not be as accurate as possible? I see nothing wrong with calling a 3.7 liter ML, an ML 370. But MB hasn't been calling me for my opinion recently.
If MB decides to round/alter the model numbers to achieve some sort of numerical aesthetic (ie. 350, 450, whatever), they may as well go with a non-number system. Hopefully, they wouldn't be using this as a cost-cutting measure. Personally, I see the use of numbers in a brand name as kind of a cop-out unless they are used to accurately describe the product.
If MB decides to round/alter the model numbers to achieve some sort of numerical aesthetic (ie. 350, 450, whatever), they may as well go with a non-number system. Hopefully, they wouldn't be using this as a cost-cutting measure. Personally, I see the use of numbers in a brand name as kind of a cop-out unless they are used to accurately describe the product.
04-06-2003, 01:17 AM
#5
MBWorld Fanatic!
engines change... models should be more constant. that's the problem w/ trying to maintain a number that reflects the engine size. as mb has been consistently NOT using the engine size for it's model names, it's not a big deal.
