I agree with pretty much everything that you have here, especially the bit about a brand new model and it being a Jag.

I am swayed some by the power and I am sure the diesel Jag will be slower slower than the base GLC.

The one point I don't agree with is in the handling. I feel the Jag is sportier, but also firmer. With the $1k adaptive suspension it beats the GLC on both smoothness and agility. Without, it is a bit too firm. This of course is completely subjective.

The hard one for me is the size. I want/need more space in the back and in the shoulder room up front than the GLC can provide. Haven't decided on that one yet. In fact we were leaning towards a GLE (leftover '16) before we saw the FP.

 

No, it isn't. They aren't related in any way.

 

right.

The GlC is to the C300 what the F-Pace is to the XF.

They did take some of the off road tech from LR though.

 

It's built side by side with Range Rover and Sport in the Solihull factory. The body and frame can be based on the discovery sport which is a downgrade. But all components, etc is shared with JLR.

 

We test drove the f pace before we discovered the GLC. I liked it more, without a doubt. The problem was the only one in the state was optioned up to $60k, way past our budget. We looked into ordering one but we couldn't build one like we wanted for less than $50k. I figure with that kind of availability, they aren't going to budge on that price for a while. Also, consider that MB has a larger capacity for production than Jag. The truckload of '17 GLC's had just unloaded across the street. I made my wife take one for a test drive and she fell in love. I felt like I got a pretty decent deal and it was a pleasant buying experience.

 

It is not based in any way on the LR, I looked it up as it was a concern of mine. I encourage you to do the same.

The platform is shared with the XF and XE like the C300 and GLC. LR are built in the same plant yes, but totally different lines.

 

Delivery waiting time? For us that was a major factor, but I don't know the current position.

 

Saying something is true doesn't make it so. The Discovery Sport is built on a FWD platform with transverse engine layout, so it has even less in common with the F-Pace than the RR Sport. The Jag shares no architectural commonality with any current Land Rover/Range Rover product.

 

There was a great article a few months ago in Car and Driver about the Jaguar V6. It shares the same block with the V8. Not a shortened block - basically the same block.

http://i62.tinypic.com/28tdjt2.jpg
http://i58.tinypic.com/2l92qur.jpg

 

Although the F-Pace is compelling, and by all accounts a great vehicle, I dismissed it pretty quickly for a few reasons.

1. Cost (value): base MSRP is good, but options rapidly price it higher than the GLC--and the discounts will likely be nil due to the lower production numbers and scarcity. Price differential on comparably-equipped vehicles will be substantial.
2. Lack of dealers: Even though I live in Los Angeles, the closest dealership is 20 minutes away.
3. Fuel efficiency: This is a personal choice, of course, but I value MPG. The F-Pace is a great performer, but the cost in MPG is too high for me. I think the GLC is a great combo of decent performance and efficiency.
4. Reliability: Time will tell, and the warranty on the Jag is good, but I'm still not convinced the Jags will be dependable enough.

That said...it's tough to go wrong with either one--I'd be very happy with the Jag!

 

Honestly, British cars or European cars in general are not nearly as bad as people like to say they are. Most euro brands score better than domestic makes. Interesting huh? There really isn't truly a "bad" choice nowadays.

Are they as perfect (overrated in my opinion) as Toyota/Lexus are claimed to be? No. Are they expensive to service or repair if something were to go wrong? Yes, unless you find a good indie mechanic or do the work yourself.

Unfortunately, Jaguar and Land Rover sell in such small numbers that impossible to find out how they're doing. The worst thing I'd imagine happening is glitches with the electronics. A common issue with all expensive cars.

 

I agree with virtually everything you said, TSchuettinger.
I'm somewhat apprehensive about the long-term cost of ownership of the Mercedes, to be honest. I've been a Honda guy for a long time, and my experience with them has been great. Very low cost of ownership and very reliable cars. But, we take good care of our cars and do all the recommended maintenance, so hopefully, the GLC will be also be a good one for us.

 

With Mercedes thats all you have to do is the maintenance. Their engines are VERY good.

How long are you keeping the car? During the warranty, I highly suggest getting the prepaid maintenence plan. About $1k even and it covers ALL wear items. Whether it be breaks, break fluid flushes, transmission fluid flushes, coolant system fluid flushes, wiper blades, cabin filters, everything.

Once the warranty is up, find an indie mechanic to do your services. You will find that these cars aren't necessarily "high maintenence", they just cost a bit more to service.

You might want to consider looking into BMW. Their reliability is good nowadays, plus you pay nothing for maintenance for 4 years and a 4 year, bumper to bumper warranty. So you pay virtually nothing for 4 years except for insurance and fuel.

 

BMW quietly modified their maintenance program. The free maintenance period has been reduced to 3 yrs/36k miles, and no longer includes wear items.

I certainly wouldn't consider their reliability to be "good", either. My BMW ownership experience was a complete nightmare. I saw my BMW Service Advisor more times in a year and a half than my previous three cars combined over a 10-year period.

 

That's true I forgot that they changed the complimentary maintenence schedule.

About the reliability, I'm getting info from stats. I don't know when you owned your BMW or what model it was...

 

Interesting. We did drive an X3, and liked it very much, but it is near the end of its lifecycle and the next generation will be coming out soon. The GLC, we felt, was superior.
The included maintenance is great, but I did not know that they cut it down to three years.

 

I test drove the X3 & X4 before choosing the GLC. Exactly the same problem - I had a 525d M Sport before and the X3 / X4 had exactly the same interior as my 4 year old 5 series. The GLC is far superior on the interior and I'm so glad I chose it instead of another BMW. The F-Pace looks good on the road but, unfortunately, my company doesn't allow me to choose Jaguar as a car company for some reason!

 

I like the GLC better too. What I didn't like about the X3 is that you couldn't get ventilated seats. I need that in the desert. Not having had a BMW before, I liked the X3 quite well. A bit more stylish than the Q5. I liked the wide infotainment screen.

 

I'm comparing the Jaguar F-Pace r-sport 2.0 and Mercedes GLC 350e for a few weeks now, and I can't decide which one to choose.

Coming from a Mercedes SLK and now E Coupe, I became a real Mercedes-lover, but on the other side I want something "new" now...

F-Pace has more exclusive looks on the outside and more storage space, the GLC has a better engine, brand reputation and money value over 5 years...

Who can help me decide? :-)

 

It all really comes down to what you feel safe with, ect.... For awhile, I thought the interior was on par with the GLC. After further examination, it is not. I test drove a Range Rover sport, the same day. The Range Rover Sport, was hands down, nicer than the F-pace.

The F-pace, sounds good, looks good (on the outside at least), ect.... it's not a good value, it's not the most luxurious, there isn't alot of available options either.

The GLC is fun to drive, it luxurious, lots of options available, is a good value, it's predecessor was also a kbb best resale value winner.

Have you looked into the X3, Q5, QX50, Macan, XT5 as well?

 

Here in the UK I though the Jaguar F-Pace was fugly. Well according to the press pictures and the colours that I've seen. However my wife's best friend and our neighbour (lane behind us) got one to replace her aging Volvo XC90 and I absolutely loved the look of hers. But she's got the top of the range S 3.0 diesel in black, with black wheels, and black silver interior. It drives beautiful and is really nice. However the price resembles nothing like the standard 2.0d versions. It is more expensive than our GLC43 AMG. I think the way the 2.0d versions are dressed up they look horrible and akin to a Nissan Quasqai. And if the 2.0 diesel versions of the GLC are anything to go buy it wouldn't have enough power for me.

So yes, I really like it but only in the range topping version and the gap between that and the entry level is ridiculously large for a car in the same range here in the UK and frankly not worth it. I paid less than that for my current full size GL.

I think it is a car that is very sensitive to what paint and wheels you choose, beautiful and fugly at the same time. Drives nice though in the range topping engines, but feels like Fred Flintstone in the bottom of the range engine. But to be fair, I think that is the same with the GLC220/250d.

 

I don't like BMW and especially not Audi. Macan is too expensive and looks a bit too much like an Audi...

 

Variety is the spice of life.

I say do the Jaguar (highly popular where I am - even more than the GLC it seems). You can always get a Benz next time around.

Take a few more test drives. Go with what you feel, if you think you could live with the car day in and out. Which car would make you feel alive on that drive home.

 

Interesting perspective, it sounds like you are saying that because the interior of the F-Pace isn't as nice as a car that is $30,000 - $60,000+ more expensive in the RR Sport then it is crap. The comparison here is with the GLC right?

IMO the GLC interior is nicer than the FPace no doubt, but not by that much, and the FPace exterior styling is hands down the best out there (but the GLC is nice too).

The drive of the FPace is more sporty but still smooth and luxurious (on the std 19" or 20" wheels) and the GLC is a nice but a bit bland (on std 18" wheels). For me, the Jag wins this by a lot, but that is a matter of my sporty preference.

At least here in the US price/value shouldn't really come in to play as they are very similar. In fact Jag should win easily because of the tiny $1500 premium to get the 3.0l six (what do you think the GLC 43AMG will cost). I built similar cars on the perspective web sites and they were very close. GLC 3004M with P2, Lighting and pano vs FP 2.0 premium, with cold weather, vision (lighting and blind spot, parking sensors etc) and Nav. The FP was $49.5k and the GLC (without parking sensors or rear seat heaters) was $50.1k. Similar difference if you went with the GLC sport and the FP prestige (you don't get leather interior with the GLC and you don't get stitched dash in the FP). Maintenance is $1.2k extra on the Merc for 4 instead of 5 yrs. Discounts will be better on the GLC - now you probably won't get much more than $1k off on an FPace.

To me the real consideration should be things like:
-Size, the FP is significantly bigger and more useful and yet still more sporty
-Brand - MB wins this for reliability history and number of dealers but Jag has been doing very well here recently and has 5yr warranty and free maintenance for 5 yrs. Both have a high luxury prestige.
-Sport vs lux and styling preference - totally subjective you gotta go look for yourself on this one.

Bottom line, you really should drive them both, preferably on the same day. Pictures don't do either of them justice, and you can only measure feel (road, to the touch, and emotional) and things like ergonomics from the drivers seat. Bring some golf clubs or boxes or whatever to see if the sizes are right for you.

 

Have you guys/girls not seen this episode from Top Gear? Jaguar vs Porsche vs Mercedes