hope3702

Comparing to Q5 and FX...Anyone go through the same decision and why did you end up at the GLK?

MBRedux

There was a thread a few months ago where this was also discussed.

We own both. My wife desires the GLK because she "loves" the size, the boxy style and the feel... she also loves being treated like a queen by the dealership. It's a fine baby Benz... a little rough out of the gate when it was introduced but very nice all around. We all enjoy it very much.

We also recently bought the Q for our kid.... and I must confess, I prefer the Q over the GLK.... there's more rear seat room; the steering feel on the Q is superior in my opinion over the Benz. Road feel and feed back are precise and clear with the steering wheel self centering after a hard turn, along with very little understeer... tight!

Just my 2 cents... but what do I know... I drive a Nissan.

RedRover

Did the Q5. Did the EX, not the FX. The FX is a different class and is larger than the compact SUVs. It's a foot longer than the GLK.

Q5- To Start with I did NOT like the styling of the Q5 but I DID like the way it drove....EXCEPT for the steering. The steering on the GLK is not great for road feel either..but it is better than the Q5 which really has some sort of "remote" feel.

The one thing where I thought the Q really shot down the GLK was the back seat.
The GLK rear seats are "OK" when me and the wife are in the front seats. I am 5'7" and she is 5'0". If you are 6'....the back seat is going to get cramped....

The Q has those wonderful slide back and forth rear seats (like the Tiguan) and I think that is just great.

Aside from the near classic style of the GLK, the part where it really shot down the Q5 was the body integrity.
Just drive one over to the others dealer and take turns closing the front door.
Then just buy the one that sounds like a bank vault.


In the end.....I think it really got down to the styling and I have had it with all the SUVs that look like jellybeans. So feminine with all their curves. And the huge guppy mouth on the Q turned me off.
And the GLK drove like a ....well.....like a Mercedes Benz.


The EX was a different situation.
I owned a Nissan Murano.
It was the little girl that lived in the lane.
When she was good, she was very, very good.
But when she was bad.....lets just say that she destroyed the myth of Japanese "perfection".
The Nissan Service organization sucks.
Doubt me?
Go to Nissanmurano.org and ask them. I was there from 2003 till...... well I am still there...just not very often.

But Infiniti service is a bit better than Nissan itself..so I dropped by.
I asked to see the EX. They showed it to me.
I clumb all over but did not drive it.

Look, just because somebody tells you that a midget can play center on your basketball team, does not mean that he can... the EX is a car.
They call it a an SUV (Actually they like to use the term CUV) but it is a car.
Does NOT allow you see over traffic from the drivers seat. It is much lower than the GLK or the Murano or the FX.
I saw enough.

I also tested the Tiguan, the RDX, the CX7, the RX and the X3.
It took me about a month, but once I drove the GLK, it was pretty much over.
It actually got down to the Acura RDX vs the GLK and I A/B'd them on the same day......and bought the GLK.

HBirdman80

I looked at all 3.

The FX was too big for what I was looking for. So I looked at the EX.
The EX is too small, doesn't compete with GLK or Q5, see what Red Rover said above (I second it). Also, I had a Nissan before, I agree that Nissan service sucks. Cannot speak to the Infiniti service.

And it was hard for me to simply discard the Infinitis because I have VPP with them through work.

So it came down to GLK, Q5 and XC 60 for me. Ford sold/is in the process of selling Volvo so that was out. I just posted my thoughts re. GLK v. Q5 on another thread on this board, so look for that. But the summary is that the Q5 had too many poor design elements that would be used on a daily or near daily basis that would really tick me off. So GLK it was, and I couldn't be happier.

As to the steering between the two, while YMMV, the Audi dealer told me the earlier Q5s had a different steering mechanism than the later Q5s and that there was a fuse you could remove to improve the steering. I'm not a fan of removing fuses, etc to improve the performance of the car. And who knows if the dealer really knew what he was talking about.

And for buying the one that sounds like closing a bank fault, no kidding. The GLK makes a very satisfying 'thunk' when you close that door...you know that thing is shut. The Q5 didn't sound flimsy, but it certainly did not have the same satisfying sound that the GLK has.

MKenM

I spent almost 6 months looking for a new vehicle. I drove an FX 35 for 6 years and LOVED that car. For a 5,000+ Lb car it is quick and nimble. I rented a new FX at Hertz and drove it for a week (on business) and although I liked it was too big and I did not like the grill and headlights. It still reminded me of my FX and there was not enough difference. It has more of a sports car ride for sure. The rear is definitely bigger that the GLK, my golf clubs sit diagonally in my GLK.

I drove the EX and it was to low and reminded me of driving a sedan.

Initially I did not hear good reviews of the Q so I didn’t even consider it.

Bottom line FX is a great choice if you want a larger vehicle worse gas mileage and a very good handling, otherwise its GLK hands down.

hope3702

Thanks in advance for all the help...

I know FX is bigger but it seems as if the FX who's loaded price is more then Q5 leases much better...Haven't talked Lease price on the GLK yet...EX is out...I will be FX/GLK/Q5...have G now so I do like how much you get for your money with Infiniti...

Q price was mid 700 with Nav and upgraded stereo...just too much

NYCGLK

I thought FX has nicer interior. But it was too big, had poor visibility, and needs better nav screen. Design is questionable. Dealer was a bit sketchy trying to push 72 month financing at 9% rate hahahah. And lastly, Infiniti didn't have good deals as it was newer model at the time.

Elpena

I bought the GLK350 while looking for a small SUV and I liked the price. I regret it now. The GLK350 is great for the old lady and I but, when the kids and grandkids come around, its too small.

ftttubrgcm

http://www.motoringfile.com/2010/01/...icial-release/
There is another premium small SUV coming relatively soon(US-March 2011). I'm talking about the MINI R60 Countryman. I love our GLK and my wife mostly loves it but if I had to purchase another SUV, it would have to be the R60. I don't like forced induction so I would get the Cooper version, with ALL4(AWD) if available in that level. With leather interior, NAV, and desired packages, it will easily sell in the mid $30's range. It will be manufactured in Austria by Magna Steyr for BMW/MINI. My passion is the Mini/MINI and its culture so this vehicle would fit me perfectly.

NYCGLK

No offense and I like regular mini, but that thing is not an SUV, that's a 4 door clubman with AWD. Can't even have 3 people in the back.

ftttubrgcm

Funny you say that. It is a MINI and is only sorta mini. The Euro version has 3 seats in the rear but the US release will only have the rear buckets. I think this vehicle for the micro SUV segment will be very popular. I'm just hoping that STUPID central rail system isn't standard. To me, it ruins the vehicle.

Also, this is considered a premium vehicle as is the GLK but I'm not saying at the same level. Even though, my current MINI has a couple more luxury accessories my GLK doesn't. I love my power folding mirrors and keyless entry on my Clubman. Also, the R60's rear seats do move a little fore and aft, giving a little wiggle room. The rear cargo area is tiny but as I have said, this doesn't compete directly with the GLK/Q5/RX350. For those of you liking better mpg, nimble and sure handling, AWD, quirkiness, and are not needing a full sized SUV, this may be what you are looking for.

NYCGLK

I think "those" would not be in the SUV market to begin with.

IMO demand for small suvs is over estimated. Those who want/need SUVs want a big one, for space. People who look for good handling and mpg would not look for SUV at all.

Kamen

Keyless I got and can be had for like $400 more; and power folding mirrors for those of us in the north

I'm just curious, is the back leg room that bad? Honestly I have never sat in the back of my GLK as I am the driver, but I have made a few road trips down to Seattle with 4 full sized adults in my car and have never encountered the leg room issue. My passengers are I are all between 5'8" to 6" tall. I am 5'10" myself and upon looking it appears my driver seat does go quite a ways back and it could possibly cramp my passengers knees but I never heard anything

ftttubrgcm

I'm 6' tall and I would think that in a vehicle the size of the GLK, I would be able to have my seat in a comfortable position and not worry about the legroom of the rear passenger. This is not a micro SUV like a CR-V, which I have had 4. I had 3 second Gen and 1 3rd Gen and I never had to worry about the rear passenger's leg room. Still, we are very happy with the GLK, having known the lack of legroom prior to our purchase.

NYCGLK, I'm sure you won't be seeing the R60 around every turn but I bet MINI will sell quite a few. I see it in direct competition with Subarus for the high country market.

mr.mbenz

the GLK is comfortable and I even had a 6'2" person in the back! I am 5'10'' myself and while buying the car, I had enough people with me to do all kinds of test...

ftttubrgcm

I'm sure a 7' tall passenger can sit back in the back but I'm sure the front seat passenger/driver will have to move their seat forward to an uncomfortable position. As I have said, I noticed the less than average rear leg room on the test drive but I didn't care because it was reasonable. One larger point: If you have passengers which normally have a hard time entering/exiting a vehicle, the GLK does have an issue with that...not major but noticeable.