Your experience--W164 M Class to X204
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 71
Likes: 1
2008 Mercedes C300 4Matic Sport Sedan
I made this very same switch on my wife's GLK from ML. I like the tighter feeling of the GLK, and the things like the panoramic roof. The ML was better optioned, but that's something that just was the features that each car had. The GLK also feels to have better power delivery, and I really like the increase in gas mileage. We got 18-19 on the ML and it's more like 23-24 in the GLK. They are definitely different, as the GLK is more like a beefed up C Class, but I prefer the result. Rear leg room is only slightly less, and I don't notice a difference in cargo space.
The windshields are much, much cheaper in the GLK too, as the rain sensors is not embedded on the GLK like it is on the ML. We're talking a difference of $2-300 for the G and $7-800 for the M.
Cons to the GLK: I wouldn't tow anything of decent size with the GLK as the wheelbase and chassis aren't really for towing.
Ground clearance is not as good, but not a big deal as our cars are pavement queens.
Tire in the 19" size seem harder to find for the GLK too.
That's all I have.
The windshields are much, much cheaper in the GLK too, as the rain sensors is not embedded on the GLK like it is on the ML. We're talking a difference of $2-300 for the G and $7-800 for the M.
Cons to the GLK: I wouldn't tow anything of decent size with the GLK as the wheelbase and chassis aren't really for towing.
Ground clearance is not as good, but not a big deal as our cars are pavement queens.
Tire in the 19" size seem harder to find for the GLK too.
That's all I have.
Last edited by hondafan; Mar 5, 2014 at 12:31 AM.
Senior Member
Joined: Nov 2002
Posts: 336
Likes: 11
From: Northern California
2016 GLE300d 4Matic
The ML felt more spacious but more ponderous too. It felt like a minivan-SUV if that makes sense ('06 ML350) The GLK feels lighter on it's feet and a lot more fun to drive.
I wish it could tow more like 5000 lbs though but as hondafan says, it's doesn't have the chassis for it.
I wish it could tow more like 5000 lbs though but as hondafan says, it's doesn't have the chassis for it.
Super Member
Joined: Aug 2008
Posts: 689
Likes: 30
I didn't go from ML to GLK, but I did look at a used ML350 before buying the GLK250.
Our main beef about the GLK, is that it is small. We often have two men in front because of the legroom and two ladies in back. They feel cramped. Partly, but not only because the seats are pushed back. Access to back seats is also tight. Check the width of the rear doors vs any other similar sized suv.
We are golfers. In most smaller suvs, there is room in cargo space to stow 3 or 4 sets of clubs across the back. The GLK is too narrow for even one men's set. Long clubs have to be removed to fit them in.
We have bought a roof rack and Thule box just to carry the stuff we take south as snowbirds. With our E320 sedan, we didn't need to do that.
Fuel consumptin is not as good as advertised. But at 7.7l/100 km mixed use at last check, it is not bad. Certaily better than larger gas powered gas guzzlers.
The GLK250 feels quite sporty. Not truck like. It is fun to drive, probably because it is quite small.
Minor problems we have had in 3500km: Passenger side mirror no longer folds. Parking brake warning keeps coming on. Otherwise good.
Our main beef about the GLK, is that it is small. We often have two men in front because of the legroom and two ladies in back. They feel cramped. Partly, but not only because the seats are pushed back. Access to back seats is also tight. Check the width of the rear doors vs any other similar sized suv.
We are golfers. In most smaller suvs, there is room in cargo space to stow 3 or 4 sets of clubs across the back. The GLK is too narrow for even one men's set. Long clubs have to be removed to fit them in.
We have bought a roof rack and Thule box just to carry the stuff we take south as snowbirds. With our E320 sedan, we didn't need to do that.
Fuel consumptin is not as good as advertised. But at 7.7l/100 km mixed use at last check, it is not bad. Certaily better than larger gas powered gas guzzlers.
The GLK250 feels quite sporty. Not truck like. It is fun to drive, probably because it is quite small.
Minor problems we have had in 3500km: Passenger side mirror no longer folds. Parking brake warning keeps coming on. Otherwise good.
Last edited by 107123210; Mar 16, 2014 at 07:54 PM.
Member
Joined: Nov 2013
Posts: 137
Likes: 3
From: Denver, CO
2013 GLK 350 4Matic
I didn't go from ML to GLK, but I did look at a used ML350 before buying the GLK250.
Our main beef about the GLK, is that it is small. We often have two men in front because of the legroom and two ladies in back. They feel cramped. Partly, but not only because the seats are pushed back. Access to back seats is also tight. Check the width of the rear doors vs any other similar sized suv.
We are golfers. In most smaller suvs, there is room in cargo space to stow 3 or 4 sets of clubs across the back. The GLK is too narrow for even one men's set. Long clubs have to be removed to fit them in.
We have bought a roof rack and Thule box just to carry the stuff we take south as snowbirds. With our E320 sedan, we didn't need to do that.
Fuel consumptin is not as good as advertised. But at 7.7l/100 km mixed use at last check, it is not bad. Certaily better than larger gas powered gas guzzlers.
The GLK250 feels quite sporty. Not truck like. It is fun to drive, probably because it is quite small.
Minor problems we have had in 3500km: Passenger side mirror no longer folds. Parking brake warning keeps coming on. Otherwise good.
Our main beef about the GLK, is that it is small. We often have two men in front because of the legroom and two ladies in back. They feel cramped. Partly, but not only because the seats are pushed back. Access to back seats is also tight. Check the width of the rear doors vs any other similar sized suv.
We are golfers. In most smaller suvs, there is room in cargo space to stow 3 or 4 sets of clubs across the back. The GLK is too narrow for even one men's set. Long clubs have to be removed to fit them in.
We have bought a roof rack and Thule box just to carry the stuff we take south as snowbirds. With our E320 sedan, we didn't need to do that.
Fuel consumptin is not as good as advertised. But at 7.7l/100 km mixed use at last check, it is not bad. Certaily better than larger gas powered gas guzzlers.
The GLK250 feels quite sporty. Not truck like. It is fun to drive, probably because it is quite small.
Minor problems we have had in 3500km: Passenger side mirror no longer folds. Parking brake warning keeps coming on. Otherwise good.
Junior Member
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 71
Likes: 1
2008 Mercedes C300 4Matic Sport Sedan
That's really good to hear. The ML was a great car, but for what we needed, the GLK was a better fit. As the family grows or we have the need to tow anything, we'll likely step into another ML or even GL.
Trending Topics
MB World Stories
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
6 Mercedes Models That Did NOT Age Well (But Are Somehow Still Cool)
Verdad Gallardo
Manual Mercedes? 6 Times Sindelfingen Let Drivers Have All The Fun
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes SLR McLaren 722 S Is Extremely Rare Example Modified by McLaren
Verdad Gallardo
8 Classic Boxy Mercedes Designs That Have Aged Like Fine Wine
Verdad Gallardo
Flawlessly Restored Mercedes 190E Evo II Heads to Auction
Verdad Gallardo
Electric Mercedes C-Class Unveiled: 11 Things You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
Mercedes EQS Gets A Major Update: Everything You Need to Know
Verdad Gallardo
5 Underrated Mercedes-Benz Models That Don't Get the Love They Deserve
Verdad Gallardo
