SL55/63/65/R230 AMG: Redesigned SL nose update -logic behind the rumors
Sounds like the perfect time point to bring on the SLK styled nose to the SL. One would assume the new 2005 SLK nose is up and ready to meet the 2005 standard and one can only assume that a similar styled nose for the SL will better disguise the changes that have to be made anyway to comply with the government mandated Pedestrian impact rules that go into effect in October 2005.
Last edited by Mercedesfan; Feb 15, 2004 at 01:56 AM.
Besides, there is a high level of jealousy between Mercedes, Porche, and BMW and I can just see the Mercedes management not giving Porche and BMW the competive advantage in being able to tout their available "Pedestrian Safe" models while implying Mercedes lags behind.
Last edited by Mercedesfan; Feb 15, 2004 at 04:28 PM.
I also find it highly unlikely that MB was caught unaware of a potentially required change when the redesign from R129 to R230 happened. Regulations like these just don't appear overnight. If anything, the R230 was released in MY 2003 to beat the requirements making sure that a redesign wouldn't be required before MB's intended time frame.




Wolfman
Trending Topics
The front-end of the R230 is already the design product of the pedestrian safety issue; plastic instead of a metal grill, soft bumpers and plastic headlight covers...
Wolfman
The Best of Mercedes & AMG
Somehow the idle thoughts of a reporter don't hold nearly as much water for me when he didn't design the car and wasn't part of the legislative process of creating the new standards
This is now the third time this thread has appeared in reference to the R230 and a potential redesign of the nose.
Which brings up a really good question in regards to the new standards...why would the nose have to be redesigned to comply? Given than MB can make cars of such caliber, are we presuming that the designers are just too plain stupid to be able to either redesign non-visible structure to comply and leave the oustide alone? Are they unable or unwilling to use materials that are visible that would comply with the new standards and still give the current appearance?
If the proposed legislation takes affect in Oct '05, does anyone honestly believe that it was just introduced? It was a sudden whim by the EEC; an idea tossed around on that Tuesday and passed on Thursday afternoon. These things exist for years before getting close to a final form. Once they are passed they take significant periods of time to work into effect.
Given the size and lobbying "muscle" that a corporation like MB has, I'd have to believe that it holds a strong influence on those who make these decisions (along with counter parts BMW, Porsche, Audi et al). I don't believe for one second, let alone a minute, that all of those companies would have been caught off guard with the many recent redesigns of cars that have taken place in the last two to three years. That the EEC would pass such legislation that would negate the billions of dollars spent in R&D, design, redesign, testing and finally production is rediculous.
Finally, in the intial posting the reference to cars needing to be altered were the "front engined... sports cars." I can only presume that means that given the output of most MB's, all of the cars will have to be retooled, whether sedan or convertible. Is there going to be a difference between an E500, E55 and E320? If the design of the front end is the danger to pedestrians, each and every one of those engines has the capacity - when in pedestrian areas - to cause an equal amount of damage. The engine size become irrelevant.
But then again...what do I know beyond simple logic. It's not like I write for Autoweek.



