Mercedes M class, any thoughts?

I have been looking to get something since I sold my Jeep Wrangler, that I could haul people and stuff with. I rode in a friends M320 and I really liked it. Saw one at a lot and drove it, liked it, and it wasn't any more expensive than everything else in its class. Not looking to go serious off roading, more taking guys to golf course and maybe a down a dirt road or two. I know a bunch of CPFers are going to make a million suggestions about what to get, but I am only asking about the M class. Any experiences?

My freind had one for a while, it's a good car and all, confortable, but for the money I'd probably go with a Pathfinder or 4Runner.

http://www.suv.com/ML320./mltd01.htm

Lots of links, many dead, but good starting points:
http://www.suv.com/ML320./mlrevlk.htm

My feelings?
Have a good dealer nearby; could be a gas guzzler.

Well...how about something powered by a diesel?

Let me extol a few diesel virtures:

1. Way better mileage...typically 30% or more.
2. Huge torque for towing, pulling or climbing, etc.
3. I saw diesel fuel up to 20 cents/gal cheaper (than the cheapest gas) this summer!
4. Engines routinely last 250,000 miles or more.
5. No spark plugs, no "tune ups", no ignition system at all
6. Here's the kicker (for me at least)...

Diesels can operate on renewable fuels that require absolutely ZERO imported oil...biodiesel. Since biodiesel is made from plants that are grown the same year that the fuel is consumed...any carbon released is immediately recycled by the plants. We spend something like $2 billion every week for imported oil in the U.S. That's $2 billion that leaves our economy and goes away.

And...the beauty is, a diesel engine requires no modifications to run biodiesel so you can switch back and forth ANY time you want to or run mixtures of any kind.

A SUV that runs a diesel... Jeep Liberty in 2004.

Jeep Liberty diesel packs an admirably quiet punch

off topic but the money that leaves the economy does not just go away. There is a three part balance involved in trade and one is the balance of payments.

The only reason that people will accept the billions in American money is because it has value around the globe but it has value abroad because it has value here. What are they going to do with those american dollars that they are getting, the can save them or spend them. If they save them, they are acting in an anti inflationary manner to our economy because it is not increacing demend on our economy, when they spend them, the money has come home and it places some inflationary pressure on us but is demand on our production. They might spend them elsewhere but they are accepted elsewhere because they can be used here. American dollars are held because they are considered a store of value. But if they never use them, they have given us the item exchanged for for free in the long run. They gave us oil, we owe them something in return, they have those dollars to buy something from us or someone else with. The 2 billion just did not disapear. I am more concerned with what they are buying with that money than the fact that the money left. The money that was spent to buy weapons materials did come back to our economy but I would have rather sold them a refrigerator.

JonSidneyB said: I am more concerned with what they are buying with that money than the fact that the money left. The money that was spent to buy weapons materials did come back to our economy but I would have rather sold them a refrigerator.

I agree with that.

BTW...don't forget that the U.S. has a HUGE trade inbalance that is hurting in many ways...not the least of which is loss of jobs (know anyone that is out of work?).

So...the inbalance shows that many of the dollars that leave, aren't coming back (from anywhere). They are circulating in someone else's country...perhaps helping their economy...but not ours.

When you buy biodiesel, the money stays here with American producers, circulated in our economy, helping everyone grow including all of the jobs for Americans that would be created by that circulating money.

Its impossible to run an trade imbalance forever, it reverses by impact on the trading mechinism. There is a trade imbalance but it is not as big as it appears by they way it is measured, this is offset by the balance of payments. The expanations for the state of the economy cannot be accounted for by trade balance alone. It will take far more to explain that I could in this small section. There are problems but they are not what they would appear to be at first glance. this may sound like a differnt subject but it is actually the same. When the industrial revolution occured, people thought it would reduce jobs but it actually increased jobs long run, anytime there is an efficency change that takes away jobs, more jobs come into existance than there was before at a higher combined rate of adjusted compensation. The real delima is not changes in efficiency added to the economy. Productive factors are getting better, but there are inefficiencies causing the problem, but they are not on the production side and it is not forign competion causing the real problem.

I guess some of you guys missed the part about only wanting to talk about the M class and not other vehicles or global politics. I put myself through college as a heavy equipment mechanic, all diesel engines. I do not want one.

bigcozy said: I guess some of you guys missed the part about only wanting to talk about the M class

Oops. Sorry, I re-read your first post and it is clearly that way. I had mis-read it to mean you wanted comments on different SUV possibilities. My mistake.

All I can say is the Mercedes ML Class had TERRIBLE quality problems when it was first introduced. It was, by far, the worst vehicle in recent years in the JD Powers and similar surveys. This killed the ML Class resale value making used ones cheap, but questionable as to whether you'd really want one. It also means you'll take a big hit on depreciation on new ones. Not sure if you're thinking new or used, but I think there are better choices either way.

I do know that DaimlerChrysler is going to do a full redesign for 2005, and it will share a common platform with the new Jeep Grand Cherokee.

I'd certainly shop around before buying, comparing against other "prestige" SUV models like the new Lexus RX330 (gorgeous!), BMW X5, and Land Rover Discovery. I also think the Chevy Tahoe is a worth considering, it is bigger and therefore a different kettle of fish, and while not quite as ritzy, you do get a lot for your money.

I can say that my mother has a Lexus RX300 (probably a 1999?) and loves it; its a nice size, rides and handles like a fine luxury car, and has been totally trouble free. My dad has a Tahoe and loves it, it's a bit more "trucky" which he likes.

Since I personally won't be in the market for any of the above, take my advice and consider it worth what you paid for it! /ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif

Good luck; wish I had your predicament!

Dave

http://www.4x4abc.com/ML320/

http://www.whnet.com/4x4/

the latter is also an excellant read (lots of techy stuff) for learning about stability systems and the like. impressive.

best of luck

Infiniti FX35/45 is another alternative. However, like Lexus RX, it's not much of an off-road vehicle.

I appreciate the answers. My big question, although I didn't state it, was why I could get one used for such a great price. I found a low mileage one for around $21K, seemed to good to be true. There had to be a reason they were dropping off so steep in the aftermarket, appears quality is the reason.