Mercedes Benz X-Class

[Junkyard-Dog]

I usually like just about everything MB does but that thing is bloody hideous.

[Raptor]

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Now we’re fitting bigger tyres and wheels to the Merc - yeah righto that’ll do it, not even gunna waste typing an answer to that.

You just did

Can I remind a number of you posting in this thread that name calling, insults and the like targeting other members is not on. So far I've just been editing it out but it's becoming a bit too common for that to continue.

Play nice.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by Bevsta007

I dont think the Amarok is that quick, at least I haven't read that it is.

I've driven my mates Amarok up in Darwin, its very refined and handles the corrugated roads great. accelerated ok but I wasn't out to set 0/100 times

I agree. I drove one and it wasn't really impressive at all. It might be reasonably quick for a dual cab ute but it's acceleration is about what you would get in a sohc falcon 6 from 20 years ago.

An F150 Platinum with a V6 Ecoboost on the other hand is very quick for a 2.5 tonne block of flats. Couldn't believe how well they go.

[Dave R]

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Even if the Ranger Raptor was offered with a motor running the same power as the Merc I’d still opt for the 2 litre. Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

Are they getting the little engine because it's cheaper or because it's more fuel efficient, or both? Genuine question, my knowledge is not state of the art when it comes to Rangers.

My thinking is there might be an argument for the standard models, but I can't see droves of folks spending big bucks on something that is called a 'Raptor' (with everything that name implies) and opt for less grunt. I assume when you're in the position to spend 60 or 70 grand on a leisure ute (sorry Ford lady, "truck") there's probably enough disposable there to not sweat about fuel. Maybe I'm out of touch.

As a vain and petty man I'd likely opt for the Benz at a similar price point if it meant I wasn't getting my doors blown off by grandma in her Mazda3. If Ford does an ecoboost V6 (should have kept the Twin Force concept name, but alas everything is eco in this century) I'd be half interested, might make an interesting tow vehicle.

[Ben73]

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Am I disappointed Mercedes offered a 190kw/550Nm engine to Fords 157kw/500Nm for the Ranger Raptor? Sorry to disappoint you, no I’m not. Even if the Ranger Raptor was offered with a motor running the same power as the Merc I’d still opt for the 2 litre. Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

The ones who buy the 4 cylinder wouldn't happen to be the private buyers looking at buying the cheapest model and business buying cheap fleet cars?
From what I last heard private buyers chose the 5 cylinder more often than the 4.
I bet with this X Class most will be sold with a v6. At least Merc and VW give you and option on your engine choice. Ford said "here is our performance truck and here's the wheezing engine. Bad luck if you want something bigger"

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

Only about 10% buy the small capacity Ranger. Why? Because they are cheaper no other reason. They are provided for the tight ****s and from my experience are generally heavily discounted. They are not more efficient in my experience. I've had 2 of them and now have a 3.2.

[Syndrome]

$100,000 for a tarted up Nissan Navara?

https://www.news.com.au/technology/i...36d0cefb4be251

[GasoLane]

Originally Posted by Syndrome

$100,000 for a tarted up Nissan Navara?

https://www.news.com.au/technology/i...36d0cefb4be251

Definately overpriced but it seems that the journo's can't add up .....................

"Priced from $79,415 plus on-road costs, the X-Class is one of the more expensive utes you can buy.
That’s before you factor in optional extras — our test example brought gear such as leather seats ($1750), sports bar ($6227) and tow pack ($2063), pushing its price to an eye-watering $94,731 plus on-roads, or more than $100,000 in the traffic. "

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

sports bar ($6227) and tow pack ($2063),"[/I]

talk about rape & pillage, on those prices...

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Definately overpriced but it seems that the journo's can't add up .....................

"Priced from $79,415 plus on-road costs, the X-Class is one of the more expensive utes you can buy.
That’s before you factor in optional extras — our test example brought gear such as leather seats ($1750), sports bar ($6227) and tow pack ($2063), pushing its price to an eye-watering $94,731 plus on-roads, or more than $100,000 in the traffic. "

For that price, you could get a Ram 1500........

[au2000]

For that price I WOULD by the Ram

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by jpd80

For that price, you could get a Ram 1500........

I think the RAM would hold more street cred in this class as well despite the 3 pointed star on the X Class.

[yakcam]

I've seen both the X Class and RAM frequently on the road (I'm a courier) and can tell you that the X Class is just another ute. The RAM on the other hand is very impressive and has almost as much road presence as a F250 super duty... almost

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by naddis01

despite the 3 pointed star on the X Class.

just Lipstick on a Pig.......

[hayseed]

Originally Posted by au2000

For that price I WOULD by the Ram

Me Too.

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by hayseed

just Lipstick on a Pig.......

Bloody expensive lipstick

[smoo]

I don’t think these are selling too well, in NZ anyway.
Last month I took a look at one of the dozens of four cylinder 2018 plated examples on yards around the country. Discounted from around nzd 72k down to 54k. Huge discount, despite that I can’t bring myself to spent that sort of coin on these Thai Utes.
Mercedes would be better off offering their own 150kw/510nm 2.1 four cylinder diesel with the 9 speed auto and low range in the base model as opposed to the Renault/Nissan one.

[arronm]

Any ute that cant fit a pallet between the wheel arches is useless

Merc can , Navara cant. Ranger cant..

[jpd80]

Originally Posted by arronm

Any ute that cant fit a pallet between the wheel arches is useless

Merc can , Navara cant. Ranger cant..

Which obviously isn’t an impediment to most of those buyers..

[Vesper Martini]

Originally Posted by yakcam

I've seen both the X Class and RAM frequently on the road (I'm a courier) and can tell you that the X Class is just another ute. The RAM on the other hand is very impressive and has almost as much road presence as a F250 super duty... almost

There would mostly be X250D's on the road atm.
The X350D has a wider track so should look more impressive.


Add bolt ons, wheels and a sticker pack and they can look very impressive
https://www.carlexdesign.com/en/pick...es-x-class-exy

[Dr Smith]

Slightly related, I watched a YouTube video of a US-based car reviewer where his last video was on the topic of luxury brands and the excessive option prices they charge or conversely comparably low standard spec list. His chosen vehicle was a 2018 Range Rover Vogue @$US95,000 and how a new Rav4 at $US40k had more standard safety features etc.

An interesting point he made was a Range Rover buyer would never look at a Rav4 and therefore doesn't know what the standard specs are. Thus when faced with paying for options in their RR which are otherwise standard features in half price or lower cars, they just think this is what it costs to get these features...and the luxury brand car manufacturers will hold off for as long as possible as well.

Now in the case of the X-Class this probably isn't the case as I'd imagine buyers have owned other utes before and probably have cross-shopped so have a better understanding of what is standard/options and costs between brands.

If I was a tradie I'd probably be more concerned of what a potential client would think when I roll up in an X-Class and submit my quote. I had that issue to a lessor extent when we had a T5 Transporter and no-one bats an eyelid with a Transit Custom or Trafic.

Around my side of town most tradies drive more common brands and let their wives hang out in X5's/GLE's/Q7's/RR Sports.

[roKWiz]

Originally Posted by Dr Smith

If I was a tradie I'd probably be more concerned of what a potential client would think when I roll up in an X-Class and submit my quote.

Not a lot, I've rolled up on my bicycle or Kenworth on a couple of occasions doing quotes and it didn't bother the client. They're more interested in the ability of what you can do for them.
I would love to take one of these things on a weeks trial and see how it survives.

[hayseed]

I'm Pretty sure a Tickford ranger would be "getting up there" in Price....??

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by GasOLane

Definately overpriced but it seems that the journo's can't add up .....................

"Priced from $79,415 plus on-road costs, the X-Class is one of the more expensive utes you can buy.
That’s before you factor in optional extras — our test example brought gear such as leather seats ($1750), sports bar ($6227) and tow pack ($2063), pushing its price to an eye-watering $94,731 plus on-roads, or more than $100,000 in the traffic. "

GST or something maybe? I'm assuming this would be LCT exempt?

Originally Posted by arronm

Any ute that cant fit a pallet between the wheel arches is useless

Merc can , Navara cant. Ranger cant..

Can't imagine any of these Merc utes doing any work for a living, so what is the point of it being able to carry a pallet?

[kypez]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Only about 10% buy the small capacity Ranger. Why? Because they are cheaper no other reason. They are provided for the tight ****s and from my experience are generally heavily discounted. They are not more efficient in my experience. I've had 2 of them and now have a 3.2.

Originally Posted by Adrenaline

Are they getting the little engine because it's cheaper or because it's more fuel efficient, or both? Genuine question, my knowledge is not state of the art when it comes to Rangers.

Originally Posted by Ben73

The ones who buy the 4 cylinder wouldn't happen to be the private buyers looking at buying the cheapest model and business buying cheap fleet cars?
From what I last heard private buyers chose the 5 cylinder more often than the 4.
I bet with this X Class most will be sold with a v6. At least Merc and VW give you and option on your engine choice. Ford said "here is our performance truck and here's the wheezing engine. Bad luck if you want something bigger"

Dont mix up the slow 2.2 with the more powerful 2.0. The 2.0 Twin turbo from the Raptor is more expensive than the 3.2. chrisandsharon was talking about the 2.0, not the 2.2.

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Am I disappointed Mercedes offered a 190kw/550Nm engine to Fords 157kw/500Nm for the Ranger Raptor? Sorry to disappoint you, no I’m not. Even if the Ranger Raptor was offered with a motor running the same power as the Merc I’d still opt for the 2 litre. Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by kypez

chrisandsharon was talking about the 2.0, not the 2.2.

Well actually no, the part of the post I quoted from chrisandsharon was referring to the 2.2. Considering the post was made over 12 months ago, the 2.0 hadn't even been released then.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by naddis01

Well actually no, the part of the post I quoted from chrisandsharon was referring to the 2.2. Considering the post was made over 12 months ago and the 2.0 hadn't even been released then.

while the post is 12 months old, he is still referencing in 2.0 given the power outputs listed.

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Am I disappointed Mercedes offered a 190kw/550Nm engine to Fords 157kw/500Nm for the Ranger Raptor? Sorry to disappoint you, no I’m not. Even if the Ranger Raptor was offered with a motor running the same power as the Merc I’d still opt for the 2 litre. Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

Edit: Got this one wrong!

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

[naddis01]

Originally Posted by chrisandsharon

Even in the current Ranger there are customers who choose the smaller capacity engine - imagine that.

Originally Posted by naddis01

Only about 10% buy the small capacity Ranger. Why? Because they are cheaper no other reason. They are provided for the tight ****s and from my experience are generally heavily discounted. They are not more efficient in my experience. I've had 2 of them and now have a 3.2.

If you go back to my post, that is what I quoted. Not the entire post made by chrisandsharon. Quite clearly the "current" Ranger 12 months ago was not available with the 2.0 despite the reference to the Raptor earlier in the post.

[kypez]

Originally Posted by naddis01

That is what I quoted. Quite clearly the "current" Ranger 12 months ago was not available with the 2.0 despite the reference to the Raptor earlier in the post.

Stupid me! I get it now! Apologies!