RE: New Mercedes-AMG G63 launched as a hybrid
Discussion
Really loving the idea that a G63 fulfils a very specific niche where Mercedes bows to an elite group of discerning buyers who demand old-fashioned underpinnings for no benefit.
Again - it’s entirely about why a clean sheet design, developed at significant cost, retains those compromises - not about whether or not it’s good enough despite them.
If you can’t grasp that, there’s not much point trying to discuss it.
Again - it’s entirely about why a clean sheet design, developed at significant cost, retains those compromises - not about whether or not it’s good enough despite them.
If you can’t grasp that, there’s not much point trying to discuss it.
NomduJour said:
Really loving the idea that a G63 fulfils a very specific niche where Mercedes bows to an elite group of discerning buyers who demand old-fashioned underpinnings for no benefit.
Again - it’s entirely about why a clean sheet design, developed at significant cost, retains those compromises - not about whether or not it’s good enough despite them.
If you can’t grasp that, there’s not much point trying to discuss it.
But you're assuming that there is no benefit. Clearly, to those buyers, there is a benefit. It may be entirely in their heads, or utterly pointless in your eyes but, to them, it exists. If it didn't this car wouldn't exist.Again - it’s entirely about why a clean sheet design, developed at significant cost, retains those compromises - not about whether or not it’s good enough despite them.
If you can’t grasp that, there’s not much point trying to discuss it.
It's as simple as this: People want a car like this. Mercedes build it.
Jon_S_Rally said:
But you're assuming that there is no benefit. Clearly, to those buyers, there is a benefit. It may be entirely in their heads, or utterly pointless in your eyes but, to them, it exists. If it didn't this car wouldn't exist.
It's as simple as this: People want a car like this. Mercedes build it
No - Mercedes build a car like this; (certain) people want it. It's as simple as this: People want a car like this. Mercedes build it
They don’t want it because of some specific ability or trait that being constructed in a similar way to the original gives it, they want it because it’s a G-Wagen. Nicely built, feels really solid, sounds great in a childish way, looks a bit like a car that had some authenticity and purpose. But doesn’t.
NomduJour said:
Jon_S_Rally said:
But you're assuming that there is no benefit. Clearly, to those buyers, there is a benefit. It may be entirely in their heads, or utterly pointless in your eyes but, to them, it exists. If it didn't this car wouldn't exist.
It's as simple as this: People want a car like this. Mercedes build it
No - Mercedes build a car like this; (certain) people want it. It's as simple as this: People want a car like this. Mercedes build it
They don’t want it because of some specific ability or trait that being constructed in a similar way to the original gives it, they want it because it’s a G-Wagen. Nicely built, feels really solid, sounds great in a childish way, looks a bit like a car that had some authenticity and purpose. But doesn’t.
Loads of people drive nice stuff simply because it appeals to them or is perceived to be cool.
2 friends got Porsche Boxsters… one still has his. Neither really knew anything about Porsche, their racing heritage, the flat 6. One sold because he thought his RCZ was faster and better! He couldn’t get his head round using the revs. The enthusiast, the real car person… is for more interested in the engineering, the how and why… most, all of that is wasted on them. The majority won’t even know the G-Wagen could be way better than it is. It’s the new one… so it must be in their minds.
It’s not worth getting into deep discussion about it. It’ll sell regardless.
NomduJour said:
No - Mercedes build a car like this; (certain) people want it.
They don’t want it because of some specific ability or trait that being constructed in a similar way to the original gives it, they want it because it’s a G-Wagen. Nicely built, feels really solid, sounds great in a childish way, looks a bit like a car that had some authenticity and purpose. But doesn’t.
And what makes it a G-Wagen? Oh yeah, that would be the looks, the way it's constructed, and its specific abilities and traits They don’t want it because of some specific ability or trait that being constructed in a similar way to the original gives it, they want it because it’s a G-Wagen. Nicely built, feels really solid, sounds great in a childish way, looks a bit like a car that had some authenticity and purpose. But doesn’t.
To further underline the flaws in your argument, Mercedes have been adding wood trim, leather and other non-essential stuff to the "G" in order to turn it into a luxury road car for more than 30-years. That's compared to about 10-years of production where you could argue it was a purely utilitarian vehicle. On that basis, it's been a luxury trinket for far longer than it was ever a simple military truck, so which is the more authentic bit?
Alas, the fact you continue to make thinly-veiled attacks on the customer base makes it's pretty clear that this has nothing to do with the car, so I'll leave it there. Enjoy your day, and try not to shout at the clouds too much
How can a car made by Mercedes Benz, which has evolved slowly from the original, and is sold & loved the world over be inauthentic?
That moniker could be levelled at the new Defender that shares nothing in common with the original.
This is why car manufacturers ignore the pearl clutchers who rail against the Range Rover not having a hose down interior or the MX-5 gaining weight.
It is what the people who actually buy NEW cars want.
People who love the brand but buy 2nd or 3rd hand don’t matter. Don’t believe me? Look at BMW.
If it was left up to ‘popular’ opinion then the E-Type & Cortina would still be on sale and Fuel Injection & ABS wouldn’t exist.
Is the G-Wagen anachronistic? Yes.
Is the G-Wagen authentic? Yes.
That moniker could be levelled at the new Defender that shares nothing in common with the original.
This is why car manufacturers ignore the pearl clutchers who rail against the Range Rover not having a hose down interior or the MX-5 gaining weight.
It is what the people who actually buy NEW cars want.
People who love the brand but buy 2nd or 3rd hand don’t matter. Don’t believe me? Look at BMW.
If it was left up to ‘popular’ opinion then the E-Type & Cortina would still be on sale and Fuel Injection & ABS wouldn’t exist.
Is the G-Wagen anachronistic? Yes.
Is the G-Wagen authentic? Yes.
Jesus suffering feck! It is primarily an off-roader.
Hence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
For the most part, Toyota-Lexus has also once again applied the same principles to its new Land Cruiser, GX, et al.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
There’re I6 turbo, diesel and petrol, versions with higher ground clearance.
And there’re still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
And then there’s the 2024 G63, which with McLaren-type non-ARB indie hydraulic suspension incoming, will have an even broader range of abilities - on- and off-road.
Image problem? FWIW, I don’t give a flying f*ck into a rolling doughnut because depending on exterior / interior colour(s), wheel spec, etc, any car, especially SUVs and 4x4s, can either have a “dodgy image” or look cool.
But whoever or whatever the owners may or may not be, I bet they enjoy their G63s.
Hence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
For the most part, Toyota-Lexus has also once again applied the same principles to its new Land Cruiser, GX, et al.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
There’re I6 turbo, diesel and petrol, versions with higher ground clearance.
And there’re still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
And then there’s the 2024 G63, which with McLaren-type non-ARB indie hydraulic suspension incoming, will have an even broader range of abilities - on- and off-road.
Image problem? FWIW, I don’t give a flying f*ck into a rolling doughnut because depending on exterior / interior colour(s), wheel spec, etc, any car, especially SUVs and 4x4s, can either have a “dodgy image” or look cool.
But whoever or whatever the owners may or may not be, I bet they enjoy their G63s.
NGK210 said:
Jesus suffering feck! It is primarily an off-roader.
Hence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
For the most part, Toyota-Lexus has also once again applied the same principles to its new Land Cruiser, GX, et al.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
There’re I6 turbo, diesel and petrol, versions with higher ground clearance.
And there’re still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
And then there’s the 2024 G63, which with McLaren-type non-ARB indie hydraulic suspension incoming, will have an even broader range of abilities - on- and off-road.
Image problem? FWIW, I don’t give a flying f*ck into a rolling doughnut because depending on exterior / interior colour(s), wheel spec, etc, any car, especially SUVs and 4x4s, can either have a “dodgy image” or look cool.
But whoever or whatever the owners may or may not be, I bet they enjoy their G63s.
Ah, the Land Cruiser....another icon that I adore. When I win the lottery I'll have a bonkers G wagon. In a light metallic pink. A six wheeled G wagon a deep brown metallic with tan leather, a Unimog camper in whatever colour it likes and a Land Cruiser for taking the dogs out....authentic as fHence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
For the most part, Toyota-Lexus has also once again applied the same principles to its new Land Cruiser, GX, et al.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
There’re I6 turbo, diesel and petrol, versions with higher ground clearance.
And there’re still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
And then there’s the 2024 G63, which with McLaren-type non-ARB indie hydraulic suspension incoming, will have an even broader range of abilities - on- and off-road.
Image problem? FWIW, I don’t give a flying f*ck into a rolling doughnut because depending on exterior / interior colour(s), wheel spec, etc, any car, especially SUVs and 4x4s, can either have a “dodgy image” or look cool.
But whoever or whatever the owners may or may not be, I bet they enjoy their G63s.
k me... 
The G class because an icon, and this is a continuation of that, in that way it is authentic.
Its the clientele that changed, from folk who needed a G wagon because of what it did, to those who wanted one because of what it is.
Its become a cultural thing, makes a quite specific statement, and its no longer that you are a farmer, soldier, police, landowner or anyone else who needed the off road aspect when there was very little image to them, relative to how they are now.
Things change, they have got to have a little bit of an edgy image, in 63 form anyway which most are, that speaks volumes as in the past it was all diesels and lower powered, workmanlike petrols, they were by and large pretty utilitarian, where now they are full on, quite chinzy luxury cars.
I can see the appeal, even if they now kind of miss the point of what they were, and are now a completely different thing. They were never cheap, but the price fitted with the high quality and robust construction, now it seems more like they load the price and make it because Influencers, footballers, dodgy types and wealthy folk wanting to look a bit gangsta buy them and will pay a premium, I cant imagine anyone buys it because its the best off roader or the best on road, or better than a Range Rover, its mainly based on it being a G wagon and what that represents.
Its the clientele that changed, from folk who needed a G wagon because of what it did, to those who wanted one because of what it is.
Its become a cultural thing, makes a quite specific statement, and its no longer that you are a farmer, soldier, police, landowner or anyone else who needed the off road aspect when there was very little image to them, relative to how they are now.
Things change, they have got to have a little bit of an edgy image, in 63 form anyway which most are, that speaks volumes as in the past it was all diesels and lower powered, workmanlike petrols, they were by and large pretty utilitarian, where now they are full on, quite chinzy luxury cars.
I can see the appeal, even if they now kind of miss the point of what they were, and are now a completely different thing. They were never cheap, but the price fitted with the high quality and robust construction, now it seems more like they load the price and make it because Influencers, footballers, dodgy types and wealthy folk wanting to look a bit gangsta buy them and will pay a premium, I cant imagine anyone buys it because its the best off roader or the best on road, or better than a Range Rover, its mainly based on it being a G wagon and what that represents.
Reading and responding to posts in this thread is what I imagine the first week teaching at special school is like.
The 2018 car was entirely, totally, completely new, from the ground up - there are something like four parts shared with an old W461 (silly things like the spare wheel cover and door handle buttons).
The new car was never, ever intended to have any kind of commercial or military or practical application (you know - absolutely all the things that once made a G-Wagen a G-Wagen, wherever they stuck in a big V8 or not) - and not a single scrap of its design or build or anything is intended to do more than pretend to be the old one, but with slightly better road manners.
It’s a parody, a fraud, conceptually bankrupt.
Stick Legs said:
How can a car made by Mercedes Benz, which has evolved slowly from the original, and is sold & loved the world over be inauthentic?
Evolved slowly from the original? The 2018 car was entirely, totally, completely new, from the ground up - there are something like four parts shared with an old W461 (silly things like the spare wheel cover and door handle buttons).
The new car was never, ever intended to have any kind of commercial or military or practical application (you know - absolutely all the things that once made a G-Wagen a G-Wagen, wherever they stuck in a big V8 or not) - and not a single scrap of its design or build or anything is intended to do more than pretend to be the old one, but with slightly better road manners.
It’s a parody, a fraud, conceptually bankrupt.
NGK210 said:
Jesus suffering feck! It is primarily an off-roader.
Hence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
And there’s still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
“Primarily an off-roader”. Yeah. Course it is. Grrr. Hence, a ladder chassis, 3 locking diffs, high- / low-ratio, and a multi-link solid rear axle.
In turn, it’s one of the world’s best OEM-spec off-roaders and can tow 3.5 tonnes - if it was unibody with IRS, it probably wouldn’t nor couldn’t.
An off-road-focused G - snorkel, ladder, full length / width metal cage-type roofrack, etc - is avlbl in Oz and the US.
And there’s still the base spec NGO / military versions with solid front axles, etc.
In short, it’s-fit-for-its-prime-purpose – which is off-roading.
Loads of stuff can go off-road and tow 3.5 tonnes.
The “off-road” one is actually a trim package to give a “Rugged appearance courtesy of selected equipment specification” (according to MB).
The “base spec NGO / military versions” are an updated version of the old G461, nothing to do with the current road car.
Let’s off-road!
I don't think it's any more vulgar than a new RR or RRS or the new Defender for that matter, they all have an image issue if pigeonholing the drivers of cars is your thing.
Nothing more chavvy than an SVR RRS as an example if you want to go there, big powerful SUVs will always project a certain image to people, some will like it others not so much.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff