Shame on Top Gear!
Yet again British chauvinism shines through and another piece of shameless propaganda thinly disguised as motoring journalism is out and about.... If I were MBUK I would simply stop paying my TV licences in protest for this load of bull's manure!
http://www.topgear.com/uk/photos/test-merc-rangie-2011
What they don't say is that the vast majority of 1991 RRs have already been scrapped while any 1991 G-Wagen still commands strong money. And the same will happen to the two cars tested!
shame indeed mate
I have never read a test featuring RR's in various incarnations where it has not beaten all oppostion not just the G wagen. Don't be surprised and to be fair to the writer of the article there are qute a few compliments in there too.
I think the verdict would be reversed if the tester had to drive them both for 10,000 miles on and off road and then report what had broken or fallen off each vehicle.
I could buy a 5 year old current model range rover for less than the value of my 18 year old G Wagon. I think that says it all.
And now we know why G's never do to well in the UK., when muppet like reviews like this one are put onto top gear. But does that matter, when in reality the people who know and are serious, will get the G anyway?
Thinking of;
The ADF
The MoD (aparently for serious regions outside the UK they prefer G's)
NATO
Members of the GWOA
The one things that is not mentioned is the residules, as has been pointed out here, could anyone find a RR more than 10 years old that will match the G for resell value? I think not.
I know its old but just to remind people
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3ShJZnH3flQ
Jezza, Hampster and May.......you should hang your heads in shame!
Spider1V
Of course your all biased, but how can you possibly comment when niether of you have test driven both vehicles and compared! , which is what has been done in this report. You want to blame anyone for the lack of g sales in the uk don't blame the journalists, blame mb uk!
As for the video, hard road Tyres on hard greasy grass, the g would have done exactly the same !
What part do you not like or think is untrue?
I can see no reall untruths.
It is compairing new 2011 models not 1991 models. Or am i reading the wrong review?
If you have K80+ to spend on a luxury 4x4 you dont give a s**t about what its going to be worth in 20 years time let alone 3.
If the Merc was deemed a better car by purchasers of luxury 4x4 vehicles it will out sell the RR- its called consumerism.
Or you buy a G and drive it because its rare and different.
Talk with your feet and your wallets and go and buy one of the many new and unwanted g350s that are for sale... Or does no one here really think it appropriate to be spending 80K on something a tad flash for the current financial climate? (Drug deallers and russian Billionaires aside- who would buy the G55 anyways).
I believe th G350 at that price is a car with no real market.
I am a G owner and would never buy a RR or a LR but i saw nothing untrue in that review.
Having gone to the wales weekend and meeting up with the general manager of mb Shrewsbury, whom has worked for them for some 30 years, I had some obvious questions to ask, he has been driving g wagons since they were sold in 79, he was the only one that loved driving them, he also said that back then mb dealer salesmen were snobs, and hated trying to sell the g. He said that there are some 30 dealerships that have been given the 350, but not sold one, and when there six months is up they will discount them to the sound of 15%, it's a non starter. G are not that comfy in the back either.
Just to say, friend of mine has a 98 ranger rover p38, done 120,000, and only minor issue line heater fan, yet this model was supposed to be the most unreliable of the rr's, none of us can deny that the range rovers do have a very nice interior. But for 88k I'd have the g above all regardless of it being a blinged up 32 year old motor.
just to say my friend has 2008 rr nothing but issues recovered three times but heater fan is lovely
How many people will use a £80k car to go serious off roading? I agree the built quality is exeptional, but in principle all of us are using a serious off roader for something a Saxo would do.
I have driven the new RR, and it is a fabulous car. I still chose the G, but the RR is stil great.
If money was no issue I would probably buy one of each .....
Talk about the lack of ergonomics applied to the G-wagen, the jorunalists did not give even one example to demonstrate this.
However, examaining both photographs, notice the R/Rover has the light switch in the same postion as is in th G-Wagen, the hand brake is on the left side of the driver as in the RR, the centre consol houses the Radio, command module and heater controls, so if the G-Wagen has not employed ergonomics, how is it then, the RR has?
If I had the money, I would buy the G55 without question. I have not checked yet If, I am the winner of the €60,000,000 on the Lottery, if I had, I'll be off to Brooklands, and put in an order for a Cabriolet.
I agree with Moritison the RR is now 'Indian'
Check out the links below.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zfpqfwt_cLg
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=olF4kpkiWys
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hjWd9a8Ck8U
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-fQrY1r5OD4
Cheers,
http://reporter.mercedes-benz.com/down-dirty-offroad-with-the-g-class-2376/
Topgear produce comic book journalism but in the context of comparing luxury SUV’s the RR wins hands down. Yes I’ve driven both and additionally the D4 also runs rings around the G IN THIS CONTEXT. You can include the Tourareg, even the stupid Cayenne etc. in this as well
You can put all the lipstick you like on a pig but it’s still a pig. I like pigs by the way. The G is a 30+ year old design which was conceived and designed as a utilitarian vehicle. The RR is maybe a 10 year old design conceived as a luxury car which needed to have off road credentials as a marketing necessity. Why attempt to compare. Modern G’s have lost their way, this latest incarnation will be a marketing disaster.
So what about residuals I didn’t see that as part of the criteria. Diff locks, next to no one in the market for this type of vehicle will have a clue what to do with them. What on earth has the fact that it’s owned by Tata got to do with anything. If the rest of Europe are stupid enough to rate the G over a RR in this context then they are the biased, chauvinistic, xenophobic ones.
This childish “mines bigger than yours” is pretty pathetic and obviously not based on any actual knowledge. I’m comfortable with my choice, understand why I’ve made it and also accept what a G is and what it can never be.
I don’t particularly like the RR and certainly wouldn’t ever have one but it does what it was designed for extremely well. What’s the purpose of a 2011 G350?
I think they're missing the point.
The G-wagen isn't for the landed gentry, but more so the WORKING landed gentry and non-gentry (and for the ones that just want one!). Everybody knows that the RR simply won't take long to break when you're towing occasionally, driving around in muddy fields (ALL DAY long) and being partially used as a real working vehicle. If they want to compare the RR to an SUV, go for a comparison test with the V8 GL450 diesel instead of the 350 (which they still seem to think is the benchmark to compare the RR's V8 diesel to).
Even though the G-Wagen's price tag is eye-watering, it hasn't stopped at least two farmers in our area from forking out the necessary to get them behind the wheel of the Diesel variant: their reasoning is simply that nothing comes close to the bomb-proof reliability, build quality and durability of the G (and comfort - comparative vehilces only really being the Toyota Land Cruiser and the older big diesel Nissan Patrol). It is precisely because of these qualities that our dimplomatic-core boys in Basra chose G-wagens and not RRs.......because they didn't want a break down for understandably all the right reasons........
Although I don't agree with the American 'quality' schemes (JD Power and the like) entirely, they have a very good point.........what do the customers say about their newly bought wonders over a 3 year stretch.........
Having owned a number of LRs products over the years, what the British press don't seem to realise is that as new vehicles they are great, but they just don't stand the test of time: they are just too unreliable. A fact that hasn't been lost on the rest of the World which in the '70s used to drive overwhelmingly in LRs.......what do they drive today? The only reason I switched out of LRs (initially to Toyotas and then to Mercedes) is that I was so sick and tired of fixing them, or getting them fixed, all the time.......and the fact that the company seems to think that not changing the seating position or making the roof leak-proof in Defenders for almost 50 years (when everybody has been complaining about it for 50 years) is acceptable. For me, NEVER again. They have lost a once (too) loyal customer.
Why doesn't the press write an article on why LR's market share has fallen so drastically in the working sectors? Too negative. Maybe......but the company does need its cage to be rattled (just as - let us be honest about it - Mercedes' needed to have the same treatment in the early 2000s). The point being, nobody here wants to see another British product heading towards the history pages of great marques of the past. However, if they don't listen to their customers, this is exactly what will happen. Thankfully for us, I suppose, Mercedes has got its act back together again. They DID listen and learn.
I hope someone on the editorial staff of our great motoring press is reading.......
Ph
The fact that Mercedes can’t shift the G 350s speaks for itself, there are better choices for a £90k commuter car or workhorse; the G might have been designed for a military purpose but it turned into a design classic and as such the 2011 G 500 is the ultimate package: it looks and sounds right [the 5.5l V8 will soon be replaced by a turbo-engine].
All fair comments. A live axled 30 year old design is still that whatever paint you apply. Only things going for G are build quality which only comes to light after 5-10 years and steel springs in suspension. The comment about RR on flowing roads maybe true but down bumpy twisty roads it no doubt loses all sense of wheels being attached still (air suspension) whereas the G holds together better as you can still feel the wheels. The RR is a waft wagon not a trooper wagon.
Not sure about the latest LR and Freelander .. Ford did a good job on them before they sold them so they may be up to scratch for their niche. Now suspect they will be starved of investment again (along with Jaguar); go to India and look how they treat their buildings.. throw them up and never spend a dime again on them.
The fact that Mercedes can’t shift the G 350s speaks for itself, there are better choices for a £90k commuter car or workhorse
I would be interested to read what you think would make a better £90k workhorse than the G. I think this is the one area that it excels in. It is tough, reliable and you can get twenty five years use out of it. Not something that can be said about the current Range Rover.However in the real world who really wants to pay £90k for a workhorse when there are pleny of alternatives for a third of the price.
I am fortunate to own some luxury 4x4's that are in the new G Wagon price bracket and have been asked a few times on this site why I don't buy a new G. The answer is that I could not justify using a new G as it was intended to be used off road the same way as I use my current (old) one. The cosmetic damage alone would probably half its value in a month. Therefore a new G would only be used for light offroad duties and daily transport which sort of defeats the purpose of spending all that money for something as tough as the G.
To be honest there are other more modern 4x4's that do the daily driver thing better than the G and in more comfort. If you compare the interior of the new G with the new Cayenne the G seems a bit old fashioned and not particularly luxurious. I also think this is where it lost out quite a bit to the RangeRover in the TG test.
I have a soft spot for the G and if I wanted to get to the top of my nearest mountain it would be my first choice, but for driving long distance at speed and in comfort with the occasional bit of rough stuff it loses out to its younger cousins.
Bigblock here here,
I also can not justify buying a new G either. However on servicing the wife's runaround the other day at our local Merc dealership, I couldn't help but ask for a test drive in their resident G. A 350 CDI. I must admit, it is a great car (albeit a bit stiffly sprung even compared to our 500) and the build quality is far superior than the American-built MLs and GLs......but, like you, would I part with (say after a little bit of haggling) £80k for one? I would have to admit, a firm no. I am not a landed gent, nor a farmer and really would only use it as a daily runaround and occasional offroading on my way home from work. For that my wife's car is a far better and certainly more comfortable on long trips alternative........and we already have Gs to use for our offroading trips, so why buy a new third one (which in my most objective opinion IS overpriced).
Like many on this forum, I also think that MBUK has made a grave error. The fact is that, especially for the 'base' diesel version, they should be selling it for around £60-65k and I'm sure people will be lining up around the corner for one as this would be a true competitor to the Land Cruiser or big Patrols. I don't mention the RR, simply because it IS in another market segment. It can not be considered as a working vehicle. Defenders are exactly what they say on the tin: cheap good working vehicles (when they are working), but are not in the same league as Gs or the Japanese for durability........and I think every even dyed-in-the-wool objective LR fan would admit it.
So where does this leave us. The new G is too expensive for what it is. MBUK isn't selling enough of them, so maybe we should all just wait until they come to their senses and start selling them at discounted prices to G-club members...........well nobody said we couldn't dream as well!
Ph
>> So where does this leave us. The new G is too expensive for what it is. MBUK isn't selling enough of them, so maybe we should all just wait until they come to their senses and start selling them at discounted prices to G-club members...........well nobody said we couldn't dream as well! <<
Overpriced has always been MBUK's price structure.. the 460's when they first came in were 20-30% more than a RR for less of a luxary car. Just be happy that a few get bought so we can have a second hand market for us skinflints in a few years. No doubt they will drop the range again within 2 years for UK as sales folk do not understand what they are selling and the profit/volume is negliable. Meantime Landcruisers will continue to clean up in the niche they might have occupied while the London/Urban centric MB sales force wonder why sales are low except for G500 WAG's
"Overpriced has always been MBUK's price structure"
fair comment, but exactly for this reasons it is hard to understand why Mercedes decided to market the Diesel vs the G500; I agree with bigblock's logic, independent of budget a well maintained or restored earlier G is more desirable that a G350; heated seats and ambient lighting might be interesting for the commuter car but they are not necessarily in line with the spirit of the Diesel G-Wagen; marketing the PUR and G500 would have made more sense.
However, this is all a bit nerdy for Mercedes-Brooklands: they target the customer who is happy to pay £300k for an SLR McLaren (just to realise that the faster McLaren 12C can now be bought for £170k); for these customers the G55 is the only choice.
Well, well, well
This is turning out to be a rather interesting debate. I do feel somewhat annoyed with the sales team at Brooklands, as just before they were going to launch it I spoke with the Head of Sales for the 'luxury' division, where the G is sold (its the actual area we had our AGM). When the question of price came up and he asked what I thought, I did recommend that the 463 should start at the £60K/£65K mark, and about the £70K+ mark for a 500. Its obvious that he may not have listened!
However...
One has to remember that the G is classed as an off roader and therefore will compete against the GL and ML ranges, which means that the G sales would eat into their sales if it were a more sensible price. What is galling though, is one would have thought after almost 30+ odd years and the numbers they have sold through licensing (Peugeot) the cost would have been paid for and they could afford to reduce the price? Or MB have paid for the cost and are just being greedy?
It is such a shame that for such an iconic car MB don't think of the existing owners/loyal customers and provide some sort of 'special' discount. (and yes I am miserable that I can not get a new one due to cost), but part of me does think that its rather nice having such a unique car, it helps me find it faster in the Waitrose car park amongst all the Range Rovers! :)
While my initial comments earlier was more a dig in jest, even I realize that the RR has changed somewhat from what its origins were (as has the whole off road market) as has the G - I mean a button to put you into low ratio? PLEASE lol. Its all about choices and I chose a G, preferably one that is pre owned and well looked after!
Keep up the discussion!
Spider1V
hi to all !
jesus, i have been reading this type of british motoring journal bulshit since 1984 !!!!!
PLEASE NO ONE TAKE OFFENCE......PLEASE.
but this british ignorance makes me sick, and puts shade on the fabulous people the brits are...
Overpriced G? Of course it is. It is a hand-made vehicle. But MB don't give a fiddler's fart about it: They sell every G they make. For a reason. They last. They are reliable. And they don't leave a track of oil on your driveway, as opposed to LR products.
The reason for me posting the link in the first place is that I collect every magazine test about the G that I become aware of. From Britain. From Germany. From France. From Spain, Italy, you name it. And what I invariably find is that the reviews about the G are invariably favourable. All of them except those coming from the UK.
Your loss.
Rakesh, I hope that these Indians will The RR's improve build quality and reliability!
JOIN THE GWOA
This website and forum are provided for the benefit of enthusiasts and owners of all Mercedes Benz off road vehicles, in particular the G Wagen. The costs of development, upkeep and provision of the site are met entirely by the annual subscriptions of club members. If you are using the site and are not a member of the G Wagen Owners Association please consider joining. You will have access to areas on the site that are not open to non members, to club trips and meetings and to technical assistance. In addition your contribution (only £25 annually) will help us maintain and develop our website for future users.
Who's new
- Jaffa_JIM_23
- Wrabstar
- GG
- KTMSCANIA22
- 280ge
Yes, problem is that there are reviews of the GWagen and RR all over Europe and the only place where it is said that the RR is a better car is the UK. Not bad for an INDIAN vehicle
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZkyYkKKnns