Mercedes-AMG To Introduce '53' Line Of Vehicles

[68_427]

Competing with BMW slapping M-Sport badges on everything, I suppose.

This is even worse.

[cawimmer430]

The issue that people have isn't that MB shouldn't offer people choice, its that offering too much AMG makes the brand worth less.  There is no reason that a 43/53 can't just be a Mercedes 430/530; there is nothing that makes them an AMG.  Assuming this '53 applies to the C class, the US will have a C300, a C43AMG, a C53AMG, a C63AMG, and a C63AMG S so, more AMG's than the normal model.  Brands mean something, and AMG is a strong brand, but MB needs to be careful not dilute it to the ground.  Everyone also wants a Ferrari, but that's only because no one can have them.

Ok, now I understand where you're coming from.

I guess it will be interesting to see where this will go. But I don't think this will destroy the allure of an AMG car, primarily because the current '43 AMGs do have the performance and handling to be considered credible and fun sports cars. If these badges were just slapped onto a standard Mercedes' and sold as AMGs, then that would be an issue, IMO.

The weird thing is that I personally prefer the looks of the E43 AMG over the E63 AMG. I think the E63 AMG body kit is a tad too aggressive, whereas the E43 AMG looks just right - perfect blend between elegance and sport, and not to overdone in the sporty looks department.

[12,000 RPM]

If these badges were just slapped onto a standard Mercedes' and sold as AMGs, then that would be an issue, IMO.

Isn't that what they've done? What's the difference between a C400 and a C43 AMG? All I can see are tuning changes, which does not meet the requirement of AMG models as I understand it.

[cawimmer430]

Not sure where you're getting the notion that I think less of the car because it has a 6-cylinder instead of an 8.  That has nothing to do with it.  If Merc had replaced the last C63 with a new one that has a similarly powerful turbo I6, I wouldn't think any less of it (well, maybe a little since I do love me some NA V8).  And, no, I don't think the C32 was a lesser car than the C43.  Why?  Because it matched the performance of the older V8 car and was the top-dog C class of its vintage.  It was not "a" AMG C class available in 2001.  It was the AMG C class available in 2001.  The one-and-only AMG C class available.    Mercedes didn't also offer a cheaper, slower, weaker, C30 or C28 AMG as a sister or companion car.  They had one AMG C class and if you wanted the fastest, baddest C-class with a 3-pointed star on the grille, that was what you bought.  When somebody saw the C32 AMG badge on it, they knew that there was no faster C class available.  That made it special.

Wasn't a fan of the diesels, personally.  Also note that the AMG diesel C class was the one and only time AMG delved into performance diesels.  I give them a nod for trying something different, I guess.

It was an interesting experiment, and they were pretty quick (and fuel efficient). I wouldn't have a problem with diesel performance cars a la AMG. To me a Volkswagen Golf GTD is more appealing than a GTI because I like the blend between economy and performance.

You are right about the C43-into-C55 conversion.

I have no problem with the car itself.  My grief is with the way they are branding it.  When they were selling it as a C450 AMG-sport last year, did you hear me complaining?  Why do they have to pawn it as a full-blooded AMG model?  What's wrong with selling it as the Mercedes Benz C400 or 450 or whatever the latest number-that-doesn't-actually-reflect-either-the-engine-size-or-output is?  If they absolutely must include an AMG tie-in, they can put a little "tuned by AMG" badge on the trunk or wherever.  If they must, I'd even tolerate a the "AMG-Sport" moniker as a way of denoting models that aren't full AMG but that had AMG contribution.  But at the end of the day, the AMG model should represent the fastest model in the line.  If I see a car with "Cxx AMG" emblazoned on the tail, I shouldn't have to wonder, or ask the owner, if that's the top dog AMG or the next one, or two, tiers down.  By inserting other, lesser AMG models within the C or E or whatever class lineup alongside the top dog, they have cheapened the meaning of having the AMG model.  Especially when that lower tier AMG isn't even a real, full-blooded AMG with a proper, hand-built AMG engine.

Now I understand. I wonder if MB/AMG have asked themselves this same question. I am sure they must have, and they must also have conducted market research before taking this next step.

In a way this could be mimicking what Mercedes' does in their home market. Like how you can get a base C180 or a fully loaded C63 AMG, and both products are still appealing to buyers who won't think any less of the brand for offering these two very different cars. At the end of the day the badge on these two cars is very desireable, no matter what is under the hood. I don't think E-Class drivers will feel bad if an E-Class taxi pulls up next to their ride. Happens here all the time. 

Although I am not the target market for an AMG, I do find the C43/E43 AMGs more appealing than the C63/E63 AMGs - simply based on the less aggressive-looking body kit. And performance wise those cars don't disappoint either.

But I now understand what you are saying. I guess only time will tell... 

[cawimmer430]

Isn't that what they've done? What's the difference between a C400 and a C43 AMG? All I can see are tuning changes, which does not meet the requirement of AMG models as I understand it.

With a "standard Mercedes" I meant a standard Mercedes; soft and comfortable, not the sportiest handling.

The C/E/GLC43 AMGs at least offer satisfying and impressive performance and great handling; hardly "standard Mercedes" in that sense.