I just can't get behind Mercedes Benz producing AMG after AMG right now. Forgive me for being a bitter have-not, but it pisses me the hell off to watch MB crank these out for the rich bastards who are literally capitalizing on the suffering of the rest of us.
Americans, in particular, are getting the seriously short end of the stick right now, and we're getting it up the bum. With offshoring, the banking sector, the housing sector, employment nationwide surpassing 10% and showing no sign of slacking off on top of the rest of the mess we're in, it seems almost a slap in the face by the nouveau riche to even contemplate the purchase of such a vehicle, much less the conspicuous consumption of driving it, to say nothing of it's production.
Now, with that mini rant done, this concept is rather ugly. MB's design language as of late is uninspiring, to say the least. To be more accurate, it's unoriginally bland, strangely proportioned and the protrusions at random angles and points do it no favours. And what the HELL is with this "Massive Wheels Make It Better!" crap?! Good thing the only people buying mercedes these days are gangsta rap thugs, because His Noodliness knows that's the only mindset this will appeal to: thick-skulled bling-whores.
@Wankelin' For A Rotary: You see, this is the problem. You could make the same argument about any luxury automaker. Why single out AMG? I drive an AMG, and I'm not some nouveau riche bastard. MB supplies these because there is demand.
@Wankelin' For A Rotary: So, during depressing times like this you would rather have nothing cool offered?
Cars like this, and the Aston Martin Rapide, and any number of high-end car are objects of desire for many people no matter what their economic circumstances. A vast majority of those people will never be able to afford these cars, but they still desire one and will still strive to be able to afford one some day.
If taken to its logical conclusion, your philosophy would mean every car produced would be a Prius or Taurus. Sony, Panasonic, et al would only produce 15" CRTs and not the 50"+ LCD HDTVs we lust for.
In a time and a world where most "affordable" cars on the road offer little more than basic transportation between point A and point B, I think it's important for car companies to continue to put out cars that we can lust after. It's important to have a carrot to drive us to want to do bigger and better things.
@th1nwhiteduke: Oh, yes. Clearly, I hate everyone who is successful. And America. Yep. That's it. You've pegged it. I'm just a crazy leftist nutjob who thinks guns should be outlawed, too. And anything that doesn't have a CVT. Ooh, and no more than 2.0l while we're at it! Can we make the engines from recyclable materials, too? And they should run on sunshines, rainbows and puppy kisses.
...Idiot. I'm probably one of the biggest supporters of pure driving cars you'll find, radios and cupholders are entirely optional in my world. But hey, you'd know that if you had even bothered to give my previous posts a cursory glance. Then again, I can spell cursory correctly the first time. Perhaps it could be that maybe, just maybe, I do not think that this is badass? Certainly a v8 pushing prodigious amounts of thrust and twist is badass, but I disagree that the engine makes the car in the segment AMG sells to. Certainly,
@Duke engineerd von Prandtl: I can see the correlation you're making with respect to the 60's musclecars, but I would submit that the venerable 'vettes and 'stangs of that era were significantly more simplistic in their attack and mindset through design. I would submit that the AMGs of today are closer to the one-off, limited runs of the 50s rather than the 60s and 70s musclecars. The first thought in those cars was the luxury and appointments to the interior with the (heinously unreliable) performance engines as a relative afterthought to the entire execution. Perhaps the most translateable to AMG is the Imperial line from Chrysler. over the top styling for the time, large displacement engines and a top-of-the-segment model. Ultimately, the Imperial was a styling exercise as it's thorough impracticality and touted-innovations introduced were offset by the V8 under the hood. What the Imperial DID do, however, was define the design language for the entire Chrysler company.
I see AMG as essentially the same thing. Useless, but perhaps stylishly so. Can they go fast? Sure. But there's only one or two I really want to do that in. The rest are exactly like the Imperials - to large and heavy to be offset with even the mighty V8.
idk if anyone agrees, but I feel like on a car of this magnitude, the interior is a let down. I know its supposed to be a bit throwback in design, but it really doesn't come across as anything spectacular to me. Maybe because its all in black. A red or a beige might be better.
@Bullitt417: But it is a step up in anything they have done recently. Much better sorted out than the SL, which was weird the day it came out. That huge slab of wood in the CLS is also weird. It seems that, with this one, everything is in it's right place.
@Bullitt417: true, would've been nice if they went a little crazier- like the Stirling concept. But then again, this is Merc. The craziest thing anyone there did today was jerk off left-handed to a Czech porn star.
They then decided they must have her, and, well, I think you know what happens next.
If MB can put Gullwing doors on a convertible I will buy it. I mean, that would be the coolest shit ever. I haven't had enough drinks yet to show everyone how that works, but you believe me it will work.
What's the point of having gullwing doors? It's not a neccessity, like the 300SL. I hate when stuff like this is designed into a car for the sake of style and not function.
@crankcase - Now 50 and even crankier!: Ah, that's where you're wrong. The 300SL needed the gullwing doors because of the insanely high sill. The same reasoning applies to the Gumpert Apollo's case.
@tony-e30: Strongly disagree. That interior is a step up on everything they got in terms of style. The SLR interior is hideous. The SL was outdated the day it was launched. I'm not a fan of the ultra-luxo CL and S also. The CLS is fine but that whole car was wrong to begin with.
Isn't the order of the things altered in here? If they clearly have a close to production interior they should be in the same level with the exterior. Why tease us with out of this world sketches then?
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
Americans, in particular, are getting the seriously short end of the stick right now, and we're getting it up the bum. With offshoring, the banking sector, the housing sector, employment nationwide surpassing 10% and showing no sign of slacking off on top of the rest of the mess we're in, it seems almost a slap in the face by the nouveau riche to even contemplate the purchase of such a vehicle, much less the conspicuous consumption of driving it, to say nothing of it's production.
Now, with that mini rant done, this concept is rather ugly. MB's design language as of late is uninspiring, to say the least. To be more accurate, it's unoriginally bland, strangely proportioned and the protrusions at random angles and points do it no favours. And what the HELL is with this "Massive Wheels Make It Better!" crap?! Good thing the only people buying mercedes these days are gangsta rap thugs, because His Noodliness knows that's the only mindset this will appeal to: thick-skulled bling-whores.
04/14/09
04/14/09
Cars like this, and the Aston Martin Rapide, and any number of high-end car are objects of desire for many people no matter what their economic circumstances. A vast majority of those people will never be able to afford these cars, but they still desire one and will still strive to be able to afford one some day.
If taken to its logical conclusion, your philosophy would mean every car produced would be a Prius or Taurus. Sony, Panasonic, et al would only produce 15" CRTs and not the 50"+ LCD HDTVs we lust for.
In a time and a world where most "affordable" cars on the road offer little more than basic transportation between point A and point B, I think it's important for car companies to continue to put out cars that we can lust after. It's important to have a carrot to drive us to want to do bigger and better things.
04/14/09
I miss the America where people weren't vilified for their success.
Also, you're tearing this car apart and you haven't seen a complete shot of the exterior that isn't covered in camo or a concept drawing. Impressive.
04/14/09
...Idiot. I'm probably one of the biggest supporters of pure driving cars you'll find, radios and cupholders are entirely optional in my world. But hey, you'd know that if you had even bothered to give my previous posts a cursory glance. Then again, I can spell cursory correctly the first time. Perhaps it could be that maybe, just maybe, I do not think that this is badass? Certainly a v8 pushing prodigious amounts of thrust and twist is badass, but I disagree that the engine makes the car in the segment AMG sells to. Certainly,
@Duke engineerd von Prandtl: I can see the correlation you're making with respect to the 60's musclecars, but I would submit that the venerable 'vettes and 'stangs of that era were significantly more simplistic in their attack and mindset through design. I would submit that the AMGs of today are closer to the one-off, limited runs of the 50s rather than the 60s and 70s musclecars. The first thought in those cars was the luxury and appointments to the interior with the (heinously unreliable) performance engines as a relative afterthought to the entire execution. Perhaps the most translateable to AMG is the Imperial line from Chrysler. over the top styling for the time, large displacement engines and a top-of-the-segment model. Ultimately, the Imperial was a styling exercise as it's thorough impracticality and touted-innovations introduced were offset by the V8 under the hood. What the Imperial DID do, however, was define the design language for the entire Chrysler company.
I see AMG as essentially the same thing. Useless, but perhaps stylishly so. Can they go fast? Sure. But there's only one or two I really want to do that in. The rest are exactly like the Imperials - to large and heavy to be offset with even the mighty V8.
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
Bruce be quick
Bruce dropped the top and looked sick.
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
They then decided they must have her, and, well, I think you know what happens next.
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/14/09
04/08/09
I hate when stuff like this is designed into a car for the sake of style and not function.
04/08/09
04/08/09
@crankcase - Now 50 and even crankier!: Ah, that's where you're wrong. The 300SL needed the gullwing doors because of the insanely high sill. The same reasoning applies to the Gumpert Apollo's case.
04/08/09
04/08/09
04/08/09