Talk Morgan Forums Community The Malvern Arms Sustainability in car design

Moved to the correct thread...
Suffolk Cars..

Wrong thread..

Its simple Sospan. The old saying was that no one ever got fired for buying IBM. In other words, career safety lies in following the herd. Its exactly the same reason why all the banks gets themselves into trouble at the same time with the same mistakes. So in the car industry if one brave sould tries something different and succeeds, they all follow suit.

I suspect that design and production in the car industry is more akin to the fashion industry with as much research going into determining marketing trends, and developing designs to meet these trends on a world wide basis, as into technical developments to meet all other necessary criteria.

I agree with any of the points you make but I have to question some of the comments based on personal experience?

I had an MB W212 E63s (585bhp 5.5V8BiT) and am now using the W166 ML63PP (565bhp of same engine) (Yes I know I am going to get some stick for being a planet smasher but I do try and compensate...) I had the same engine and drive the same way. The E was way better to drive and gave better MPG all the time.

The aerodynamic is best served discussing CDa which is frontal area * drag coefficient as you mention so the ML is a lot worse than the E was. The MPG was 20% worse on the ML all the time. Same routes, same plank at the wheel! Much less fun to push within road limits.

The interior space is pretty much identical. The boot is more cube shaped in the ML but the E was deeper and wider which was more useful in most cases. After the E the ML feels less efficient for general boot use. For shopping the wider deeper floor in the E was definitely more useful. We tried it so see what the fuss was and also a M-i-Law house move. We used the E63s to move our home and it did pretty much everything.

I have had several performance estates but this is the first quick SUV lump and I doubt it will be replaced with another. At this end of the spectrum and our specific needs I would far prefer the E63s. You really can tell the impact of the height, weight and aero. Then you get to the agility on the roundabouts and back roads. Massive difference.

I totally accept that this is a far end of the spectrum and many other peoples requirements are different but in a road situation the E63 whips the ML63 outright for me.

I don't consider the X1/Evoque 2WD/Juke in the same conversation?

Not meant in a rude manner but the cars are so similar I did want to share.

Agree with it. It sounds more than logic that the E goes better than the ML. The ML is much heavier with worse Cx as we mentioned.

About the boot, If you fold the rear seats of the ML and use the height you have, sorry but the E is light years behind in capacity. Maybe you never needed to fold the ML rear seats and use all the height?

And my previous sedan (a fantastic XJ), despite it had a huge boot it didn't allow me to fold its seats, so the new F-Pace is so much better! Try to put your mountain bikes in the boot of your E63.... I guess it depends on the models of each brand... and of course your personal needs.

And I admit the comfort of the XJ was way better than the sporty with super-hard-suspension of the F-Pace I have now...

If you count cubic volume they may well be similar but the E was more effective. The ML is narrower and less deep but higher this is not useful for shopping bags etc You need the height a lot less than the floor space in our lives. I need to put the seats down far more often in the ML than I did the E which indicates real life to me?

As you say I think it is the personal needs of each of us. I like the more relaxed view point due to the height of the ML but don't get the benefits overall. I think many of the large ones are purchased for the perceived social position? Range Rover or S Class ? F-Pace or XJ as you say.

I miss the ability to push on roundabouts. If I did not need a boot I would definitely have another CL600, my god that was an astonishing car and second hand it was a bargain.

You said it right: "if I did not need a boot". But in our case this was the main reason why we changed the XJ for the F-Pace.

Today I went with my wife to pick up a couple of friends at the airport. They were coming from Dallas, to do a master's degree in Madrid for the whole year. Five huge suitcases + 3 cabin-sized troleys + two small back packs. I removed the boot tray. Kept it under the boot floor in its space. Folded 40% of the seats. And keeping the big suitcases in standing up position, I put all luggage and the four of us inside. Impossible to do this with a sedan. Impossible. And this thanks to the fact that the boot admits a suitcase standing up, which a sedan does not.

How many times do I need to do this? Very few. Not enougth to justify buying a SUV. In my case I bought one because I like to carry the two mountain bikes and skis. And enter small easy offroad paths precisely to practice the mountain biking and hiking. And now (not planned when I bought it) becausue I tow the trailer with the M3W in it. So, I guess in our case it's really justified to have an SUV rather than a sedan. But this is now. In the future, who knows? I won't hesitate to change my type of car if my needs change.

You mentioned the CL600. Amazing car. If I could afford another car, without price limitation, I would hesitate between the S class Coupé and the Bentley GTC for travelling (when not with the mountain bikes, skis or towing the Morgan, obviously! LOL!)

And another reason why the SUV is a danger - visibility. The woman driving the thing might be able to see but the poor sod following in a normal car is presented with this huge vehicle blocking any visibility in the same way that white van man does. Doesnt help that most of them have drug dealer glass in the rear windows.

If you have one, you can see through it as you're at the same height!

Unless is has tainted glasses. But many normal cars have them too