Or maybe not, we're talking about Daimler-Chrysler era cars here, which were, to be frank, s**te.
Ugly, cheap looking leather, cheap looking dash.
I could go worse, but that would mean a Kia Magentis. If you squint, it even looks like one.
Well yea, but they have to be under 3 years and 60k old or HR will mock and laugh hehe :-)
You already do worse.
It might be "cheap" looking, but it isn't cheaply made. You won't find a car in the same price range as well nailed together as anything to come out of a Toyota factory.
For the same standard you are looking at a Phaeton, E Class, better specced 5 series, and it will be harder wearing, more reliable, and more comfortable than any of them.
Hateful cars. They may be well built, but I'm not driving anything that's even more ugly than the Passat is akward looking from the rear
3/4 angle.
Except by 2003-2004 they'd got themselves back on track. They now don't rust or fall apart or rattle or fail unexpectedly.
The W202 fragility is long gone, even later W203s are actually OK if a little closed in. Late W210s don't rust, W211s don't rust anyway. S class cars were never cheapened off.
But they *look* like a DSG salesmans wet dream on the inside.
Cheap looking leather and fake wood.
The leather is coated for stain resistance, the wood is a thin but real veneer behind shedloads of lacquer. The real beauty is in the tasteful design.
Nothing tasteful inside a modern Merc, I'm afraid.
Really hate the leather, and I'd prefer it if they used a decent thickness of wood (think the stuff Volvo use in the SE Lux models - proper marine ply type stuff) rather than coat a thin layer in over shiny lacquer.
Then you buy an S which has that kind of interior. Mainstream stuff is designed for a long hard life - plenty of 400k mile plus E classes with seats and trim that cleans up like new.
The Volvo stuff is still just a thin veneer with a matt lacquer.
If you look at the S40 / V40 with the SE Lux trim, you get solid marine ply, not stick on tat.
The fact there is even a discussion about rust, is unacceptable. There is
8 -12 year old AMG Mercs, so at least £50k+ cars new, all over the place with rusty rear arches. That is just ridiculous.
People are specifically employed to sell DSG gearboxes?
(Yes, of course I know what DSG stands for - extended warranty on your kettle, sir?)
The word from the VAG forums seems to be one of avoiding DSG at the moment, teething problems. This is just what a couple of VAG fanbois on Cliosport have been saying they've been hearing.
The ones fitted to the DSG Octavia broke too.
Seems to be in the higher power applications they're having most problems.
Surely not...
MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.