We currently own a 2002 G500 which has been a nightmare to own with multiple mechanical, electrical and quality problems in the first 12k miles. It is not reliable enough to take it out of town on a long trip in our opinion. The dealer has been great and has fixed each of the problems as they occur. My wife was considering replacing it with a 2006 ML500. Any thoughts on this?
The car currently drives perfectly and looks great and would command a decent trade. Should I keep it with the multiple problems it has had in its first 12k miles? It's almost as unreliable as a previous LR Defender I owned.
Thanks
Steve

My brother just purchased the 06' ML500 about 1 month ago. He absolutley loves the SUV, and has had no issues. I drive an ML55, and i must say the new truck is great, not nearly as quick. Overall feel is much better than previous ML's, and it appears they have refined/eliminated many of the typical problems with the new model.

But its only been a little over a month

We traded the G500 today for a new 06 ML350 which my wife is very pleased about. Hopefully it will be a good one.
Steve

I read in car and driver that the 06 ML350 with the increase in HP and addition of the 7sp auto trans was as quick or quicker than the old (163) ML430 while getting much better fuel economy.

Food for thought!

"I read in car and driver that the 06 ML350 with the increase in HP and addition of the 7sp auto trans was as quick or quicker than the old (163) ML430 while getting much better fuel economy"

Got to disagree. The '99 ML430 "officially" gets 15city 18Hwy. miles to the gallon. The car and driver test says that the new '06 ML350 gets 16 city and 20 Hwy. Not exactly a big difference. In addition, in my 1999 ML430, I get a little better mileage than that (about 18-19 combined) while C/D says that in their test they got 17 mpg combined "observed" in the '06 350. While you would think that the 350's (in all the MB lines) would be more efficient than their v-8 counterparts, they ironically work out to be anything but. In fact, I beleive that the disclosed MPG on the 04/05 ML350's was actually WORSE than the mileage (disclosed) of the old ML 430's.

I believe part of the efficency problem is due to the fact that to make good power, the 350's must be reved higher (hence the 7 speed boxes). The torque of the 430's gets you up to speed without having to rev it high.

My thoughts, for what they are worth.

the 04/05 ML350 was not the same engine as the 06 (164) ML350. That was what I was referring to. Heres is a quote from the article:

Under the hood of the ML350 resides Mercedes' fresh 3.5-liter, 24-valve V-6. Successor to last year's 3.7-liter, 18-valve V-6, good for 232 horsepower and 254 pound-feet of torque, the new 3.5 ups the ante to 268 horses and 258 pound-feet, all the while using less fuel—it gets 16 city and 20 highway versus 15 and 18 for the previous iteration. Teamed with Mercedes' seamless 7G-Tronic seven-speed automatic, the 3.5 had little trouble spurring our 4802-pound test vehicle to a governed top speed of 132 mph. On the way, the ML350 eclipsed 60 mph in 7.1 seconds and the quarter-mile in 15.4 at 90 mph. We never tested an '05 ML350, but the last ML320 we tested required 10.3 ticks to hit 60 and 17.7 at 78 mph for the quarter [C/D, December 2000]. What's more impressive for the new ML350 is that it posted quicker times than our long-term ML430 in December 1999 (8.1 to 60 and 16.3 at 85 in the quarter) and was only a smidge slower than an ML500 we tested in February 2002 (6.7 and 15.3 at 92)