If you think Pietschman is biased against the ML, who would you reccomend that has concrete actual real world experience with both? I guess I kind of see the bias going the other direction with Harold. He doesn't even own a G anymore, that I am aware of. He is quite enomored with his ML. I think he gives an accurate portraital of the differences. Don't be sour grapes because the guy doesn't support your side.
Adding larger tires to the ML is likely to exacerbate the 4ETS shortcomings, not help them. So I am not quite sure where you are going with that part. I would also take issue with the adding of lockers to an ML. Did you know that every axle shaft, u-joint and CV joint in the G is designed to withstand full engine torque in low range? That is a tremendous amount of twist. It is quite overdone. I highly doubt the ML is made to that military tough spec. This is why when you add lockers to Jeeps, Rovers, Toyotas, etc, that they break axles and u-joints. Sure you can add lockers but, the ramifications of doing so are rarely considered.
What do I make of the MLs overall capabilities? Well Tracy, it was my full intention to get my wife into an ML after the S600. We took extended drives in both a new ML500 and an ML55. She uses her car on the road. It was highly unlikely that the vehicle we chose for her would be an off-roader. After all, we already had a G. Both of those truck are darn quick
Then we drove the G500. I am sorry but they just do not compare. I do not like the pinched off sightline of the aerodynamic ML. The view out in any given direction is compromised compared to the G500. The cargo space is also much less useable. The G is a big box
The rear seating in the ML is also much more clausterphobic than the towering G. Neither of us like the ride, it is pretty choppy, much better than an X5 but not as composed as the G IMO. Certainly the ML can outcorner and outbrake the G but, the margins are not great enough to be useful in a street driven truck, especially when my wife is driving it. We have a road burner already if thats the mood she is in. The final concern after deciding that we both preferred the G's space and driving dynamics was the reliability. I have had G's for years, they have been by far the most solid reliable vehicles I have ever owned. I have been known to change cars like underwear, there have been a few:p While the ML has gotten better and, may be a very solid piece, it is undeniably a greater risk than the G. I have grave concerns about anything assembled in the US. Lets face it, most folks here just don't give a darn anymore, no pride. I understand from people who have recently visited Graz where the G is built that this is NOT the case. It makes me feel better
to know somebody takes pride in what they build still.
I am far from an ML hater, I actually consider them to be the best of their ilk. I just don't consider them in the same catagory as the G. Someday when you have the resources, I would be more than happy to demonstrate what I am trying to defend here. I really don't think you can comprehend the scope of what the G can do from pictures and words. It is breathtaking and, I don't expect you to understand until you have experienced it. There is a much larger gap between the two than you know. My contention is that for me the G easily meets and exceeds my on road and general utility needs. The bonus is that it is one heck of a mountain goat. Unfortunately the ML did not appeal to me as much for my daily needs and I know it wouldn't meet my desires for it as a toy. I feel very fortunate to have found the G, they really suit me