Why are MBs so much more expensive than BMWs? - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

mbtjc · #1 05-11-2002, 11:36 PM

As a German car enthusiast, I keep up with the stats on pretty much all German cars. One of the biggest things that I notice is that a BMW costs a lot less than a comparable MB. For instance, a well-optioned 330Ci Coupe costs a hair over 40 grand. A well-optioned CLK320 Coupe cost around 50. Or the new 7, starts at around 70 grand and fully optioned tops out around 80. If you go by straight engine size, the S430 would be its direct competitor, but I say the S500 is, because the BMWs 325hp 4.4 will blow the doors off a 302hp S500. Quite the hp/liter difference. So if you go by that, a decently equipped S500 will cost you upwards of 90 grand, all the way to over 100 grand. That's at least a 20 grand difference!!! But for what? What are you getting for that extra minimum of 20 grand? BMW makes excellent cars, all car magazines ever do is incessantly rave over their engines, trannys, suspension, steering, handling, overall "feel", etc. The M5 has been heralded the "perfect car" and so on. They regulary make C&Ds Ten Best, sometimes more than one model at a time. They constantly place 1st in comparos.

I love my 86 MB, I'm never selling it. I don't care for older BMWs, they looked like crap compared to MBs. But the new ones are right up there with MB. If I were to plop down my money today, I would be hard pressed to pay the extra 10-20 thousand, not being sure what I was getting extra, arguably getting less.

So I was wondering what everyone's take on this is. And please...no cheap shots like the whole Ford/Chevy thing...like they are junk, BMWs suck, or you get what you pay for. MB has had more than their fair share of quality problems here lately. I'm looking for intelligent thoughts and comments.

Holson Adi · #2 05-12-2002, 01:21 AM

I honestly think that after the W140, I'd just take the BMW equivalent of Mercedes cars... (in the low end range).

The top end MB's still appeal to me more than BMW's.
e.g,

S-Class .vs. 7-series -> the new 7 is kinda horrendous. I can't make myself love it. The old one looks awesome and I just can't help wanting it. The new one....

SL .vs. Z8 -> The SL is more powerful, looks better, and is both a handsome and elegant coupe and a muscular roadster.

CL-600 is just an awesome car...

I'd always take the 'slow' G500 over the much faster X5 4.6iS.

That's if money's not a problem. Otherwise I'd just avoid those cars... hehehe

The lower end MB's are different though..
E-Class .vs. 5-series -> I love the 5-series... the interior is beautiful, the body looks good, the exhaust sounds nice and the engine is more powerful, stick shift, etc. you know what my pick is.

C .vs. 3 , same thing...

C-Coupe is pretty ugly too IMO. Call my W123 ugly, however I think the C-Coupe's ugly too

to each his own.

Except maybe the SLK, the Z3 is ugly IMO.

That's what I think.

Why they charge more, I do not know. I do agree with you that 'realistically', BMW is my choice over MB (new cars...)
I hope Mercedes isn't relying on the "Star" to sell their cars at a higher price .vs. their competitors.

BenzOnline · #3 05-12-2002, 01:28 AM

There is always a reason behind a price. Look at a BMW 15 years down the road and then compare it to the same age Benz!

My 2 cents.

mbtjc · #4 05-12-2002, 01:40 AM

Thanks for the good post! Well I agree with you for the most part. I don't think the SL and the Z8 are direct competitors, the SL is more mainstream and the Z8 more exotic and exclusive. I also don't think the G and the X are competitors, more like the ML and the X. But anyways, not really my point....I wasn't going off of looks though, (ie the 7, which I agree, Munich designers=one too many trips to the Hofbrauhaus!), my main question was about substance/performance for the dollar.

420SEL · #5 05-12-2002, 11:42 AM

Dito on the depreciation coment from Benzonline. The difference is apparent in both durability, and resale price even after 5 years.

mbtjc · #6 05-12-2002, 12:52 PM

Well I went a did a little research. I looked up the blue book prices on a few cars. All these cars had the same mileage and equipment levels.

1990 420SEL=11.0; 1990 735iL=10.8
1996 C280=17.8; 1996 328i=17.7
1999 E430=38.0; 1999 540i=39.0

I also went on Auto Trader to see if these blue book prices were accurate, and for the most part they were. The "average price" was right at or near the blue book on all cars. Of course there was a wide range on all cars, but the prices generally reflected the blue book price.

So as you can see, the prices are not much different at all. I will agree that older MBs are more durable, I have seen a lot of 10 year old BMWs with really crappy interiors, cracked seats, wood dashes with no more finish on them, etc. Like I said, I I don't care for the older ones BMWs all. However, my original post I do specifically address new cars, like if I was going to go out and buy one today. I have no indication that new MBs are of higher quality or more durable than a new BMW. And with MBs quality problems, continually cheaper feeling cars (C230k and ML for example, and many car magazines have even said that some of the buttons and controls on the new R230 SL feel like they were pulled straight from a Hyundai), I would have an indication to swing the other way on that issue. So that's where the 10-20 thousand dollar question comes in again.

pentoman · #7 05-12-2002, 05:04 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by mbtjc

I love my 86 MB, I'm never selling it. I don't care for older BMWs, they looked like crap compared to MBs.

You said it without realising it... Ever drive an '86 BMW? You'd see where the extra $ went when you compare it to your MB.. And I think MB *still* put the extra money into the kind of engineering which you won't see until the car is 15 years old.
(Read recently posted info about current V6/V8 line)

As for the new cars, I think in 15 years people (including you

) will *still* be saying 'old BMWs look crap' - about the current 2002 models. Not because of the 7-series, but because they just don't age well.. doesn't the E36 (previous 3-series) look horribly dated now?
MBs always maintain a 'classic' look you could never attribute to a BMW..

To summarize: Maybe some would compare a BMW to a very attractive one-night stand, but a Mercedes-Benz to a girl you could live your whole life with.

And similarly, many want the former, and many prefer the latter - ultimately it goes deeper than hp/litre figures and what a magazine says (I wouldn't choose a girlfriend by her cup size and what my mate said she was like in bed..., but there are people that will).

As long as MB maintains these 2 points, their cars will always be worth more, when new and especially when old - so long as management don't start abusing this and seriously cutting costs but maintaining the prices for max $$$ (dangerously close I know)

later

Russ

mbtjc · #8 05-12-2002, 05:54 PM

Thanks for the thoughtful input. You are assuming, though, that the cars will age at the same rate or the same way as they have. Would you expect a 2002 VW to "age" the same as an 80s model VW Rabbit? Of course not, times change. So just because BMW had issues in the past with the wear and aging of their vehicles, does not necessarily mean that they will do the same now or in the future. On the same token, just because MBs have aged more than gracefully in the past (yes, they do have a classic look that BMWs don't have), it doesn't mean they'll do the same in the future. You haven't seen an ML, a W203, or a W220 that's 15 years old. I think most of us will agree that MBs were more solid and over-engineered in the past. I am not blindly defending BMW saying that they WILL age better now and that MBs WON'T age as well now, only time will tell. All I am saying is that you can't base a car's (or a brand's) future entirely off its past.

As far as the magazine articles...I don't treat them as the Bible or anything, but if a variety of publications (MT, C&D, R&T, Consumer Reports, etc.) come up with the same conclusions and rave reviews year after year, I think that is a pretty good indication.

pentoman · #9 05-12-2002, 06:39 PM

Of course it remains to be seen if MB still make cars as long lasting as they have been, but I do believe that's where the money goes, not entirely based on the past - I wasn't sure until I read the info about the opened up V6 someone on the forum saw (can't find the post).
I do still believe our current MBs will look better after 15 years than BMWs. By that stage I should've made it to the US, and... hey, I'll buy ya a beer if my 2002 SL500/SL55 doesn't look better than a BMW Z8

.
(I hate quoting magazines but

) many european magazines rate the mainstream MBs above rivals.. and some though not all of the niche models (SL over Z8, SLK over Z3.. not M3, M5, X5, 3-compact).
I would consider most of the BMWs to own, but still think for long-term ownership the MB would be a better bet.. for now.

later

Russ

#10 05-12-2002, 07:07 PM

My opinion After w140 no benz is for me (other than a G500) I would buy almost any Bmw after 1989 I think the looks and quality appeal more to me.
As for the age factor I can find you a number of 190e's that are as old as my BMW and in the same shape. I think is the fact of who buys the car. BMW is known for its popularity with younger people ( assumed to be harder on cars) which would lessen the value. Where mercedes are known for the older higher class people ( assumed to treat cars better)
I think MB's such as the w126 would be worth more because of the style compared to the old 7 but than agian this is all in my opinion.

pentoman · #11 05-12-2002, 08:14 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Benzman500

I think MB's such as the w126 would be worth more because of the style compared to the old 7 but than agian this is all in my opinion.

True, but the various old-style ('80s - '90s) 7-series I've driven never really felt a lot like a luxury car, at least not any more.. and I think less 'luxury' (quality, smoothness, prestige etc) than a W126.. they do drive fairly well (not as well as an A8, but different era), but its not so important. Similarly they can kinda feel like riding a time-bomb, just wonder what's going to wrong in an expensive way next.. totally untrue of course, but a W126 would never give that feeling - but then it's very true about the age of drivers - the BMWs get a pretty hard time!

Either way, IM(v)HO for me (as a young driver - 19) I find the BMWs I've driven do drive well, but the MBs have much more going for them.

later

Russ

Ali Al-Chalabi · #12 05-12-2002, 09:02 PM

I still like the BMW engines better. The straight 6 has 24 valves and steplessly variable valve timing on both the intake and exhaust. Although the new 7 is extremely ugly, there is some very impressive technology put into the engine that no Mercedes contains. It is a gas engine with no throttle and remarkable power delivery and efficiency.

ymsin · #13 05-12-2002, 10:41 PM

I find the new Bimmers very attractive and fashionable as compared to the new MBs. Take them 10 years down the road, and you'd soon know why the MBs are more expensive from the on-set.

I think its pretty much like why the Nissan is cheaper than the Honda despite both being Japanese.

Ashman · #14 05-13-2002, 03:52 AM

to me, BMW has only really gotten much better int he last 10-14 years. Before that, there was no comparison to a mercedes as far as quality, design, and overall driving experience.

For me, the new BMW's are very nice cars. I have been driving my dad's business partners 2002 740IL around today, and the car is wonderful, but I still prefer a benz as a car for myself.

To me a BMW is a good car, and very fun to drive. The problem is the typical owner leases the car for 3 years and returns it for another.

The typical benz owner leases a car for a few years, then keeps on driving it for many more years.

Mercedes styling has always been ahead of its time, and its designs have always stood the test of time. Even today, the older 1980's and 1970's and even older benzes, still look great on the road.

Compared to other cars, most don't look good after 20 years, but benzes keep on going.

Show me a BMW that has lasted 20 years and is still solid as a rock. Show me just about any car that is still solid as a rock after 20 years. I know most benzes are solid after even 30 years.

I love BMW for their styling, and for their attitude of making very sporty cars. But I love mercedes for their ingenuity, timeless styling, and length of model runs. Most mercedes run for a minimum of 5 years without chaing shape or style. Most BMW's and other manufacturers, change their styling because after a couple of years, they look outdated.

Overall, I'd drive a BMW any day, but I'd Drive a Benz Everyday.

Alon

dtanesq · #15 05-14-2002, 05:24 PM

I can't speak for the newer cars, but from my direct experience, older Mercedes cars have better build quality than like-vintage BMWs. The 1986 300E in the signature below is in every bit as good condition as the 1993 BMW that I now drive every day, even though the Mercedes has had 7 years' or more road experience than the BMW. John's comment that BMWs might have been more likely to have been owned by a boy-racer resonates here. I like that it seems less expensive to tinker with my BMW than with a Mercedes, and it seems there's more fun stuff to choose from (suspension, engine, drivetrain, exhaust, wheels, etc.). My BMW's already "hot" computer chip is being replaced in the next couple of weeks for about 10 more horsepower and foot-pounds of torque. The cost is ridiculously cheap, too.

As far as price differentials, I would suggest the possibilities that BMW might tinker with prices in order to maintain or advance market share (I believe there is competition pressure from Lexus, Acura and Infinity as well as Mercedes and Jaguar in the high-end market, no?) or that they control production costs (by ignoring build quality to some degree?) differently than Mercedes.

I fully anticipate that the 300E will still be cruising around Northern California in 5 years while my BMW will be in a parts yard. But I've had more driving fun in the BMW than I ever had in the 300E. I've spent quality time on Highway 1 between Bodega Bay and Mendocino in both cars. The 5 is simply quicker, the handling more precise and more direct and capable of making my lady love toss her cookies faster than the W124. If I have to buy two Bimmers for that driving feel in the span of time that a comparable-class Mercedes lives, so be it; it's part of why I do what I do for a living. I've said it before on this forum, though, that for my lady love and our gaggle of children (and for me in a more sedate mood), nothing beats a Mercedes. I just have to get her out of that darned 4Runner.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode