2021 Mercedes-benz Sprinter on 2040-cars

Auto blog

This or That: Mercedes S-Class 350SD vs. 2003 Jaguar XJR [w/poll]

Budget. It's a wretched word, whether you're going out to eat, shipping for a new outfit or, more relevant to today's discussion, buying a car. Massive marketing machines have convinced us, as a population, to buy the best you can afford, repercussions be damned – If you've saved up some money, spend it! All of it, on whatever it is that currently sits atop your personal Amazon wishlist, be it a Timex that takes a lickin' and keeps on tickin', a $17,000 Gold Apple Watch or a $60,000 Rolex Cosmograph Daytona. But what if the best you can afford is... say, $12,815? For that price, you can buy a brand-new 2015 Nissan Versa (including destination), assuming you're happy with zero options and a manual transmission. For that price, you'll get standard air conditioning, a CD player and... well, a warranty. Pretty sensible choice, Captain Frugal. But also ridiculously uninspired. And so that brings us to today's edition of This or That, in which two Autoblog editors pick differing sides of an argument and duke it out to see which one of us can convince you, dear reader, is better. Or at least less wrong. You be the judge. As a refresher, I'm two-and-two on these challenges, having lost the first and second editions before storming back in rounds three and four. Today, as alluded to above, we decided to throw our collective brainpower (oh lord, what have we done?) at what may be the single most difficult question currently confounding the best minds our planet has to offer: What is the best used used luxury car you can buy for the price of a 2015 Nissan Versa? Shall we meet our contenders? Allow me to introduce you to the most perfect luxury car money can buy (assuming the amount of money you're holding is equal to the amount of the cheapest new car currently sold in America, the Nissan Versa). My pick is the 1991 Mercedes-Benz S-Class. Not just any S-Class, but the legendary W126, which was produced between 1979 and 1992. And not just any W126, either, but one powered by a 3.5-liter turbodiesel engine. And with that, I send the argument to my esteemed colleague, Associate Editor Chris Bruce. Bruce: Jeremy, we had over $12,000 to budget for this challenge, and the best you can manage is a 24-year-old diesel Mercedes? I love oil-burners as much as any other auto writer with their mountains of torque and huge cruising range, but you're making this too easy on me. Also, you're really choosing a brown, diesel, German luxury sedan?

Mercedes plotting E-Class Maybach, next A-Class for the US?

Mercedes-Benz has opened 2015 by hinting at a host of new products. Dieter Zetsche nudged the idea that there'll be a Maybach-branded SUV. AMG chief Tobias Moers told Motor Trend that "We want to be seen by the public on the same level as the other sports car maker in Germany" when asked if his crew was working on a car to rival the Porsche 918 Spyder. That and a few other tidbits have people thinking that we'll eventually see some sort of celestial AMG supercar. The latest handful of hints came from Mercedes USA CEO Steve Cannon during an interview on the marque's move to Atlanta. Cannon told Automotive News that we'd "see more from the Maybach brand," leaving the impression that there "could" be an E-Class draped in the superluxury trim. If such came to pass, there's plenty of pricing room between the E and the S-Class to slot a higher trim in. The top non-AMG E-Class starts at $62,350, the S-Class opens the bidding at $94,400. Even if you slapped the E-Class with the $23,000 premium it takes to make an S600 a Maybach S600, you've still got plenty of breathing room between the midsized and full-sized sedans. At the antipodal end, Cannon told AN that we could get a front-wheel-drive Mercedes smaller than anything here right now. That leaves the A-Class, since we've already got the B-Class. Getting the next-gen A-Class here would help with CAFE numbers, and since it will be built in the new factory in Aguascalientes, Mexico it won't have far to travel to get here. We're told it won't be like the current car, however; Cannon said, "The A-Class will change from what you have seen and from what you are used to." We hope that's a good thing, because we really like the current car. Related Video:

Aston Martin Vantage vs. Mercedes-AMG GT C Review | Translating German into English

GROssBRITANNIEN — No car matches the new Aston Martin Vantage as closely as the Mercedes-AMG GT, the two sharing both their 4.0-liter twin-turbocharged V8 and electrical architecture while competing for the same market niche. So, of the many challenges Aston Martin faced when developing it, ensuring that the Vantage had a unique identity must have weighed more heavily than any other. The added spice to this confrontation is the GT's status as halo model for AMG. Meanwhile, Aston Martin's brand identity, built on the sharp-suited machismo embodied by a certain big-screen spy, is a make-or-break issue for the company. The identity problem has fascinated me since the AMG deal was first announce in 2013. So exploring the Vantage on British roads with the GT literally filling the mirrors is a big deal. Now, finally, we have directly competing products with which to explore the theory. And there's much to like in both, not least of which is that common powerhouse of an engine. While they don't share a platform, both use the classic front-engine, rear-drive, transaxle layout, with traditional driving manners to match. Some quick number-crunching as an appetizer: The AMG GT C you see here has the dry-sumped M178 derivative of the V8, with 550 horsepower and 501 pound-feet of torque, driving the rear wheels through a transaxle-mounted, seven-speed dual-clutch transmission and fully active electronic locking differential. It's 179 inches long, weighs 3,748 pounds and will clear 0-60 mph in 3.6 seconds en route to 197 mph. The Vantage has the wet-sumped M177 version of the same engine, as featured in countless AMGs and shared with the DB11 V8. It makes 503 hp, 505 lb-ft and drives the rear wheels through a transaxle-mounted, eight-speed automatic gearbox and fully active electronic locking differential. Sounding familiar? It's comparable in overall length but a couple of inches longer in wheelbase, and weighs pretty much the same as the GT C, give or take a few pounds. It hits 60 in 3.5 seconds and tops out at 195 mph. Both have adaptive dampers and a variety of driver modes, both are built from aluminum and both are at the sportier end of the GT spectrum. The two U.K.-market cars you see here cost just more than $180,000 with options. Pretty darned close, then. Numbers are one thing.