I recently completed a Munich to Paris road trip in a BMW 335. When I returned to the US, I was retrospectively struck by the lack of high profile vehicles (pickup and SUV’s, not celebrity Ferraris or Leclerc battle tanks) on French and German roads. I suppose when gas costs nearly seven bucks a gallon, fuel efficiency is all. Personally, I don’t care for SUV’s; the few I have owned have taught me that being tall and overweight is no more fun for a vehicle than it is for a former supermodel. So when my Mercedes dealer suggested I have a look at the new ML63, I scoffed. And then went along for the ride.
This beast is beyond bling. The Alabama-born SUV’s exterior is festooned with enough bright work and eye candy to make a ‘Sclade owner scurry off to SEMA for a quick retrofit. The ML63 brings the noise with four shiny exhausts, stainless steel running boards with rubber studs (the material, not Madonna’s back-up dancers), a truly fearsome high-gloss black radiator grill and lots of tough looking bumps and warts. Strangely enough, all the special effects are so oversized they’re almost tasteful. In the LIFE IS LIFE department, the ML63’s flared wheel arches shelter massive twenty-inch AMG wheels loaded with 295/40 tires.
The ML63’s interior is lavish; everything that isn’t soft touch plastic has been polished to a mirror-like sheen or slathered with lush, fragrant bovine hide. The sports seats are more heavily bolstered than the President’s justification for the Iraqi war; with a similarly wide range of adjustability (including the world’s most pronounced lumbar effect). The new AMG-designed steering wheel boasts a fat curved rim, ergonomic thumb rests and perfectly placed buttonology. Just in case the headless Ninja turtle helm doesn’t proclaim the ML63’s sporting intent, the on-board lap timer– sheltering inside the cowled gauge cluster containing a 200mph speedo– should do the trick.
There’s plenty of room for four adults, and just enough for a family of five. Although you wouldn’t expect the ML63 to haul anything dirtier than Parisian lingerie, access to the spacious cargo bay is excellent. Visibility is also top notch, save the view out of the right side mirror. Talk about flying under the radar; “normal” cars can slip completely beneath your field of vision. And speaking of sights unseen, why would anyone spend $2800 on a rear seat DVD entertainment system when the 503 ponies generated by the ML63’s 6.3-liter V8 are guaranteed to make the driver do things that will make watching a six-inch screen an exercise in car sickness?
As silly as I felt entering this blinged-out brick, its absolute power corrupted me absolutely. The ML’s 6.3-liter engine should be a bit high-strung, what with a relatively high horsepower peak (6800 rpm) and a torque peak not a lot lower in the rev range (5200 rpm). But it isn’t. The ML63 burbles about town or eases down the freeway in the traditional Mercedes mindless manner. And then…
Even with two-and-a-half tons of SUV to lug around, the ML63’s acceleration is on the insane side of brisk. Zero to 60 takes just 4.8 seconds of your time. The ML63’s in-gear grunt is similarly fierce; kick the near-prescient seven-speed autobox down a couple of cogs and, well, let’s just say that The Wizard of Oz isn’t the only place you can watch a house get up and go.
The ML63 deploys Mercedes’ Airmatic ride control system, hooked-up to a double wishbone (front) and four-link (rear) suspension The AMG-tuned system smothers imperfections and/or stifles body roll, depending on whether or you push the Sport button or stay in the ML63’s Comfort zone. Although the ML63’s pace is from another planet (called “fast sports cars”), its dynamics are old school Mercedes: if you’re determined to play with the laws of physics, the ML63 won’t punish you for going out of bounds (even if the police will). Otherwise, you'll soon learn to throttle back a bit and save those growling burst of speed for the straights.
With a plutonium credit card challenging as-tested price of $93k, cliff face depreciation and a prodigious thirst for premium go-juice (12/16 by the book, less by the foot), the ML63 is an expensive way to transport the brood from A to B, without any off-road excursions to C (score one for the Porsche Cayenne Turbo). Still, while I don’t share it, I can understand the desire to own a Mercedes ML63. Like so many AMG products, the ML63 gives you the sense that Mercedes has turned the clock back 20 years or so, back to a day when build quality and effortless power delivery was the norm, and even the bean counters were engineers.
Nice ride. I see them more frequently than anyone in a medium-sized metropolis probably should, being that the factory is right down the road (and most of the execs live here in town).
Still, why someone would buy this over an AMG E63 wagon is sort of beyond me, since all the numbers and bottom line are better on the car. No offense to my fellow Alabamians, but if given the choice, I’ll take the car built in Germany over the US-made SUV–especially given some of the spotty history of the Bama plant. I guess there are still enough people who want that SUV image, even enough to compromise the performance and efficiency potential of the powerplant.
Any reasonable person would realize that a wagon is better than a car-based, crossover/SUV/too-tall-hatchback, but, soccer moms and very vain people feel they *need* to sit 5 feet above the road and *need* AWD.
I love the E63 wagon as well, but the addition of 4 wheel drive and superior build make the ML63 a serious contender.
This is an SUV, if I am not mistaken. Tell us what the offroad performance is like.
If I want 0-60 in 5s on pavement, I can always choose the WRX and save a ton of money.
Why? You will never see a paying customer take their ML63 offroad (on purpose).
Wonderful review.
Great insights and comments.
I like SUVs. I wish I had the money to lease one of these.
Thanks.
wsn:
I go off roading occasionally. No one brings their $95,000 merc, or lexii, or anything. they bring old pickups, 12 yr old broncos ans ancoient chevy sedans
This car is rediculous.
And why is there no GL-63?
Baffling.
Jay Shoemaker:
I love the E63 wagon as well, but the addition of 4 wheel drive and superior build make the ML63 a serious contender.
Noticeably superior? (Pardon my surprise, I still fee like people who bought the poorly-screwed-together first-gen ML-class got a raw deal on build and reliability)
On a side note: Remember when Lambo built that insane SUV about 15 years ago? I think that any manufacturer selling an SUV should also be forced to quote some 0-60 time in soft sand, just as Lambo did. At least for fun and discussion.
Why? You will never see a paying customer take their ML63 offroad (on purpose).
Then, why all the ground clearance?
Air dynamics and center of gravity surffers because of that.
Loading little ones into an SUV is easier than a wagon. Of course, it’s easier still into a minivan. And it’s ever so damnably hard to find a minivan that will dispose of all that extra loot one has tucked away, so….this thing might actually make sense in that light.:P
“Cars” like this have nothing to do with performance or driving. They only exist to so their owners can impress other people who are shallow enough to be impressed by a blinged out SUV.
Before long we’re sure to see a V12, 750 hp, 180 mph “SUV” just to one-up the people whose neighbors bought a ML63.
This vehicle is a joke.
Loading little ones into an SUV is easier than a wagon. Of course, it’s easier still into a minivan. And it’s ever so damnably hard to find a minivan that will dispose of all that extra loot one has tucked away, so….this thing might actually make sense in that light.:P
Are you sure that the ML63 is better than the standard ML350, when there are “little ones” around?
In Europe at least, I’m pretty sure you can get a E63 AMG 4matic, which in additional to its obvious advantages of performance and efficiency over the ML, also has 7-passenger capabibilty. I can’t think of any reasons to pick the ML other than bling and enjoying looking down into other motorists’ windows.
This vehicle is a joke.
For you, maybe, but not for everyone.
The funny thing is, you could buy a Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8, save $40,000, be just as fast(it hits 60 in 4.8), have just as much room and probably have a more reliable ride and in my opinion, a better looking ride too. This Benz is festooned with too much design. The Grand Cherokee is a statement of simplicity in comparison.
Looks like Tony Soprano has his next car!
I’d rather cane an ML63 than a Cherokee SRT-8, I tell you what.
So you’d rather waste $40,000 on the Benz Robert?
You know what you could buy for $40,000?
An Elise.
Hmmm……
MB ML63 AMG
OR
Jeep Grand Cherokee SRT8 and Lotus Elise
Decisions decisions…
RF-
I gather you haven’t driven the SRT8
I've driven the Cherokee SRT-8 and I'm not a fan. While stupid fast, the driving dynamics on that bad boy were downright scary. Going from Jay's review (and prior experience with heavyweight AMG products), it would be easier/safer to extract speed from the ML63 than the Jeep. Don't forget: death is an expensive business.
I’d love to see a review of it here. What was wrong with it?
I didn't drive the SRT-8 long enough to write a proper review. But I did drive it long enough to know that it gets bent out of shape on broken pavement. I mean ALL bent out of shape. The ML (especially with air suspension) gives a driver confidence. The SRT-8 almost gave me a heart attack. I can understand those who like that "steer with your right foot" muscle car routine, but include me out.
Nice to see valid counterpoints for those who would actually consider the ML63 (maybe why they’re reading this review). The Grand Cherokee SRT8 is a rocket, but understandably doesn’t have the cache of the three-pointed-star. I’d still buy the Jeep before plunking down twice as much for the ML63 or Cayenne. And I prefer the Jeeps clean asthetics to both of the bulbous Germans.
What I find funny are those of you saying, “I’d buy an SRT-8….” Yeah, sure you would. If you had the money to comfortably afford an Cayenne Turbo or ML63 AMG I am sure that you, or anyone else in that position, would not buy the Jeep.
It’s all a matter of perspective.
Very true ktm. If I made enough money where I could comfortably afford the ML63, I would buy either that or the Cayenne Turbo. But I’m not in that position, so I’m looking at value for the dollar.
Perspective is a funny thing.
I suppose what annoys me about this one the most is the bling factor. Who told the Germans about bling? Who? It used to be that AMG didn't need to be so shouty about their underhood trickery, and yet what we have here is the same thing that happened to the new M5: more chrome grilles than the Source awards, and more badges than an over-achieving boy scout. How much cooler this could be as a Q-Ship. I still wouldn't want one, but I would be less inclined to throw rocks at it's owners.
When you have wealth, your perspective changes. Keeping it becomes more important than displaying it.
The Cayenne Turbo is faster, handles better and is the best production off-road vehicle on earth.
And the Turbo S is even faster.
No contest.
Weirdly, somehow the Porsche is uglier.
Though… I really am in love with the GL-450. Especially because I was so ready to hate it, and yet I fell so in love with it.
So basically what we have here, I’m gathering, is the epitome of all that’s wrong with the SUV craze, right? It’s footprint is not any bigger than a car, but it’s taller, top-heavier, harder on the wallet, thirstier, worse on handling, and with no additional appreciable room inside than the comparable 63 sedan or wagon. I bet the insurance is more than the car, too. It doesn’t really tow or go off road, nor is it made for that. Say whatever you want about the evils of Suburbans and Tahoes and Navigators, but I can justify their existence a lot more easily than I can this. I think that people look the other way when it comes to limited units like this, since they’re not clogging every street corner. But the silliness is still there, and for at least twice the price.
Ash
The problem with the ML63 is that yeah, it is totally slly and all that, BUT it features the world’s best automatic transmission and one of the world’s best engines. So… it is hard to totally dismiss it, despite all flaws.
Jonny,
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a Benz fan and a DCX shareholder–and the ML/GL/R-Class plant is great for our local economy and workforce. I was just trying to step back and be objective, which probably doesn’t make any sense at a certain point…
Ash
The rich are very different from you and me.
meh… a brick is a brick even if it has a monster engine
A 155 MPH SUV with better driving dynamics than a Ford Taurus at 55 MPH. Outstanding !
SUVs, as of last week, are not just for off-roading anymore. Really. CNN told me so.
Yeah… How bout a luxury GL63 with the driving dynamics of a Porsche Cayenne turbo S… Raise the bar MB !
So now Porsche has competition for the most outlandish and expensive car of a silly car class ($100k SUVs) which has no reason for its existence other than people with too much money on their hands looking for an automotive novelty.
I went to my Mercedes dealer with AMG in mind and wound up driving this. I was really impressed and I was expecting the worst. I enjoyed driving it. I even thought hard about owning it. I side with the folks who think this thing is ridiculous; I thought it was ridiculous before I drove it. I still think it is ridiculous, but now I don’t laugh at those who drive one. This and the R63 are the only ways to get four wheel drive in your AMG, which is pretty important with all this power. I am however, going to spend my own money on the E63.
With all those tacked on “special effects,” it would be kind of impossible not to feel a little silly while driving this thing. maybe that why the windows are heavily tinted.
when’s lexus going to make something like this??:/ i bet it would be 1000 times better!
On the other hand, not everything has to be a go-kart either.
SUVs are what they are and nothing more.
All this pressure for SUVs to become cars has spawned “crossovers” and “SAV”s (if you please) neither of which solves the problem entirely; both of which have pandered enough to hoodwink more than a few auto journalists.
I wouldn’t go so far as to say that SUVs are for people with peculiar psychological needs. They look good to some people and that is all that matters in the course of purchasing (off-roading aside). How many times can you call (fill in the blanks) “idiots” anyway?
So…I think you should just judge the SUV on its “merits” whatever they may be.
I am getting sick of every SUV review’s obligatory preemptive denunciation of the SUV as a way to gain “points” with the readers. (They certainly couldn’t be thinking they’ll actually dissuade SUV buyers, could they?).
Car and Driver is well-known for that, although that’s because they’re Car and Driver.
But 10+ years after these things have blessed–or cursed–us with their presence I’d like to think that journalists have moved on.
I’m only hoping for one review that evaluates an SUV within the narrow perimeters of what they claim to be–for better or for worse–very tall, heavy, non-cars.
At least they evoke some sort of emotion. (I’ll stop there…)
But then again, it could just be me.
Replying to So…I think you should just judge the SUV on its “merits” whatever they may be.
I am getting sick of every SUV review’s obligatory preemptive denunciation of the SUV as a way to gain “points” with the readers. (They certainly couldn’t be thinking they’ll actually dissuade SUV buyers, could they?).
True, nothing wrong with SUVs as a class of cars. Even if 90% of all SUVs never go offroad, we can blame that on the drivers instead. No matter how cheap or how car based (CRV?), your average SUV should have some light offroad capabilities. Say, to the BBQ park.
But, the ML63 cannot even do that. It’s not really an SUV, since there is the “U” missing. It should be called STV; T for tall.
P.S. The ML63 itself invites comparisons to a go-kart, since it’s not really an SUV as mentioned.
“How much cooler this could be as a Q-Ship. I still wouldn’t want one, but I would be less inclined to throw rocks at it’s owners. ” (BrendanMac)
See that’s the thing. Those who don’t want the bling are going to buy the wagon, or something else but not the ML. So a deblingled ML would be pointless and only sell to people who would rebling it anyway.
This is so depressing. The mere fact that these things are being built and sold means that Western Civilization is doomed.
I can’t wait to review the R63, a 503 horsepower minivan, to see how everyone reacts if I like it.
Relax about SUVs, everyone. Some ghastly vehicles, namely those with tailfins, sold well back in the good old days and civilization survived. And on another point raised above: What’s so bad about having extra ground clearance even if we don’t take the SUV off road? There’s a weird building driveway in my town where I easily clear a sudden upward slope with my Forester, a tiny “SUV,” but scrape it with my BMW 3-series. So I think ahead for those days and drive the Forester.
In Europe at least, I’m pretty sure you can get a E63 AMG 4matic, which in additional to its obvious advantages of performance and efficiency over the ML, also has 7-passenger capabibilty.
Euhm…No there isn’t. And there shouldn’t be either. Europeans prefer RWD cars over AWD when it comes to performance cars. Ok, some performance cars are AWD (Lambo, RS4) but in that case they’re always “rear wheel drive biased”, so the driving experience gives you the impression it’s a RWD. A E63 AMG with AWD and 7 passager capability would lower AMG’s brand value like the Compass does Jeep’s and would be laughed at. It’s why BMW doesn’t make an M7; they take themselves seriously.
Nobody, except maybe people in the alps or Scandinavia needs AWD.
Even with all the performance and bling, it still looks like a Kia Sorento to me. Am I jealous? You bet!
Re the off-road ability of the ML, if I recall correctly the previous ML AMG had a warning in large letter on the front page of the owners manual:
DO NOT TAKE VEHICLE OFFROAD!!!
Apparently, the low-pro tyres were not suitable for even a dirt road…
So, the argument about whether their owners take them off road is academic.
I can’t wait to review the R63, a 503 horsepower minivan, to see how everyone reacts if I like it.
I would say R63 make more sense than ML63. Since neither can go offroad, I suppose R63 is better due to the more useful interior and reduced mass.
The R-class mercedes is as bulbously unpleasant to gaze upon as Prescott in a speedo.
It’s sure to be fast, and probably better to drive than the ML, but the E63 wagon makes more sense.
Euhm…No there isn’t. And there shouldn’t be either. Europeans prefer RWD cars over AWD when it comes to performance cars. Ok, some performance cars are AWD (Lambo, RS4) but in that case they’re always “rear wheel drive biased”, so the driving experience gives you the impression it’s a RWD. A E63 AMG with AWD and 7 passager capability would lower AMG’s brand value like the Compass does Jeep’s and would be laughed at. It’s why BMW doesn’t make an M7; they take themselves seriously.
Nobody, except maybe people in the alps or Scandinavia needs AWD.
Europeans “prefer” whatever they are told to “prefer” (much like Americans–and anybody else for that matter).
Impracticality aside, social acceptability is immensely important in Europe (i.e. what other people think about you).
That gives the press enormous power to shape exactly people do or do not buy–something the automotive press on this side of the Atlantic can only dream of.
It really has nothing to do with a somehow “mature and enlightened culture of drivability and superb handling”. Consequently, they also have their share of bad cars. We just don’t hear about them.
It really has nothing to do with a somehow “mature and enlightened culture of drivability and superb handling”.
Ummm, Yes it does, unlimited speeds and narrow roads will do that to you.
Beautiful car (truck). How much will she tow?
I’d like to drive the Jeep SRT-8. I sat in one and if the looks are any indication, there’s good reason why its half the price of this Benz.
So Jay, how much do you think the ML63 will be worth one year from now in the used car market? I’m thinking $65-75k.
Tell us more about your E63, Jay….though I suspect we’ll be hearing 800 words worth soon.
JJ:
It’s why BMW doesn’t make an M7; they take themselves seriously.
The reason Bimmer doesn’t make an M7 is because they can’t see a profit in it. As soon as they can, away we go.
Porsche used to be a serious sports car company, and now we have the Cayenne.
The E63 is best car I have ever owned (although it is still on its honeymoon). I am writing a piece as we speak, but RF might be sick of my reviews of expensive AMG cars.
Bring it on.
I purchased an ML430 during October 1998, the first week that those V-8s were available in the US. True, the interior fit-and-finish was a bit chintzy. However, the drivetrain performed flawlessly for six years.
My current vehicle is a Touareg V-10 TDI. No, I didn’t buy a diesel for fuel efficiency (>23 MPG hwy). With its twin intercooled turbochargers pumping, it delivers massive torque (up to 553 lb-ft) throughout the throttle range (red line at 4400 rpm). Too bad that only 400 were imported before this year; VW dealers seem perplexed when trouble arises…..
Well, I’m off to test drive an ML63 tinight!
Having driven primarily SUV’s for two decades, I perceive that the high seating position is invaluable to survey the flow of traffic, especially thru/around puck-ups & other SUVs. Moreover, I just feel a bit more secure wrapped in >5000 lbs. of steel.
After more than 7 years of ownership, I just traded my FX45 for a 2008 ML63 AMG. The cost was much less than 1/2 the original MSRP and comes with a 6yr /125,000 mile warranty. It was a locally dealer maintained car and overall a nice upgrade, in many ways, over the Infiniti.
I’m finding the fuel MPG to be better than I expected considering it’s 5,200 lbs. In the last week I’ve been getting about 11 in the city and we got 17.8 on the highway. Previously in our FX45 we were getting only 13 city / 19 highway, but it was much smaller, lighter and slower.
My commute to work is only 19 miles each day rt and this is our third car, 2005 SLK350 being my daily driver. We also have an E500 4matic.
We really like the power, airmatic suspension, nappa leather dash, seats, and overall feel, compared to the FX45. We will mainly used for our annual Holiday trip to the snowy mid-west, CostCo shopping, and carrying mulch. With the proper winter tires, I expect that it will be great in snow.