Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,506
Likes: 1,139
From: St Louis MO
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by ppro
See also this thread
https://www.crossfireforum.org/forum...ghlight=Jaguar
Not similar experiences but I can tell you that you are right.
Take a look at any part that is large enough to put the three-pointed star on and you will find a three pointed star. Even the little buttons that are holding the interior panels have a three pointed star.
The engine is entirely MB as are the ancillary components (keep in mind that Mercedes outsources some stuff but it's the same stuff you would find in an SLK.)
Then there are the facts that the car was manufactured for Daimler-Chrysler in Germany by Karmann, in the same factory as the SLK, many Porsche, Audi, VW, and other cars.
The literature on the car comprehensively documents the depth of Mercedes parts that are direct from the Mercedes parts bin.
The body is by Chrysler design, built by Karmann, and those parts are manufactured by Daimler-Chrysler, about 80% of that in Germany.
The whole concept of "badge engineering" is pretty abstract to non-car people. Try telling a Jaguar X-Type owner that they don't really own a Jaguar (it's a Ford Mondeo) and you'll get a whole lot of eye-rolling (and maybe even beat up), but the fact remains it's a Ford that has been badged a Jaguar - no more Jaguar than your sneakers.
You shouldn't worry about those who doubt you, they just don't know and for whatever reason choose not to believe you. If it's really important you could walk them through the car with an SLK parked right next to it and prove it. They might still deny it, just because they're unwilling to be wrong.
You could also do the online research and refer them to the sites that have the info. They'll probably cite a dozen reasons why that too is not right.
But really, you know, so who cares what they think?
https://www.crossfireforum.org/forum...ghlight=Jaguar
Not similar experiences but I can tell you that you are right.
Take a look at any part that is large enough to put the three-pointed star on and you will find a three pointed star. Even the little buttons that are holding the interior panels have a three pointed star.
The engine is entirely MB as are the ancillary components (keep in mind that Mercedes outsources some stuff but it's the same stuff you would find in an SLK.)
Then there are the facts that the car was manufactured for Daimler-Chrysler in Germany by Karmann, in the same factory as the SLK, many Porsche, Audi, VW, and other cars.
The literature on the car comprehensively documents the depth of Mercedes parts that are direct from the Mercedes parts bin.
The body is by Chrysler design, built by Karmann, and those parts are manufactured by Daimler-Chrysler, about 80% of that in Germany.
The whole concept of "badge engineering" is pretty abstract to non-car people. Try telling a Jaguar X-Type owner that they don't really own a Jaguar (it's a Ford Mondeo) and you'll get a whole lot of eye-rolling (and maybe even beat up), but the fact remains it's a Ford that has been badged a Jaguar - no more Jaguar than your sneakers.
You shouldn't worry about those who doubt you, they just don't know and for whatever reason choose not to believe you. If it's really important you could walk them through the car with an SLK parked right next to it and prove it. They might still deny it, just because they're unwilling to be wrong.
You could also do the online research and refer them to the sites that have the info. They'll probably cite a dozen reasons why that too is not right.
But really, you know, so who cares what they think?
Cars are like religion. There are a whole lot of misbeliefs and disbeliefs that could start wars.
Truth is the Chrysler crossfire is as American as they come.
Like most of us it has a proud heritage.
But it is still a mutt.
Like most of us.
roadster with a stick
Last edited by Franc Rauscher; Dec 5, 2008 at 01:02 PM.
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 198
Likes: 0
From: Charlotte, NC
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
I don't know if I've weighed in on this topic before, though I am sure I've seen it a thousand times. My two cents is that when someone asks about it, I tell them it's a Chrysler Crossfire. If they seem further interested (i.e., 'what's under the hood, how fast does it go, etc.) I give them the appropriate answer. I think of my car as what it is... kind of a ******* child of both Chrysler and MB. But since it says it is a Chrysler, it is a Chrysler. If someone asks what kind of engine it has, I tell them it's a 3.2L MB engine.
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying it IS a Mercedes, because any nancy boy can see the Chrysler badges or search the internet and find that it is not (at least not REALLY, though in most respects it is). So I think honesty is the best policy for me. It's a Chrysler with a buttload of Mercedes thrown in.
I wouldn't feel comfortable saying it IS a Mercedes, because any nancy boy can see the Chrysler badges or search the internet and find that it is not (at least not REALLY, though in most respects it is). So I think honesty is the best policy for me. It's a Chrysler with a buttload of Mercedes thrown in.
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 104
Likes: 1
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by +fireamx
Very true, but You never hear anybody ever say it's got a "Mercury" engine in it now do ya?
Senior Member
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 7,509
Likes: 7
From: Akron, Ohio
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by Isellthem
I wasn't mocking your statement at all. The fact that Panteras were sold out of Mercury showrooms is a hoot.
From what I've read, it was a big marketing mistake (by Ford) trying to sell them at Mercury dealers. But Ford felt that since it cost so much more than the Corvette, they needed to display it at their more "Up Market" Mercury dealers. Only problem was, your typical Mercury buyer just wasn't into high dollar Italian sports cars.
She can ride with me ;)
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 3,399
Likes: 3
From: Sharon, PA
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
I've gotten some flak at the race track when I tell people it is a re-skinned Mercedes. Then I run a 12.7 second 1/4 mile and they ask "what did you do to that thing?" Then I repeat that it is a re-skinned Mercedes with a hand-built supercharged AMG engine. Then they get it.
Joined: Feb 2008
Posts: 104
Likes: 1
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by +fireamx
From what I've read, it was a big marketing mistake (by Ford) trying to sell them at Mercury dealers. But Ford felt that since it cost so much more than the Corvette, they needed to display it at their more "Up Market" Mercury dealers. Only problem was, your typical Mercury buyer just wasn't into high dollar Italian sports cars.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 25,432
Likes: 648
From: Ontario
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Basically it is a Daimler Chrysler Crossfire, that makes it pretty unique.
In ten years it will be a collectable car, so look after it now. If you have sold it by then, you will kick your butt.
In thirty years, you will see them go for big bucks and you can tell your younger family members " I had one of those" and they will kick your butt.
You were warned.
In ten years it will be a collectable car, so look after it now. If you have sold it by then, you will kick your butt.
In thirty years, you will see them go for big bucks and you can tell your younger family members " I had one of those" and they will kick your butt.
You were warned.
Last edited by onehundred80; Dec 5, 2008 at 06:45 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,506
Likes: 1,139
From: St Louis MO
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by onehundred80
Basically it is a Daimler Chrysler Crossfire, that makes it pretty unique.
In ten years it will be a collectable car, so look after it now. If you have sold it by then, you will kick your butt.
In thirty years, you will see them go for big bucks and you can tell your younger family members " I had one of those" and they will kick your butt.
You were warned.
In ten years it will be a collectable car, so look after it now. If you have sold it by then, you will kick your butt.
In thirty years, you will see them go for big bucks and you can tell your younger family members " I had one of those" and they will kick your butt.
You were warned.
But....
My Grandaughter will be driving my Crossfire, bragging to her friends as she explains the concept of a stick shift and an internal combustion engine.
OR, I will haunt her dreams!
roadster with a stick
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 2008
Posts: 5,180
Likes: 13
From: North Plains, OR
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
I have a 14 year old grandson that would love for me to pass down the SRT6 to him. We took a 3000 mile trip around the west in the SSB this last summer and he was tickled.
I tell folks it is a Chrysler Crossfire, but mostly a MB SLK32. Most dont know what either of those are so it dosent really matter.
MikeR
I tell folks it is a Chrysler Crossfire, but mostly a MB SLK32. Most dont know what either of those are so it dosent really matter.
MikeR
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 230
Likes: 2
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Do you folks recall Chrysler's TC by Maserati in the late 80s and early 90s?
http://www.allpar.com/model/tc.html
That was a pathetic mess. Thank god, the Xfire has no Italian guts inside.
http://www.allpar.com/model/tc.html
That was a pathetic mess. Thank god, the Xfire has no Italian guts inside.
Forum Regular
Joined: Jul 2008
Posts: 591
Likes: 0
From: Kent Island, Maryland
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Good Lord, that car was one unholy mess. I was parked next to one of those things today. Kinda good idea, terrible execution. I kept looking over my shoulder for Ricardo Mantalban...
Forum Regular
Joined: Sep 2007
Posts: 963
Likes: 2
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by BlazingSaddle
Do you folks recall Chrysler's TC by Maserati in the late 80s and early 90s?
http://www.allpar.com/model/tc.html
That was a pathetic mess. Thank god, the Xfire has no Italian guts inside.
http://www.allpar.com/model/tc.html
That was a pathetic mess. Thank god, the Xfire has no Italian guts inside.
The short-sightedness of youth...
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,506
Likes: 1,139
From: St Louis MO
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by ppro
I vaguely remember that car and thinking at the time "this is why I won't ever buy a Chrysler..."
The short-sightedness of youth...
The short-sightedness of youth...
Nobody and I mean nobody was producing any kind of an exciting convertible. It's purpose was to put some sexy Italian spark into the brand. It did that. But was perceived, correctly, as a marketing ploy.
A few of these had five speed Getrags in them and with the Turbo there was some spirit to the 2.2 litre engine. Sadly the advantages of a manual doesn't translate all that well to a front wheel drive. I think there are only about 500 with the Getrag so there is some value for collectors. It is not a performance car but if you have one, you have something more unique than a Crossfire, even an SRT.
Having owned an '82 Mark Cross version, I liked the TC and wanted one, but at the time my perked up little Lebaron just wouldn't die. So I had to keep it for 200K miles. Last I heard it was still running and on it's fourth owner.
Yeah, they were lousy cars.
roadster with a stick
Last edited by Franc Rauscher; Dec 6, 2008 at 08:42 PM.
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 230
Likes: 2
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
I can't recall if the Maserati came first or the Lebaron. Either way, the Lebaron should have never entered the picture. Maserati was a brand -- with a long colorful history. Chrysler should have never mixed them up.
Mercedes and Chrysler marriage was also problematic from the start. It would have taken a really fantastic product with just as fantastic marketing to make the marriage result in anything good for either of them.
Take a look at Pacifica Vs the R class. Have you looked at them? What a difference a brand makes. The Crossfire, for me, isn't about Chrysler or Mercedes. It's about the cool design of the car that harks back to the Bugatti and other classic sport cars. I wish it's interior was more "classic." Another is what appears to be high reliability ratings -- even better than SLKs.
Mercedes and Chrysler marriage was also problematic from the start. It would have taken a really fantastic product with just as fantastic marketing to make the marriage result in anything good for either of them.
Take a look at Pacifica Vs the R class. Have you looked at them? What a difference a brand makes. The Crossfire, for me, isn't about Chrysler or Mercedes. It's about the cool design of the car that harks back to the Bugatti and other classic sport cars. I wish it's interior was more "classic." Another is what appears to be high reliability ratings -- even better than SLKs.
Forum Regular
Joined: Nov 2008
Posts: 511
Likes: 0
From: Central Indiana
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
The TC post reminded me of my first introduction to the world of fast cars. I was 7 or 8 years old and my I was with my dad. We always would go look at car together and he finally found something he thought he could talk my mom into buying. He had spotted a Red Dodge Spirit R/T, 1992 version. It had the 2.2 DOHC turbo, intercooled, Getrag 5 sp, wood grain delete. We pulled onto US 31 and he nailed it. Getting planted into the front passenger seat is something I will never forgot and seeing the smile on my dad's face. Mom agreed, it had air bags and ABS I think was his rationale to her. She understood what it could do. Anyway its a special time anytime we can go looking at cars together. I am hoping to be able to get him to do Tail of the Dragon money and time permitting. We are planning a week long road trip to the bad lands and rockies in the early summer. The Spirit was one of the fastest cars I have ever been in my young age includeing a 78 400 Firebird Formula, Slightly tuned 67 Olds Toronado, 63 Fairlane with tuned 260, 353 Galaxie, and Supercharged Buick Riviera.If I could find another R/T or Daytona R/T turbo I would jump on it and begin my collection.
Senior Member
Joined: Mar 2008
Posts: 8,506
Likes: 1,139
From: St Louis MO
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by BlazingSaddle
I can't recall if the Maserati came first or the Lebaron. Either way, the Lebaron should have never entered the picture. Maserati was a brand -- with a long colorful history. Chrysler should have never mixed them up.
Mercedes and Chrysler marriage was also problematic from the start. It would have taken a really fantastic product with just as fantastic marketing to make the marriage result in anything good for either of them.
Take a look at Pacifica Vs the R class. Have you looked at them? What a difference a brand makes. The Crossfire, for me, isn't about Chrysler or Mercedes. It's about the cool design of the car that harks back to the Bugatti and other classic sport cars. I wish it's interior was more "classic." Another is what appears to be high reliability ratings -- even better than SLKs.
Mercedes and Chrysler marriage was also problematic from the start. It would have taken a really fantastic product with just as fantastic marketing to make the marriage result in anything good for either of them.
Take a look at Pacifica Vs the R class. Have you looked at them? What a difference a brand makes. The Crossfire, for me, isn't about Chrysler or Mercedes. It's about the cool design of the car that harks back to the Bugatti and other classic sport cars. I wish it's interior was more "classic." Another is what appears to be high reliability ratings -- even better than SLKs.
At the time nobody on this side of the pond had anything, not even the Corvette was worth much attention. Just my opinion.
But Chrysler was at least, trying to make cool cars.
I'm damm glad they didn't stop. The 94/95 truck turned Detroit upside down, The LHS and cab forward was copied(as much as they could with skin changes) by the competition. Unless you were still in love with GM boxes with different labels or the Ford old engineering repackaged time and time again, you bought one of these truly new machines.
My son still has his 95 LHS and it still looks, runs and drives well. Sumptuous interior and all.
In the late 80's Chrysler had a lot of ideas, but not a lot of money. Chrysler tried a lot of ideas to get attention, this was one. New york was full of "K" car limos for a while. Still see one on Ebay from time to time.
The Maserati was a lot like the "K" limo. Not a great product perhaps, but it got a lot of attention. In the end it sold a lot of cars for Chrysler. I must add this, the Maserati /lebaron was more unique and more reliable than the Cadillac Allante'. Now there is a mutt car from late 80's early nineties with a story to tell.
roadster with a stick
Last edited by Franc Rauscher; Dec 6, 2008 at 11:01 PM.
Senior Member
Joined: Apr 2006
Posts: 25,432
Likes: 648
From: Ontario
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by Franc Rauscher
For the record, the Lebaron came first. The Maserati was an attempt to add spice. It was a mix of garlic and cinnamon but for some, not that much of a b*st*rd.
At the time nobody on this side of the pond had anything, not even the Corvette was worth much attention. Just my opinion.
But Chrysler was at least, trying to make cool cars.
I'm damm glad they didn't stop. The 94/95 truck turned Detroit upside down, The LHS and cab forward was copied(as much as they could with skin changes) by the competition. Unless you were still in love with GM boxes with different labels or the Ford old engineering repackaged time and time again, you bought one of these truly new machines.
My son still has his 95 LHS and it still looks, runs and drives well. Sumptuous interior and all.
In the late 80's Chrysler had a lot of ideas, but not a lot of money. Chrysler tried a lot of ideas to get attention, this was one. New york was full of "K" car limos for a while. Still see one on Ebay from time to time.
The Maserati was a lot like the "K" limo. Not a great product perhaps, but it got a lot of attention. In the end it sold a lot of cars for Chrysler. I must add this, the Maserati /lebaron was more unique and more reliable than the Cadillac Allante'. Now there is a mutt car from late 80's early nineties with a story to tell.
roadster with a stick
At the time nobody on this side of the pond had anything, not even the Corvette was worth much attention. Just my opinion.
But Chrysler was at least, trying to make cool cars.
I'm damm glad they didn't stop. The 94/95 truck turned Detroit upside down, The LHS and cab forward was copied(as much as they could with skin changes) by the competition. Unless you were still in love with GM boxes with different labels or the Ford old engineering repackaged time and time again, you bought one of these truly new machines.
My son still has his 95 LHS and it still looks, runs and drives well. Sumptuous interior and all.
In the late 80's Chrysler had a lot of ideas, but not a lot of money. Chrysler tried a lot of ideas to get attention, this was one. New york was full of "K" car limos for a while. Still see one on Ebay from time to time.
The Maserati was a lot like the "K" limo. Not a great product perhaps, but it got a lot of attention. In the end it sold a lot of cars for Chrysler. I must add this, the Maserati /lebaron was more unique and more reliable than the Cadillac Allante'. Now there is a mutt car from late 80's early nineties with a story to tell.
roadster with a stick
In the Summer I drive the Xfire and the wife has the 300. Suits me just fine.
Last edited by onehundred80; Dec 9, 2008 at 11:26 AM.
Forum Regular
Joined: Apr 2008
Posts: 389
Likes: 1
Re: Mercedes eye-roll. Need opinions
Originally Posted by meshcraft
I need a few opinions or thoughts on something. Apparently no one seems to take me seriously when I mention that the Crossfire is a re-skinned SLK. If I so much as mention that there is a Mercedes engine or built on a Mercedes platform I get an eye-roll and people telling me it's not a Mercedes. I'm not calling it a Mercedes. Just simply stating the facts that all us Crossfire owners know.
I also had some people and police officers argue over it and I was telling the truth. These idiots think I'm a liar. Some of my own family members think I'm lying about it being a Mercedes underneath.
A lot of cars share parts. We have Volvos on Ford platforms..etc. But in the case of the Crossfire it's almost an entire SLK that has been re-skinned and it looks better than that version of the SLK I might add. I'm tired of the eye-rolls I get everytime I mention the word Mercedes. I'm sure there's some of this talk on the forums that I've missed, but would like some thoughts.
I even made up a comparison image and printed and people still insist they are right and I am wrong or they go silent with embarrasement after having been proven wrong.
People generally tell me that it doesn't matter what's under the hood. If it has a Chrysler emblem than it's a Chrysler. I never said it wasn't. Just stated that it's built on a Mercedes, but that is the argument I get and that it has nothing to do with Mercedes if it has a Chrysler emblem on it.
By their own argument I could buy a Lambo fiberglass kit-car and put a Lambo emblem on it and it would automatically be a Lambo. If their argument where valid.
Anyone else have similar experiences?
I also had some people and police officers argue over it and I was telling the truth. These idiots think I'm a liar. Some of my own family members think I'm lying about it being a Mercedes underneath.
A lot of cars share parts. We have Volvos on Ford platforms..etc. But in the case of the Crossfire it's almost an entire SLK that has been re-skinned and it looks better than that version of the SLK I might add. I'm tired of the eye-rolls I get everytime I mention the word Mercedes. I'm sure there's some of this talk on the forums that I've missed, but would like some thoughts.
I even made up a comparison image and printed and people still insist they are right and I am wrong or they go silent with embarrasement after having been proven wrong.
People generally tell me that it doesn't matter what's under the hood. If it has a Chrysler emblem than it's a Chrysler. I never said it wasn't. Just stated that it's built on a Mercedes, but that is the argument I get and that it has nothing to do with Mercedes if it has a Chrysler emblem on it.
By their own argument I could buy a Lambo fiberglass kit-car and put a Lambo emblem on it and it would automatically be a Lambo. If their argument where valid.
Anyone else have similar experiences?
Last edited by Glockhit; May 5, 2009 at 08:43 AM.