Xoutpost.com - Today i got up and looked at the X and said (out dated?)

Quote:

Originally Posted by TiAgX5 (Post 999956)

I stand behind my statement in regard to how the E53 design has aged, just look at a few other SUVs from around 2000........

Thanks for the pics, they will help me prove my point...lol!:rofl: So let's take a look at the vehicles you posted one by one and analyze them.

First up the MB M-Class or W163, built from 1998-2005, this thing looks like a high top baby shoe, and was a real turd to own, Google the terms, "Bama Benz, Alabama Trashcan or Bama Rust Bucket and you'll find a pic of a W163. Here are excerpts from a site dedicate to the W163.

Despite all the fanfare, build quality and reliability of these early M-Classes (or W163 to Mercedes loyalists) was notoriously poor. This can be exemplified from a 1998 episode of Top Gear, where Jeremy Clarkson was able to fit his fingers between the unacceptably wide gab between the rear bumper and the body.

Interiors of the early models were also sub-par for a Mercedes-Benz. Hard plastics, cheesy-looking fake wood door trim, and lack of many expected luxury features such as automatic climate control were among its shortcomings.

The M-Class even scored last place in a J.D. Power quality survey.

Here are some owner comments about the MB W163.

I think the w163 has fallen farther and faster than any other MB model. They quickly shifted to the buy-here pay-here lots, and those on the road are disproportionately likely to be in rough shape.

“Mercedes W163 (1998-2005 M-Class) – Conceived in Germany, Born In America”……. and complete rubbish. Nothing epitomized Mercedes fall from grace as a maker of well thought out and well made cars then the first generation of M Class. The M Class may have beaten the Acura MDX to market by 3 years and the Lexus RX by year, the Acura and the Lexus were so much better in most respects and the fact that there are loads of first gen RX and MDX roaming the roads and the first gen M Class is a rarity on today’s roads is telling by itself.
Heck even the Land Cruiser based Lexus LX(starting its second gen in 1998) was light years ahead in terms of refinement and reliability(not a surprise due to it based upon the Land Cruiser)
I hate sounding so negative on any car because I like to think that if I look hard enough at any car(except the Smart FourTwo) I can find a redeeming quality but there is none on the 98-05 M-Class. It is huge POS that dragged Mercedes name in the mud and on top of that they did not seem to get the memo about correcting the issues that car had at all during the whole first gen run. QC issues abound on the things. Take the example car in the pics. The paint is shiny and the body looks great with no rust EXCEPT on the fuel door. How is it possible to only have rust on the fuel door? How many cars out there with metal fuel doors do you see rusting?

Oh, did I mention I have two cousin that work in the MB plant in Alabama? And yes they built many a "Alabama Trashcan...lol! Timeless it ain't.

Now let's take a look at the next pic, I believe that's a 1999-2000 1st Generation Cadillac Escalade, this thing looks like the box the X5 came in! The 1st Gen Escalade was one of the worst badge engineering jobs since the Cadillac Cimmarron, GM's president went on record and said that Caddy did not need a truck in their line-up to compete against the Lincoln Navigator. Well any auto enthusiast knows how that turned out, Navigators sold like cheap beer and Caddy had nothing to compete against it. So they rushed to market a re-badged Tahoe/Yukon, GM fans revolted en-mass, Caddy is still apologizing to this day for the 1st Gen Escalade. It was so badly received, GM skipped the 2001 model year so that they would get the 2nd Gen Escalade right when it debuted for the 2002 model year

Here are excerpts from a Car & Driver magazine article.

the first Escalade, a flabby, shameless badge job hastily rushed to market at the behest of unhappy SUV-less Cadillac dealers, who were dismayed at the astounding initial success of the Lincoln Navigator. The hurried launch followed a terse statement by General Motors president Jack Smith and then marketing czar Ron Zarrella to the effect that a sport-utility vehicle was not consistent with the image GM had mapped out for its prestige division. Therefore, there would not be a Cadillac sport-ute. No way. Ha.
The time that elapsed between those denials and the hastily cobbled 1999 Escalade, which rolled out in mid-1998, was roughly 18 months, an interval that Cadillac later cited as an example of GM's improving ability to reduce development time. Sure.

Again, it ain't a timeless design

And last but not least the Range Rover, I'll somewhat agree with you on the RR, only because it has stayed true to its overall styling for so long. And I guess they have a reputation for toughness, although us BMW fans no what real POS's they are, and to think we complain about BMW...lol!

Sorry for the long post, I'm not saying the X5 isn't fun to drive, it's a hoot when it's not throwing codes, leaking fluids or the cooling system is exploding. But when people start throwing around the word "Timeless" for a massed produced SUV, and that's all it is, I gotta raise the BS flag...lol!:D Like I said earlier, you gotta take the ownership emotion out of the equation, you gotta be Mr. Spock like, no emotion, just simple Vulcan logic. Now that beautiful Viper in your avatar, that's timeless, post some pics of that puppy!:thumbup: Timeless cars eventually find their way into a car museum, I say again let me know when you find an E53 in a car museum in the near future.