Clarkson's biased...
 

Incredibly biased. I mean, he talks about the Ford GT during the review, calling it his "childhood dream", and he ends up buying one.

He raves about the problematic RX8, a Mazda, which is owned by Ford, but trashes the 350Z, which won car of the year in two different publications (Top Gear being one of them, but if you read the issue, Clarkson voted against it) probably because it was the RX8's main competitor.

He prefers a Jaguar XKR to a Porsche or a BMW 6 series, the latter two being brilliant cars for the money. Jaguar is part of the Premiere Automotive Group, or PAG, which is owned by Ford.

He always subtley criticizes German-built or owned cars, as long as they are not Mercedes-Benz's, (since he does own an SL55) his reason that they lack character. (So Mercedes Benz has character? give me a break. The last one that did was built more than 3 decades ago.) This is so evident in the June 6 episode where he placed the absolutely brilliant (and I'm not alone on this) Porsche Carrera GT on the uncool side of the "cool wall" and the McLaren-Mercedes SLR on the cool side. His reason? The Carrera is too vulgar. WTF?! The Carrera GT looks like a really fast Porsche, but the SLR? It's more vulgar than an Enzo for pete's sake. I mean, the length of the bonnet, the vertical doors, the razor blade rims, the side vents, the air brake, the alloy-in-glass rear lights... hell, even the exhausts are on the side! And he says its not vulgar?!

I'm bloody happy Hammond and the TV audience stood up to him and forced the SLR down to the uncool side of the board. Talk about double-standard and biased.

He owns and loves Ferrari's, and as long as he's the one doing the review, he will almost certainly choose them over anything else, (as long as it isnt part of the PAG; i.e. Aston Martin) no matter how logical it is to choose the other (i.e. Ferrari CS vs Porsche)

He loathes BMW's, probably because they are the only real competitor of Mercedes-Benz's, and uses his popularity and wit to sway viewers towards his side of the pendulum. One only needs to see the M3 vs S4 review here. With all due respect to Audi, the S4 is a brilliant car, but the M3 is still far better in terms of performance and handling. The M3 is one of the most popular cars bought by racing enthusiasts/teams, and if the S4 was really better than it, then it should follow that they would be purchasing that car instead.

He took a shot at them (BMW) when they reported the 1-series, by mocking the acceleration time, a time which is not exactly trounced by a regular Focus, Mazda 3, or Golf.

In the June 6 episode, he took shots at the Z4, calling it just short of being a terrible car, yet over at 5th Gear, Tiff Needle (who used to be a Le Mans veteran, for those who aren't aware) pitted the Z4 against the Boxster, and the Z4 won. Tiff also called the M3 and the Z4 fantastic cars.

Clarkson's biases are really starting to leak through, and frankly, its starting to get on my nerves. Its very difficult to watch and appreciate a road test/review when you know that the reviewer makes his decisions based on his opinions (and biases frankly), and not on logic, which is what we, the viewers, actually need to base our purchases on.

End of rant.

Mmmm .... well , i dont think anyone buys a car based on a car show , you go to the dealer , test drive all your options and end getting one ...

The funny about clarkson is that he always picks the car HE thinks its the best ... and always prefers British cars cuz of his nationalist , you dont need to pick him very serious , we all laugh about his pointless apretiations , and agree in some objetive opinions that he mades ... He just makes his appretiations on cars , very personal ones , and that is why the ppl like the show and like Clarkson ... It would not be as popular if they run something like DRIVEN , giving points for Value for money and Space and WTF ... the show is mainly about how cool a car can be

That's true, but what I don't like is how he puts down brilliant cars just because he feels that the competitor should be the one people should buy, because that's what HE would buy. He could at least call them fantastic, then simply say why he would prefer the other one, because of what type of person he is, therefor he prefers that kind of car. Something like what James (May) does all the time.

Clarkson called the McLaren F1 twitchy, harsh, and all these other expletives, yet the rest of the world disagreed with him. I mean, can't he simply accept that he's not a good enough driver for it? I've read different publications, (in different languages as well) and they all agree that the McLaren F1 is still the car to beat. It's incredible how biased he can be.

Mind you though, a good review (or a bad one) CAN influence your purchase, generally because you trust that the reviewers know more than you do.

All ppl knows that Clarkson never talks seriously , and i agree he always picks teh car that HE would buy . I dont think the McLaren was too much for him , remember it was built to be an easy car to drive . And this was not the only time that everybody disagreed with him ... M3 , M5 as far as i can remember . I think ppl watch mostly top gear because the spectacularity involved in the show , the editings , the features , they just spend all the money in getting a good show , maybe not for extremely good reviewings , he also has said a lot about not buying a Mercedes cuz they are bad built , bad service , not even an attitude , i remember he said that about the E class , while he loved the E class Diesel version in his Times Column ...

I agree with you that Jeremy is biased but you forgot one important thing.... everyone is biased! Every person has a different taste, how boring would it be if every single person in the world got the same taste in "things". Diversity is what makes us interesting. Not sure about you, but most people, including myself, likes certain cars more than the other.

Given the choice of a M3 and a S4, I would certainly take the S4 instead of the BMW. Not that I hate BMW or anything but there're certain things that the Audi is more suitable for my personality, intended image and well... taste.

You may think I'm a Jeremy fan who agrees everything he says. Maybe I am but it's probably due to coincidence and similar in taste. For instance, I love the aston db7/9 and jag XK's. Unlike Tiff, I don't care about how well (bad) they handle. On the public road, you can never ever reach that limit. Call me biased but I do want a ride that's fun to drive yet reasonably responsible. There's no point having a car if it's so unusable you can only drive it once a month.

As you say, Jeremy is doing the reviews based on his opinions and that's what separates Top Gear from the rest of the programs. If you want objective reviews, just watch Auto Motor und Sport. If you want reviews for people who just want a freeway cruiser, watch an American show. If you want reviews for people who need a cheap ride, watch a Canadian show. However, if you're like most of us, looking for an entertaining review, Top Gear is your show. 5th Gear isn't bad either but it got a little bit boring after the producers put on the sensible hat.

Yes, I AM BIASED but I'm proud of that :mrgreen:

That's why you have more than one reviewer on the show. Each reviewer representing each type of person. For example, Richard would take a Porsche over a Jag but Jeremy would take the Jag no matter what. Okay, he does hate the cheap jags like the S-Type.

Same thing can be said about 5th Gear. Tiff is completely biased towards "fun" cars, many of which are unsafe on the road. If the car doesn't go sideways easily, it's not fun. Not to mention Tiff doesn't like AWD cars, in an interview he did last year, he mentioned how he prefers FWD over AWD. I'm sure a number of you won't agree with him on that.

Wait, I think you've misunderstood me. Read what you just said:

See how you explained WHY you prefer those cars? Jeremy doesn't. He blames the cars (that he doesn't like) for his shortcomings, and since there ARE people who aren't as aware or as educated as we are, it comes across as if he's calling that particular car a poor product. He likes the SLR because he said it didn't bite his head off, like the Carrera GT or the McLaren F1. I could've understood it if he said that he prefers the SLR because he can't be bothered to shift gears while going fast whilst seating in a nice comfy interior, but he instead labels the Carrera GT and the McLaren F1 as cars which are not user friendly/difficult to drive/to stressful.

Besides, you CAN have a good show EVEN if you are biased. Look at Richard Hammond and James May for example. Richard does not own a Z4, and instead prefers Porsches, but that did not mean he would trash a perfectly good car (Z4) because of personal taste.

I agree with AlienDB7 , its like when you go to the doctor and he diagnoses Cancer , would you believe him ? or take different opinions to make your own ? :wink:

This would've been fine if all 3 of them reviewed the same car, but they don't. Then at least we could draw our own conclusions based on the collective input of the 3.

I think the show ill improve though, since Hammond stands up to Jeremy's bullying, and makes sure that the audience does as well.

haha i always new he was biased but never thought he would love ford that much

Well actually the only ford he LOVES is the GT , and the Jag/Astons he loves them cuz they are british , remmeber he always complains about the ford bad quality in the Jag/Aston products .

Exactly! This just shows how easy it is to pick out just the shortcomings and ignore the rest.

But that's what makes for an interesting debate and that seems to be what Jeremy is good at ;)

You notice he usually try to go against the audience? He even like the ugly renaults.... no comment on that!

Well he said all french cars are Cool , very bad quality and horrid rides but Cool ...

Hehe... that wouldn't be a show if he would not do it that way. Just compare Martin Brundle and his Supercars video with Jeremy, who's more entertaining?

That's a good point about the supercars DVD. You can have the best cars and most analytical reviews of a car, but Clarkson just offers an alternative light hearted view of motoring.

He is the first to admit he cannot drive and his opinions are purely subjective, but he is a journalist and creates the most imaginative and entertaining similes once a week for entertainment! You just have to learn to take his reviews seriously and just enjoy the programme :D

SIR GT
i think ur post is off little value...
mercs do have character compared to bmw and audi ...
and he hates american (just to make his show funny) but he loves fords
well he may be biased but given what he says it does make sense...(biased sense!)

clarkson loves loves loves loves loves ferrari... and yet he said the 612 sucked..
and didnt put it on the cool wall.. u see he isnt really biased... clarkson loves merc but hates the E and says the S is the best luxory car... well the S is the best ( looking at statistcs of number sold... the S sells the most out of 7 and xj and a8)
and also about the mf1 well he said the money put him off..
and ALSO THE REVIEWED THE HUMMER (HE IS THE ONLY FUCKING BRITISH JOURNALIST TO SAY IT IS GOOD)
and also.. clarkosn insulted the S type... thats a jag! hmmmm..
oh and if u didnt know the mcf1 is twichy and high speeds... i ve read that b4..
he likes the slr compared to the carrera mainly because he does.. its his choice..
i like the slr more than the carrera mainly because of the looks...

and also everyone is biased u think merc sucks sir gt... well bmw and merc are technically, equal. they are designed however for different segment of ppl ... mercs for slightly older ppl and bmw more popular with youngsters...
and also about the 350z... well it really sucks.. has good looks.. (MY FRIEND OWNS ONE U CAN ACTUALLY FEEL THE BASS IN UR ASS , BUILD QUALITY IS BETTER IN A FIAT PANDA).. but then again u like the 350z so its all about opionin

now im not saying that clarkson is always right.. but even u are not always right..
i think ur missing the point of this show its jeremy clarksons top gear ...
(ohh and if u have seen the movie by JC called top 100 cars.. he puts the m5 number 10!!... and he admits that tiff would call and make fun of him)

im not arguing saying that the cars u think are better are not... just saying that when it comes to a subject on cars.. it is very subjective...and top gear is not like car and driver or 5th gear.. its more for entertainment.. plus they do give good/unbaised reviews...
oh and ur comkplaining about the 645ci.. well HE PUT IT ON THE COOL WALL .... and if u think the 645 is better than a carrera it is up to u.. (most ppl wouldnt ) but ur not wrong , its what u like

SO IF U REALY ARE GETTING OFFENDED BECAUSE U ARE AMERICAN OR JUST GETTTING OFFENDED AT WHAT HE SAYS .. DONT WATCH THE SHOW..
IM INDIAN AND ONE OF HIS LAST POSTS HE INSULTED HIS NEW ROVER CAR FROM INDIA.. AND THEN MADE FUN OF ONE GUY IN THE STUDIO WHO WAS INDIAN .. .well... i dont like it but then again its just a show...

IMO, if TG is the great show it is, and Jeremy the great host it is, it's because he is bloody biased and bloody funny :D we all know that he will put cars in the uncool part :D and he will just answer "because it's like that" :D and there is no problem at all :D we can all read lot of reviews everywhere, see vids not done by TG... TG is first of all a TV show :D and it has to entertain :D ... it does :D

TT it entertains AND helps us to buy cars... to an extent...lol

Well sure, but if you would buy a car just listening to a single person , Jeremy in this case... you always risk to go wrong ;)

damnit, you trying to tell me i shouldn't have listened to jeremy? my last four cars were all his recommendations. bloody he...

y know what. i loved them all, to bits. so jeremy's getting more biased as age and hair loss is creeping up to him; but honestly, buy a car because you want to. not because someone told you to. just because he says don't buy a rover doesn't mean you have to not buy it. be sensible, and don't buy a rover.

I think Clarkson isn't to be take very seriously, and he knows it, he is biased on purpose and he overreacts a little bit to be funny!
He oftens says that the car X is the best car in the world, and in the show he says that it sucks! lol
I think he is a good host, because he describes the cars well. The only thing is that after that, he considers some of the aspects as defects, (Porsche design, for example) while I (and most people, think of those things as qualities!!

But sometimes he gets me on my nerves!! Do you remember the test drive between the 360 CS and the GT3RS, when he is driving the GT3 and keeping up with Luca Badoer in the CS, and overtaking him??
After doing that in the Porsche, how can he say that the Ferrari is better?
He considers himself better than Luca Badoer??? Give me a break....

But I think he is funny, although not being as good as a pilot as Tiff!
:) :)

I think he is biased too, and not only biased, but so fickle; he makes quick and poor decisions left and right.

What do you mean "quick and poor decisions"? Fickle, yeh I can see that point..

Although Clarkson is sometimes being a bit childish about cars and oversimplifying or exaggerating things. An example of this are his constant remarks on Alfa Romeo's reliability.

But his biggest problem is that people simply don't listen!!
First of all, it should always be clear he is stating his personal opinions, not facts that are the same to every person on this planet. Reading this thread makes it clear not everyone accepts that.

Second, many people don't differentiate. The example given by Sir_GT on the BMW Z4 shows that. Jeremy was not criticizing it for poor handling, but for its atrocious ride. Tiff tested the car on a smooth track and praised its handling, which is an entirely different thing. EVO's long term reports on the Z4 support this line of thought.
Clarkson can hate a perfectly handling car for lack of character and the other way around. To me he always seems to put the things he likes about cars and the things he doesn't into words very understandably. Whether I agree or not is up to me.

Cars are very debatable. Top Gear regularly shows that with Clarkson, May and Hammond quarreling over cars and not coming to a unanimous verdict. To the people that don't get this: it's your loss. You're obviously not getting as much out of TG as you should. And lastly: lighten up, it's only a bloody opinion!

That is a good point , remember the SLR test when he compared a supercar ( salad ) with the SLR ( salad wrapped in bread ) ... it was just so clear ... and also so funny and it happens every show , he simplifies everything ...

As for he thinking he is a good driver ... he always say he is a crappy driver , that Tiff can blow him away .. and he respects him a lot too

The F1 though is exactly what eh said, and im glad a brit finally admitted it. Its neither agile or as good handling as an F40 or F50, and of all the supercars, its the easiest to drive and the most practical. This has to do with its softer suspesin setup and aero geared for 241 mph. The Mac F1 is far from the ultiate sports car. Ultimate GT car, maybe.

By the way, the CDhallenge Stradale vs the 911 GT3 RS, The Cs does deserve to win. IN fact, all mags have put it ahead.

yes but for one CS you can ALMOST get two GT3 RS'. Or at least one GT3RS and one used Mk2 GT3. Even i can admit that the RS is excellent value for money; and i'm a ferrari nut.

And they are user friendly/difficult to drive/to stressful. That's the point of them, that's why I would like to have one instead of SLR and that's why I would probably get rid of them after a few months. And all that can be understood from JC's words, if you are listening ...

i would not not agree at all if he is biased but i would if someone said he was racsit...

for the first time i actually saw an entire , full, episode of TG and at least 4-5 times they brought up the subject of how stupid the americans are and the fact tat they cant make cars go fast around corners...
well abt the cars going around the corners.. well.. i mean they dont have to rub it in!

He is biased, but they all are. I don't watch car shows to decide which car to buy(well other then perhaps when the car is exceptionally bad). I watch the shows because I enjoy them. I mean, look at motor trend magazine. They had the pt cruiser as a car of the year, wheres the journalistic integrity there? Oh yeah, they have none.. But if I were to read that mag, it wouldnt be for that(I dont but its a good example).

yea i agree, top gear is so much better than watching some garbage like motorweek on the speed channel or car and driver television where they tell you shit you already know about the car, like if they do a review on the elise they will be like "it has a small engine, it weighs under 2000lbs, it handles great wonderful car!" and thats it. clarkson on the other hand gives his opinions on the car according to what he thinks not on pure facts, i mean he still tells you the basics but he gives so much more than that, and is so much more passionate about his reviews. i mean christ i want to blow my brains out everytime i hear the narrator on motorweek drab on about how the honda civic is an economy car and is reliable, and gets great gas.....no shit i have heard all that before, i want more than that. and more is what clarkson gives, however as a consequence of giving more, he will be biased/opinionated and many will dissagree, but hell they still watch.

I had thought about this but hadn´t realized that he was sooo biased... anyway I don´t really care, cause as some others said, the show is for pure entertainment. Gotta love the driving and some of the weird stuff they do with cars.

For a more objective car show go for Fifth Gear.

i agree with what sir GT said, because it's basicley what i've been saying for a while, how can he chose an aston martian over a ferrari.. ohhh what it's british.

if i had a dolloar for evreytime he contradicts himself!

This has already been said in various ways, but I'm going to add my little twist to it anyways...

I think we all know JC is biased, and in some cases his choices don't make a lot of sense, his comments anger me for their inaccuracies & obvious bias, and he tries desperately to make the car he likes look the best...but holy fucking shit! At least Top Gear gets some emotion out of me, besides 5th Gear, no other TV show about cars even gets more than half attention.

Sir_GT, I don't think you have ever watched one of those absolutely horrible American car shows...Autoweek, MotorTrend, or Car & Driver...because if you had you would be begging for some badly biased BBC car shows...they are ten times more interesting to watch. 8)

I for one would never buy a car because a TV show liked it, I would buy a car because I went to the dealer, drove it and loved how it felt to drive...so I don't really care too much that JC makes some ignorant comments now and then...I was pretty mad when he trashed the McLaren F1, but at least I was mad, if it was Car & Driver reviewing the F1 (they haven't) besides seeing footage of an F1 I would have been on the verge of falling asleep...:roll:

i agree, i live in the US and therfore dont get Top gear so the only time i see him is when i download the episode and clips. he makes the show entertaining which is the point of the show. its mostly for entertainment, not really a legit and thourough review of cars.... Tiff is better at that. JC is there to make you smile and when he says "this car sucks blah blah" you prove him wrong by checking out that car and realizing you like it. his humor and biases are what make you watch....imo :D

I see what you are all saying, but I just think you cant take him too seriously. I disagree with what you are saying about him only liking cars owned by ford cos he has one, and similarly with Mercedes-Benz.

He just has strong views on cars, and doesn't give a dam what the general consensus is about a particular model.

You say he has a thing against BMW's, and although it does come across that way sometimes, just look at the M3 CSL test on the isle of man, he absolutely raved about it.

He IS very patriotic and so goes mad for astons - just look at the 'great train race.' He no longer has a ferrari, yet he still thinks they are great cars.

All i'm saying is that you can't take him too seriously. Like someone has already pointed out, everyone is biased towards their own personal likes/dislikes, so he is just highlighting those.

Whatever his motives when reviewing a car, or taking the piss out of Hammond, he is a very funny person.

Cheers
Tom

Can't we all just look at Jeremy as a man who says thngs to make it fun...
You always know he's gonna say "And now... it's time for.... the Stig." But even if you know he's gonna say it, it's always fun.. And when he mentions "The Germans" then it's also fun because you know he's gonna say that...
It's for entertainment, that's why they always put cool cars on the uncool wall, it's not because he thinks the 612 is uncool, but too be entertaining...

Good original post!

Clarkson is a irreverently funny guy. Enjoy him for his wit. Do not take him or his opinions too seriously.

Clarkson is a journalist first and a car reviewer second

And all of you whiners who think he drives shit - Yeah Right ... What are you - the next best thing since Mario Andretti?

I seen him drive pretty well - I was impressed by his abilities in the Carrera GT. Sure he is not as good as Tiff - but Tiff is a past F1 driver for Pete's sake.

Very well said.

The vast majority of things he does is just to be purely controversial, but i have to say, i think he's got the whole cool wall spot on, with maybe a few exceptions.

All of you who say he is biased, racist or what the hell, need to open your eyes. Take the cool wall for example again, and how he moved every single ford into the cool section when he wanted a GT!

Like has been said, he does things for a bit of controversy, or to liven a set/section up.

If you complain about his show so much, DONT WATCH IT!!!!

Tom

To the person who said that I haven't watched any american car shows: Yep, I haven't. Maybe that's why I was a bit peeved.

Mind you, I'm downloading the June 13 episode right now. I still love the show, even though I disagree with JC 95% of the time.

This thread was meant as a personal rant. Some of you took it too seriously.

hm,mmm
SIR GT... okay.. but i dont understand how u disagree with 95 percent of what he says?

i mean i agree with him about 80 % and roughly thats abt what everyone would probably do.. hmmm.. so guessing u like bmw more than merc, u love porsche, love ferrari...
well clarkson loves them too! i mean he put the 645 in the cool wall and still said it sucked compared to the jag and porsche.. ( isnt that true)

to be honest......i watch his series because they are great in terms of quality of reports, the programms lenght, it has its funny moment.,....but in terms of the precission of his comments..........and he is biased enough because he says what he thinks or he likes a certain car or not regardless this car is realiable or not ,....i dont agree in many of his statements.....in this terms....i think that the 5th Gears comments when testing a car are more approached to the cars characteristics

Yes but thats the trade-off.

I find 5th gear relly dull.

I agree that Clarkson is bias BUT I believe is gives credit to a good car even if it's not one of his favorites. For example, he loved to Carrara GT.

I do like BMW more than MB in terms of driving dynamics, but that wasn't the main thing that ticked me off. Yes he put the 645i on the cool wall, but Clarkson will always defend an MB based on the good qualities it has, but underlines the bad qualities of a BMW, instead of defending it for its good qualities. I do find the man funny, (the entire show as well actually) but I am starting to see his bias, which he is totally privy to, like what everybody has said, but I like I said before, he practically blames the car for his shortcomings, instead of admitting that he hasn't reached the level of driving skill needed to properly review the said car.

Let's put it this way; say Clarkson did a comparison test between the SLR, CGT, and the Enzo, I will listen to his comments, but I would not believe him when he says "so and so is the best performing car because..." simply because he isn't in the level that is needed to properly assess each cars abilities, qualities, and limitations.

If that review was done by Tiff on the other hand, I would seriously take his opinion into account, simply because everybody knows how good Tiff is.

...but I will only watch 5th gear for that review. I'll still sit through and enjoy an entire hour of Top Gear. :)

SIRGT :


simply because he isn't in the level that is needed to properly assess each cars abilities, qualities, and limitations.


NONO ... now dont make statements like that...

remmber clarkson reviewed the porsche and 360CS .. he does have abilities LOL... tiff and him say more or less similar things.. clarkson hated m5 but then said it was the best saloon car in his video head to head.. then abt the lambo gallardo.. both said "its not a ferrari"
its just that tiff the person to watch if u only care abt the driving i.e y he loves bmw...
personally i dont like bmw cos well they are long on engineering but it doesnt have the class of the mercedes or the passion of a jaguar..
and thats whats make a car good - having a soul.

BOTH SAID THE ZONDA WAS BETTER THAN A LAMBO MURCILAGO
BOTH SAID M3 IS BETTER THAN AUDI FUCKED UP S4
BOTH SAID THE CROSSFIRE SUCKED
im not saying they always say the same thing.. but more or less

not ugly to me :shock: the uglyness is in the eye of the beholder 8)

Regarding Merc's...

I own two. A classic 280SL and a C-class. My dad owned a merc too. My late grandfather owned several (including the old CL's, which we've tried to maintain)

...and I'll tell you, based on my experience, Mercedes-Benz TODAY is only a shadow of Mercedes-Benz BEFORE. Ever since the DaimlerChrysler merger, everything turned into shit. You have a CLK which "hands" the driver his seatbelt, while a much more expensive CL which does not. Why is that? Why pay more for a GT which does not pamper you? Do you know that both the CLK and the CL do not have driver memory? This may sound trivial, but because the seats are electronically operated, once a rather short human uses the car before you, and sets the seat that way, you will have a VERY difficult time getting the seat back to the way you want. Why? Because it doesn't have driver memory. :roll: You have lots of plastic in a pricey E-class, and an almost Ford-level build quality in the C-class. You have plastic in the SLR... why? Why is that?

Why sell the SL without a manuel? Why make supercharged cars without a manual, or at least a paddle-shift?

Why go down market when you're regarded as a classy manufacturer? What was the point in the A-class? Isn't the C-class enough? To give people their first taste of MB? If that's the case, why destroy their trial with a plastic interior and a shit ride?

Why make delivery vans and then pass them off as passenger vans? Why?

etc. etc. etc.

Mercedes has LONG forgotten where they came from. The racing lineage which they once proudly stood for. They have turned into Ford, just with more brand presence... something which they proudly abuse to no end.

They have lost ALL passion. They have simply become a profit-turning machine.

Blah.

Next time you want to ride in luxury, go take a peek into the Audi or BMW showroom instead. But if you want the best BRAND NAME in the auto industry, then by all means, buy a Merc.

Unless they regain sight of WHO they were in the past, the shoddiness of their products will continue.

The end.