When the M-Class was redesigned, the first generation SUV's third-row seat did not make the transition. No matter, two new three-row models were scheduled to join it. Last fall Mercedes introduced the 3x2 R-Class crossover, and this spring brings the seven passenger GL-Class SUV. I reviewed the R350 last fall, but after driving the new GL450 needed a refresher. How different are these two vehicles? To find out, I drove an R500 immediately after driving the GL450.

Styling

With the right wheels, the R-Class is a sharp vehicle. Unfortunately, few ship with the right wheels, including the blob I drove this time around. R-Class sales have been weak, in part because few people seem to like the overly fluid styling.

I suspect the GL-Class will fare much better based on its looks alone. Though it strongly resembles the much less expensive Jeep Grand Cherokee, there are worse SUVs to resemble. Like the Jeep, the GL features angular bodywork and a bold stance. Very handsome, if lacking in originality.

Unlike the R, the GL doesn't look nearly as long as it is--at 201 inches it's over a foot longer than the Jeep. The reason for this is height: the GL is over six feet tall, and the eye relies on height to estimate length. The R-Class' roof is seven inches closer to the ground.

Professional reviewers often compare the GL450 to the Cadillac Escalade, and find the Mercedes lacking in road presence and "bling." Based on the price comparisons performed at my site, consumers are much less likely to compare the two: the Escalade is not among the six vehicles most often compared to the GL. This suggests that the two appeal to two different market segments.

Mercedes' interiors turned a corner with the introduction of the current SLK, and the GL continues the ongoing stream of improvements. It's interior is finely detailed and exquisitely finished. For example, despite the mid-50s base price the entire top of the instrument panel is covered with stitched top quality vinyl. And fine chrome accents are everywhere. Lots of subtle bling--yes, I know, a contradiction in terms. But all of the small bits add up to a very eye-catching total effect.

The R's interior is similar, but not quite as nicely finished or thoroughly designed. I greatly prefer how the GL's center stack flows into the console; in the R the center stack ends before reaching the center console, recalling minivans and domestic sedans where the console, if present at all, appears an afterthought. The R also does without the grab handles that sweep the length of the GL's console. These might be more necessary in a vehicle that might conceivably venture off-road, but the way I like to drive my passenger will need them on-road. And they look good.

The GL I drove had the standard "MB-Tex" (i.e. vinyl) upholstery. Many people will mistake it for leather, and it will last longer with much less maintenance. Leather is an option, but for some reason isn't on many of the initial vehicles.

Accommodations

In every row the seat cushions are larger in the GL. Those in the front row are virtually thrones. In either vehicle, the seats are much better padded than in Benzes of yore. This plus the larger size of the GL's buckets makes them supremely comfortable. Generous side bolsters provide good lateral support.

In both vehicles the seat controls are located on the seat bottom. Mercedes invented door-mounted pictographic controls, and even successfully sued Infiniti when the Japanese brand copied them for the first Q45. So why is Mercedes abandoning them now? The salesperson guessed cost. But you'll find Mercedes-style controls on the doors of the new Kia minivan.

A critical distinction is that the R has a pair of buckets in the second row, while the GL has a three-person split bench. If you have three children, like I do, this could all but rule out the R. Either second row is comfortable, with generous room for heads, shoulders, and legs, but the GL's larger, higher-mounted bench actually has an edge over the R's buckets.

Getting into the third row in either vehicle is about as easy as it gets courtesy of second row seats that easily tilt (R) or tumble (GL) forward. Which means you'll still have to squeeze a bit. The GL makes do without the R's epic rear door by having the seat get more out of the way. You can get into the third row on either side of the R, but only on the right side in the GL.

The third row in either vehicle is about as good as a third row gets, with adequate space for adults. In both cases the seats are slightly undersized, so the head rests must be raised a good half-foot to provide proper support. As in the second row, the GL's power-folding third row seat is a bit larger and higher off the floor than the R's manually folding one. The average adult can just about ride back there in comfort. If you want a third row this good in another SUV, you'll have to step up to the considerably larger Ford Expedition.

This just demonstrates how badly GM dropped the ball by sticking with a live rear axle in its recently redesigned large SUVs. The third-row seats in the new Tahoe, Yukon, and Escalade are tiny, sit right on the floor, and do not fold flat; they must be removed for maximum cargo volume.

In both vehicles rear compartment climate control is an option. Given the volume of these interiors, I'd want it.

The GL's second row occupants do lose out in one respect: they get no glass over their heads. A fixed glass panel over the third row is standard, while a sunroof over the first row is optional. With the R-Class, an optional panoramic roof includes nearly the entire roof.

There is space behind the third row for a couple of suitcases or two to three rows of grocery bags in both the R and the GL. So except for large items or long trips it shouldn't be necessary to fold the third row or resort to a roof-mounted cargo box. However, the sort of deep well present in many recent crossovers and minivans is absent in both. Instead, Mercedes opted to locate a huge full-size spare under the flat floor.

Fold both the second and third row and both vehicles offer about 85 cubic feet of cargo volume. This is about average for a midsize SUV, and significantly below most full-size SUVs and minivans.

On the Road

Because I drove the R500 and not the R350, I was able to directly compare Mercedes old SOHC three-valve and new DOHC four-valve V8s. Though the GL's 4.6-liter DOHC powerplant is 400 cc's smaller, it produces 33 more horsepower, for a total of 335. Torque output, and thus midrange power, is the same for both engines.

But the real story isn't the amount of power, which is more than adequate but less than thrilling in both vehicles, but how this power is delivered. The old engine is much coarser and louder than the new one. I personally would not buy a Mercedes with the three-valve unit at this point, the new engine, which will replace it in all 2007s, is so much better. The larger 5.5, which will eventually be available in both the R and GL, has all the virtues of the 4.6, plus another 47 horsepower.

Both vehicles use Mercedes seven-speed automatic. Every time I have test driven a vehicle with this transmission it has produced more than a few hesitant and/or rough shifts. This is probably because it needs to learn the driver's style, but I haven't been able to confirm this.

And now we come to the big difference between the GL and the R: handling. The GL might not look as large as it is, but from the driver's seat it feels it. The driving position deserves as much blame as the size and considerable mass of the vehicle. You sit well above the road, as in other large SUVs, but because of the location and height of the beltline and the huge A-pillars that terminate atop a relatively high instrument panel it is very difficult to gauge how close you are to the left edge of the lane. I suppose one adapts with enough time behind the wheel, but I found it disconcerting throughout most of my test drive. I do not recall having this problem in the Chevrolet Tahoe and Ford Expedition. I did have this problem in the Hummer H2, though.

In comparison, the R feels very much like a regular car. Though not nimble by a long shot in absolute terms, compared to the GL it feels like a sports car. Think of it as an S-Class wagon in size and character if not amenities. As a result, I felt much more confident behind its steering wheel and found it much easier to drive.

I do not mean to imply that the GL handles badly. It has a balanced feel and a degree of chassis composure that Land Rover's Range Rover Sport sorely needs. It feels tied down to the road, with no slop to speak of, in the manner typical of high-end German cars. Despite its height lean in turns is moderate, and the suspension never feels squishy. The R does not feel quite as firm, likely because its lower center of gravity permits softer suspension settings. No, the problem with the GL, such as there is one, is that the SUV feels as long and tall as it is. If you want a three-row European SUV with a hint of agility, your best bet is the Volvo XC90.

Because the third-row seatback is not tall and its headrests retract, it does not block rearward visibility the way many third rows do. Still, this vehicle has a high beltline, so small objects (like the car I personally drive) will be hard to spot. Rear obstacle detection should be mandatory on all vehicles with limited rearward visibility. Normally I'm not one to complain about what is and is not standard. If a safety feature protects the owner, then a case might be made that it can be optional. But those that protect others should be standard.
Unfortunately, in the case of the GL obstacle detection is only available as part of the $4,500 Premium Package.

Both air-suspended vehicles ride solidly, with a total absence of quivers in the body structure. The GL's unibody construction, unique among large SUVs, pays off here. But the R, with its ultra-long 126.6-inch wheelbase and relatively soft suspension, rides more smoothly. The GL never feels rough, and certainly rides better than a BMW X5, but it suffers from the jitters that afflict just about every SUV. In this case they are largely, but not entirely, suppressed. This was with the standard 60-series treads. Fit lower profile tires and the ride could worsen.

Both vehicles are quiet inside, and feel very much the high-priced premium vehicles they are. The latest Jeep Grand Cherokee and GM SUVs are much more refined than their predecessors, but the GL lives at a whole other level.

Both vehicles come with hill start assist and hill descent control to aid in off-road endeavors, but the R-Class clearly isn't meant for such duty. The GL, on the other hand, can be fitted with a dual-range transfer case and with its standard air suspension at its highest setting possesses a whopping 10.9 inches of ground clearance. The average 4WD vehicle has eight to nine inches.

Mercedes-Benz GL450 Price Comparisons and Pricing

Compared to the V8 M and R, the GL450 is only a few thousand more than the former and is a bit less expensive than the latter. Even though factory-to-dealer incentives bring the R's price lower than that of the GL, this is fitting. The GL is still far from cheap, but the high 50s price of the adequately-equipped vehicle I drove seems reasonable for what you get.

A Land Rover LR3 or Volvo XC90 V8 runs about $9,000 less after adjusting for features. The Land Rover likely has an edge in off-road prowess, and the Volvo, despite having more slop in the chassis, feels much handier. But otherwise the Benz, with its larger, nicer interior, seems easily worth this premium.

Prices change frequently, and differences will vary based on feature level. To quickly generate these and other comparisons with the specific features you want, visit my Web site, www.truedelta.com. (It's the only site that provides true "apples-to-apples" price comparisons.)

TrueDelta's page for the GL-Class:

http://www.truedelta.com/models/GL-Class.php

Last Words

I found the driver's poor sightlines disconcerting, but otherwise was thoroughly impressed by the GL450. Conversely, I preferred the easier handling of the R, but otherwise found it less desirable, and perhaps even a bit ordinary. Given the GL-Class' more conventional styling, nicer interior, and extra seat, I suspect Mercedes will have a far easier time selling it.


A note on Mercedes-Benz GL450 Reliability

I cannot practically cover reliability within the context of this review. However, many people are interested in such information, so I've started collecting my own data. Results, once they are available, will be posted to my site, www.truedelta.com, with updates every three months.

Unlike other sources, TrueDelta will clearly identify what difference it will make if you buy a GL450 rather than another vehicle by providing "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats (among others). You will be able to specify the number of years, annual miles, and types of repairs to include in Mercedes-Benz GL-Class reliability comparisons.

Before I can report results, I need data on all cars--not just the GL450--from people like you. To encourage participation, those who help provide the data will receive free access to the site's reliability information. For non-participants, this access will cost $24.95.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.

If you're a member, and you want to receive an email when I post a new review, click here.

Some of my reviews of related vehicles:
Audi Q7 review
BMW X5 review
Chevrolet Tahoe review
Jeep Grand Cherokee review
Land Rover LR3 review
Land Rover Range Rover Sport review
Mercedes R-Class review (original review)
Volvo XC90 review