[Spy shots] 2027 Mercedes-Benz "Baby G-Class"

[Tuffode]

but longitudinally mounted engines are not out of the question.

Mercedes Baby G-Klasse wird in Lappland erprobt

Neue Erlkönigbilder ganz aus der Nähe zeigen den Baby G von Mercedes-Benz bei der Wintererprobung in Lappland

jesmb.de

Looking at the side profile of it, I think longitudinally mounded engines are out of the question unless they mount them Audi style with the engines hanging off the front wheels which won't happen.

 

[AbsoluteUnit]

Looking at the side profile of it, I think longitudinally mounded engines are out of the question unless they mount them Audi style with the engines hanging off the front wheels which won't happen.

Not sure that would matter much in a lifestyle vehicle like a baby G. They would do what they need to do.

 

[Tuffode]

Not sure that would matter much in a lifestyle vehicle like a baby G. They would do what they need to do.

Obviously doesn’t matter to the masses, most people are dumb f#cks, which is why MB and other German brands can and have been getting away with releasing the most dreary and unimaginative products that the masses just gobble up.

 

[klier]

A real successor of the GLK, that’s possible.

No it's not possible. The GLK is renamed GLC but is exactly that car.

Funny how 15 years ago, this car would've been developed with a V8 in mind from the get go. Should have done that too for this day and age. Americans could potentially gobble up a baby G with mighty V8.

 

[Dopebouy]

I always said the Ener-G-Force concept should have been the vision for all their SUV’s to build a Range Rover like rugged lineup, but we have nightmarish GLA’s and GLS’ses instead.

I feel like if they introduced something like the Ener-G-Force as a “GLG” so that it co-exists with the G would’ve made sense.

I think the G lineup should be:
G-class =Legendary model, can’t be replaced.
GLA =A-class SUV
GLB =B-class SUV
GLG =Modern Rugged G-wagon with body-on-frame 4x4 4matic.
GLE =E-class SUV
GLS =Should move upmarket to be S-SUV, Not stretched GLE

honestly this mini G is not gonna make sense for as long as a 4matic GLA & GLB exist.

 

[Uygar]

It’s just a cash grab model. I don’t really have high expectations for it but I hope they prove me wrong.

 

[Merc1]

What exactly is cash grab model? What is the difference between this and other models they sell to make money?

M

 

[Uygar]

It’s their way of milking the G name, and I personally find the whole thing unnecessary. The “milking the G name” was argued many times already, so I’m not gonna explain anything. Everyone has a different opinion on that.

 

[klugscheisser87]

I feel like if they introduced something like the Ener-G-Force as a “GLG” so that it co-exists with the G would’ve made sense.

I think the G lineup should be:
G-class =Legendary model, can’t be replaced.
GLA =A-class SUV
GLB =B-class SUV
GLG =Modern Rugged G-wagon with body-on-frame 4x4 4matic.
GLE =E-class SUV
GLS =Should move upmarket to be S-SUV, Not stretched GLE

honestly this mini G is not gonna make sense for as long as a 4matic GLA & GLB exist.

The GLA and GLB shouldn’t even exist if they pretend to be a premium and luxury brand.

The very lowest entry SUV should have been a lifestyle premium crossover like the RR Evoque, but well thought and done.
The Ener-G-Force had a lot of potential.

Everything else should have been developed under the Smart brand, they can even link it stronger as “Smart by Mercedes”, but there should be a brand-image barrier for low segment and commercial vehicles.

There are very few left they see the same Bruno Sacco image of a brand that is now trying to stretch the star from KIA til Bentley, it’s so pathetic.

The G-Class it’s the root that still sits there independently, the baby-G will change it bringing it into that foggy image of CLA’s and tacky Maybachs IMO.

 

[Esp5]

I believe the Baby G is one of the best decisions Mercedes has made (among several missteps) in recent years.
The G is a kind of halo car, especially regarding robustness image (so necessary for the brand) so expanding that feeling to a broader market segment can only bring good things, also driving sales of other models from the brand, as icons generally provoke.

I see many pros and few cons.

 

[Merc1]

It’s their way of milking the G name, and I personally find the whole thing unnecessary. The “milking the G name” was argued many times already, so I’m not gonna explain anything. Everyone has a different opinion on that.

The same way they milk any other hot product. It’s nonsense. They’re in the business of selling cars to make money. If you have a hot product, you capitalize on it. There are many examples of this. I really don’t see what the issue is besides the need to complain about something.

M

 

[Merc1]

The GLA and GLB shouldn’t even exist if they pretend to be a premium and luxury brand.

The very lowest entry SUV should have been a lifestyle premium crossover like the RR Evoque, but well thought and done.
The Ener-G-Force had a lot of potential.

Everything else should have been developed under the Smart brand, they can even link it stronger as “Smart by Mercedes”, but there should be a brand-image barrier for low segment and commercial vehicles.

There are very few left they see the same Bruno Sacco image of a brand that is now trying to stretch the star from KIA til Bentley, it’s so pathetic.

The G-Class it’s the root that still sits there independently, the baby-G will change it bringing it into that foggy image of CLA’s and tacky Maybachs IMO.

That ship sailed 1997 with the first ML.

M