While the Mercedes-Benz R320 wagon is good, you get more useable room in the Mercedes GL SUV for about the same price.


OUR TAKE: There's a lot to like about a 5092-pound tall wagon with three rows of seating, cargo capacity to spare, a fuel-efficient diesel engine under the hood, a sleek body shape and a Mercedes star on the nose. So why are we not more enamored with this R320? Probably because we know that for around the same money, Mercedes offers even more utility in the GL320 diesel.

Drive quality doesn't lean enough to the R320's favor--both are hefty, air-suspended cruisers. And while the R-Class is clearly more stylish, the GL offers more usable space in the back, and the roofline doesn't intrude on third-row headroom.

Truth be told, other than styling and investment in the sheetmetal stampings, we're not sure why the R-Class soldiers on--or why it was continued at all alongside the far more salesworthy GL. Like the Chrysler Pacifica, this "segment buster" was an interesting idea when it first appeared, but its days are probably numbered.


As-tested price: $64,325
Drivetrain: 3.0-liter turbodiesel V6; awd, seven-speed automatic
Output: 215 hp @ 4000 rpm, 398 lb-ft @ 1600-2400 rpm
Curb weight: 5092 lb
Fuel economy (EPA): 20 mpg
Options: P03 package, including rearview camera, Parktronic, power passenger seat with memory, auto-dimming driver and rearview mirror, power driver's seat with tilt/telescoping steering column with memory, Tele Aid, Hands-free communication, double sun visors, panorama sunroof, power-folding mirrors, rear audio controls, DVD navigation, satellite radio, three-zone climate, rear climate control, premium sound, power rear quarter windows, power liftgate, cargo net, adaptive damping system, air suspension, rear air conditioning, infrared reflecting glass ($11,250); rear-seat entertainment ($2,670); full-leather seating-surface package including wood/leather multifunction steering wheel, burl-walnut wood trim, interior ambient lighting package ($2,200); lighting package, including bixenon headlights, with active curve illumination, headlight washing system ($910); sand beige paint ($710); second-row center console ($410)



- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER



M

It will be interesting to see what the facelift has in store. Hopefully it will have GST rear lights and a completely restyled front.

I can't wait to see what they do when it comes time to re-design it. Will they stick with this concept or try something new again....or drop the 3rd member of the Bama triplets altogether.

M

It's a shame that Mercedes didn't work as hard on the finer details because the R really has nice shape and good proportions for a *gulp* van. Too bad they didn't have the guy who was responsible for designing the new TT. For me that car was completely saved by the detailing alone.

The killer is that all of their market research and the "buzz" that the original Vision GST concept created told them that the R was exactly what the market wanted. I can only imagine the executives expressions when the R didn't sell. I can imagine there were some firings and re-assignments made too.

M

Styling generally wins over practicality. I have a faded memory of a review when the car first came out (2006) and they absolutely loved it - perfect in every way, the only criticism was the untouchable price tag. I'd like to see the review from an auto-magazine who keeps one in their long term test fleet. I believe you'd see it used/signed out more often than much of the other offerings. There is truly no better way to travel down the highway than in one of these. As a driver, I get what I want (luxury, comfort, prestige, high quality/performance) as a passenger you can take with you who you want, what you want, have a conversation, and not be fatigued at journey's end. The kids can even watch their own movies. What about all those urban moms who refuse to buy min-vans? The R is the perfect compromise for everyone - and at mid-life I've come to adore it, AND happily pay for its premium fuel - because it's not THAT much more than the previously loud, cramped and primitive ride in my 2006 Honda CRV that burns one litre less every 100 km. So there!