Mercedes-benz Cl500 - Midnight Blue Metallic W/ 19" Chrome Rims!!! on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Clark Gable's 1955 Mercedes-Benz 300SL Gullwing doesn't sell, then does sell for $1.85 million [UPDATE: w/video]

How much extra value does previous celebrity ownership add to of a car? Really, there's no way to know until the car in question hits the auction block and bidders start raising their hands. In the case of the 1955 Mercedes-Benz 300SL Gullwing you see above, the celebrity owner is none other than Clark Gable, who purchased it new. After Gable's death in 1960, the car changed hands a few times before settling with Charles Wood in 1975.
A high-dollar restoration was performed in 1989, and period accessories added by Gable himself were kept in place, including the Rudge knock-off wheels and Nardi steering wheel. Any Mercedes-Benz 300SL is worth a big chunk of money. In the case of Clark Gable's old Gullwing, the bidding stalled at $1.9 million here at the 2013 Barrett-Jackson auction in Scottsdale. As one of the 5000-series cars, this 300SL carried a reserve, and a bit of after-the-fact dealmaking saw the car change hands for $1.85 million.
You can see our high-res image gallery above, and the car's official auction description below.

Infiniti went out of its way to make the QX30 not a Mercedes

You can complain all you want about perceived badge engineering when a company (like Mercedes-Benz) sells a platform to another brand (such as Infiniti). The reality is that most buyers won't know the difference, and they won't even realize their Infiniti is really a Mercedes underneath or that their neighbor's GLA has the same basic parts as the QX30 they just bought. What's weird to me isn't that sameness, but the places where the two cute little utes differ. These two vehicles, which are more like tall hatchbacks, use the same Mercedes 2.0-liter turbo four and seven-speed dual-clutch transmission. Infiniti adds its own throttle and transmission calibrations. The suspension design is the same, although there are tuning differences. Both come standard with front-wheel drive, with all-wheel drive an option. Fuel economy matches for the FWD models, while the AWD Infiniti lags behind the Mercedes for some reason. So they're very similar despite their different looks. And design makes sense as a point of differentiation. Frankly, they go further than a lot of vehicles on shared platforms do – further, in fact, than the upcoming Nissan Navara-based Mercedes X-Class pickup does. The QX30 has its own sheetmetal and glass to separate it from the GLA-class. You probably think one looks better than the other. If you know where to look, the signs of sameness are obvious. Most major systems and pieces are shared, like the steering wheels (with different center covers), most switchgear, and things like interior and exterior door handles. Shared parts are fine as long as the parts are good ones. On that note, how many Tesla buyers realize their steering column and stalks, plus the window switches, come from Mercedes? And does that actually matter? We'd argue no. About those differences. Many are functional, like the fact the Infiniti does not carry over the Benz's Brake Hold feature – when you roll to a stop in the GLA (or any other Benz), pressing the brake pedal firmly applies the electric parking brake until you hit the gas to move again. The QX30 has an electric parking brake, but no Brake Hold feature. Someone used to driving Mercedes models will look a bit silly standing on the brake pedal to no effect. Ask us how we know. The Mercedes gauge package is carried over, but with the Infiniti font. Makes sense, although it's off-putting at first if you've seen the original, prompting a weird deja vu. Circular dash vents are replaced by rhomboid ones.

Range Rover versus Mercedes-Benz: Which makes a more appealing SUV?

From time to time — truth be told, all the time — the Autoblog staff enjoys a good debate on the merits and demerits of the cars and trucks we drive each week. This week, we spent some time in a brand-new Land Rover Range Rover Supercharged SUV, a model some of us think sits at the pinnacle of the luxury utility vehicle segment. Others disagree. The following is a real-life online debate that took place over the course of a few hours. Have a read, and feel free to take sides. There's a poll at the end so you can make your voice heard. Consumer Editor Jeremy Korzeniewski: Strange as it may sound, Jeremy Clarkson and I have a few things in common, most obvious of which is that we share a given name. But we also both love cars so much that we decided to turn our automotive passion into a career — with varying degrees of success, of course — and we both have come to realize over time that there's no point in trying to topple the Land Rover Range Rover as the world's best luxury off-road utility vehicle. Thing is, this universal truth isn't quite as universally shared as I think it should be. In fact, my esteemed colleague Alex Kierstein believes that Mercedes-Benz makes the most desirable four-wheel-drive off-road vehicles. He's clearly wrong, but I feel obligated to let him explain his choice, though it won't go without a rebuttal. Senior Editor Alex Kierstein: That's correct, and so am I in this regard. I'm sorry, Jeremy, but it's an irrefutable fact that Mercedes-Benz is doing the best interiors in the business now. And the interior is where you're going to spend most of your time, at least when the thing's running. The Range Rover's interior simply isn't as special, and frankly it'll be in the shop enough that you won't enjoy it. Now, stepping into pretty much any contemporary Mercedes sedan interior is a "wow" moment. They seem special — posh, exclusive, luxurious. The SUVs, all older vehicles coming due for total redesigns at some point in the future, are lagging a bit, but it's still a premium and upscale experience. Especially since performance is almost academic at this point. Anything in this class is going to be powerful, almost absurdly so. So why not go for the one that makes you feel like royalty, rather than your mechanic? JK: I just want to point out that it was you who brought reliability into this discussion.