Mercedes Benz Glk
Although the GLK 350 has just been released as a brand-new model this year, I have seen a lot of them on the road; heck, I have seen a few with the colors I love. My parents currently drive a red GLK350 with the Appearance Package, and they told me that it is the greatest Mercedes “SUV-like” vehicle they have ever driven ever since they had their white ML 320 ten years prior (perfect timing, huh?). My impression? The outside looks like a miniature version of the Mercedes GL from the front and back; hence, the model name “GLK.” Still don’t follow? It’s okay, give it some time. J Unlike the GLK’s big brother, though, gas mileage is after all okay on the GLK, but I would say that 16 mpg in the city, and 22 on the highway is still a bit under par for a premium-compact SUV, which is why I would rather go for the Lexus RX 350 for a bit more optimum fuel efficiency. Besides that point, the GLK is a very nice car to look at from the outside, with lots of headroom in both the front and rear inside.
The GLK 350’s derived the exact same chassis of the C350 which has the identical 3.5L V6 engine that produces 268 horsepower, and I would have to say that for a car that has a starting price of approximately $34,000, you get what you pay for as far as performance and handling. One of the downsides to this car is that I cannot really stand the Appearance package with the huge 20-inch wheels and the aluminum roof rails. Straight-line performance from a stop to 60 mph, in just a tick below 7 ½ seconds, is still a bit under par, and the V6 engine does not have the “oomph” to back it up.
The 235/45R20 Pirelli Scorpion Zero tires, which come standard on the Appearance Package, do not really stick to the road while hard cornering, and I felt a bit of under steer and body roll at descent speeds in the turns. Well, this car is not really meant to be used on the track, anyway. I mean, if you want to get a car like the GLK that has great gas mileage, I would steer clear of that package. A stock GLK comes with 17-inch wheels and tires, with standard roof racks, which can lower wind drag just a tad bit more while driving on the highway-therefore, making the car more pleasant, yet efficient to drive. The steering is a bit on the soft side while driving around town, but when I hop on the 405 going southbound at 70 mph to Irvine, the steering feels a bit tighter thanks to the car’s “C-Class”-like handling, so passing those slow rigs (and slow drivers on the fast lane) is a plus for me.
As far as the GLK’s interior features are concerned, if you decide to go “bareback” with not that many features such as the Multimedia Package, Parktronic, and the P2 package, you probably will not get what you paid for, even if you paid the $34,000 base price plus sales tax and fees. The Nav+4 (aka “Universal Media Interface”) is not really that user-friendly, so if you really would like to pay $1000 for a “cheap” GPS, I suggest you go either to Staples or Office Depot, and get a portable Garmin unit for $800-900 in savings, or opt for the Multimedia Package which also comes standard with voice-activation feature, a back-up camera, and the Harman-Kardon Audio system.
The MB-Tex seats are pretty comfortable if you are into that sports-car like feel, but if leather suits you more, then I would say go for it. The dash, again, like the C-Class, feels a bit on the cheap, yet plastic side, but the Burl-Walnut trim adds back a little rebound of luxury. I also felt that the cargo area in the back of the GLK is not that ample to hold 3-4 pieces of luggage while picking up 2-3 extra people from LAX, but not that bad either. Besides, the back seats can actually sit up to two extra people instead of three (the middle “seat” can be a bit cramped, unless you have a little toddler). However, if I fold the seats down with the 60/40 split, then it is a different story-at least I could fit in my rolling backpack along with my two guitars, amplifier, and sometimes my golf bags.
