Jump to content

Talk:Mercedes-Benz/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Model info and vehicle quality issues

Noteable models

I don't think I saw the W126 Class of Mercedes (the S-Class from 1979-1991) mentioned as a notable model. It is perhaps one of the most influential cars in modern automotive industry, pioneering many things. Even the new Lexus LS series is still based on it. Needless to say, a true classic, and the last of the top quality mercedes. It had engines ranging from the 6-Cyl 2.8 L up to the 8 Cyl 5.5 L (560 SEL) and includes a few diesel models in between (5 Cyl 3 L , and 6 Cyl 3.5 L).

i think the 190E 16 vlave is a noteable model that should be in here

Model naming convention

I had changed the S-Class page to read S600 instead of S 600 (for example), because I found that the US MB page had it noted as such. Looking at the .de site, I notice the first original convention is correct.

It's probably worthwhile to maintain the primary model name on each page, and mention any different names immediately thereafter. I'm going to fix the S-Class right now—it's probably not a bad idea to use the introduction as an example. --Milkmandan 05:14, 2005 Feb 25 (UTC)

G-Wagen

Does anyone else think the MB G-Wagen should be added to the 'Significant models produced' section, after all its still in production, after what must be over 25 years since it first became a civilian 4x4 (probably longer if you include military use).

Also the '280' in this section is a bit ambiguous but I assume the W116 S-Class was the model in question. -JCW - 8 April 2006 (UTC)

Yes it should. Its certainly an iconic model.213.243.180.4 13:00, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Wrong

E320 CDI is not a V6 3.0 litre diesel. In the American market where it was tested, it is a 3.2 litre DOHC inline six.

Sure about that?

The Mercedes-Benz USA web site does say that "3,222-cc DOHC 24-valve inline-6." is the engine on sale in USA for E320; but that is not the engine used in the FIA approved endurance test, a V6 is used. Here are links supporting the use of a V6 in the test, including the official Mercedes-Benz website page. can't find any credible source that say an inline-6 is used!

www.mercedes-benz.com

www.carpages.co.uk

www.edmunds.com

www.motoring.co.za

Also the only V6 currently used in any E-class is a 2987cc (3.0L for all intents and purposes) so will revert back to previous edit unless better information shown. Thanks. --JCW 10:03, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

G55

What about the Mercedes Benz G55, the first and only Mercedes utility SUV? 67.188.172.165 00:16, 20 July 2006 (UTC)

Airbags

The article says the first airbags were offered in North America in 1986. This may have been on Mercedes-Benz cars..but the 1974 Buick Electra 225 came with optional driver and passenger side airbags. Someone should fix this.

Anti-lock Brakes

The article states that "Anti-lock brakes (ABS) were used first in Mercedes-Benz cars in 1978. They have been standard equipment on all Mercedes-Benz cars since model year 1989." At least the second part is not true, for I used to drive a 1990 190e which did not have ABS. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 85.178.24.230 (talk) 13:27, 4 February 2007 (UTC).

I don’t wish to sound condescending but your car was probably produced just before the ABS 1989 standard was implemented, and then registered and/or sold in 1990 hence leading to the confusion. Note, It is a recognised fact that MB cars produced (produced being the important word) post 1989 had ABS fitted as standard. Thanks. --JCW 13:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)
I have to agree with the above comment. I have had 2 300 D Turbo Diesels, one from 83 and the other from 84 and both had anti lock brakes.

The truth of Mercedes Benz

The truth of Mercedes Benz is that it is sensitive and takes up alot of gas. they are also very expensive to fix and to pay for all of its expenses. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 69.129.105.106 (talk) 20:54, 26 April 2007 (UTC).

yeah sure buddy... let be guess; a bad experience with a car produced between 1998 and 2004, fair enough. takes up a lot a gas u say, well u are probably an american then (coz u said gas) and since u lot have a problem with diesels you’ve only got yourself to blame, your only now starting to introduce low sulphur diesels ofer there haha, but the petrol’s are not exactly thirsty, in fact the are amongst the most economical in their respective classes. And If your talking about an AMG, or a large V8 model, then what did u expect?... 50mpg combined?? lol. --JCW 23:56, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Do we really need so much detail for every model?

I acknowledge that Wjs13 has done an enormous amount of work on this section - but has he gone too far? Do we really need a dissection of every individual model range, when they all have their own sections in Wikipedia? I feel this is all superfluous, adding bulk but little value. If we are to retain all this work, perhaps some native English speakers could undertake to polish up the grammar? And delete all the competing BMW references? Paul Fisher 10:53, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yeah it does seem a bit silly, and some sections have just one line about them... very informative... just seems a bit pointless really, I have added some info to a couple of the models in that area, just to give it some purpose, but I too am unsure of its relevance and necessity/ look at the E-Class bit... lol cumon!. --JCW 23:46, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
My point was that all these model have their own pages so there is no point giving lots of detail in the main Mercedes-Benz page. If we must have a listing and brief description, let's leave it at that and not pad it out. If you have information on particular models add it to the specific model's page. Paul Fisher 04:20, 28 May 2007 (UTC)
OK, I bit the bullet and removed the whole section. In my opinion it was really quite unnecessary. Paul Fisher 04:33, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Again - do we need details of every single model?

I do not believe we should have details of every current model in the main Mercedes-Benz page. Every model has its own page - that's where the details belong.

Talk page refactored

I was BOLD and refactored this article discussion page to consolidate topics under four broad headings. No other changes were made. This talk page has never been archived and related comments made over three or more years were scattered all over, making topical threads very difficult to follow. The article itself is pretty chaotic right now; maybe organizing the talk will help clarify a cohesive approach to the article. If you are adding a comment to this page, please consider adding it as a subhead under one of the topic headings above. -- LisaSmall T/C 17:55, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Mercedes article merge?

Why are there two articles viz. this one and Mercedes (car)? Paul Beardsell (talk) 21:59, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

Mercedes(Car) refers to the vehicles produced by Daimler between 1902 and 1926 (I think). The Mercedes-Benz did not come into existence as a brand until the effective merger of Daimler and Benz in 1926. I think it's appropriate to have a separate article. Paul Fisher (talk) 03:54, 6 March 2008 (UTC)

WW2 issues

"No mention of Hilter or Nazis in article!!?"

Why is it that in this article there is no mention of Hitler, Nazis, Slave Labor and almost no mention of WW2? It looks like this information was added some time ago and now someone decided that it was not important. I am deeply offended by this. Some people are saying that "every company in Nazi Germany was doing this" and "It's the past forget about it". It should at least be mentioned. What are you guys, Nazi sympathizers?Coolpepper43 (talk) 19:19, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

"Hitler's Mercedes"

On my book on the topic, it claimed that Hitler and other Nazi officials all used Mercedes limousines from a motor pool, rather than having a personal vehicle. --Robert Merkel 10:26, 26 Jun 2005 (UTC)

There is nothing interesting. Hitler was defending German superiority so it is very normal to hear that he and his government all used %100 German made cars. Also, maybe Führer wanted to use different cars. Deliogul 14:49, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

The Canadian War Musuem has one of Hitler's personal cars, its one of the most famous MB of all time. CJ DUB 22:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

WW2

The article currently states:"During the Second World War, Mercedes-Benz is known to have exploited more than 30 000 forced workers and prisoners of war, some of whom would eventually strike and be sent to concentration camps. This working force soon became essential to the production capacity of the company since 1941, and was a key to the construction of the Nazi Germany's Luftwaffe and war machine." I think a sources should be cited in line with Wikipedia policy to ensure credibility.--A Y Arktos 23:34, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

This was a government policy. Companies can't be accused because of it. Maybe we must change our one-sided view about the events of WW2. Winners of the war hided manythings but they also blamed Axis Powers for all the damage that was given to the world. Deliogul 15:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, the winners. Dude we're talking about HITLER. Not the English during the American Revolutionary War. HITLER, DUDE. 71.68.15.63 19:59, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
I find AYArktos' comment to be extraordinarily offensive. It is a widely known fact that Mercedes Benz and innumerable other German companies exploited workers (especially Jews and other minorities target by the Nazis). For example: "Krupp doesn't make consumer products but other former slave employers do. Daimler-Benz, for example. The firm avidly supported Nazism and in return received arms contracts and tax breaks that enabled it to become one of the world's leading industrial concerns. (Between 1932 and 1940 production grew by 830 percent.) During the war the company used thousands of slaves and forced laborers including Jews, foreigners, and POWs. According to historian Bernard Bellon (Mercedes in Peace and War, 1990), at least eight Jews were murdered by DB managers or SS men at a plant in occupied Poland. There was a report that Daimler-Benz built mobile poison gas vans, but this has never been corroborated and is doubtful." - straightdope.com
The article presently has no mention of forced labor, and it should. It's not the Wikipedia's place to apportion blame for the slave labor between the firm and the regime. It is Wikipedia's place to report that slave labor was used. -- LisaSmall T/C 17:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
What is offensive? sources help back up the facts, they are very important.Chris H 17:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

You should wake up. Mercedes has paid reparations. Its not a question of aportioning blame, a higher authority than wiki has alreday done that. CJ DUB 22:54, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

This isn't about blame, it's about history. It happened. Just because the United States is really really sorry about Jim Crow doesn't mean we should just go ahead and forget about the civil rights movement. 71.68.15.63 00:02, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

M-B and the Nazis

"Mercedez-Benz automobiles were driven by Adolf Hitler's secret police."

So what? I'm sure they were also driven by lots of other people who were not police, and by police (secret or otherwise) other than the Nazis'. And which "secret police" does the author mean? the Gestapo? the Sipos?

"The mercedes badge/logo is actually derived from the Nazi emblem."

This does not seem to be supported by the previous information about the Mercedes-Benz logo; could the author cite some evidence to substaniate this? If not, let's remove it.

Missing history

Hey so uh, did Mercedes not exist during WW2? I mean, it just seems like, I dunno, for some reason, there's some omitted history here. Just pointing that out... 71.68.15.63 19:58, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

I agree, see "WW2" thread above, begun in December 2005. -- LisaSmall T/C 17:10, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Definitely the forced labour aspect should be in there. I drive a Merc and have no hang-up about that today. A good brand doing business in a bad bad period. Ford and IBM didn't close their German operations until the USA was actually at war with Germany in 1941.86.42.220.211 (talk) 21:59, 25 November 2007 (UTC)
Ford Germany and CocaCola Germany produced through out the whole war —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.164.233.168 (talk) 13:48, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Seems like a factual error/nonsense?

In this article, looks like someone's idea of a practical joke, in the first para: "Mercedes-Benz is exclusively made for Dr. Robert Shkreli, owner of Villa Shkreli, who is known for being a savvy businessman across the world. He owns several properties across Ulqin, and Vuksanaj. He currently sold his land for a record 10 million dollars. He also has a extreme interest in cars as you can tell with his red Bentley, S 65 AMG, and Bullet Proof E-Class.k .pany,"

This should be changed asap. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.127.223.2 (talk) 17:13, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:BOLD--Camilorojas (talk) 03:34, 9 March 2009 (UTC)

Significant models

The significant models list seems to keep growing - soon it will be identical to the list of Mercedes-Benz cars. I have deleted a couple of the W114 models and replaced them with a generic link to the W114 page. Perhaps other parts of this list should be similarly revised. Paul Fisher (talk) 03:41, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

World's oldest German brand

Can we stop reverting this one please? Mercedes-Benz as a brand dates from 1926. There are innumerable brands older than that. (Renault, Peugeot, Ford, Chevrolet etc etc). Therefore it is not the world's oldest brand of motor vehicle. Neither is it the oldest German brand - Opel, for instance, produced vehicles under than name in 1899. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opel And the form "World's oldest German brand" is meaningless. It's either the oldest German brand, or the world's oldest brand - but in fact it is neither.

Mercedes-Benz started as Daimler-Benz, and Daimler-Benz their first gas powered car in 1886, so it's technically older than Opel, since they made their first car under the name of Opel in 1899. The name Mercedes-Benz started in 1926 when Gotlieb Daimler had a daughter named Mercedes and decided to put his daughters name in front of Benz, therefore calling it Mercedes-Benz. Studebaker, Renault, Peugeot, Ford, Chevrolet, Fiat, Spyker, Holden, didn't start making cars until the 1900's, although Studebaker is technically the oldest brand, didn't start making automobiles right at 1852, they only made there first car in 1902 until they went bankrupt. Holden started out as a saddle buisness in it's establishment year (1856), they didn't start making cars until 1919. Ford, and Chevy made cars right at the start, though, but there still only established in the early 1900's (Ford 1903, Chevy 1911). Spyker made their first car in 1900, while being with Fiat during their time of having built the first car. Opel was established in 1863, but didn't make their first car until 1899. Renault started making cars in 1899, even though they were established during 1899, the same year they were established. Peugeot was established in 1881, but made their first car in 1889. Mercedes made the first car, but it was just under a different name, Daimler-Benz. Studebaker is the oldest brand but Mercedes is the first brand to have made a car. Also try to remember to sign at the end by putting 4 (~) at the end of your posts, I know I forget to do that sometimes, but try to remeber to do that. Marauder09 (talk) 17:20, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
Interesting stuff Marauder, but you've got the basic facts wrong.
  • Daimler and Benz were separate companies until 1926.
  • Both built cars (separately and independently) in 1886.
  • Daimler adopted the Mercedes brand name in 1900 (approx). Mercedes was the daughter of their Austrian distributor and member of the Daimler board, [Emil Jellinek].
  • I haven't bothered researching all your other stuff, but I'd suggest people treat it with caution.

Paul Fisher (talk) 13:17, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

Mercedes

Does this article tell how the name Mercedes-Benz started? If it doesn't I could add it, and I do know the whole story behind it, Gottleib Daimler had a daughter named Mercedes, and he decided he wanted to put Mercedes as a part of the name because he thought Mercedes-Benz sounded better, so he then called his cars "Mercedes-Benz". My source was a book called "Mercedes-Benz" Marauder09 (talk) 17:01, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Marauder09, you should get a better book, as that story is quite wrong. Please see my response to your earlier post above. Paul Fisher (talk) 10:03, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
It's been a while since I read that and I dont quite remember what it said about how the Mercedes name came into effect, I know Mercedes was the name of some guys daughter. I'd probably have to check again. Marauder09 (talk) 23:27, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Assessment WP Germany and comments

This article is still in need of expansion and explanation. As it stands now, it is more or less a summary of the kinds of vehicles the company made. What was the manufacturing process/ engineering process that made them unique? What about the racing program? There is also a significant LACK of citations, plus there is one in the Lead, which probably is not actually necessary. Needs work, but more than a good start. Auntieruth55 (talk) 17:48, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Images

I believe the Picture of the interior of the Mayback is from the Coupe concept, and not the production car. The production car isn't nearly as sleek or aerodynamic looking.

The picture of "600 SEC" is showing CL coupe, I believe.

Image caption

The caption of the S-Class picture said the car was a 1998. That's impossible: that generation debuted in 2000. (The error is now corrected.)
—Vespristiano 03:53, 2003 Dec 21 (UTC)

Mercedes-Benz has got a refurnished Corporate Design. Perhaps it would be wise to add the new Logo. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.214.125.32 (talk) 10:08, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I have replaced the logo with a photo of the car's symbol. The previous image is: Image:Mercedes-Benz.png --Black Squirrel 21:51, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

A caption?

There is no need for a caption stating that the image of the logo is a logo. This is according to the WIKI caption policy. Showing the logo of the brand or the company is not an attempt at advertising. The notion of putting a caption stating that the logo is a logo will somehow reduce the effect of "advertising" is false. Showing the logo as part of a Wikipedia article is not advertising according to the definition of advertising --

"Advertising is paid and/or sometimes free communication through a medium in which the sponsor is identified and the message is controlled. ..."

Therefore, including a “fair use” image of the logo within a Wikipedia article about the item or organization identified with that particular logo does NOT make it advertising. Wikipedia guidelines clearly state that no caption needed for company or product logos, where the logo is current, and the article is about the company or product. -- Thank you CZmarlin 07:25, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Do you think an image of the original logo -- with the laurel wreath which symbolized Karl Benz's line of cars -- would add anything to the article? I suggest it in addition to, not replacing, the smooth-circle logo. However, it's true that the smooth-circle logo is widely published and the laurel is not, so maybe the laurel version has more encyclopedic value? -- LisaSmall T/C 17:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

The new corporate logo has been used by Mercedes for about a year and a half now, I think we should replace the old with the new. I would do it myself, but I'm not sure how. Here is an example: http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://bp1.blogger.com/_UYUyHACXkrA/R82YRBcipxI/AAAAAAAABJU/TbTXH3-AFCw/s400/Mercedes-Benz%2Bnew%2Blogo.bmp&imgrefurl=http://mercedes-benz-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/mercedes-benz-signs-official.html&usg=__ochnCzMNQF3BzkWfJxRoE4CKdfY=&h=249&w=320&sz=7&hl=en&start=2&tbnid=q8Y5Ox3i4ydtOM:&tbnh=92&tbnw=118&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dnew%2Bmercedes%2Blogo%26gbv%3D2%26hl%3Den%26safe%3Doff%26sa%3DG New logo is white star and text on a silver graded background. Pmb600 (talk) 00:48, 12 January 2009 (UTC)pmb600 January 11, 2009

Layout of the images

I thinked a layout of the images of this article was very ugly [1]. Therefore, I mended it [2]. But it has been reverted [3] somehow. Are you, editors, satisfied with a present layout...?--Morio 15:36, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Too many pictures

I counted 32 images, including front, side, rear and quarter shots of the new C-Class. This is far too many and makes downloading the page far too slow. The majority o these should be in the various model pages. I intend to delete a large number. Paul Fisher 04:10, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

People keep adding links to Mercedes clubs, forums, blogs etc. While these may be interesting in their own right, I don't think they belong in an encyclopaedia. Paul Fisher 11:29, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

I've added a comment into the wikitext at the end of the External Links section asking editors to discuss any new external links before adding them. It's proven fairly successful on other articles. -- DH85868993 11:38, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
Thank you. Paul Fisher 11:57, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Official sites for other countries

I was about to add the official Mercedes-Benz sites for some other English-speaking countries, specifically Canada (www.mercedes-benz.ca), Australia (www.mercedes-benz.com.au), and New Zealand (www.mercedesbenz.co.nz) before I saw the tag requesting that additions be discussed here. Should those sites be added or not? — Dale Arnett 19:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

I wonder if there's a lot of value in that? The basic information is the same everywhere (though admittedly with some variation among model line-ups). But where do you stop - USA, Canada, UK, Australia, New Zealand, South Africa, India, Singapore, Malaysia and probably many more English language official sites. Paul Fisher 08:40, 4 August 2007 (UTC)
Point taken. Not going to touch that one then. :) — Dale Arnett 15:40, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

I've just deleted country-specific websites for UK, USA and Italy. They are not necessary - all countries can be accessed through www.mercedes-benz.com. Paul Fisher 12:50, 1 October 2007 (UTC)

eMercedes-Benz.com

This link eMercedesBenz The Unofficial Mercedes-Benz Weblog keeps getting deleted. Although it calls itself an unofficial weblog, it is in fact a very reliable source of information including official MB press releases on new models and other news. I think it should be retained as a valuable and reliable resource. Paul Fisher (talk) 12:20, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I've reinstated it again! Please stop deleting it. Paul Fisher (talk) 10:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, but it is pure and simple spam. The site features heavy advertising. The last person to add the link was Ashleyrude (talk · contribs) whose only contributions have been to repeatedly add the site to a number of wikipedia articles. Whatever the content might be (and it descibes itself as an unofficial blog) it is clear that people are spamming this link on Wikipedia. There is already a dmoz link in this article which should suffice for non-official M-B links. --Biker Biker (talk) 10:23, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry Biker Biker, I have to disagree with you. The site is the only place on the web you'll find all the recent MB press releases and details on all their models (plus some of the hideous "tuner specials"). I don't see how you can call it spam - by definition, spam in unsolicited commercial email sent in bulk to numerous recipients. emercedesbenz.com is a website which contains and consolidates a lot of useful technical and historical information about Mercedes-Benz. I strongly believe it should be reinstated (again), FWIW I have no connection whatever with emercedesbenz.com, except that I look in on a daily basis. Paul Fisher (talk) 01:35, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
WP:ELNO. Point 5 "Links to web pages that primarily exist to sell products or services, or to web pages with objectionable amounts of advertising." - this site has huge banner adverts and google adwords plus links inciting people to advertise with the site. Understand that emercedesbenz.com exists to make money by getting people to view the content and click through the adverts. The fact that it provides information that people find useful is a credit to the team behind it, but little of that content is unique and is only put on the page for the purposes of getting people to click the adverts. That's what running a commercial website is all about. Point 4 "Links mainly intended to promote a website." - that is exactly what Ashleyrude has been doing (see WP:LINKSPAM to address your question about spam. Finally point 1 "Any site that does not provide a unique resource beyond what the article would contain if it became a Featured article." - that is key. There is no unique content on this site, only stuff pulled together from M-B press releases and other people's reviews. If a reference needs to be given for a particular statement on a page then it should be directed to the original M-B press release rather than this site. If this site belongs anywhere it is on DMOZ. --Biker Biker (talk) 06:34, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
eMercedesBenz has one ad on the site, I would like to reinstate the it as an external source for Mercedes-Benz news. - ashleyrude 03:08, 21 February 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashleyrude (talk • contribs)

Subsidiaries

Is it okay to include MB's subsidiary divisions into the link site? After all, division such as Mercedes-Benz Accessories GmbH does not currently has its own page. -- Jacob Poon (talk) 00:28, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I havn't personally checked, but I think the general rule of thumb (providing it is an 'official' link) is that if the said link is accessable from their main 'portal' link - then no, but if not, then yes, add it. 78.32.143.113 (talk) 09:12, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

housing for door/fender mirror

Can anyone please explain if a garage tells me they have replaced housing for door/fender mirror ,what does that mean?

Personally I think it means the whole unit including the outer case has been replaced. They charged me 86.99 and frame--71.00 and blinker lamp replaed.at 17.70

Is this fare price?


I edyvean date--4/12/09 —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.27.156.194 (talk) 14:14, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Innovation by MB

1957 First crumple zones, 1959 First passenger safety cell, 1959 First hidden windscreen wipers, 1959 First interior without sharp edges, 1963 First sports car with safety body, 1963 First offset crash tests, 1965 First diagonal seat belts, 1968 First airbag test, 1973 First three-point safety belt, 1973 First safety head restraint, 1973 First child restraint system, 1978 First anti-lock braking system, 1981 First driver airbag, 1988 First passenger airbag, 1989 First rollover sensor, 1992 First ABS and driver airbag as standard, 1995 First electronic stability programme, 1996 First brake assist system, 1997 First side airbags, 1998 First window airbags, 1999 First active body control, 2002 First crash sensors, 2002 First Pre-Safe system, 2005 First NightView Assist night vision system, 2005 First radar cruise control system to 0 mph, 2006 First collision mitigating radar system,

here are a few from: http://www.roadsafe.com/magazine/2007spring/manufacturers.html consider implementing these milestones (some have already been added)


Mercedes did not invent Adaptive highbeam assist, it is supplied by Continental AG: http://www.conti-online.com/generator/www/de/en/continental/automotive/general/press_service/press_releases/hidden/powertrain/pr_2009_06_22_mercedes_benz_e_class_en.html --Arado (talk) 13:22, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Article Vandalized? Nonsensical revenue figure

The revenue figure stated on the article is "m,cgjfghsfgdsfgfdfsgdfvsczdfgsdfg", which is a nonsensical figure. Could someone correct this figure? I might've brought this up too late as the article was already locked to prevent further vandalism. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dashwarts (talk • contribs) 15:04, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Foundation date of Mercedes-Benz

Mercedes-Benz was created as a legal entity and therefore founded in 1926. Although it traces it roots to other companies founded earlier, 1926 is the correct foundation date for the company "Mercedes-Benz". The 1881 date that previously appeared in the infobox may be true for a predecessor company, and that date should appear in the infobox for the predecessor company article. I have added the wikilinked names of the predecessor companies to the infobox so that people interested in tracing the history back to the 1881 date can do so. Ch Th Jo (talk) 17:38, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

availability of engine W126 S-class Mercedes-Benz R 129 Engine

How & where can I can get the Engine above in south africa? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.210.163.250 (talk) 08:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

WWII vehicles - no mention?

Wow, nothing at all on Mercedes vehicles in World War II CJ DUB 22:51, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

I was thinking the something, its prob because all of the economy was being used to make WWII weapons. But there should still be mention in the history about this.Chris H 17:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
Of course there is no mention. Didn't you know that MB was on holiday, along with the rest of post-war Germany, from 1939 to 1945 so there is nothing at all of any interest to an advert...I mean encyclopedia article. 86.160.164.247 (talk) 22:03, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

Four wheel brakes

The article about Mercedes-Benz states that it was "The first passenger road car to have brakes on all four wheels (1924)" quoting from a roadsafe.com reference. Howver, the Wiki article on Argyll cars states "Four-wheel brakes designed by J.M. Rubury of Argyll[1] and patented on 18 March 1910 by Henri Perrot and John Meredith Rubury (Patent number 6807) [2] were available from 1911 on". This is also confirmed on the website of Argyll Motors at http://www.scotiaweb.co.uk/argyll/page1/page1.html Beej38 (talk) 12:55, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

Slave labour

Slave labour needs to be mentioned, otherwise this article will be a useless piece of advertising or fan fiction.
It's not about blame, it's about factuality, as was discussed before. And yet there's no mention of the people who were exploited yet. (I guess it was there but somebody deleted it)
If there's a section on history of the company, the history needs to be complete, that is all.--109.196.118.133 (talk) 02:43, 25 March 2012 (UTC)

Improvement Drive

The article Hummer H2 is currently nominated to be improved on WP:IDRIVE. You can vote for this article there if you are interested in contributing.--Fenice 12:05, 17 July 2005 (UTC)

Bling bling

Weren't stars stolen from Mercedes one of the bling bling items associated to hip hop fashion? --Error 02:48, 8 March 2006 (UTC)

Factoids

Nice job on reworking the "Mercedes"-daughter factoid into the improved article. --Ed Poor

Not sure what factoid is being discussed here. As it stands now, this article is a farce! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 159.134.94.21 (talk) 14:23, 17 January 2007 (UTC).

Here's another small factoid: while a Mercedes-Benz car is often, or even usually, referred to popularly as a 'Mercedes', in some countries the name is abbreviated to 'Benz'. (For a chap like me, of course, who likes to travel with his head out the window, either will do.) -- TheToxicAvenger 22:18, 12 December 2005 (UTC)

Project spam

I can't believe that this sort of spam is thought appropriate. It should be on the talk page and not in the middle of the article. CambridgeBayWeather (Talk) 04:20, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Redirect from teleaid

for some reason teleaid redirects here, even though there's no mention of it on the page. I'm not sure what that is, (although judging from the link from car phone it must have something to do with car phones), but it doesn't make sense to redirect here and then not even mention it. Inordinate (talk) 00:23, 26 October 2008 (UTC)

Article fact and layout issues

history revision on 5.25.2006

Found the revision of the history section lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts -- so I returned the former version to the article.

Taking an engine and placing it onto a stagecoach one has purchased (and therefore, which is the invention of another person) can not qualify as inventing an automobile that can be patented. The number of wheels in the Benz automobile has never been considered an impediment to the recognition that he invented the first automobile that was put into production. (There are automobiles which were built in the mid-twentieth century with three wheels.) Benz was granted a patent for the invention. Benz went into production in 1886. Daimler and Maybach did not build an automobile from scratch until 1889. There was no patent issued to Daimler for an engine put onto a stagecoach! There was no production of automobiles by Daimler and Maybach until 1989. In no way do I intend to diminish their inventions, however.

Perhaps, if the article is restored as it was before the changes, some consensus about any changes may be reached.

As I see it—later in the article—there is further discussion that explores the fine points that concern the editor who made the sweeping changes and that and other discussion clarifies the differences in the development paths of Benz and DMG. More importantly, other articles on the inventors and such, are more appropriate as the place in which to go into much more detail.

After all, this is an article about Mercedes-Benz a brand that was designated for automobiles built 26 years after the death of Daimler and 15 years after Maybach left DMG. Of the three inventors, only Karl Benz had any involvement with the company, Daimler-Benz, which was the manufacturer of the brand that began in 1926. - kb 2.25.2006

Addressing KB's points on history

Quote: "In no way do I intend to diminish their inventions, however."

Well you have, you see in 1886 Gottlieb Daimler built (or designed) the worlds first four-wheeled motor vehicle when he took the stagecoach (made by Wilhelm Wimpff & Sohn) and adapted it to hold his engine. This is a widely accepted and recognised fact, just because there is no patent for it does not mean the accolade is unmentionable. below are links to automobile history all show the 1886 Gottlieb Daimler invention. I just can’t see how you can conceivably think that the worlds first four wheeled gas engine automobile is not worth even mentioning! It is without question a landmark event/product in Mercedes history, regardless of whether it was built from the ground up by Daimler or not. Countless car manufactures today use chasses and engines from rival/other companies, this does not suddenly mean they are not automobiles worthy of mention.

I never said that because the Benz vehicle had only three wheels that it fails to be an automobile in my edit I clearly state that: "Benz, who had his shop in Mannheim invented the worlds first true automobile " the fact that it is three wheeled is even in brackets.

These essential details are not addressed later in the article. You said that you found the revision in history: "lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts" will I don't see the problem, everything is chronologically ordered in an understandable fashion. It is the current edit that is "lacking in clarity and not presenting the best organization of facts" and, is inconcise and incomplete and but if you still don't like it the clean it up don’t just revert to a previous edit.

History of cars Who invented the automobile? Automobile History, List of Events

Thanks for your comments, but im reverting to my edit. --JCW 09:37, 26 May 2006 (UTC)

I will work on it over the weekend—to see whether we can reach some agreement about that section. There are many previous examples of carts, boats, or stagecoaches being adapted to carry an engine—these are not patentable inventions built as a concept. If you feel they are, then, in order to make the history correct, you also should mention all of them in the history section for the Mercedes-Benz—because they were the first converted contraptions with four wheels. I would not—and will continue to debate whether the number of wheels is a justification for asserting that the primitive converted stagecoach of Maybach and Daimler should be considered a first in the general history of the Mercedes-Benz. It simply was not the first stagecoach or horse wagon with four wheels that had an engine put onto it to make it move, as you assert. In 1885 Maybach and Daimler purposely built a patentable motorcycle and in 1889 they purposely built a true automobile that could carry passengers as well as the driver, both deserve recognition. I will look at the sites you advise before returning to the edit. Thanks. - kb 2.26.2006

Quality issues

Towards the end of the article the author seems to get a bit excited about modern build quality, somewhat giving the impression that things will now be fine and dandy, when it actual fact Mercedes have a long way to go yet.

Don't worry. Once I had a 1989 200 E and it was the best thing I've ever used. Now, I have a faster and a newer car but it is not the same. Mercedes is one of the best manufacturers in the world. Deliogul 15:02, 9 June 2006 (UTC)
  • Sorry mate, Mercedes WERE one of the best manufacturers in the world, ever since the merger with Chrysler, quality of their cars have gone south. For example, the electrics on many of their new cars (espciallt the C-Class) are terrible and I've seen a few with severe rust that are only less than 10 years old. Mercedes now are nothing of old, and they are slowly going down the same road Rover did 25 years ago.
  • Yeah, how's so ? do you have a source for that ? I don't think Mercedes has ever gone down hill with its quality, i think this brand is probably so only one is the world, has truly has an exceptional quality build —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dim386 (talk • contribs) 05:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

As Arthur Wellington said so well in 1887 in his book about railroad engineering, "engineering is the art of doing well with one dollar which any bungler can do with two." The author would do well to remember this when thinking of Mercedes Benz quality.

The authors’ statement about declining quality “possibly related to the then board of directors being distracted from maintaining the marque's traditional quality whilst buying up or into many second-rate manufacturers such as Chrysler…” is an unfortunately typical reaction to the DaimlerChrysler merger.

The Mercedes Benz decline in quality had nothing whatsoever to do with Chrysler. The causes vary with opinions, but at one point it had dipped even below Chrysler’s standards. The 2004 Chrysler Crossfire – a thinly disguised previous generation Mercedes SLK launched with a flash but quickly gained a reputation for gremlin plagued electronics and Mercedes priced maintenance. Sales ‘success’ followed, as did production cancellation. It is my opinion that the Mercedes quality slide was an unfortunate byproduct of attempting to justify the already high purchase price of a Mercedes Benz vehicle by pushing the technology envelope without increasing prices even more. The core ‘hardware’ remained sound, while the poor electronics detracted from the owner’s perception of quality. Then fixes had to be implemented, which ended up raising prices even more. The result was even higher vehicle prices with lower customer perception of quality.

The merger with Chrysler was strictly about money. This was admitted in public by DaimlerChrysler management, but somehow the press never caught on...

DaimlerChrysler Chairman, Juergen Schrempp, addresses the Annual Meeting in Berlin. April 08, 2004 "Any claims that Chrysler is being subsidized by other parts of the Group are simply false. They have nothing to do with the facts. Chrysler is not the "poor relation" of the Group. Since the merger of Daimler-Benz and Chrysler, the Chrysler Group has, on balance, made a huge, positive contribution to the success of the Group as a whole. And here I'm talking about both the operating profit and the cash flow. Even when Chrysler posted a negative operating profit in 2003, its cash flow, after investments, remained clearly positive. And here we're talking in the billions range."

The authors’ claim that, “once Chrysler was dumped from the company portfolio, quality and reliability of Mercedes-Benz vehicles began to return to their traditional levels,” is equally misguided. Daimler left Chrysler a "hollow shell of a company that had been starved of product” according to Robert Nardelli, CEO of Chrysler LLC. Chrysler was spun off because it had no more money to give. The quoted improvements to the quality Mercedes Benz vehicles (1st quarter 2007) were implemented while Chrysler and Mercedes were still parts of one company.

The author should learn how to separate opinion and arrogance from fact. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Danoid (talk • contribs) 03:19, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

I am the author in question...

Actually at the end of the article I said: "Many now hope that the rest of the Mercedes-Benz range will inherit this fastidious attention to detail and rock solid reliability—that gave Mercedes-Benz its prestigious name in the first place." implying that most of the rest of the MB range still need improving in the build quality department.

However the W221 S-Class has been widely heralded as a magnificent car by its reviewers, with quality 'back on form' (i.e. as it was in the pre-Chrysler (pre late 1990's)days) being a common comment by independant reviewers. And the citations are examples, although most reviews are on paper (can't find on net to link) in magazines such as ‘CAR’, ‘Top Gear’, ‘What Car’, and ‘Mercedes Enthusiast’. I think this is a fair and comprehensive paragraph, with more citations in it than the rest of the article combined. Not merely an off the cuff comment on ‘modern build quality’ of Mercedes Benz cars, as you implied. -JCW 9 May 2006 (UTC)

I can't find that bit in the article, has it been removed? It's worth mentioning if sources can be provided, although I think it's also worth mentioning that only time can tell for sure how good the build quality really is.--Santahul 03:15, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

electric problem

would like to find out something.i own a benz c 200 1995 model.what does it mean when ext temp is showing on the dash board what does it mean.please help — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.223.119.129 (talk) 08:47, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia, but I placed the question "benz c 200 1995 model.what does it mean when ext temp is showing on the dash board?" in google and various sites came up. I would suggest that you see if any one of them can help you, as they know more about this than we do. Britmax (talk) 09:55, 25 November 2012 (UTC)

Criticism and controversy?

Is there any criticisms or controversy, which would be relevant to Mercedes Benz, which could be included within this wiki? Electric Avenue 19:37, 3 August 2006 (UTC)

There could be an article on build quality. As is well known, pre-93 cars are built to an incredibly high standard but then some director guy came in and decided to start cutting corners to improve profits and it's done a huge amount of damage to Benz's reputation. The build quality hasn't been the same since either (look at the M-Class), even with the huge efforts that are being made lately they're struggling.--Santahul 03:11, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
There's now a small note about the drop in quality at the end of the "Innovations" section, moved down from its incongruous placement in the "History" section. -- LisaSmall T/C 16:57, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Industry wide innovations, such as galvanization of lower body panels has very dramatically reduced rust out deterioration of all new cars and the manufacturers who can include the best innovations will enjoy the benefits of better build quality.68.97.87.243 (talk) 23:34, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Split the Models section to List of Mercedes-Benz models?

Split? It's a useless parts-number list at present. Reformatting to a table would be easy, but it's already at WP:UNDUE for this top-level article. Andy Dingley (talk) 13:05, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

What about List of Mercedes-Benz vehicles? I think the section needs to be pared down. Keep only the current models, and a more discriminating list of significant past models. The nomenclature decoder is fine but doesn't belong in the Models section. --Dennis Bratland (talk) 03:37, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Stuttgart district

PFG: Cannstatt (or Bad Cannstatt as it#s called (from 1933) today) is (since 1905) a city district of Stuttgart and not an independent city near Stuttgart, therefore I corrected this passage. Please compare to the page "Stuttgart". Also Untertürkheim (since 1905) and Zuffenhausen (since 1931) are "only" city districts of Stuttgart and not independent towns. These facts are often published false (even in books).

News section

ee think this page should be used like a news service to reference to all current models and happenings. (e.g the snippet on the Vision CLS availability to the U.S). This is an Encyclopedia and there are many Mercedes-Benz sites that will cater for American Enthusiasts.

I am removing the said section, if anybody has a big problem with this let's discuss it and find a solution. But some of the content on this page is definitely "news" instead of "encyclopedia". Dawidl 07:00, 8 Mar 2004 (UTC)

History section - extension

The history section of the article is insanely compact for such a relevant enterprise. It could be extended with some material of de:Mercedes-Benz#Geschichte. -- Horst-schlaemma (talk) 08:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)

Brabus SLS AMG specs?

I'm asking here since it'll be a long time before someone sees the Brabus article's talk section and replies. Is the "BRABUS SLS 700 BiTurbo" their SLS AMG Gullwing? I was wondering what the specs for the car are because I saw one the other day at a gas station near my apartment and it was supercharged, with a badge on the side reading "SUPER CHARGED / KLEEMANN", and the Brabus "B" in place of the Mercedes star in the grill. What are the specs on the engine other than it being supercharged? Is it the 6.3 liter V8 or something else? --RThompson82 (talk) 01:19, 10 May 2014 (UTC)

A fatal confusion

There is a fatal error in this article as to the nature of the name "Mercedes-Benz" as such.
Mercedes-Benz is a brand. Daimler AG is a company name.
The confusion is caused by several facts.
Laymen generally identify some brand names with the company names they are involved. This is correct in many cases - but not in the present case.
Mercedes-Benz has never been the name of the German company. When the firms of the former Gottlieb Daimler and of Carl Benz were united in 1926 under the company name conatining Daimler-Benz. At the same time, Mercedes-Benz as a brand statrted and was registered as a trade mark.  : As far as I know,
Since the name Daimler had been used in the UK since the first years of the 20th century, the name "Daimler" in the name of the newly unified fim was replaced by the most successful racing car model of Gottlieb Daimler's firm - the Mercedes (being named after Mercedes Jelinek, the daughter of Emil Jelinek,the sponsor of Gottlieb Daimler's racers).
So, Mercedes-Benz has ever been a brand and has been cited shortly as Mercedes.
The confusion arises from the fact that several commercial and other affiliated companies related to Daimler-Benz (and temporarily DaimlerChrysler and Daimler AG, at present) hold company names incorporating this combination of words.
To be short, Mercedes and Mercedes-Benz are brands and are equivalents but neither identical with Daimler AG as a firm.
So I think the infobox of the present article is erroneous and should be deleted or modified in the light of the above.
You can check my words just by looking up the German Wikipedia-version of the article of the same title.----Linkoman (talk) 12:22, 26 May 2014 (UTC)

Explanation for the W### nomenclature?

Am I missing something or does the article not explain the W### (i.e. the W115, which had a bunch of different engines) significance? Shouldn't that be in the article? Also, why the hell doesn't this talk section get more traffic???? MB is a major world brand. --RThompson82 (talk) 00:46, 15 December 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 18 external links on Mercedes-Benz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:07, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Front Design Of Day Sign Light

Dear Sir,

Please Change Your Car's Day light to your company Logo.please fix the light at your logo .it will look very dynamic.


Thanks & Regard, jajatikesari.mishra@gmail.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.87.245.86 (talk) 10:20, 23 April 2016 (UTC)

Pre-war rear-engined MB - Expensive VW?

I don't do cars, but I stumbled on the W17 family, which I had never heard of. These looks like VWs to me, rear-engine and most have O4s. They were designed and in production in the 1930s. Ferdinand had to know this car when he was designing the VW, didn't he? Did it influence him? Could he have been trying to make a cheap MB? Someone may be interested. Thank you. ReTeam (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2016 (UTC)

Number of locations?

Currently this section of infobox states "Jakarta, India, Medan, Kuala Lumpur, Singapore, Bandar Seri Begawan, Hong Kong, Taipei, Macau, Shanghai". Are we to believe that the only locations of Mercedes-Benz worldwide are in SE Asia? And what locations exactly would that be? Factories, assembly plants, delerships, offices? Not to mention that the section is called "Number of locations" and there's no number in the description.

I'm intending to change it, just wanted to hear if there are any objections first. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Go.pawel (talk • contribs) 10:36, 12 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Mercedes-Benz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:13, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Mercedes-Benz. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:12, 26 January 2018 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for speedy deletion:

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 18:36, 18 July 2019 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Mercedes (marque)

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was Oppose
RonaldDuncan (talk) 14:51, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

1) This article gives little information to stand alone, 2) the Mercedes Benz article has nearly no information about the company before becoming Meercedes-Benz. Enivak (talk) 14:20, 16 July 2019 (UTC)

Basic knowledge of automobile history should tell you that under Daimler-Benz, the company had no relation with Marque marked by the released of the petrol Benz Patent Wagon, with the specific distinction between the post-1926 brand and the earlier Daimler-Motoren-Gesellschaft craft. Mercedes should be kept to it's normal standards as stated here: [1] Truly, Kugihot (talk) 14:38, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Against it would be better to merge with the article Daimler Motoren Gesellschaft instead.Catfurball (talk) 19:57, 9 October 2019 (UTC)

Closing and removing the merge from the Mercedes (marque) RonaldDuncan (talk) 14:32, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

References

  1. ^ "Wikipedia:Merging", Wikipedia, 2019-09-21, retrieved 2019-10-09
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mercedes-Benz/Archive_1&oldid=1078322855"