Was in one of these last night. It was a dark red/burgendy colour and had matching coloured seats and dash board. It was horrible, uncomfortable, the dash was made of cheap brittle plastic and it had no air con and the stereo was a cassette radio. It had a semi auto gear box and no power in first at all. Why the hell do people pay the inflated Merc price for these cars that are less classy inside than a basic Nissan Micra?

The "Prestige Badge" is why.

Do Merceded actually make these things or is this a case of badge engineering as happens with electricals so much? I really find it hard to reconcile Mercedes image of high class interiors etc with just how tatty this car is. The interior materials are not on power even with Skoda, VW, Ford etc. In fact even the Fiat Punto I recently drove as a hire car had classier cabin fittings.

Mercedes don't have much experience of making small cheap FWD cars...hence why they didn't do a particularly good job of it.

The brief for the project was to build a car which would sell for

Most Merc interiors are pretty bare and uninspiring, IMHO.

It was not the bareness that bothered me, it is the low quality materials. Anyone who would pay 15K for one of these just for the Merc badge is mad. As it stands it is comparable only with makes like Kia for build quality. The new version looks just like the old in the photos in What Car, at least to my eyes.

It was not the bareness that bothered me, it is the low quality materials. Anyone who would pay 15K for one of these just for the Merc badge is mad. As it stands it is comparable only with makes like Kia for build quality.

I'd have to disagree - Kia's do feel well screwed together but the materials are *really* cheap...certainly in the Shuma II and the Rio (I believe the newer ones are considerably better).

I quite liked the A-classes I drove - the concept was a bit flawed, but in terms of quality it seemed pretty good. Probably on a par with the Octavia...

The new version looks just like the old in the photos in What Car, at least to my eyes.

Really? Looks a lot sleeker now...

Rob.

There is no way the quality of the plastic in the A-class dash board is anything like that in the Octy or even my old Felicia. It is like that hard brittle stuff you get in

There is no way the quality of the plastic in the A-class dash board is anything like that in the Octy or even my old Felicia. It is like that hard brittle stuff you get in

I think it was a 99 model going by the number plate.

Don't get me started on the A-Class was great for lugging computer gear around in having a completly flat floor and all seats could be removed if required.

We had an Avangarde (sp) model with half leather seats, air con, ACS, + plus all the nice safety features which were added after the moose incident The plastics, material and switch gear seemed to be of a decent standard.

Mechanically and electrically the car was poor, not being help by pathetic dealer support and not much better backup from MB UK.

The (diesel) engine needing replacing at 84k miles was the final straw, on top of everything else which failed over the four years we had it. At least the shell was original

I feel sorry for drivers of Smart vehicles if they get the same level of support when problems occur.

moose incident, don't you mean Elk? (ie extinct Irish moose).

A class was a (relative) reliability disaster for Merc with its general poor fit/finish.

The new A class OTOH is a different league altogether. It seems Merc is finally trying to recover the image of solid build that it stupidly and short-sightedly frittered away in the nineties and early noughties.

No problems so far with my Merc C-class unlike a lot of others, touchwood.

My boss drives a smallish Merc coupe (not sure of model (I hate makes that use numbers rather than names)). She has found it to be a major disapointment compared with her previous larger Honda Coupe, both in terms of handling, performance and electrical reliability. According to her the only plus point is as it is so much smaller she can park it in her garage with out the risk of scrapping it as frequently happened with the Honda.

I've driven a pre- and post-elk test A-Class. Both were awful.

Whilst, as William points out, the build quality and materials were awful, this wasn't the low point for me. The biggest disappointment was, without doubt, the appalling handling and ride. The early version was bad enough, it felt like it was on tiptoes all the time. But the later car was dreadful. It felt as if the traction control and ESP kicked in if you so much as thought about touching the steering wheel. And the ride was similar to a Citroen, but a citroen where the hydragas had failed, and the tyres deflated.

And to make matters worse, it had a cramped driving position, no rear visibility, and no advantage over a more conventional supermini. It really was a case of Emperor's new clothes, as far as I was concerned.

Aaah yes the 'A' class wasn't that the one that tipped over when driving through the slalom road cones test when it's emergency cornering!?

I mentioned the dreadful quality of the interior because I was inside the car for a few minutes and drove it only at low speed for a few hundred yards. It was hateful and a shame on the name of Mercedes, and a bad reflection on the girl who paid

SNIP

and a bad reflection on the girl who paid

She will know all about Mercedes once things start going wrong... Main dealer prices know how to charge premium prices.

Altough in What Car magazines reliability survey, prestige makes did not cost much more to repair than more common or garden brands.

Smart (mercedes), service,

I have to say I never get all the fuss made on here about rattles. Cars rattle, always have done, always will. I have never been in a car that does not rattle. I do not even notice it to be honest. Especially as by the time I have the cubby hole filled up with coins, pens screw drivers etc, the whole cabing is rattling .

I looked at the A class before buying my last but one Octavia.

The appeal factor was initially high, and the leather clad cabin was quite nice too, but as soon as the ignition was turned on, it sounded cheap, felt wooden, and was nasty really, and I was very dissapointed having had a few older Mercs.

I would sum the A class up as being technically clever, and an innovative design, but it simply does not work!

JD Power survey agrees, and the Skoda was superior despite the badge!

JT

Well the A-class I was in (bought by a friend) was not appealing at all. Externally it was as nice looking as an A-class can be, smart burgendy paint work. Inside was awthful. The seats and dash were burgendy as well. The plastic was hard brittle shinny stuff, really really cheap looking. The equipment fit was minimal, radio cassette player no CD, and no air con. I didn't notice if it had electric windows etc. I could not tell you what engine it had, but it had a semi automatic gear box and felt gutless.

I wasn't all that impressed with the A140 classic I had for a month or so.

They look OK from the outside but the interior was a bit too plain looking for my liking.

It seemed fairly well put together but some of the plastics were a bit cheap and nasty.

For a base model it had aircon , ABS , leccy windows and a cd player though which is pretty decent spec

My main complaint was about the way it drove. The engine was woefully underpowered , and if you thrashed it to get some performance it sounded like it was in pain. The handling was "interesting" with no feel from the steering , and indeterminate levels of grip. Oh and the fuel consumption was not good at 30 mpg on the motorway.

Smart (mercedes), service,