AD #2556 – Mercedes Unveils GLC Coupe, BMW Reveals Cost Cutting Plan, Medium-Duty Truck Sales Dip in February

March 20th, 2019 at 11:53am

Audio-only version:

Listen to “AD #2556 – Mercedes Unveils GLC Coupe, BMW Reveals Cost Cutting Plan, Medium-Duty Truck Sales Dip in February” on Spreaker.

Follow us on social media:

Instagram Twitter Facebook

Runtime: 5:41

0:07 BMW Reveals 2018 Earnings and Cost Cutting Plan
1:24 Ghosn’s Trial to Begin in September
1:44 Toyota and Suzuki Share Partnership Details
2:34 Medium-Duty Truck Sales Dip in February
3:41 Mercedes Unveils GLC Coupe
4:12 BMW Teases 2 Series Gran Coupe
4:39 Kia Adds New CUV To Ceed Family
4:59 New Chevy Onix To Debut in China

Visit our sponsors to thank them for their support of Autoline Daily: Bridgestone and Dow Automotive Systems.

»Subscribe to Podcast |

5661 rss-logo-png-image-68050 stitcher-icon youtube-logo-icon-65475

Thanks to our partner for embedding Autoline Daily on its website:

48 Comments to “AD #2556 – Mercedes Unveils GLC Coupe, BMW Reveals Cost Cutting Plan, Medium-Duty Truck Sales Dip in February”

  1. ChuckGrenci Says:

    Maybe some of these new sedan introductions are pacing themselves, biding their time as it were, when the buying public has had enough of crossovers (at least some may be lured back). Sometimes people want something different and that may again be a car…………….maybe.

    And you know, Chevrolet might do themselves some good, styling wise, by adopting similar front light design that they are showing on the Onix and replace those squinty eyed headlight assemblies on the new Silverado and most of their other offerings.

  2. Kit Gerhart Says:

    When I saw “2 series gran coupe,” I thought it would be like a smaller, and less expensive 4 series gran coupe, a hatchback that is available with either RWD or AWD. Reading the linked article, though, I find that it is FWD, and I’m not sure it is even a hatchback, rather than a sedan.

    Regarding the GLC “coupe,” in checking the MBUSA site, I find that the “coupe” starts at $6600 more than the squareback GLC, and has mandatory AWD in the US market. The squareback GLC is available with RWD.

  3. Brett Cammack Says:

    I will never understand the “tall sedan” SUV/CUV concept. “Gosh, I sure do want me something with all the weight, poor handling and bulk of an SUV/CUV, but I don’t want none of that cargo space or utility!”

    It seems like an answer to a question that absolutely nobody asked.

  4. Kevin A Says:

    Toyota and Suzuki! They would be the undisputed world production leader if they merged. Any chance of that happening?

  5. Kit Gerhart Says:

    3 They’d have less aero drag, which may be why Tesla is going in that direction, but yeah, I agree with your sentiment, and it seems to bear out in the sales of these lifted hatchback “coupes.”

  6. Kit Gerhart Says:

    1 I agree on the squinty headlights. I don’t find them attractive, and they aren’t good, functionally, either. They are worse for blinding oncoming traffic, relative to the amount of light they get to the road.

  7. Larry D. Says:

    4 Suzuki? Give me a break. Why don’t they drop dead or just make motorbikes? Their cars are a Joke. GM used to waste time and $ cooperating with them and they had a bunch of US models nobody bought, and they had to leave the US market with their tail between their legs. Toyota gains little by cooperating with such major league losers.

  8. lambo2015 Says:

    Sean; that was some fine footage (2:44)of that “professional driver” pulling his trailer through the median because of the car in the far right lane.

  9. Larry D. Says:

    The 2 series so-called ‘grand’ coupe is another idiotic idea. Even the 5 series grand coupe does not look too graceful, but the tiny, short 2 series coupe will look ludicrous.

    The GLC is Merc’s smallest SUV (former GLK), and this four-door “coupe” is another stupid idea that apparently some idiots are attracted to. You have a small SUV and you make it much smaller by making its back a ‘coupe’-like thing. And it does not look any better than the regular SUV WITH the “utility” and without the stupid coupe.

  10. lambo2015 Says:

    Is the MB GLC coupe pronounced Coup’a because it looks like a sedan with a Toupee?
    The GLC looked like it will share its platform with the Maybach that was on yesterdays show however the hatch looks better than the Maybach trunk version.

  11. Kit Gerhart Says:

    7 Suzuki does quite well in other parts of the world. They are number 3 in Japan, barely behind Honda, with 14% market share.

  12. JWH Says:

    #7 & #9 – We realize that nothing except Tesla meets your high standards. Perhaps like our parents told us, If you don’t have something nice to say, keep it to yourself, or at least utilize constructive polite criticism. Or go post on your own website which I believe you definitely crave.

    Have a good day.

  13. Larry D. Says:

    11 I was talking about the US market. In the rest of the world, everybody can sell any car in some market which is not 10% as competitive as ours, junkmakers like Yugo (or Fiat, its parent, for that matter), Dacia ( a cheap renault in Romania) etc.

    In Japan, the most popular cars, due to taxation and driving conditions, are tiny boxy 600 cc kei cars.

  14. Larry D. Says:

    12 you have no effing clue. I never even owned a Tesla. I drove Hondas, BMWs and Mercedeses for 40+ years. Better luck next time, hit-and-run anklebiter. God forbid you would ever CONTRIBUTE anything of value to this forum.

  15. Larry D. Says:

    14 I meant I owned. I have driven many other brands and models without owning them, but again, I have not even driven any Tesla.

  16. ArtG Says:

    Is there a moderator on this forum?

  17. Larry D. Says:

    16 you hate Teslas too? Isn’t it enough that Tesla is not allowed to sell its vehicles in half the US states for you?

  18. Kit Gerhart Says:

    7, 13 Maybe you didn’t know, but Suzuki did “drop dead and just make motorbikes,” as you put it, in the US market, about 5-6 years ago.

  19. Larry D. Says:

    18 I am well aware of that, I even remember the models it tried (unsuccessfully) to sell here, with names like “Baleno” (a small sedan) and the like. Maybe if it did not have the agreement with the US, it would have left the auto sector much earlier. In the 80s our senior secretary had a tiny GM-Suzuki hatch I borrowed from her once, and I had to push the driver’s seat all the way back to get in. It weighed maybe 1,600 lbs at best, probably had less than 50 HP, but I bet it was not a manual. Don’t remember how it drove at all now. Swift, Stark, Chevy versions etc. I may have the details at home, I have kept a 1988 ROad Track Annual review with one page per model, very interesting how underwhelming and underpowered almost all cars were back then.

  20. Larry D. Says:

    I meant the agreement with GM, not the US, in 19 above. Isuzu similarly left the US car market some decades ago but I think they still sold some trucks here.

  21. Kit Gerhart Says:

    19 I had a 1986 Chevy Sprint, which Suzuki called Swift in the US. It struck me as a modern day (for the time) VW Beetle. It was very basic, and would not have been good in a crash, but it was reliable, and kind of fun to drive, in it’s own way. I had a 1.0 liter 3 cylinder, and 5-speed manual. It was slow, even for the time, with 0-60 in probably ~12 seconds, which was entirely adequate for the way I used it, mostly commuting.

    I never drove or rode in one with an automatic, but from what I’ve heard and read, it did not work very well. It was a 3-speed automatic, and was really slow, and got worse mpg than a number of much larger, quicker cars. I consistently got over 40 mpg with my manual transmission car.

  22. lambo2015 Says:

    12 & 16 Your wasting your time. The opinions that require descriptors like losers, ludicrous, stupid are also the only ones that matter at least to that person, Do yourself a favor and just skip the irrelevant posts about their opinions and you will find you can read the comments in half the time. Most often the opinion of the self proclaimed expert is duplicated in multiple lengthy posts.

  23. Albemarle Says:

    We did a bunch of off roading in New Zealand in Suzukis and they were tough, reliable vehicles. I think they just didn’t have the dealer network to make a go of it in North America. They are also smaller than the market is looking for, certainly currently! No question their engine and other technology is good.

  24. Larry D. Says:

    21 That was it, although Virginia’s must have had the auto. I checked her out too and found she passed away in 2014, decades after she retired, at 87.

  25. Larry D. Says:

    22 I doubt they are capable to use their time an y better. PS it’s “You’re wasting”, not “Your wasting”. You’re Welcome and thanks for your kind words.

  26. Larry D. Says:

    21 I also remember renting a tiny Suzuki “Jeepish” crappy little thing once, in 2006. In fact, we were guests at an old friend’s estate, he had a big Land Rover 7-seater at the compound but was worried about us using it, so he rented us a VW Polo, and the small rental outfit (it was in a small but recently popular island overseas) asked me to switch to the Suzuki (Maybe it was called “Samurai” for our last 2 days there. The VW Polo (one size smaller than the Golf) was much better and had fewer miles on it). The Samurai has been blacklisted by CR in the US for rollover and other safety weaknesses I believe.

  27. lambo2015 Says:

    21 That Swift got 44 mpg and 0 to 62mph in 15.9 seconds, a maximum top speed of 90 mph, a curb weight of 1477 lbs. Just 48 HP that’s crazy to think of driving that now. Most motorcycles have more HP.

  28. gary susie Says:

    I’M WITH YOU 22!!!

  29. Larry D. Says:

    28 of course you are. BTW, ever going to contribute anything of value to this forum, or you are happy just as self-appointed hall monitor and anklebiter too?

  30. lambo2015 Says:

    25 No problem! PS I often post from my phone and use swipe, which doesn’t always catch errors or the slight differences between your and you’re, (Kinda like an y and any) but hey if pointing out spelling errors makes you feel superior knock yourself out, Please do.

  31. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27 Might that 0-62 time have been for an automatic? Mine didn’t seem THAT slow, though it’s been a while since I had it, so maybe it was.

    My sister had a Geo tracker for a while, and a friend had one much longer, until the road salt rust got to it so badly that the driver’s door fell off. The Tracker/Suzuki Vitara were more-or-less replacements for the narrower, smaller Samurai, though I think there was some overlap in years they were sold in the US.

  32. Kit Gerhart Says:

    27 My scooter has more power than the Sprint/Swift. It’s a Honda SilverWing with 49.6 hp.

  33. lambo2015 Says:

    31 Not sure! Found that doing a search online and didn’t specify if it was manual or auto. I did see when they added the turbo and cranked it up to 80 some HP the 0-60 times dropped into the 9 second range. Having some of todays powerplants in a 1400 lb car would be fun but still probably only get 40+ mpg

  34. Kit Gerhart Says:

    33 A Prius powertrain in a 1400 pound car would be fun. It should do 0-60 in about 5-6 seconds, and get well over 50 mpg under most conditions. Put the engine assembly in the back, and make it rear drive, and put the ~100 pound battery in the front. It would be hard to keep the car at 1400 pounds, though, because the complete Prius powertrain itself, with the battery, would probably weigh at least 500 pounds.

  35. Brett Cammack Says:

    Signal-to-noise ratio sucks today…

  36. Barry T Says:

    35 Agreed!! LOL. Tomorrow is a new day.

  37. cwolf Says:

    Kit, do you remember the guy from several years ago who had an attitude? After we grew intolerable of him he dropped of the radar for awhile but returned later under a new name. It didn’t take us long to put two and two together to find him out because his writing style was identical. Just curious if he may have returned.

  38. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Yep, cwolf, he is the one who had many different names, one of the later ones autos101 or similar.

  39. Kit Gerhart Says:

    Yep, cwolf, he is the one who used many different names. All of them seem to be on the forbidden word list, as I can’t post an example.

  40. Roger T Says:

    1. Onix and Prisma are old news in South America, and I assure you they don’t look nearly as nice as the new design language used in the US. That’s a low cost lineup meant to provide good value to taxi drivers.

  41. Larry D. Says:

    I doubt that any 4wd Samurai could weigh just 1,400 lbs, but even if the first version did, soon after they would have been much heavier. Even the tiny Smart is 1,600 lbs.

    In any case back to the Sprint, it was a very poor design if a 1,600 lb car with a 50 HP engine can only get 40 MPG. My 1991 Civic, which was the same design since 1987, was 1,875 lbs (or maybe 875 kg) and with a 75 HP, 1.35 lt engine and 5-speed it could regularly get 44 MPG highway. AND if my father had the patience to wait just a few months and instead of buying the Civic in Dec 91 bought it in 1992, he could have got the next generation, which had airbags and ABS too, AND the V something version got a 55 MPG EPA in the US.

  42. Kit Gerhart Says:

    41 The Samurai weighed 2059 pounds, according to:

    My Sprint would get over 40 mpg for a fillup, almost no matter what, including tanks with a lot of short trips from a cold start during Indiana winters. I’m sure it would get 50 mpg highway at moderate speed, but I made any trips where I could check a full tank that way.

    A friend had the next generation, called Geo Metro, and used it for a ~50 mile commute on 55 mph speed limit roads for a few years, and got 50 mpg or more. A much bigger car will do that now, but in 1991, that was pretty good, even for a very small car. My Sprint had a carburetor, and my friend’s Metro had the same 1.0 liter triple with throttle body injection.

  43. Kit Gerhart Says:

    42 correction, …..but I NEVER made any trips where I could check a full tank on the highway (with Chevy Sprint)

  44. Larry D. Says:

    42 Thought so. Our Suzuki Samurai (or maybe it was Sidekick) rental was in 2006, maybe it was a few years old at most.

    I have detailed tank by tank fillup stats for the Civic in lts/100kms and they are all mixed driving, no highway but a coastal road with lots of lights and downtown stop-go traffic, and still it got, in the last 10 or so fillups of its life, 6.51

    Which should be pretty high in MPG. HWy it got 5 or less.

  45. lambo2015 Says:

    42 When I went to college I had to get rid of the V8 muscle car and I got a hand me down 1979 Datsun 510. Almost a 2.0L engine with like 94hp and only got 28mpg. Seemed responsive at the time (mid-80s)but then again the Mustang and Camaro were only like 205hp. I think the weight was around the 2200 lbs.
    Just hard to get cars that light with all the required crash tests structures, air bags, ABS, seat structures and the fact that no one wants anything that small. Just read where the average car weighed 3,221 lbs in 1987 but was 4009 in 2010. So we keep making engines more efficient but negate the improvements with more HP and more weight.

  46. Larry D. Says:

    39 MPG = 6.0 lt/100km
    36 6.5
    47 5.0
    50 4.7

  47. Kit Gerhart Says:

    45 The lightest of cars now sold in the US, like Versa and Yaris weight about 2400 pounds. Well, a smart fortwo weighs 2140, but it doesn’t really count. A current two door Mini S weighs almost 2800 pounds.

  48. Kit Gerhart Says:

    44 Somewhere, I probably have the fuel data for my Sprint, but I wouldn’t know where to find it.