CD Article: 2006 Mercedes-Benz B200 Turbo

[Shnak]

B200 - 168.1" length, 70.0" width, 63.2" height, ~2800 lbs

A3    - 168.7" length, 69.5" width, 56.0" height, ~3263 lbs

The figures are from Canadian Driver test reports.

Wow the A3 is close to 500 points heavier than the B-Class?! That is a huge difference for such small vehicles!

I think because of the added height, people will sit more upright in the B-Class, and be much more comfortable.

[autotechy]

I do like the new B-Class, BUT,  but, ...I think has this model as a specific, annoying problem I also find in some other MB models; the interior rear-view mirror is mounted much too LOW for tall drivers (I'm 6'-0").  See last photo in the Test Drive article, and note the mirror location!  For a MB driver/owner, there is NO hope of having the mirror detached and re-mounted higher as one can in many other auto manufacturers as their models usually have the mirror attached directly to the windshield.  Strange, MB provides a nice, large windshield for great visibility, but for some drivers a big chunk of that visibility is significantly blocked by the low mounting position of the interior rear-view mirror.  I'm a little dumbfounded as to why the mirror must fixed so low.  Why?  Is it not a ...(serious) safety hazard?

AutoTechy

[Shnak]

I do like the new B-Class, BUT,  but, ...I think has this model as a specific, annoying problem I also find in some other MB models; the interior rear-view mirror is mounted much too LOW for tall drivers (I'm 6'-0").  See last photo in the Test Drive article, and note the mirror location!  For a MB driver/owner, there is NO hope of having the mirror detached and re-mounted higher as one can in many other auto manufacturers as their models usually have the mirror attached directly to the windshield.  Strange, MB provides a nice, large windshield for great visibility, but for some drivers a big chunk of that visibility is significantly blocked by the low mounting position of the interior rear-view mirror.  I'm a little dumbfounded as to why the mirror must fixed so low.  Why?  Is it not a ...(serious) safety hazard?

AutoTechy

That is a great point. But since the roof is so much taller than on a regular sedan, I'm pretty sure it won't be as much of a problem than in their sedans.

[Snowman]

B200 - 168.1" length, 70.0" width, 63.2" height, ~2800 lbs

A3    - 168.7" length, 69.5" width, 56.0" height, ~3263 lbs

The figures are from Canadian Driver test reports.

   Exterior dimensions do not tell the whole story. Do as I did and actually go sit in both vehicles for comfort and fitment. The rear seats of the A3 are the same or less than my WRX. The B200 is more family oriented than the A3 by far.

[safristi]

..WOT $55K LOADED!!! Hmmm sounds just like THE ROYAL FAMILY!!!......

[Snowman]

..WOT $55K LOADED!!! Hmmm sounds just like THE ROYAL FAMILY!!!......

Well to do families need people movers too. The B Series will have the desired snob appeal.

[AVToller]

  Exterior dimensions do not tell the whole story. Do as I did and actually go sit in both vehicles for comfort and fitment. The rear seats of the A3 are the same or less than my WRX. The B200 is more family oriented than the A3 by far.

  I thoroughly agree! I would immediately rule out the A3 as it is too low. With good, modern suspensions, a lot can be done to reduce (not eliminate) the adverse handling effects of greater vehicle height. That height, on the other hand, provides for spacious interiors, better visibility (in a world crowded with SUVs and pick-ups), and better accessibility for those of us with aging knees and backs. The B200 is bound to be much larger even though the "footprint" is very similar to the A3's.  

[eax]

Snowman, the R is the people mover...the B is the compact.  A fully loaded R is big, big bucks...

[Snowman]

Snowman, the R is the people mover...the B is the compact.  A fully loaded R is big, big bucks...

Yes, it was the B200 Turbo I was in. I did not go near the R.

[wing]

2800lbs ... wow that's light!

[Snowman]

Hmmmmm. I’m having trouble with that 2800 lb number. This requires further investigation, that is 200 pounds lighter than my stripped WRX.

[Snowman]

Yep….very light:
http://www.mercedes-benz.ca/index.cfm?id=4959

[sirAQUAMAN64]

I sat in the A3 and just couldn't do it. It's far too low. The rear seat has restricted headroom AND legroom with the Open Sky roof. Trunk room is smaller as well.

The B200 had space everywhere the A3 didn't. I happen to like the way both look - the B looks a little kicked-in-the-a$$ tho, but otherwise is very appealing. The tall seating and view out the large windows can't be beat - I was driving beside one (looking up) with 3 people in it and it's one of the few times I wish I were in that car rather than my own. I really liked it and think it's an intelligent design, but am still stuck on a GTI which is larger insider (more headroom) than the A3, but still looks like a slicker/sportier design than the B at lower cost.

The A3 3.2 Q looks like far better value (if you could call it that), but truthfully buyers may compare both but they're very much apples to oranges. Both are great for urban drivers - the A3 is more single-sporty ski-enthusiast, the B-Class more versatile, urban-chic, 2nd Benz, and roomy.

A base B200T represents good value to me though. Just not when loaded with options.

[wing]

That's lighter than my S!

[bmorton]

Wow, I'm 5'10" but feel short in this crowd of people unable to squeeze into an A3. No question in my mind that I'm not the tall wagon type. Don't need the room or the look. I much prefer the A3, but at this point I'm leaning towards waiting for the 4-door GTI next summer.

[Shnak]

Wow, I'm 5'10" but feel short in this crowd of people unable to squeeze into an A3. No question in my mind that I'm not the tall wagon type. Don't need the room or the look. I much prefer the A3, but at this point I'm leaning towards waiting for the 4-door GTI next summer.

well at 5'10, you ARE short... 

[Snowman]

I can fit in the A3 and I am 6’-4”. I even moved the seat up an inch or so. The rear seat and cargo area are tighter than the B Series. The B is also a taller design which gives more room inside and makes it easy for entry and egress.

[Shnak]

I can fit in the A3 and I am 6’-4”. I even moved the seat up an inch or so. The rear seat and cargo area are tighter than the B Series. The B is also a taller design which gives more room inside and makes it easy for entry and egress.

It all depends on how much you recline your back seat... I too can sit in any vehicle I want if I recline the back seat into an horizontal position... but it won't be much comfortable. And the more you recline your back seat, the less space rear passengers will have!

I personally doubt I'd find it much comfortable in the A3 because its roof is a bit lower than the Golf, and I already thought it was pretty tight in the Golf. There's no doubt in my mind that I'd rather be in a tall wagon than a regular hatchback or wagon.

[bmorton]

Ain't it great that there's another choice in the marketplace? We little people who don't often carry passengers and prefer a regular car can choose the A3, and if you want more space you can get into the B-class. Still waiting to see a B on the road.

[Shnak]

Ain't it great that there's another choice in the marketplace? We little people who don't often carry passengers and prefer a regular car can choose the A3, and if you want more space you can get into the B-class. Still waiting to see a B on the road.

You talk about the B as though it's a spacecraft... what makes the A3 a "regular car"? Since when an extra 4-5" in height makes it not a "regular car"? And besides, a "regular car" like you say  is a Corolla, something with 4 doors. A hatchback isn't a "regular car", it's hatchback.