It seems that whenever a marque launches a flagship model these days, it’s quickly followed up by a variant designed to draw people into showrooms with a cheaper asking price. Something less potent, less feature-rich, less headline-grabbing. This is the new Mercedes-AMG GT 53 4-Door Coupe, and although it’s just as visually questionable as its quicker brother, it’s going to take longer to leave your line of sight.
That’s because while the Mercedes-AMG GT 63 4-Door Coupe dishes out 1,153 horsepower and the AMG GT 55 4-Door Coupe serves up 805 horsepower, the latest base model uses dual motors to crank out a peak of 536 horsepower. That’s less than half the output of the top trim, and such a reduction does have a meaningful effect on performance. Mercedes-AMG claims zero-to-62 mph in 3.5 seconds with one foot of rollout deducted, or zero-to-62 mph in 3.9 seconds if you aren’t on a drag strip, testing for a magazine, or measuring from the taint. Quick, sure, but not earth-shatteringly so. A Hyundai Ioniq 5 N should be quicker, and a modestly-spec’d Porsche Taycan 4S should be neck-and-neck with the Benz.
This is a bit underwhelming, because unlike the Hyundai and the Porsche, Mercedes-AMG’s flagship electric car is the very definition of gopping, having stolen the crown from some sort of deep-sea fish. The nose is still a jumbled clash of surfaces, but the rear end treatment has only grown more offensive over time. Who signed off on mounting a handful of tiny round taillights and a strip of LEDs from a frat house on a dinner table-sized mass of cheap, shiny black plastic? It’s simply awful. Truly dreadful. In such poor taste that it almost disguises how Mercedes-AMG cheaped out and didn’t put a black filler panel between the pano roof and the rear window to blend the greenhouse properly.
If you’re able to look past the way the Mercedes-AMG GT 53 4-Door Coupe looks and its slightly anticlimactic power output, it does put out some figures that are impressive. Mercedes-AMG claims it will do 502 miles on a single charge during WLTP testing conditions. Or maybe as few as 423 miles, likely depending on wheel and tire package. Either way, once range is exhausted, you’ll be able to DC fast charge the AMG GT 53 4-Door Coupe at up to 600 kW, assuming you’re lucky enough to find an exceptionally rare 600 kW fast charger.
While you’re DC fast charging, you’ll have a moment to get acquainted with what Mercedes-AMG thinks luxury is now. Spoiler alert: It’s a lot of screens and not many real buttons. The dashboard looks like the demo wall of televisions at a Best Buy, ambient lighting visible to the camera in the daytime seems excessive, and six spokes on the steering wheel? Really? It all seems like it would grow quite tiresome, particularly because it’s just not as visually interesting as, say, BMW’s new parallelogram-shaped iDrive system or Lincoln’s slim pillar-to-pillar screen arrangement. Oh dear.
Finally, we get to the really big problem: If you want a quick electric Mercedes-Benz, you’d be foolish to buy the AMG GT 53 4-Door Coupe on paper. The new electric Mercedes-AMG CLA 45 makes 134 more horsepower, gets to 62 MPH nearly a second quicker, still has more than 416 miles of WLTP range, can still DC fast charge at an entirely reasonable 330 kW, and is going to cost less. A lot less. Likely tens of thousands of Euros less, or tens of thousands of dollars assuming both models make it to America. Like the AMG GT EV, the CLA 45 gets simulated gear changes and engine sounds, active aerodynamic elements, silicon carbide inverters, and an 800-volt architecture, except the CLA is less visually offensive. I’ll admit, the front end still isn’t great, but it has a normal rump, and that’s something you can’t say about the AMG GT 4-Door.
So, the Mercedes-AMG GT 53 4-Door Coupe isn’t ideal for speed junkies, nor is it likely to appeal to traditionalists. It also doesn’t look fantastic, so its usefulness for posing in posh areas is limited at best. While maximum WLTP range and peak DC fast charging figures are impressive, it’s going to be a tough sell when a quicker, cheaper CLA 45 is sitting across the showroom. Anyway, expect the lease deals to be superb after a year or two on sale.
Top graphic image: Mercedes-AMG
They might do ok after the leases are up. The problem is I’m assuming most people that aren’t crazy enough to buy it new want it green and the people crazy enough to lease it will get it the German rainbow. They might do well to limit the amount of German rainbow cars the build to push up residuals.
It’ll lease just fine for the person who wants to be seen in an AMG but can’t afford the top tier. That person wouldn’t be caught dead in the CLA 45. Despite it being the far better option in the real world.
The Taycan has it all over this thing. MB still can’t dig itself out of the muck.
The rear looks like an undead Pontiac Sunfire, still roaming the earth all these years later – unwilling to live, but unable to die.
I hold out hope that, because it seems that everyone at Mercedes hates how this car looks, they’ll rush a facelift to market, and we might have a significantly better looking car in 2-3 years. The mechanicals and the basic shape are very solid (the side profile is a bit Panamera-meets-Fisker Karma, which I think is great). It’s just the interior – which we’re probably stuck with – and the ends that really let the car down.
Woof.
I’ll always remember the Sacco era cars are the ones I’ve wanted most. Built very well, to last, comfort-focused first, and elegant.
Italians restrained by Germans was a wonderful combination, especially when the focus was on putting the best damn product out there.
Lexus scared them shitless, as they showed it could be done cheaper. Ever since, they chased that lower price, with questionable results. Then they started to chase performance, with some great engines like the M156/M159, and cars like the SLS. Now they’re chasing tech.
See the pattern? Instead of Mercedes standing confidently behind who they feel they are and the customers they serve, they’ve been trend chasing for the sake of “growth.” Phooey to it all. I say they should go back to being what we loved them for.
The original LS400 was definitely the shot across the bow.
A neighbor growing up had a late ’60s Benz I got to ride in a few times as an ’80s kid. That thing was a road Panzer. Built to a standard, not a cost. I’ll take that relic or a Sacco era Benz over this ‘thing’ any day.
“Italians restrained by Germans was a wonderful combination.” 1938-1945 would like a word…..
As already mentioned, I think the side profile looks great. I even don’t mind the rear, I like that it’s clearly a Mercedes but different enough from regular models, but the Chrysler 200 inspired bar above the grill connecting the headlights looks dumb on a CLA EV and it looks dumb here too. Also, insert obligatory complaint about too many screens here.
I’m not trying to be intentionally contrarian, but I actually like how this car looks. Some of the design features are awkward (the tail lights and the front bumper), but overall it looks good. It is nice to have a design that is distinct enough that there is something to actually love or hate about it. Would y’all really prefer if M-B released yet another bland, soulless crossover transportation instead of this?
I have less positive opinions about the interior, though. One of my biggest dislikes in modern cars is the amount of interior lighting. I find excessive interior lighting distracting and unpleasant. The photos of the interior look nice in the lighting conditions it is shown, but I think this car could be abslutely miserable to drive at night.
I also presume this car is going to be stupidly expensive, even if it ends up being substantially cheaper than the 63.
The side profile is quite attractive and flowing. But step in either direction and its a big ol yikes as soon as you catch a glimpse of the front or rear.
Savagegeese dropped a great video on modern “luxury” yesterday that I recommend everyone watch. Their argument is essentially that Genesis of all brands is currently delivering the best traditional luxury experience out there because their cars aren’t overburdened by screens, don’t have any cheap touch points, and are backed by good enough warranties that the prospect of owning one for longer than a damn lease period isn’t as daunting as it is with *insert German luxury car here*.
I think they’re probably right, and I’ve literally never been less interested in owning a German luxury car than I am right now…although ask me how I feel again tomorrow because they may finally be debuting their rolling screen and it can (and will!) keep getting even worse.
This also reeks of yet another feeble attempt to win over the Chinese market that these brands are so goddamn obsessed with. It won’t work, it’s never going to, stop trying to make fetch happen. You could remove a few of the 9,000 3 pointed stars, tell me this is a Chinese BEV, and I’d be like *Hank Hill voice* yup.
Line up, those with exponentially more money than taste, Ze Germans have another lukewarm, beige serving of totally irredeemable slop for ya for the low price of $1999 a month for 36 months! Warranty’s up at 37 months too, so best of luck to the poor aspirational sap that buys it for “holy shit I can get an AMG for HOW much?!?!”
A friend of mine has a G70 that he absolutely loves. the interior is a legitimately nice place to be as long as you’re not in the back. If I were looking at a full-size luxury car I’d go with the G90 over any of ze Germans.
Quincy Sandbank (rando up and comer) nailed it with his recent essay video:
https://youtu.be/C_0xBbEFjLk
This Isn’t a “car channel”, but it’s clearly an enthusiast that’s very hands on.
It’s all just enshittification, and cars have been charging headlong down that road harder than ever in the past 10-15 years. It’s trend-chasing nonsense, selling you “features” you don’t need, in things never intended to last in the first place.
Throughout the video he buys and starts restoring a 190E 2.6. … and he loves the shit out of it, despite having to dig into bugbears any 35-year old car will have. Yet it’s well packaged, so it’s easy enough to get to things to repair it correctly. It’s effort, but he can get new parts that’ll last and feels confident it will. And it still feels as solid and hewn from a single piece of metal as it always has.
———
Folks, I’m the same way. The one car I SPLURGED on, as said to me by someone else, “I know the insane amount of money you spent on this… but holy crap, it feels A LOT more expensive than that.” Yeah, they cost that for a reason.
I’ve done “top-shelf” restorations and modifications of all my video game consoles so they’re just “plug and play” with either retro OR modern hardware. It all “just works.” I had Nintendo coin cell batteries in cartridges still maintaining save games after 40 years — but I’ve since replaced them (while maintaining current to keep the saves), and putting in coin-cell holders so future battery swaps are EASY.
You have a modern console like any XBOX or PlayStation, where a new game might be AN HOUR over a super-fast connection to “install” and then update a game, and update the console’s firmware… and then you still need the disc in the drive which is not a speedy thing. The older stuff? You’re up and running instantly! Even the Switch 2, to its credit, worst case you’re rolling in a minute or so.
The furniture I buy is meant to outlive me. I repair electronics in the rare case things go south. I build my computers, and as a tech nerd I can “use all of it.” I self-host my own stuff, instead of using “cloud providers.”
———
I started voting with my wallet a loooong time ago. Rest of us should do the same.
The amusing part is that the w201 190E was decried as “cheap” when it was introduced. And it was certainly a cut below the w124 that it shared parts with. The beginnings of the slide.
But I would rather have either than anything Mercedes makes today. Even my ’14 E350 wagon, while solid mechanically and nice to drive, was extremely disappointing in materials quality and longevity. Still felt far more like a proper Mercedes than this modern crap though.
Yep. A 190E was the predecessor to the C-Class! I knew someone in the early 2000s who bought a gingerly used first generation C-Class thinking it’d be a better 190E. BOY, WAS THAT NOT THE CASE.
I have a W204/C204 C63 with the 6.2L quad-cam M156 V8, and it feels a lot more, uh, “modern German luxury car” inside. It’s fine, but that 190E runs circles around it in terms of material quality of most things. They also tended to be simpler, but cleverer solutions, and then overbuilt with more material and higher precision than “necessary.”
Current Mercedes? I mean, the dash in a modern S-Class squeaks and creaks in places. I look at a CLA and GLA/GLB like I would a German Altima or Rogue. As they are, as that’s the customer they’re chasing.
—
Granted, a Modern Mercedes is WAY cheaper than they were back then. Go look at what the late Sacco era W124 convertibles cost. They were easily $85-90K equipped in mid-1990s money. That’s damn near $200K in today’s FOR AN E-CLASS CABRIO.
But that’s the thing… when you get into an E-Class today, although they’re one of the few cars Mercedes still mostly does right, you absolutely feel why they cost about half as much in today’s money.
Oh for sure – my ’88 300TE would be $90K+ for a car with nothing in the way of features, compared to $70K for my thoroughly modern E350 wagon. But no comparing the relative quality of them, even if the modern one was MUCH more reliable overall. A better car, but an overall somewhat worse experience in too many ways – and the rest of the industry has closed the gap soo much. Too many pennies pinched in the interior in particular. Ultimately, TANSTAAFL – all that money got saved, and looking at the interior of my ’14 made it pretty obvious where a good chunk of it was saved.
I get why Mercedes needed to chase volume with the cheap cars, but it’s too bad. As I said in another post, the old CLA was a less desireable car to me than a Jetta, and that is just sad. The way they have cheaped out the still quite expensive ones today is inexcusable. I’ve sat in an EQS and it was *horrible* inside.
I like the Genesis design language, just worry about the long term ownership experience. I tend to buy used and keep forever. The only real reason I let go of my ’05 MDX a year ago was that the power steering rack blew and the rust was becoming chronic.
Mercedes cannot catch a break.
Their styling has been perplexing for a number of years.
Yet, there are people who keep buying them. Though I see fewer on the road, but perhaps that’s just a reliability issue.
That’s how I feel. I can’t think of anything apart from the G wagon that actually stands out. They all just blend in with the Kia’s and Hondas.
Although the top shot says “dubious”, “Dubai-ous” would work as well.
I’m giving up the German car industry for dead at this point. Give me either diesel from Shitbox Showdown over this monstrosity. Preferably the S-class.
Great. Another car for the rich 1% crowd.
How do you tell old money from new money in a single car.
Old money buys cars by the pound – the most value for money – and keeps it for as long as it will last.
New money buys/leases flashy, expensive cars and trades in frequently.
Example:
Old Money – a 10 year old Mercedes-Benz E Class Wagon bought new or CPO.
New Money – a new Mercedes-Benz G-Wagon AMG
I wonder what is more DOA, this or the Jeep Recon.
“or measuring from the taint.”
Hahahahah! $5 says Peter added that.
Those tristar brake lights are horrifying, who thought that was a good idea? Looks like a fanboy upgrade from Amazon.
Those are by far the most egregious styling choice on a vehicle that is nothing but egregious styling choices.
I just passed a Johnny’s gas station the other day and thought oh look, there’s the inspiration for that ugly Merc’s tail lights. Previously I couldn’t see anything but the Izze logo. Or is it simply a sliced cucumber?
Regardless, it does not belong in such a car. Those tails just look ridiculous.
https://velvetshark.com/ai-company-logos-that-look-like-buttholes
This feels so conceptually close in a way I had never thought of the three-pointed star before.
Maybe it’s the screens on the inside and the fact it looks like a bunch of cheaply glowing red orifices at the aft.
The fourth owner who will buy it used at a Buy Here Pay Here Lot, that’s an associate shift manager at Arby’s, and is really into gravity bongs.
I am by no means the target demo, but I am a huge fan of fast back style sedans. Beyond the dope side profile, the hatch makes so much more sense then a disconnected trunk. I think if there was better adoption of this 30 years ago we would have a lot more sedans around.
Also, I feel like MB designers are taking bets on how many logos they can work into the cars. Its hilarious!
Yes, we need more liftbacks. The crossover market is saturated enough.
Across the board, even on fun cars. Because of the hatch, my Civic type R can carry 8 foot lumber home.
I feel like we’ve seen quite a few liftbacks from the premium German brands over the last decade or so. Even VW offered us the Arteon. But they are rare among JDM, USM, SKDM. Aside from the Civic, which brushes the line with a regular hatchback, there’s the Regal, first-gen Mazda6, Tesla Model S, and Kia Stinger. That’s all I can think of unless we start counting pseudo-SUV designs like the Ioniq or Mach-E Mustang.
Aside from the expense of engineering it, one downside of the design is the compromised deck length because the liftback is usually shorter than a sedan or wagon body. Think BMW 430 vs 330 wagon, or Regal liftback vs TourX wagon. But they look awfully nice.
German’s kill at it for sure. I think the Audi S7 is the best example in recent memory.
Mercedes Streeter to Mercedes:
“Why should I change my name, they’re the one who sucks!”
Tired of these pieces dumping on cars not to your taste.
I would argue that it doesn’t fit the car culture bringing us together value. And this piece isn’t particularly entertaining or informative
It really does feel like the whole auto enthusiast community is basically all coming together under the idea of “new cars suck” though…
Yeah and it really sucks to see.
I likely wouldn’t buy this car, but I don’t hate it either and it has some really nice qualities.
100% agree, unless they are manual station wagons with an odd number of cylinders.
I see it as two sides of a coin.
New cars are…
However…
There’s a distinct difference in dumping on a car, vs dumping on the person who owns that car.
If I go to a car show or meet, I love talking to the guys slammed ES Civics with fart can mufflers and sticker bombed hoods. Do I personally think their car looks ridiculous? Absolutely! But I love that they love it, and cared enough to make it their own and to bring it out. Vehicle diversity is part of the joy of good car meets.
That said – I don’t have a huge problem dumping on the owner of these. Anyone who owns this atrocity has they financial means to buy many other cars that are new and rare, but also don’t look like they’re wearing a cheap superhero eye mask from behind. The whole world knows who you are, Robin.
You know, upon reflection, “Fathom” isn’t so bad after all.
I know I’m supposed to hate this thing, but it’s growing on me. Especially that side profile shot. Maybe it’s because I feel people will stay away from it/me; especially with those radiation taillights.
The interior is still awful.
The side profile looks great. I’m still not a fan of the front or rear, though. When I saw the last shot I had to scroll up to see if I was still looking at the same car.
God every EV super sedan looks the same. The rear of this looks pretty much exactly like the luce. How the hell does that happen?
Aerodynamics and convergent design stupidity?
ok I know the car is the amg gt 63, amg gt 55, and amg gt 53
but holy shit that is such a confusing sentence. The latest base model is such a bad way to keep the confusion at a minimum.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but didn’t Mercedes pass on bringing the CLA 45 to the states in favor of the GLA 45? (A decision that I hate, natually)
I’m sorry, I know those are supposed to be 3-pointed stars, but instead they look like nuclear trefoil symbols, and now I don’t even want to approach the thing for fear of being irradiated.
If ugliness leaked like radiation, this thing would be a rolling Chernobyl.
That interior photo is really perplexing. The more I look at it the more I notice that there are just a bunch of random elements all pointing at COMPLETELY DIFFERENT ANGLES. Center console has three dials at a slight angle away from the cup holders, neither of which line up with the armrest, which doesn’t line up with the phone pocket in front which doesn’t line up with the air vents which doesn’t line up with the screen which doesn’t line up with the other screen which doesn’t line up with the other other screen. I swear the engineers at Mercedes forgot to turn on auto-snap to grid in their CAD program.
Can’t unsee.
Not to mention it has those terrible Tesla handles on the door too.