Mercedes-Benz Forum banner

1 - 8 of 8 Posts

·
Registered
'12 Peugeot 3008 HYbrid4 (sorry!)
Joined
·
397 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

No, this time it's not about the luggage area - we move up a bit for the weekend and tackle the front seats [;)][;)][;)]

My wife is - how is it you put it: "vertically challenged" [:D] - that is, she stands 153 cms tall.

She likes the W163, both as a passenger and occasionally as a driver, because the seats are not excessively deep (the seat cushion is shorter than on other vehicles).

We test drove a Volvo XC90 some time ago, and it was discarded as a possibility just because of the front seats being too deep. She could choose between having the front of the seat cutting off a reasonable bloodstream to her lower legs or not having any support for her lower back.

Now, according to the information available, the W164 is in that respect a step in the srong direction: Nominal front seat depth for the 163 is 498 mm; for the 164 1" more @ 525 mm. The W251, though equipped with the same seats as the W164, comes out slightly better @ 510 mm due to a different seat cushion angle.

Are there any short forum members out there with easy access to a real-world W164 that would care to test this??? TIA!!

Birger
 

·
Registered
2020 MB GLE 450 4MATIC, 2015 BMW M4
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
My wife is not quite so short (162 cm) and found the seats on our test drive quite comfortable. Now, be aware there are 3 different seats, I believe--base, Sport, and Multi Contour (pneumatic side, thigh and lumbar). I guess the multi-contour only comes with the premium package.
 

·
Coupe/Convertible Forums Moderator
CURRENT: 2011 SL550, 2011 C300 FORMER: ML350, CLK550 Cabriolet, C240, ML320, 300TD
Joined
·
19,255 Posts
Maybe one day, they will add a lateral adjustment to the seat cushion like they have in the S-Class (I believe the Lexus LS has it also). I like having the extra thigh support.

- RODNEY
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
We test drove the new ML the other day, and the seat base is definately pretty long. On the other hand, the front edge is fairly soft and rounded so it doesn't tend to cut into the popliteal area (behind the knee). My wife drove a bit and sat on the passenger seat the rest of the 40 minute drive, and she said it was comfortable (she's 159cm). By the way, have you considered the Land Rover Discovery 3 (LR3)? The seat bases are a fair bit shorter, there's lots of luggage space, and it tows nicely.
 

·
Registered
'12 Peugeot 3008 HYbrid4 (sorry!)
Joined
·
397 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
Thanks, Outrageous

- for the input, and for the addition to my vocabulary [;)] I didn't know that my wife's "problem zone" was called the popliteal area.

I did consider the LR3, but it's ugly - that was my wife's first, and last opinion on that.

Birger
 

·
Registered
2020 MB GLE 450 4MATIC, 2015 BMW M4
Joined
·
2,117 Posts
RE: LR3

Outrageous - 4/8/2005 9:08 PM

By the way, have you considered the Land Rover Discovery 3 (LR3)? The seat bases are a fair bit shorter, there's lots of luggage space, and it tows nicely.
I like the looks of the LR3, but it's very heavy (1,000 lb. more than the ML), which makes it somewhat slow and ponderouse and the mlieage is terrible. Did not care fot the ergonomics (hard to see center console stack, e.g.). Other downside is it's British (yes, I know Ford owns it now). Better than ML for offroad and towing, though.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
64 Posts
Birger - 4/9/2005 6:09 AM

I did consider the LR3, but it's ugly
Then there's the RR Sport, which looks like it will have comfortable seats. It has less luggage space than the LR3, but I like the separately opening rear hatch window.


 

·
Registered
'12 Peugeot 3008 HYbrid4 (sorry!)
Joined
·
397 Posts
Discussion Starter #8
Indeed,

the RR Sport might be an alternative. We had a look at it in February, and it seems quite OK.

But - I must agree with Greg's opinion on its origins [:0]

Also, it will probably be priced far above the W164.

Cheers,
Birger
 
1 - 8 of 8 Posts
Top