No V-8, No Problem: 2025 Mercedes-Benz G550 Tested
The back seat is tiny, and the price tag is large. When you drive at night, strange reflections of oncoming traffic play havoc across the flat-windowed interior. The electric version handles better. Only the AMG G63 gets a V-8. There are lots of reasons to dislike the 2025 Mercedes-Benz G550, but it would take a pettier soul than ours to do so. The Mercedes glam box manages to make the most mundane errands feel like red-carpet arrivals, and for that we can't stay mad at it.
The G-wagen remains slab-sided and tall for 2025 but boasts an extra-toothy grille, reshaped front and rear bumpers and A-pillars, and a kick-up spoiler on the roof. Visually these changes are small, but Mercedes says they help direct air over the top of the G-class and around the sides for a quieter, more efficient ride. We averaged 16 mpg on our recent drive, proving there's only so much efficiency a rolling shipping container can muster (the EPA quotes it at 18 mpg combined). If you want to skip the pump altogether, there's always the electric G580. We can vouch for the latest G550's hushed ride, as there's only 67 decibels of noise inside at 70 mph, and any wind and road roar can be easily drowned out by the Burmester audio system.
The new model year's move from twin-turbo V-8 motivation to a 48-volt-assisted inline-six is big news in G-wagen circles. Considering the G550's native habitat is expensive grocery store parking lots and Wilshire Boulevard gridlock, the topic of engine choice seems barely relevant; it doesn't take much horsepower to pull up to the valet at the Beverly Wilshire on Rodeo Drive, but part of the G's appeal has always been its capable underpinnings, a blue-collar tool kit hidden in the designer briefcase.
Not to fear, because while the new turbocharged and supercharged 3.0-liter six lacks the bass vibrato of the V-8, it still has a decent burble and, more importantly, produces 443 horsepower and 413 pound-feet of torque, which is enough scoot to get the G550 through the quarter-mile in 13.6 seconds at 101 mph. Reaching 60 mph takes 5.0 seconds, which is a smidge quicker than the previous V-8 version, despite the new model having 37 fewer pound-feet of torque.
Of course, what the test track can't showcase is the G550's intimidation factor. It may not be the quickest vehicle in a freeway-merging matchup, but when you floor it and the nine-speed automatic drops a few gears and your victim sees that big brick accelerating in their rearview, they tend to drop back out of fear, or respect. We'll take either one.
But the G550 doesn't automatically win everyone over. During testing, technical editor Dan Edmunds was unimpressed, especially on the skidpad where the G550 managed only a stability-control-inhibited 0.63 g with moderate understeer, while its electric sibling beat it soundly by pulling 0.80 g. At least the G550 stops similarly well, coming to a halt from 70 mph in a relatively trim 165 feet to the G580 EV's 162 feet. But we'll counter by saying there's no need to hustle about when you're enjoying a heated-stone massage and pondering the mood lighting you need for that evening's outing. If you want a canyon-carving SUV, there are several other German offerings that specialize in that. The G-wagen is for stately maneuvering in comfort, traversing unpaved hunting-lodge driveways in comfort, and towing showy boats—up to 7000 pounds' worth—in comfort.
And comfortable it is. Opening the door is like unlocking a safe full of valuables, both in the vacuum-releasing click of entry and the rich smell of leather and wood that greets you when you climb inside. Our test car had the classic pairing of a dark foresty green exterior with a toasty saddle-tan leather interior full of quilted panels and silvered dark wood accents. The steering wheel is a delight, wrapped in leather so soft it's almost silk and better laid out than what's in Mercedes-Benz's sedans. Even though it uses the same touch-sensitive controls of other models, they are not so prone to accidental engagement.
Seating is high up and throne-like, with a large menu of heating, cooling, and adjustment elements. We had several friends pop inside just to take advantage of the massage feature, even when we weren't going anywhere—but not all at once, because while the front seats are truly royal accommodations, the rear seats are surprisingly stingy on legroom. When combined with the optional rear-seat entertainment system ($2990), the second row becomes downright unpleasant. Anyone planning to use the G550 as a family hauler best check their car-seat measurements before clicking that option box.
Carefully considering options is important, as it's easy to raise the G550's already elevated $149,400 starting price into AMG G63 territory. Ash wood trim, leather grab handles, AMG Line dress-up options, nappa leather upholstery, those magnificent massaging seats, and many other personalizations brought our test car up to $182,240.
Which brings us back to our initial thoughts on G-wagens. Mercedes managed to make a formerly bare-bones military transport truck into an envy-inspiring luxury cruiser, and even knowing that the magic trick has been done, we remain enthralled. The G-class isn't the best choice for large families, and it's not the most efficient choice for solo driving, but it remains unrivaled as a fashion statement. The hefty cargo area and sturdy all-wheel-drive chassis offer enough capability to argue that a G-wagen isn't just trendy, it's sensible. Who can be mad about that?
You Might Also Like
Car and Driver's 10 Best Cars through the Decades
How to Buy or Lease a New Car
Lightning Lap Legends: Chevrolet Camaro vs. Ford Mustang!
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Newsweek
10 hours ago
- Newsweek
Why Williams Just Bet Their Future on James Vowles - And Why It Matters
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. Williams F1 announced a contract extension for its team principal, James Vowles, securing his future with the team. Vowles joined the team back in 2023. Many in the paddock considered it a backmarker team, forever doomed to struggle at the bottom of the grid. He was comfortable at Mercedes, excelling as an important figure within the team as the Motorsport Strategy Director. A move to Williams represented a massive risk for Vowles — considering how poorly the team had performed in the past. Team principals rarely get a second chance in F1. He would have one shot at establishing himself as a quality leader of a racing team. Vowles could have waited for another chance, but he believed in the project and new ownership. He gained enough confidence based on those two factors to dive into the deep end with Williams. Williams Team Principal James Vowles walks in the garage during qualifying ahead of the F1 Grand Prix of Canada at Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve on June 14, 2025 in Montreal, Canada. Williams Team Principal James Vowles walks in the garage during qualifying ahead of the F1 Grand Prix of Canada at Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve on June 14, 2025 in Montreal, Canada. Photo byThe move paid off for Vowles - he solidified himself as a team principal, and Williams is progressing up the grid. Almost halfway through the season, Williams sits fifth in the Constructors' standings, the highest it has been since 2016. Before the former Mercedes official took over, the British racing team's points-scoring performances were considered mere blips on the radar. This season, the team's expectations are to score points at every race. The change in expectations comes from a new car development philosophy. Rather than make a car only suited for a specific track type - under Vowles' leadership - the team designed the FW47 to be balanced and versatile across the calendar. Vowles brought a new mindset for the team, pushing expectations higher every season and demanding more from the entire team, from the engineers to the pit crew. He diligently evaluated the performance of the entire team. He kept those who contributed and removed anyone who did not fit the team's new direction. I am absolutely delighted to have signed a new long-term contract with Atlassian Williams Racing. Remaining at Williams was never in doubt, but I'm really pleased to have formalised it. This team has felt like home from the moment I walked through the door. It really is a… — James Vowles (@JV_F1) June 19, 2025 The cost cap brought an element of parity to Formula 1, giving smaller teams like Williams a fighting chance against the top flight. Everyone in the F1 paddock noticed the revolution happening at Williams, which has led to some shocking acquisitions. The most notable believer in the Williams project is Carlos Sainz Jr. Sainz was one of the most accomplished free agents on the market last season, and after all the top teams were full, he was left looking for the best of the rest. Despite massive interest from other teams, Sainz chose to believe in Vowles and joined Williams. The tangible progress Williams has made under Vowles' leadership makes him the team's most valuable asset, more than the drivers or engineering teams. Vowles injected energy and belief into the team. He introduced a methodical and practical approach that created a faster car on track. Vowles is an architect who can craft a well-oiled racing machine, making him worth every penny of the extension for a Williams team that has been stuck in mediocrity.
Newsweek
11 hours ago
- Newsweek
Mercedes Formula One Team Reports Massive $120 Million Revenue Boost
Based on facts, either observed and verified firsthand by the reporter, or reported and verified from knowledgeable sources. Newsweek AI is in beta. Translations may contain inaccuracies—please refer to the original content. The Mercedes Formula One team has reported a significant revenue increase of approximately $120 million (as per today's exchange rates). Sixty percent of the earnings come from sponsorship and licensing. From the data published by the UK's Companies House, as published by Mercedes Grand Prix Limited, the parent company of the Mercedes F1 team, reported a turnover of approximately $856 million (£636 million) in 2024, which is a stark increase from 2023's $735 million (£546.5 million). Consequently, profits too have jumped significantly. Mercedes recorded an approximate $112.7 million (£83.8 million) net profit in 2023, with the number rising to $162 million (£120.34 million) in 2024, an increase of approximately $50 million. Mercedes' British driver George Russell pulls into pit lane after winning the 2025 Formula 1 Grand Prix du Canada at Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve in Montreal, Canada, on June 15, 2025. Mercedes' British driver George Russell pulls into pit lane after winning the 2025 Formula 1 Grand Prix du Canada at Circuit Gilles-Villeneuve in Montreal, Canada, on June 15, 2025. TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AFP/Getty Images It is noteworthy that Mercedes received a significant share of the F1 prize money for securing second place in the 2023 Constructors' Championship, which increased its revenue in 2024 since payments are processed the following year. As a result of the positive earnings, the team's three shareholders, Mercedes-Benz Group, team principal Toto Wolff, and Ineos, will receive an ordinary dividend of approximately $168 million (£125 million). However, it remains to be seen what impact Mercedes' performance in the 2024 season will have on its earnings, considering it secured fourth place in the championship. In addition, it would be interesting to see a change in the percentage of earnings from sponsorships, given seven-time world champion Lewis Hamilton's exit from the team after the 2024 season. Speaking of 2025, the season has been dominated by McLaren thus far. Mercedes achieved its first win in the previous round in Montreal, where the team's lead driver, George Russell, started from pole position and led the race for the majority of the laps to secure his first win of the year. However, rumors are doing the rounds that Russell is on Aston Martin's radar for the 2026 season, when the sport enters a new era of regulations. Newsweek Sports reported Russell's comments, who confirmed the interest shown by other teams but emphasized his intention to continue racing for Mercedes. He said: "No, I'm not talking with anybody else and any teams who have shown interest. I have been quite open to say my intentions are to stay with Mercedes. That's always been clear. "And, you know, I am loyal to Mercedes. They gave me this chance to get into Formula 1. There haven't been any hard feelings with any of the talks that have been going around, you know, especially around Max because, like I said numerous times, why wouldn't teams be interested in Max if everybody could, if every driver had a clean, no contracts for next year, Max would be the number one for every single team. And that's understandable. "But ultimately there are two seats for every race team and I knew if I continued to perform as I'm doing, my position would not be under threat whatsoever. So, I feel in a good place. We're in no rush to do contract negotiations."
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Fuel firms can challenge California's emission limits, supreme court rules
Fossil fuel companies are able to challenge California's ability to set stricter standards reducing the amount of polluting coming from cars, the US supreme court has ruled in a case that is set to unravel one of the key tools used to curb planet-heating emissions in recent years. The conservative-dominated supreme court voted by seven to two to back a challenge by oil and gas companies, along with 17 Republican-led states, to a waiver that California has received periodically from the federal government since 1967 that allows it to set tougher standards than national rules limiting pollution from cars. The state has separately stipulated that only zero-emission cars will be able to sold there by 2035. Although states are typically not allowed to set their own standards aside from the federal Clean Air Act, California has been given unique authority to do so via a waiver that has seen it become a pioneer in pushing for cleaner cars. Other states are allowed to copy California's stricter standard, too. But oil and gas companies, as well as Republican politicians, have complained about the waiver, arguing that it caused financial harm. The waiver was removed during Donald Trump's first term but then reinstated by Joe Biden's administration. Last week, Trump again moved to end the waiver, signing a congressional disapproval of California's move to cut pollution and shift new cars and trucks to become electric over the next decade. Gavin Newsom, California's governor and a Democrat, who is in a huge head-to-head battle with the White House over the Los Angeles protests and state power, amid Trump's immigration crackdown, has called this move illegal and has said the state will sue. The justices' ruling overturned a lower court's decision to dismiss the lawsuit by a Valero Energy subsidiary and fuel industry groups. The lower court had concluded that the plaintiffs lacked the required legal standing to challenge a 2022 EPA decision to let California set its own regulations. 'The government generally may not target a business or industry through stringent and allegedly unlawful regulation, and then evade the resulting lawsuits by claiming that the targets of its regulation should be locked out of court as unaffected bystanders,' conservative Justice Brett Kavanaugh wrote for the majority. Liberal Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented from the decision. The lower court had previously ruled that the oil and gas industry didn't have legal standing to attempt to topple the California waiver but a challenge to this reached the supreme court, which appeared sympathetic to the claim when the case was heard in April. 'It's not that high a burden,' Amy Coney Barrett, one of the justices, said about proof of the alleged harm. California and the federal government have been allowed to 'stretch and abuse' the Clean Air Act, the American Fuel & Petrochemical Manufacturers, one of the groups challenging the waiver, has complained. But environmentalists and California's Democratic leadership have defended the waiver, arguing that it has helped push forward vehicle innovation and help cut greenhouse gases. Transportation is responsible for more planet-heating pollution in the US than any other sector. 'California and other clean car states cannot achieve federal clean air standards and protect communities without reducing harmful transportation pollution,' said Andrea Issod, senior attorney at the Sierra Club. 'We stand with these states to defend their well-established authority to set standards for clean cars.' The supreme court's ruling on Friday does not in itself end California's standards to cut pollution from vehicles, said Vickie Patton, general counsel of the Environmental Defense Fund. 'The standards have saved hundreds of lives, have provided enormous health benefits, and have saved families money,' Patton said. 'While the supreme court has now clarified who has grounds to bring a challenge to court, the decision does not affect California's bedrock legal authority to adopt pollution safeguards, nor does it alter the life-saving, affordable, clean cars program itself.'
