...more like the op posted an autotrader link and the link at the bottom was for the GLA vs X1 comparison...so I posted that one too...it's not that tough to figure out.Is this just picking out the reviews that are favorable, or is the GLA consistently getting reviews that say it is better than its competitors?
I think just based on utility alone most prefer the GLA. It really is almost impossible to fit anyone in the back of the CLA if the person has legs. lolI also find it funnny that we're getting positive review while the CLA is getting mostly negative review when in fact GLA is based on CLA
I test drove both Q3 and GLA. GLA ride comfort was superior to Q3, but I found GLA noise level higher. I think the Goodyear run flats have a lot to do with that.I read both those reviews and agree with what they're saying, except about the GLA's ride comfort and noise level. I have no problem with either, but then again, I never test drove the Q3.
The GLA is really more Subaru XV Crosstec and Mitsubishi Outlander Sport in terms of size. Or the sameless Kia Forte5.I've read in many reviews that many just do not know which classification to put the GLA on, especially the AMG version. It probably doesn't help that MB insist on calling it an SUV despite it's limited cargo space and low stance, lower than the typical SUV and so low that the government considers it a car and not a truck/SUV.
Many just considers it a hatchback (or a raised hatchback for the non-AMG) but MB frowns upon those who call it that even though it is practically the A-Class.
So in that regards, it is kind of difficult to find something that it really goes head to head with. It really is in between a cross over and car and the grey area becomes even more dim with the AMG. It isn't quite against the Q3/X1/NX but it isn't quite like the A3 hatch (doesn't even exist in the US) or any other wagons in Audi or BMWs line-up. It isn't exactly like the Evoque or Macan especially if you look at the price differences, the GLA45 sits right in between (not to mention that it vastly out performs the Evoque and it seems like you need to jump to the Macan Turbo to match up the two but price goes insanely high) those and the GLA250 is way, way cheaper than those two.
Many says the GLA45 is a grown up WRX STI or a more luxurious Golf R but those are hatches which is again a distinction MB disdains to associate with the GLA.
Wrong. The government classifies the GLA250 as a light truck, NOT a car.I've read in many reviews that many just do not know which classification to put the GLA on, especially the AMG version. It probably doesn't help that MB insist on calling it an SUV despite it's limited cargo space and low stance, lower than the typical SUV and so low that the government considers it a car and not a truck/SUV.
Many just considers it a hatchback (or a raised hatchback for the non-AMG) but MB frowns upon those who call it that even though it is practically the A-Class.
So in that regards, it is kind of difficult to find something that it really goes head to head with. It really is in between a cross over and car and the grey area becomes even more dim with the AMG. It isn't quite against the Q3/X1/NX but it isn't quite like the A3 hatch (doesn't even exist in the US) or any other wagons in Audi or BMWs line-up. It isn't exactly like the Evoque or Macan especially if you look at the price differences, the GLA45 sits right in between (not to mention that it vastly out performs the Evoque and it seems like you need to jump to the Macan Turbo to match up the two but price goes insanely high) those and the GLA250 is way, way cheaper than those two.
Many says the GLA45 is a grown up WRX STI or a more luxurious Golf R but those are hatches which is again a distinction MB disdains to associate with the GLA.