<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:itunes="http://www.itunes.com/dtds/podcast-1.0.dtd"
xmlns:rawvoice="http://www.rawvoice.com/rawvoiceRssModule/"
>

<channel>
	<title>The Truth About Cars &#187; GLK</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/tag/glk/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com</link>
	<description>The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 22:58:23 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language>en-US</language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.5.1</generator>
<!-- podcast_generator="Blubrry PowerPress/4.0.7" -->
	<itunes:summary>The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news.</itunes:summary>
	<itunes:author>The Truth About Cars</itunes:author>
	<itunes:explicit>no</itunes:explicit>
	<itunes:image href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/12/cropped-mirror.jpg" />
	<itunes:owner>
		<itunes:name>The Truth About Cars</itunes:name>
		<itunes:email>editors@ttac.com</itunes:email>
	</itunes:owner>
	<managingEditor>editors@ttac.com (The Truth About Cars)</managingEditor>
	<copyright>2006-2009</copyright>
	<itunes:subtitle>The Truth About Cars</itunes:subtitle>
	<itunes:keywords>The Truth About Cars is dedicated to providing candid, unbiased automobile reviews and the latest in auto industry news.</itunes:keywords>
	
	<itunes:category text="News &amp; Politics" />
	<itunes:category text="Games &amp; Hobbies">
		<itunes:category text="Automotive" />
	</itunes:category>
	<itunes:category text="Society &amp; Culture" />
		<item>
		<title>Review: 2013 Mercedes-Benz GLK350</title>
		<link>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/01/review-2013-mercedes-benz-glk350/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/01/review-2013-mercedes-benz-glk350/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Jan 2013 13:00:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Karesh</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Car Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mercedes-Benz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Toyota]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GLK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GLK350]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Q5]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[X3]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=472023</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[We’re all familiar with the Mercedes-Benz GLK, from its new-for-2010-looks-like-2002 exterior to its &#8220;they want how much for this?&#8221; interior. But the fourth model year is MCE time. Mid-cycle, has Stuttgart enhanced its compact crossover enough that previous rejecters should reconsider it? This being an MCE, the “aimed for G-Wagen, hit late-model Forester” metal hasn&#8217;t changed. More [...]]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472035" rel="attachment wp-att-472035"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472035" title="2013 GLK350 side, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-side-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>We’re all familiar with the Mercedes-Benz GLK, from its new-for-2010-looks-like-2002 exterior to its &#8220;they want how much for this?&#8221; interior. But the fourth model year is MCE time. Mid-cycle, has Stuttgart enhanced its compact crossover enough that previous rejecters should reconsider it?</p>
<p><span id="more-472023"></span><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472038" rel="attachment wp-att-472038"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472038" title="2011 GLK350 front, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2011-GLK350-front-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>This being an MCE, the “aimed for G-Wagen, hit late-model Forester” metal hasn&#8217;t changed. More Volvo than any post-Horbury Volvo, it remains the yang to the Audi Q5’s yin. New light assemblies and fascias address an LED deficit (and then some) while taking the box they append uptown.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472030" rel="attachment wp-att-472030"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472030" title="2013 GLK350 front, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-front-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>Mercedes got the message that many people (or at least many reviewers) found the original GLK interior overly basic, to put it kindly.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472039" rel="attachment wp-att-472039"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472039" title="2011 GLK350 instrument panel, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2011-GLK350-instrument-panel-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>The revised interior has more soft surfaces and looks more worthy of a price north of forty. Plain, hard-edged black plastic surfaces are out, displaced by some subtle curves (though the basic forms remain blocky), additional wood trim, and many not-so-subtle chrome bits. The new white-ringed instrument faces are classier. Unless it’s dusk, when the main thing you’ll notice is how hard it is to read silver digits on a white background.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472031" rel="attachment wp-att-472031"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472031" title="2013 GLK350 instrument panel, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-instrument-panel-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>Before you get carried away by visions of opulence, realize that the seat cushions remain flat and firm. Rear legroom also hasn&#8217;t changed, and so remains short of the segment average. A six-footer will fit behind a six-footer even if they’re wearing tall hats, but shins will be grazed. If you need more space, a dealer will happily show you something in a larger size.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472034" rel="attachment wp-att-472034"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472034" title="2013 GLK350 rear seat, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-rear-seat-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>The GLK brochure proclaims the “SUV embodiment of a sport sedan’s soul.” From the start, the fundamentals have been present: a big V6, nearly balanced weight distribution, and 19-inch wheels shod with low-profile rubber, all as standard equipment. For 2013, the V6 receives direct injection and a power bump from 268 to 302. Lay into it, and the GLK350 will scoot, but the powertrain’s initial response isn’t snappy as engine remains paired with an aging (if updated) seven-speed automatic. The newly offered (and standard) shift paddles don’t help. Add in the need to hit a button on the console to activate them (the P-R-N-D shifter is column-mounted), and they might as well sign up for unemployment.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472028" rel="attachment wp-att-472028"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472028" title="2013 GLK350 engine, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-engine-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>The 2013 GLK’s retuned suspension feels tighter than I recall from <a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2011/07/review-2011-mercedes-benz-glk350">the one one I drove two years ago</a>. Body control is up while lean in hard turns is down. The steering, now electric-assist, contains less slop than the previous hydraulic unit while providing a similarly low level of feedback. Drive the GLK the way such vehicles are typically driven, and it behaves well, with the ride quality and quietness people expect from a premium brand and the evident solidity people expect from a Mercedes. Push the ute, though, and you’ll discover limited grip as the outside front Latitude Tour HP scrubs and a non-defeatable, far-from-transparent stability control system jerks your chain. If you’re looking for fun, you’re much more likely to find it in the competing Audi, BMW, Infiniti, or Volvo.</p>
<p>Fuel economy has also been enhanced. In addition to direct injection and electric-assist steering, the GLK350 has gained an automatic start/stop system. Unlike Munich’s contraption, which produces shudders unbecoming any machinery this side of a Tata Nano, Stuttgart’s operates almost imperceptibly. The EPA ratings of 19 mpg city, 24 highway might seem less than impressive, but they’re considerably better than last year’s 16/21! (Unlike with an Audi Q5 or BMW X3, but like the Infiniti EX37, you can get rear-wheel-drive. The EPA highway figure is then 25.)</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472027" rel="attachment wp-att-472027"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472027" title="2013 GLK350 Eco Display, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-Eco-Display-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>Like Toyota’s hybrids, the updated GLK grades your driving. The grades are more precise than in a lowly Prius c—out of 100 rather than on a five-point scale—yet they are considerably less helpful. In a Prius c, the grades are for the current accelerate-cruise-brake cycle. In the Mercedes, they’re for the entire period since the car was started or the system was manually reset. Consequently, the link between what you do and the grade you receive is far less intuitive. You start out with a 50. From there, it’s easy to sink your score into the teens, and surprisingly difficult to nudge it over 80. On one suburban drive I managed a 98 with a feather-light foot and a sharp eye for anything that might require the brakes. The trip computer reported 28 mpg. When paying less attention to my driving, but still driving far from aggressively, the trip computer reported a score in the 40s and about 21 mpg. If your foot is at all heavy you won’t observe north of 20 in the suburbs, with 16-17 a very real possibility. Require better fuel economy? A GLK250 BlueTec powered by a 190-horsepower, 2.1-liter diesel arrives next spring.</p>
<p>Of course, most people don’t buy Mercedes for how they handle or how far they go on a gallon. What likely matters most—beyond the three-pointed star—is the amount of technology packed into the vehicle, and especially that focused on safety. To remind you of the priority the GLK puts on your well-being, the front seat belts are given a very firm tug each time you start the car.</p>
<p>Every redesigned or refreshed Mercedes beginning with the 2010 E-Class has received a drowsiness monitor as standard equipment. The system works entirely by evaluating the frequency and amplitude of steering corrections. So, if you are not aware that you’re falling asleep, a “coffee cup” icon below the speedometer will inform you.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472029" rel="attachment wp-att-472029"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472029" title="2013 GLK350 front quarter, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-front-quarter-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>Blind spot and lane departure warnings are available in passive and active forms. In “active,” the system doesn’t only warn you via a large graphic between the tach and speedometer. It also selectively blips the brakes and tugs the wheel to help get the car back where it&#8217;s supposed to be. I found the blind spot system helpful, perhaps because the warning light in the mirror alone was sufficient and I never tripped the &#8220;active&#8221; level. The lane departure system, on the other hand, proved a PITA. Touch the lane marker (quite easy to do with the one on the blind side) and you’d think death was imminent from the strength of the system’s reaction. To be fair to Mercedes, I haven’t yet encountered a lane departure system that wasn’t a nuisance. This one was only the most intrusive of the bunch.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472026" rel="attachment wp-att-472026"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472026" title="2013 GLK350 cargo, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-cargo-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>The optional adaptive cruise control impresses, even in traffic. On some of my trips around town I let the GLK do most of the driving. (The car gave its own driving style a grade of 46%.) Even if it’s not on, the Distronic system will sound a warning if you approach the car ahead too quickly. If you don’t react, it will attempt to stop the car itself. In a major ergonomic revolution (for Mercedes, at least), the turn signal and cruise control stalk have swapped positions. I made it through the entire week without setting the vehicle speed in an attempt to signal.</p>
<p>The GLK is also now able to steer itself into a parallel parking space. Unfortunately, life in the burbs provided no opportunity to test this system.</p>
<p>The Lighting Package now includes, in addition to steering-linked xenon headlamps, “adaptive highbeam assist.” Theoretically, this means that the car determines the appropriate and safe amount of forward lighting, and automatically provides it. In practice, it meant I had to switch the lamps out of “auto” to get the high beams. In &#8220;auto,&#8221; the car almost always rescinds your request for the brights the moment you release the stalk.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472033" rel="attachment wp-att-472033"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472033" title="2013 GLK350 rear quarter, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-rear-quarter-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>On the infotainment front, the GLK can now connect you to news, Google search, Yelp, Facebook and (when parked) the entire Internet for $14 a month on top of the $280/year basic “mbrace” telematics fee. Yes, it all costs money. Load up a GLK350, and the price jumps from $39,995 to the tested car’s $55,015. Even at this price the tested GLK lacked proximity key ($650), premium audio ($810), an Appearance Package (20s, shiny roof rails), and an AMG Styling Package that includes the previous and adds more aggressively styled fascias and wheels ($1,990). For the sake of comparison, let’s add the first two options, yielding an MSRP of $56,475.</p>
<p>This only seems like too much money for a compact SUV until you compare the competition. A loaded BMW X3 xDrive35i lists for $620 more—and running both through TrueDelta&#8217;s <a href="http://www.truedelta.com/pricing">Car Price Comparison Tool</a> finds that over $3,000 of the stuff on the Benz isn’t available on the BMW. Adjust for this, and the BMW is $3,700 higher. An Audi Q5 3.0T lists for a scant $45 more. But back in the 1990s, the idea of an Audi costing even a dime more than a Mercedes would have been written off as just another one of Piech’s insane ambitions. After adjusting for feature differences the Audi is $500 more. Of course, if you’re willing to go non-German, an Infiniti EX37 or a Volvo XC60 is about $3,000 less. Or, if you don’t need 300+ horsepower, the 240-horsepower X3 xDrive28i is about $1,200 less than the GLK while the 211-horsepower Q5 2.0T (not available with some of the 3.0T&#8217;s pricey options) undercuts a similarly decontented Mercedes by about $4,000.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?attachment_id=472032" rel="attachment wp-att-472032"><img class="aligncenter size-medium wp-image-472032" title="2013 GLK350 interior, picture courtesy Michael Karesh" src="http://images.thetruthaboutcars.com/2012/12/2013-GLK350-interior-450x337.jpg" alt="" width="450" height="337" /></a></p>
<p>Which leaves us where? Those who liked the GLK’s exterior before will like it more now. Those who didn’t like it before most likely still won’t, unless their issue was insufficiently fancy lights. Performance and handling have both improved, but not by enough to win over driving enthusiasts. The array of available technology could impress some people. Competitors offer many of the same features, but the GLK could have the most in the class, at least for now. Most of all, though, the dramatically upgraded interior could warrant another look. When you think of how people actually use this class of vehicle, an upscale look and feel matters a great deal, and the 2013 GLK is a much more credible luxury vehicle than the 2012 was.</p>
<p><em>Mercedes-Benz provided a GLK350 with insurance and a tank of gas.</em></p>
<p><em>Michael Karesh operates <a href="http://truedelta.com">TrueDelta.com</a>, an online provider of car reliability and real-world fuel economy information.</em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2013/01/review-2013-mercedes-benz-glk350/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>79</slash:comments>
		</item>
		<item>
		<title>Review: 2010 Mercedes GLK 350 4Matic</title>
		<link>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/02/review-2010-mercedes-glk-350-4matic/</link>
		<comments>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/02/review-2010-mercedes-glk-350-4matic/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 03 Feb 2009 13:45:37 +0000</pubDate>
		<dc:creator>Michael Martineck</dc:creator>
				<category><![CDATA[Car Reviews]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Future Vehicles]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Mercedes-Benz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Nissan]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[4Matic]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Benz]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[GLK]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[mercedes]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[Road Test]]></category>
		<category><![CDATA[SUV]]></category>

		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=236531</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[The ad for the new Mercedes GLK is targeted straight at owners of MB's ML and GL SUVs. After all, the new GLK gives you the "same innovation in a smaller design." Same agility. Same suspension. Same luxury. Same depreciation (my add). So, why bother paying more for one of Mercedes' more much macho trucks? Sure, this baby brother routine hurts the <em>automaker</em>. The Nissan's Rogue's Murano-i-cide is but one example where a new, smaller vehicle robbed Peter to pay Paul less. But that's the way it is. In Bailout Nation's new era of hunker down austerity, downsizing is almost as fashionable as having a job. Big ticket buyer meets smaller ticket price on the dark side of town. The carmakers must figure that what they lose in profit they'll recover in volume. Ask GM how well that works. In that sense the Mercedes GLK is a born win - loser. Or is it?<p align="center"><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_QoTl01VxXo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_QoTl01VxXo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></p>]]></description>
				<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The ad for the new Mercedes GLK is targeted straight at owners of MB&#8217;s ML and GL SUVs. After all, the new GLK gives you the &#8220;same innovation in a smaller design.&#8221; Same agility. Same suspension. Same luxury. Same depreciation (my add). So, why bother paying more for one of Mercedes&#8217; more much macho trucks? Sure, this baby brother routine hurts the <em>automaker</em>. The Nissan&#8217;s Rogue&#8217;s Murano-i-cide is but one example where a new, smaller vehicle robbed Peter to pay Paul less. But that&#8217;s the way it is. In Bailout Nation&#8217;s new era of hunker down austerity, downsizing is almost as fashionable as having a job. Big ticket buyer meets smaller ticket price on the dark side of town. The carmakers must figure that what they lose in profit they&#8217;ll recover in volume. Ask GM how well that works. In that sense the Mercedes GLK is a born win &#8211; loser. Or is it?</p>
<p>It takes a couple of miles to warm up to this trucklet. The Mercedes GLK&#8217;s exterior won&#8217;t fire you up on your approach. The 90s-style orthogonal body looks like it&#8217;s already due for a refresh. I&#8217;m not saying everything on the road needs to be modeled on a suppository. I love the righteous Geländewagen, a machine which shipping crates have envied for over 30 years. But the authority of the creases found on the G and GL SUVs simply doesn&#8217;t scale down. Sometimes, emulating your big brothers makes it all the more obvious that you&#8217;re the baby of the family.</p>
<p>The diminutive outside cons you. The interior appears so incredibly roomy A) because you&#8217;ve lowered your expectations and B) because it is. Two sunroofs help. Headroom and shoulder room are ample enough to make you forget this is the runt of the litter. The detail is stark but accentuates the safety deposit box theme. The silvery rings on the controls and the dials put you inside a Breitling chronograph. If I owned a big ad agency I&#8217;d do my office this way and everyone would respect me.</p>
<p>The seats are exquisite. The seat controls&#8217; traditional door-mounted position makes them easy to use and keeps snow off the armrests.  One assumes they won&#8217;t short out. An electrical problem is not what you want in this mobile Brookstone showroom. The tester had more than $6k worth of extra electronics, including a 600-watt Harman Kardon surround-sound system; 7-inch color monitor; a 6GB hard drive with media database and an entirely superfluous in-dash six-disc changer. Everything is voice controlled.</p>
<p>I didn&#8217;t fiddle with all the gizmos. Who has that kind of time? My only complaint with the inside: getting inside, through the rear passenger doors. The rear side glass intrudes on the top right, making the porthole smaller than you think.  It&#8217;s needlessly awkward on an otherwise carefully thought-out design.</p>
<p>I approached the driving part of the Mercedes GLK program with a prejudice: I like wagons. The GLK has more suspension travel than the C-Class upon which it&#8217;s based. It&#8217;s far more supple, without being soft. I could feel the ruts in the road (Yes, ruts. I didn&#8217;t baby this thing) without being jarred. The use of hydraulic dampers and blow-by valves sounds like steampunk technology, but it works.</p>
<p>This is especially true when combined with the 4Matic all wheel-drive, traction and stability control and thrown about in a square mile of fresh snow. Even with all-season rubber, this was a yak. Thanks to the power-to-weight ratio, with the all the processing tech being equal, this could be the best ski trip vehicle in Mercedes&#8217; line up . . . or on the market.</p>
<p>Power comes from a 3.5-liter V6, putting out 268 horsepower. It&#8217;s as quick as it should be. The automatic transmission was a seven-speed Zen koan. So many gears, so much wheel-spin management and suspension adjusting and brake control. In other words, I have little idea what it was doing at any given moment, but whatever it did seemed appropriate to the situation. If you consider the best transmission the one you never have to think about, you don&#8217;t need to think about this one.</p>
<p>The Mercedes GLK&#8217;s brakes are as expected: powerful enough to haul you down from speed before the cops can haul you off to jail. Mercedes has always taken their stoppers seriously and it shows. Everything is firm and fluid. Again, I&#8217;ve got to compliment the suspension, which sucked up inertia in ways I don&#8217;t fully understand.</p>
<p>And slowly, as the miles clicked by, I became a fan. I still don&#8217;t get the whole tall wagon deal. This one is derivative in intent and purpose. It won me over with genuine driving chops. The GLK was not the first to the small SUV market, but it&#8217;s the best. The vehicle will find favor amongst financially-challenged Mercedes SUV fans. But it&#8217;s also Mercedes&#8217; best &#8220;entry level&#8221; product in decades. If it was a book, it would be called &#8220;How to Win Friends and Win More Friends.&#8221;</p>
<p align="center"><object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_QoTl01VxXo&hl=en&fs=1"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_QoTl01VxXo&hl=en&fs=1" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object></p>]]></content:encoded>
			<wfw:commentRss>http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2009/02/review-2010-mercedes-glk-350-4matic/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>43</slash:comments>
		</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
