Australia: 2019 Mercedes-AMG G 63 Costs $247,700

The long-awaited 2019 Mercedes-AMG G 63 has been recently announced in Australia, and will have a starting price of $247,700 once it will receive the go ahead this July. However, if you want to opt for the Night Pack as well, then you will have to empty your pockets for another $59,000.

The new 2019 Mercedes-AMG G 63 has been unveiled at the beginning of the year with Australian customers getting it this summer, with plenty of high-end features and technology onboard. After all, the hefty price says everything about the way it looks, feel and handles.

In case you`re familiar with the previous model, you should notice that the new one is a lot bigger and wider. It thus measures 110mm longer and 106mm wider, with a 40mm longer wheelbase as well. This translates in increased space inside for rear passengers – 38mm of space for the shoulders and 68mm for the elbows. So if you are a tall person, then the advantage is on your side.

The new 2019 Mercedes-AMG G 63 looks hot at the exterior, even if it retains the traditional design language. However, if you want to shake things up a little bit, then you can choose the aforementioned “Night Package” adding 22-inch alloy wheels, black trims at the exterior, tinted indicators lenses and much more inside.

Speaking of inside tweaks, the new model incorporates plenty of technology like two 12.3-inch widescreen displays, 360-degree camera system, Burmester 15-speaker sound system with 590 Watts, as well as Nappa leather trim, AMG seats and steering wheel, or ambient lighting with 64 colours to choose from.

Fitted with AMG Ride Control suspension and nine-speed automatic transmission with all-wheel drive and locking differential, the new 2019 Mercedes-AMG G 63 comes with a 4.0-liter twin-turbo V8 engine, churning out no less than 430 kW and impressive 850 Nm of torque, quite an improvement from the previous 5.5-liter with 420 kW and 760 Nm of torque. This allows a sprint from 0 to 100 km/h in a staggering 4.5 seconds.

SHARE THE ARTICLE

Reply