The Mercedes M-Class has been to the gym. Wobbly blubber has been replaced by sculpted muscle, cardiovascular work has improved performance and...
Well, let's stop with the whole fitness analogy shall we? It doesn't hold up anyway because the new car is bigger and heavier than the one it replaces so let's just say the new M-Class (launched in South Africa in November 2005) is heaps better than the last one.
In gym talk, it's "worked" out its problems.
Then again, it couldn't have been any worse than Mercedes' previous attempt at assembling a luxury SUV - the original M-Class that emerged from the swamps of Alabama (where Mercedes has a factory) in 1997.
That model heralded a quality decline that would lead some analysts (ie, me) to wonder if Mercedes had become the Ratners* of the automotive world and was just one of the problems that eventually saw off chief executive Jürgen Schrempp.
Things didn't improve that much after production moved to Austria although 40 000 people, perhaps dazzled by the three-pointed star on the bonnet, still went out and paid colossal amounts of money to own one. (These included my former next-door neighbour, although I was not aware he had ordered one until after I had given him a boorish speech pondering who would be witless enough to buy an M-Class, and detailing its failings.)
The whole sorry episode allowed BMW's X5, VW's Touareg and Volvo's XC90 to steal a march in what would turn out to be one of the most important emerging market sectors of the last decade.
Not to harp on, but the original M-Class was quite possibly the worst vehicle ever to wear the pointed star and, while the new one is still far from the best, it is a much more desirable and better machine.
The aim, as ever with these cars, has been to make a tall, heavy behemoth handle like a low, light, estate car. This would mean disproving Newton's theories about apples so the best we can say is that, in an off-roader context, it corners well (better than a Cherokee, better even than the soon-to-be-replaced X5).
Though Mercedes has ditched the old-school, separate-ladder-frame chassis for a more road-friendly monocoque, the new M is still more capable off-road with hill-hold and hill-descent functions in the package and low-ratio an option as part of an admittedly costly "Off-Road Pro" package.
If you ask me the number of gears (seven) and the number of seats (five) should be reversed but, that said, the M's gearbox is a paragon of fluidity and cynics would point out that its lack of seats does allow space in the already niche-crazy Mercedes range for the imminent seven-seat G-Wagon.
The bigger story is the magical improvement in interior quality and style - so huge is this leap in materials and construction that you might wonder if Mercedes has been building crappy interiors on a whim these past few years.
There is, however, an elephant in the room as I write this and if I fail to acknowledge its presence I could come a cropper. I'm talking, of course, about the off-roader debate - a pressing issue concerning the environment, congestion, urban politics and global geo-politics. There, I've acknowledged it - now where was I?
Oh yes, the new M-Class: quite a fine car, but there are not enough seats and beware of the cost of the options list. - The Independent, London
*Google on Ratners:
Once a thriving British High Street jeweller in the 1980s, Gerald Ratner made the mistake of summarising thus his cost-efficiency at a presentation with the Institute of Directors:
"We also do cut-glass sherry decanters complete with six glasses on a silver-plated tray that your butler can serve you drinks on, all for £4.95. People say, 'How can you sell this for such a low price?' I say, "because it's total crap".