Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM
You are in the Sedans
What is this discussion about?
Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan
Let's try to define this forum as being limited to luxury performance vehicles where the mainstream version in a typical configuration has an MSRP of at least $60k.
A luxury vehicle with a base price of $59k qualifies because it would typically be bought with some additional equipment, bringing the MSRP over $60k.
Vehicles like the E, 5, A6, M, or GS, even if available in certain versions over $60k, don't qualify because they are cars from companies that have higher end cars in their lineups.
#14623 of 24723 Merc, I already won this argument!
Apr 10, 2006 (7:14 am)
You are too late! LOL!
"Every time I try to get out, they pull me back in!"
Re: the SC vs. the SL, part of the reason for the HUGE success of the SC is the SL-matching V8 within the Sc430 engine bay. Whether the Lexus built the SC to compete with the SL primarily, at $25k less is debatable. But the SL, for 3 years, would struggle to outrun the Lexus. I'm sure this was used in "walkarounds" often.
Re: the original SC, having been knocked-off several times (Mazda MX-6 and Buick Riviera the most blatant), and being called, at $45k, "Possibly the best car on the planet!" by C&D, the 1992-99 SC resume wants for nothing. It had to be re-engineered to bring the latest safety equipment cars started to bear in '95+, and Lexus had other plans.
As Mercedes CLK has ALWAYS shown, matching style with the original SC was futile, so just slap two doors on an E, and call it a day!
Considering Mercedes had several years to build an SC competitor, the 1999 CLK430 was another weak effort, hoplessly derivitive of the E-Class sedan, as was it's forebearer. I was truly disappointed! The 2002 (?) CLK was less derivitive, but no more attractive. Better interior, doh.
Since you brought up the CL (Comparing it to cars costing half as much smacks of desperation, Merc. You know better!), if Lexus built cars that cost as much as S550, SL550, or CL55, you wouldn't be so apt to hide in an Ivory tower.
Mercedes better have an anwser for the 600h! That could be 10-12k sales a year, by itself. Those aren't gonna come from Cadillac, or BMW, Merc.
What ya gonna do? What ya gonna do when they come for you?
#14624 of 24723 Oh yeah, just one more Ting, Merc.
Apr 10, 2006 (7:37 am)
The other shoe drops Wednesday, in New York, at 9:25AM!
Tough act to follow, especially 10 minutes later!
The End is near!
#14625 of 24723 Re: ljflx [ljflx]
Apr 10, 2006 (8:19 am)
The one DNA element the A8 has is quattro. In fact it's been the Audi calling card across the board
Exactly... oac: How could you not associate Audi with AWD? That is their calling card, no question. AWD for the A8, in particular, absolutely is what sets itself apart from its competition.
#14626 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [drfill]
Apr 10, 2006 (9:30 am)
Mercedes better have an answer for the 600h! That could be 10-12k sales a year, by itself. Those aren't gonna come from Cadillac, or BMW, Merc.
How about the tri turbo MB diesel? That is if you wanted a safer, better handling, more stylish, vehicle with better gas mileage and more power?
Oh wait, we already have an E320 with 369 fpt at 1800 rpm, 0-60 in 6.6sec, and range of over 700 miles on a tank of fuel. 27/37 mpg. Is the point of the Lexus vehicle mileage?
#14627 of 24723 Re: Merc [cashcar]
Apr 10, 2006 (9:31 am)
Actually I do love cars.
That wasn't the question. The question was what makes a car a winner or a loser.
I think the A8 is a good looking car, better looking than the Lexus or the bimmer. I really liked the previous body A8 also.
However, when you are spending your own money, the smart decision is usually the best one. i like the A8, but wouldn't buy one new because of the depreciation.
#14628 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [benzster]
Apr 10, 2006 (9:52 am)
Good luck selling diesels here.
#14629 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [ljflx]
Apr 10, 2006 (9:55 am)
Here meaning US or the area in which you reside?
#14630 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [benzster]
Apr 10, 2006 (10:17 am)
#14631 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [ljflx]
Apr 10, 2006 (11:48 am)
I understand your point. I have been a diesel geek for a while. It is still an outstanding auto. Availability and cleanliness of dispensing are always a drawback. The torque and engine noise are leaps ahead of vehicles of the past. There will always be a market for that technology but it seems that the segment will always be small. Our light truck segment will most likely benefit from the new availability the most.
#14632 of 24723 Re: Merc, I already won this argument! [benzster]
Apr 10, 2006 (12:17 pm)
I understand your point also.
I used to work in the liquor industry a long time ago. It's always been the rule that the first to market in that business was the success. There were countless second generation liquors that were better than the ones that were successfully introduced. Can't tell you how many amaretto's I've tasted that blew away Amaretto di Sarona. In a testing 10 out of 10 people would pick Di Sarona behind a new intro in taste and smoothness. It was that way in just about every case of a new entrant. But put them on the shelves of stores and the new entrant just sat there. So it is with diesel - it'll just never get started here and it's so hard to invest in a technology that has been rejected. Hybrids though are a natural and seamless extension of gas.