High End Luxury Cars

24702 messages, Last post on Dec 17, 2009 at 10:48 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

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.

Outline

Messages Page 1662 of 2471: 1; ...; 1659; 1660; 1661; 1662; 1663; 1664; 1665; ...; 2471; Prev; Next; Last

#16610 of 24702 Re: Many LS buyers can NOT afford or choose an S-Class [tagman] by merc1 Jun 19, 2006 (10:17 pm)
Replying to: tagman (Jun 19, 2006 6:27 pm) Thanks for re-wording what I've been saying all along. Price matters one minute here and then the next it doesn't. Just like status, number of gears, or 0-60 times. If Lexus has the advantage then it is seen as a major selling point, but if it one of the Euros, nope. M
#16611 of 24702 Re: Selection is a good thing , not bad [tagman] by merc1 Jun 19, 2006 (10:25 pm)
Replying to: tagman (Jun 19, 2006 2:25 pm) Yeah I didn't get that one either. Lexus has nothing on the order of "personalization" of MB,BMW or Audi yet it is brought up here concerning Lexus. The fact that Mercedes offers so many choices has been one of the reasons they've been so highly regarded all these years. What does an LS buyer do after they've had a 1/2 dozen LSs? There is no coupe or roadster at Lexus that equals the LS like there is a Mercedes. There are no performance models, no 4-seat cabriolets, sports cars? Nothing. Even Cadillac provides more choice now. Lexus is all sedans and suvs at the moment and that is the only reason why this about having too many models is a problem, because Lexus doesn't have anything to compare. Before you arrived here Tagman there was a knock on MB/BMW/Audi/Jaguar about them making all their cars look alike. It was seen as a "problem" for the C to look like the S and the front of the SL to look like the front of the CLK, but since Lexus has now (finally) adopted the same policy by making all their cars look more or less alike, the IS and LS, but in different sizes like the C & S were, its all good now. This about the having too many models too with fall by the wayside after Lexus gets done flushing out their lineup. That about having more models is definitely just a nit-pic for the sake of doing so underlined by the fact that Lexus is going the same route really exposes that claim for what really it is. M
#16612 of 24702 Re: What makes one car "BETTER" than another? [topspin628] by designman Jun 20, 2006 (4:13 am)
Replying to: topspin628 (Jun 19, 2006 12:47 pm) Now there’s a Lexus post I can relate to… no rose-colored glasses, no bluster, not an ounce of fat… it plays to the LS's strong points and is probably a perfect example of why many buy an LS.
#16613 of 24702 Re: Merc [killerbunny] by designman Jun 20, 2006 (4:14 am)
Replying to: killerbunny (Jun 19, 2006 4:03 pm) The "handling" card can only be played to a certain extend. The LS may not be the best handling in its class, but it does not need to be. I agree, and that’s the point Lexicans should stick with. Instead, some of them try to score points with handling only to get trumped. It’s like the average Joe thinking he can hit a Mariano Rivera fastball. After all it’s pretty obvious what Lexus is successful with. When a Lexus buyer says he doesn’t like a teeth-chattering ride, he prefers the softer luxury ride, this is what I respect and there’s nothing to debate. The problem is when they get greedy in these discussions and go outside the area of Lexus product benefits. I don’t know who they think they are fooling. They can’t win a performance argument and they shouldn’t even try. The LS is a pure luxury car. We need to respect the differences in these vehicles.
#16614 of 24702 The LS and tires by designman Jun 20, 2006 (4:18 am)
This talk of tires is way off the mark. You can’t just put on low-profile tires and say a car handles good. The entire suspension has to have the proper components in the way of struts, shocks, springs, sway bars, rigid chassis and frame, balance and proper wheel alignment settings—caster, camber, toe angles. In addition, the steering should have a lower numerical ratio so it is responsive. Lexus suspension and steering are tuned for the luxury ride which is soft. The Legacy GT was mention recently and this is a perfect example of how low-profile tires on a car with soft suspension do not do the trick. It’s like an obese person expecting a pair of sneakers to work wonders for him. I mean, there are other things to be concerned about, the least of which are the shoes. I don't like low-profile tires anyway. The old BMWs and Porsches had 15 inch wheels and I would think they still outhandle many of today's stars. Even the track rats are shunning the extreme low profiles. There is a point of diminishing returns. I think today's wheels and tires are more about bling. The Conestoga wagon look is in. Replies to this message: lexusguy (Jun 20, 2006 1:21 pm)
#16615 of 24702 Re: There are risks and there are RISKS [tagman] by designman Jun 20, 2006 (4:44 am)
Replying to: tagman (Jun 19, 2006 8:40 am) Better get prepared for Jeopardy. If they let me google and allow two minutes for each question I might have a shot.
#16616 of 24702 Good old summer vacation. by tagman Jun 20, 2006 (5:48 am)
Just a few more hours and . . . I'm outta here! . . . for a month . . . on a rather isolated summer vacation. Anyone with treatment advise for forum withdrawal? . . . it would be greatly appreciated. I'll look forward to catching up on all your posts upon my return around July 20th. So . . . until that time . . . have a great July 4th . . . and please take care of yourselves and your loved ones. The primary vehicle I will drive while on vacation? . . . ahh yes . . . a boat. TagMan Replies to this message: hpowders (Jun 20, 2006 6:12 am) merc1 (Jun 20, 2006 10:37 pm) dhamilton (Jun 20, 2006 7:39 am)
#16617 of 24702 Re: Good old summer vacation. [tagman] by hpowders Jun 20, 2006 (6:12 am)
Replying to: tagman (Jun 20, 2006 5:48 am) No withdrawal necessary if you take a laptop with you. Enjoy your vacation! Merc will serve as Air Europe Commander in your absence. Replies to this message: merc1 (Jun 20, 2006 10:37 pm)
#16618 of 24702 Re: Good old summer vacation. [tagman] by dhamilton Jun 20, 2006 (7:39 am)
Replying to: tagman (Jun 20, 2006 5:48 am) Have a good time Tagman, be safe, and don't forget the sun screen drumminham
#16619 of 24702 Re: The LS and tires [designman] by lexusguy Jun 20, 2006 (1:21 pm)
Replying to: designman (Jun 20, 2006 4:18 am) I don't like low-profile tires anyway. The old BMWs and Porsches had 15 inch wheels and I would think they still outhandle many of today's stars. Even the track rats are shunning the extreme low profiles. There is a point of diminishing returns. I think today's wheels and tires are more about bling. The Conestoga wagon look is in. I'm with you on that one. Most of the experts say that if you "+1" your wheels, you will generally get slightly better (but it wont turn a sloppy car into a Lotus) handling, with little to no penalty in ride quality. How much it affects the turning circle depends on the car. Putting 20" wheels on a car designed for 17s just makes no sense though, as it ruins nearly every aspect of the car. I dont remember who it was, but somebody tested an XKR a few years ago with the standard 18" wheels, and then tried some 20" BBRs from Tire rack with ultra-low profile tires. Slalom speed I think improved maybe 1mph, but ride quality was shot to hell. No thanks.