Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Sedans High End Luxury Cars
24685 messages, Last post on Nov 02, 2009 at 4:40 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
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.
|
Replying to: dewey (Oct 07, 2006 4:53 am) More follow up to your post, please. Complexity in terms of the technology involved to create the solution? . . . or, are you saying that the engine itself is becoming more "complicated" somehow. The reason I am asking is that complex technology could be utilized to create what is ultimately a "simple" or "non-complicated" solution. Generally, diesel engines are not all that complicated. So, are you referring to some major complex engine component that is now an inherent part of the engine? I mean a new generation particulate filter doesn't strike me as complex even if the technology to develop it is. A new generation of a catalytic exhaust component doesn't strike me as complicated, even it its unique individual manufacturing process is complicated. So, what specifically are you referring to that is so complex or complicated that it might be subject to increased failure? TagMan
|
|
|
Replying to: drfill (Oct 06, 2006 8:18 pm) Price out an LS460L (must be long wheelbase to properly comp) with the closest and most similar equipment package you can come up with to an S550. Let me see the true difference in price, but similarly equipped. I'll be most interested in your calculations. Thanks, TagMan
|
|
As you know Tag, I'm pro diesel. It's my slogan for this years mid-term Senate elections   . But seriously, let's disect this conversation a bit. Dewey, yes with new technology comes new problems. That can be said for just about everything. But, when it comes to diesel technology, few(if any) continents do it better than Europe. Low-sulphur equipped diesels have been there for years, with little to no more problems over the old smokin' Joe diesels of only 2 decades ago. Some of things that were mentioned in that JD study were a bit misleading to say the least. For one, the whole thing about the maintenance is nothing more than the owners are bit beturbed because they can no longer work on the trucks themselves , which now requires special tools and software to ascertain problems, diagnose, and fix. On to the mainstream passenger cars, it now has been proven that the low-sulphur diesel are more durable and have more longevity than a comparable traditional diesel. This can be tossed up due to a dramatically lower NOX level and much better management of fuel, such as those piezo injectors that burn 98.89% of ALL fuel that enters the cylinder wall, compared to a 80% at best for an older diesel. And now you have the ultra-quiet diesels that are so deceiving that you'd swear that your in a gas-powered car, as witnessed by the ultra-quiet MB 3.2CDI. This all is not yo say that you didn't bring valid points, in which you did, but I don't think that the Europeans are going to drop the ball on diesel and their incredible reliablility anytime soon. For me, gas-hybrid technology is just a band-aid to the energy problem that is happening, especially since it has been proven time and time again that they get nowhere near there estimated EPA in most circumstances. And for this, I will definetely be on the diesel side of the fence.....
|
|
|
Replying to: blkhemi (Oct 07, 2006 8:44 am) You know my position as well. Gas/electric hybric is a viable alternative that is OK as a temporary technology. Unless it provides some unusual breakthrough, I don't expect it to last for the long haul. I'm OK with it in the meantime, however. Diesels are a far better answer, without a doubt. And diesel/electric could be something to consider. Hydrogen will likely worm its way into our infrastructure, and my crystal ball says it will become the big winner when the dust finally settles. But, for the immediate future, I am so anxious to get my hands on a new generation diesel vehicle. I expect Mercedes to release the BlueTec in many of their models within the next few years. Even Japan is coming aboard. Toyota will be the lone ranger with their gas hybrids, and I'll bet they finally make the switch, too. The market itself will force them to, IMO. Their one big advantage could be diesel/electric hybrids due to their leading experience with the hybrids. TagMan |
|
|
|
Its amazing to me that we don't have the opportunity to spec out well proven four cylinder and lightweight (i.e., liner-less) diesels. Its seems a no brainer. No more ignition to worry about, hugely better fuel mileage especially at idle around town, etc. Were I a conspiracy theorist, I'd think that Detroit realizes that rightfully or wrongfully, someone who buys say a diesel SUV or HELM might step off the three year lease/trade cycle so beloved by everyone except a consumer with a calculator and the good sense to turn it on.
|
|
|
Replying to: blckislandguy (Oct 07, 2006 10:33 am)  TagMan |
|
|
Tag, Wouldn't you think an S450 is restrained by prices of the old S430. If they price it too low they hurt the residuals of S430's in the future. Only with regards to lease residuals perhaps, but otherwise I see no legitimate restraint. Looking forward is the direction that MB really needs to stay focused upon, and I see them having taken good leadership position, with the timely introduction of the new S-Class, which I still see as the benchmark, although it will have a tougher competitor than ever before. It would be in MB's future interest to price an S450 in the sweet spot, without an over-concern for the older S models, IMO. This is not to infer that I think it should be too cheap, because I wouldn't want that perception to ever accompany Mercedes. With all respect, leave that to Lexus. But "value" (which doesn't mean "cheap") can be perceived even for a Mercedes, and that is what I would hope for with an upcoming S450. TagMan |
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Oct 07, 2006 7:50 am) My complaint about diesels with low sulphur fuel was based on the following assertion by Green Car Congress: Improperly fueling a 2007 or later model with low sulphur diesel can damage the emissions system link title Unfortunately in my case I misunderstood their low sulphur terminology. In fact low sulphur diesel is high sulphur diesel when compared to ultra low sulphur diesel. New 2007 engines are designed for ultra low sulphur diesels and not for low sulphur diesels. In other words I am wrong.
|
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Oct 07, 2006 12:55 pm) Very interesting. I would doubt that the rest of us have used the "ultra" word either, when speaking of the newer ultra-low sulphur diesel fuel. But, an interesting discussion, nonetheless. And, certainly with any new components that might be a part of these new "ultra-low" sulphur diesel burners, however simple or complex, there is at least some reasonable concern for failure, although I think minimum concern. Also, your posts have made some of us more aware of the correct terminology when discussing low or ultra-low sulphur diesel fuel in the future. I find that very helpful. Take care, TagMan
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Audi A8
2010 BMW 7 Series
2008 Jaguar XJ-Series
2009 Lexus LS 460
2010 Mercedes-Benz S-Class
2006 Volkswagen Phaeton
2009 Maserati Quattroporte
2010 Mercedes-Benz CL-Class
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
