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
24700 messages, Last post on Dec 01, 2009 at 12:24 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: blkhemi (Oct 11, 2006 2:59 pm) Honda has been billed as a company that is focused on fuel efficiency due to its history. They introduced the Honda Civic during 1973 just at the time of the OPEC oil embargo. This perfect timing for Honda has created a long lasting halo affect for Honda's fuel efficient image(more of an image than a fact).
|
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Oct 11, 2006 3:11 pm) Isn't it funny how history is repeating itself? It took the domestics a full decade to produce something remotely close to the Honda Motor Company's fuel efficiency back then. Fast forward 20 years, and nothing has changed much as the domestics still have to play catch up to Toyota and Honda in that respect. And maybe I was a little brash at first with Honda, as they're still my favorite Japanese-brand company. Yes the RDX could've sipped less fuel, but when the Civic IMA getting Prius-like numbers, not to mention the CRV being the most fuel efficient in it's class of non-hybrid models(altho it's only 3 below the $8k more Escape hybrid), the company is still capable of building them right. |
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Oct 11, 2006 2:51 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: maxhonda99 (Oct 11, 2006 2:53 pm)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: hpowders (Oct 11, 2006 4:33 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Oct 11, 2006 2:54 pm) Just don't ask either of us to change the radio from AM to FM. What do you think we are, Nobel Prize winners? You guys can spin this all you like. You know BMW is the best there is for driving dynamics per cost of their vehicles. Come on folks. Let's get real! |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: hpowders (Oct 11, 2006 4:40 pm) You're funny! I still can't stop laughing about that 6 second thing!
|
|
|
Replying to: maxhonda99 (Oct 11, 2006 4:35 pm) The problem is that Lexus claimed 5.5 seconds and C&D found it really should be 6.0. I have never seen a 0-60 mph time off by so much. It sure would have looked better if Lexus claimed a 6.0 and C&D found it to be 5.5!
|
|
|
Replying to: maxhonda99 (Oct 11, 2006 4:42 pm) Of course, I park the 545 around back.
|
|
|
Replying to: hpowders (Oct 11, 2006 4:45 pm) It sure would have looked better if Lexus claimed a 6.0 and C&D found it to be 5.5! Yeah car makers generally err on the side of being conservative. Makes sense that the magazines are willing to launch borrowed cars very hard to get the best possible 0-60 times. As for the LS460, I think something was wrong with their particular pre-production sample. Hondas across the board have lousy brakes, and usually turn in very long stopping distances. Toyotas though generally do very well. I just don't think Toyota would screw up so bad that they would make a car with 100 more horses that would be slower and brake much worse than the car it replaces. They aren't idiots.
|
|
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2011 Audi A8
2010 BMW 7 Series
2008 Jaguar XJ-Series
2010 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
