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: tagman (Nov 30, 2006 3:00 pm) (Straight from the horses mouth) link title Seventeen other vehicles would have won 2007 awards if they had good seat/head restraint designs. Toyota could have claimed nine TOP SAFETY PICK awards, including three Lexus winners. Honda could have picked up four additional awards, including one for an Acura. "Protection in rear crashes is an area where many vehicles lag behind in safety," Lund notes. "As manufacturers continue to improve seat/head restraints, we expect to see more winners." AND... ALSO-RANS Rear protection isn't good These vehicles earned good ratings in front and side crash tests. They have electronic stability control, standard or optional. They would have won 2007 TOP SAFETY PICK awards if their seat/head restraints also had earned good ratings. Instead rear crash protection is rated acceptable, marginal, or poor (Honda reports that the seat/head restraints in the only Civic model with electronic stability control wouldn’t be rated good). Acceptable rear protection Audi A3 BMW 3-series 4dr Lexus IS 250/350 Marginal rear protection Acura TL Honda Odyssey Lexus ES 350 Lexus GS 350 Toyota Camry Toyota FJ Cruiser Toyota Prius Toyota RAV4 Poor rear protection Honda Accord 4dr Infiniti M35 Nissan Quest Toyota Avalon Toyota Sienna
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: blkhemi (Nov 30, 2006 2:17 pm)  Not even close. What a company invented 100+ years ago is irrelevent. Speaking of idiotic features, MB will do well re-think its COMMAND interface. The S550 has more safety, better use of it's optional features, and of course the brand prestige to pull such lofty numbers. The new S class has not been independently tested by the "crashing houses" yet. The historical record of S class was not especially good at all. As to prestige, well, all that discounting and lease subsidies across MB's model line up answer that question. Of course people care about value, that's why MB offers discounts and lease subsidies, dah!
|
|
|
Replying to: jcoby (Nov 30, 2006 4:24 pm) Sorry, but just because the standards for safety have been raised doesn't mean we can say Toyota/Lexus WOULD have won if somehow they just didn't include one or two of the safety measurements. THAT would be a spin. The tests are now inclusive of all the current different measurements, and combined give a more comprehensive perspective of a vehicle's safety. This comprehensive result is now the new standard for measurement. Interesting, that once the new standard was put into effect we clearly see the results that Toyota/Lexus vehicles receive most of the worst ratings for crash-safety. Like it or not, that's the way it now is. It's of little value to say "could haves and would haves", and call the real test a spin. TagMan
|
|
|
Replying to: jcoby (Nov 30, 2006 4:24 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Nov 30, 2006 6:13 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Nov 30, 2006 5:53 pm) The first mass-market autommobile as we know it came from Benz in 1889. This one is the first true automobile. Ask any auto buff and they will tell you. This ain't some French tinker toy that you'd have us to believe was the first car. The S-Class, of course hasn't been tested by the crash houses yet, no, but the car has the most safety equipment standard of any car in it's class, and yes that includes the Lexus LS460, and brand who is struggling with safety with those crash houses... What lease subsidies are you referring to? For sure you mean the '07 GL? The '07 E350/550, the new S550? Heck no because they don't exist.. Now that $459/mth '06 LS430 sounds extremely good right about now.... |
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Nov 30, 2006 6:25 pm) Doesn't feel so well when it is the golden L that's getting it you know where. Pursuit of Perfection? Yes, if live to tell about it... |
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Nov 30, 2006 6:13 pm) "once the new standard was put into effect we clearly see the results that Toyota/Lexus vehicles receive most of the worst ratings for crash-safety." The reason that so many Toyota vehicles were even noted is because these vehicles have excellent crashworthiness in all other tests EXCEPT for rear-end protection (you will see this in the actual IIHS press release instead of the spin document that you provided to us). If you look up the crash-test results for each of the Toyota and Lexus vehicles that were noted in the official IIHS press release (and accounted for in your spin document), you will see that I am correct. While you are at it, why don't you look at some of your favorite European models to view their overall crashworthiness; the results will not be as favorable as the Toyota and Lexus vehicles that you are trying to criticize. Most were not even in the running for a "Top Safety Pick" award and so were not even mentioned in the official IIHS press release. The results of one battery of tests by the IIHS DO NOT invalidate the results of another set of tests from the IIHS. The rear-protection test IS NOT a comprehensive safety test (and your spin document DOES NOT even suggest this). It would help if you would actually pay a visit to the IIHS website yourself so that you can avoid making such unsupported conjectures. Some of your favorite vehicles also would have the worst crash ratings by your own standards: Audi link title BMW link title Jaguar link title Mercedes link title BMW vehicles, in particular, have very poor rear-end protection scores. However, I don't expect you to conclude that they are some of most unsafe vehicles out there - as you are clearly doing with Toyota/Lexus vehicles. |
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Nov 30, 2006 6:25 pm) Oh, I agree with you that there should be no spin and accept the test results for what they are... which now officially LOWERS Toyota/Lexus insurance ratings. TagMan
|
|
|
Replying to: jcoby (Nov 30, 2006 6:49 pm) Fair enough... but there should be no confusion that these new measurements are significant enough to lower Toyota/Lexus's ratings. ALL manufacturers were subjected to the same tests, not just Toyota/Lexus. Bottom line... a crack in the Toyota/Lexus armor... the bubble is leaking. TagMan
|
|
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
