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: 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
|
|
|
Replying to: jcoby (Nov 30, 2006 6:49 pm) I bought a 3 and 5 series this year without knowing how superb their crash safety records were. Oh yes and both my cars unlike the Lexus LS have amazing brakes also. Makes me feel like my my wife and I own two Swedish cars 
|
|
|
Replying to: jcoby (Nov 30, 2006 6:49 pm) But as Tagman said all car companies are measured by these new standards. Similarily reliability ratings change with time. Today a below average reliability rating in Consumers Reports does not neccessarily mean a model is a lemon. While in the 70s or 80s a below average rating almost guaranteed that a model is a lemon. Does it make sense for a 2004 MB M Class owner to boast that his auto is very reliable compared to 1970s models? No! Does it make sense to say Toyotas do not have the largest number of least safe autos because prior year safety standards were not so strict? No! If you are going to evaluate a car then you got to use the tougher criteria (reliability or safety) of today and not some softer criteria of yesterday.
|
|
|
Replying to: dewey (Nov 30, 2006 6:59 pm) 
|
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Nov 30, 2006 6:55 pm) Bottom line... a crack in the Toyota/Lexus armor... the bubble is leaking. Shouldn't you be saying the same about BMW? It didn't fare so well in rear crash ratings either. |
|
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
