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: pat (Apr 22, 2007 6:37 am) Gosh, Pat... How dare you single out Hpowders like that and lay into him so harshly for all that off-topic discussion!! You should be ashamed of yourself!! And to think I used to like you!!  Seriously though, I was surprised that Tony might have misunderstood, but rest assured your stellar reputation is still intact, and it was certainly nice of you to make sure that your forum exchange with those posts was understood by all. It reflects that that's the kind of good person you really are. (underneath that crusty exterior, of course )  TagMan
|
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Apr 22, 2007 10:44 am)  Again I ask - does anyone want to talk about any of the topical vehicles?? (Thanks tagman.) |
|
|
Replying to: pat (Apr 22, 2007 6:37 am) On to the higher end of our running discussion, I received an additional response from Bentley...I had thought about them but got the Audi insted... `The Pride of Crewe``The Bentley Brooklands....Four seat coupe ..530 hp engine...Imperious,unmistakable, and only 550 examples in it`s lifetime...Please join us April 17.....I couldn`t as I got home too late.. What I can see of it, it looks good, and I would think enjoyable in a setting like the up`scale` beaches of the world, unlike where I think a ls460h would fit in--big city for it-- Further I would worry myself sick that it would get dented, so that would take the fun out of it for me..Tony |
|
|
(I have also posted this on the Luxury Lounge forum.) You guys have just got to read this article on the LS600hL. It will completely support the criticism I have posted about this car in the past. In fact, the results show that the LS600hL is worse than I had anticipated in a number of areas. I thought the fuel economy would be a little better than it is likely to be rated. Only 1 city MPG better than the LS460 and only 2 city MPG better than the LS460L and 5 HWY MPG WORSE than the LS460 and LS460L. This means that the average fuel economy of the LS600hL hybrid sedan will be WORSE than its LS460 brothers. Add to that the fact that the acceleration of the LS600hL is one tenth of a second SLOWER than the LS460 and LS460L. It weighs in at an obese 887 lbs. more than the LS460L! The LS600hL V-8 delivers only 9 more HP than the LS460 and LS460L V-8!! With the added electric motors, the total HP is only 438, and with that extra 887 lbs. of FAT, the car is ultimately SLOWER and burns MORE gas, not less. Those 887 lbs of AWD and hybrid electronics FAT, come at a ridiculous price tag. The test car priced in at $111,715. And there's more to getting less. It seems the trunk size of this LS600hL is 35% SMALLER than the trunk in its 460 brothers, at a mere 11.7 cubic feet. Exclusive you might think? Think again. Beyond the powertrain fat, there is essentially no option that can't be ordered on the LS460L. God bless Edmunds for telling the truth about this vehicle! Read about it for yourself here: link title Some of you may not like this, but most of you will. And... I am once again very glad that ljflx got the LS460L instead of waiting in line to waste his money on an LS600hL. Of course he could have gotten the Mercedes S600, but that's another discussion. TagMan
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Apr 22, 2007 9:14 pm)
|
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Apr 24, 2007 2:06 pm)  The 2008 EPA rating system will negatively impact mpg ratings for most cars and trucks. This will have a number of ramifications. For one, many cars will be thrust into the gas-guzzler category, and will carry tax penalties that they did not carry before. Some cars that were already gas-guzzlers will emerge from the new ratings with even worse gas-guzzler ratings, and be hit with even larger gas-guzzler tax penalties. All of this is a windfall for the government, even when absolutely no changes were ever made to those cars... just a measurement change. Nasty, huh?  It is reported that the highest mpg hybrids could suffer the most... possibly up to a difference of 30%. No one knows for sure, however. And especially no one knows the actual hit that the larger hybrids will take, because they are primarily used to bolster HP and they are less capable of delivering high MPG ratings, as the LS600hL proves. The hit could be negligable or similar to its ICE counterpart. It remains to be seen. The LS460L ICE V-8 delivers 27 highway mpg as rated in '07 and the '08 LS600hL is expected to deliver 20 highway mpg. No matter how you slice it, the ratings changes are very unlikely to make the LS600hL significantly better, if at all, than the LS460L, and they have the potential to be WORSE. At BEST, they will be be similar, meaning NO SIGNIFICANT or meaningful difference in fuel efficiency between the two models... quite possibly WORSE for the LS600hL.  The original hype was that the LS600hL would deliver terrific fuel economy and have tremendous power, but the REALITY is that the fuel economy is, and will be no matter how you spin a post, VERY SIMILAR to the LS460L, and will NOT accelerate better than the LS460L, and if a test shows that it does, it would be within the same tolerance of difference that the LS460 would also have... point being that the acceleration of the LS600hL and the LS460L are similar enough to easily conclude that the LS600hL does NOT actually deliver any tremendous power advantage over the LS460L. (Of course this is due to its 887 pounds of excess technological FAT). And now as cargo space has become a measured specification of most cars, the fact remains that the LS600hL has a whopping 35% SMALLER trunk than it's LS460L counterpart... something a large and long wheelbase car should be able to boast, not be ashamed of. There is not and will not be any significant difference, no matter who tests the car or no matter which year's EPA rating system is used. The LS600hL's data is much too aligned with the LS460's to ever even hope to suddenly be significantly better in any way whatsoever. Quite simply, it ain't gonna change. It is what it is!... and everyone needs to realize that. If you must have AWD, then THAT's the real truth about what you can get from the LS600hL... at the cost of the trunk and a LOT of extra money, in comparison to its counterpart, the LS460L. It is what it is! And you and I should not enter into a rhetorical posture just to hash back and forth about it. If you want to believe that the LS600hL gets incredible gas mileage compared to the LS460L... be my guest. If you want to believe that it has enormous performance advantages over the LS460L... be my guest. If you want to believe that the diminuitive trunk space isn't a problem in a car like this... then be my guest. As for me... I see this overweight car as delivering an inadequate advantage, if any at all, over its counterpart, the LS460L, especially in consideration of it's hefty price tag.  TagMan
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: tagman (Apr 24, 2007 4:38 pm) 12,000 / 20 = 600 (gallons consumed by LS600HL in 12k miles) 12,000 / 12 = 1000 (gallons consumed by S600, even assuming no hit at all from the 2008 test method; the reality will be as low as 9-10mpg, but let me just use 12mpg for the time being because the S600 will still lose and lose big even with this help) 1000 - 600 = 400 (gallons, the fuel saving of LS600 vs. S600) 600 - 400 = 200 (gallons, the total fuel budget of a hypothetical car that can save again as much compared to Ls600) 12,000 / 200 = 60 (mpg, the fuel economy that hypothetical car would have to deliver) In short, in terms of fuel consumption, LS600HL is exactly the midway point between the gas guzzling S600 and a hypothetical super duper fuel miser that delivers 60mpg. That's even assuming S600 can maintain 12mpg under 2008 testing method, which is highly unlikely; the real result will probably be 10mpg or less, but I'm just using 12mpg for now. There is no production car that can deliver 60mpg even under the 2007 testing method. Under 2008 method is going to be even more unlikely if most of the high mpg cars (they are often hybrids of one form or another) get cut by as much as 30% as you say. That's the reality: a switch from S600 to LS600 can save more fuel than any switch from LS600HL to any other production car, even the microcars with hybrid or diesel! That is an astonishing achievement! BTW, I agree with you that it is quite an unconscienable windfall for the government, with the new gas mileage ratings.
|
|
|
Replying to: brightness04 (Apr 25, 2007 4:28 pm) The entire exchange is not very productive...but it is very entertaining!!
|
|
|
Replying to: houdini1 (Apr 26, 2007 6:27 am)
|
|
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
