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

What is this discussion about? Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 460, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton, Maserati Quattroporte, Mercedes-Benz CL-Class, Sedan

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.

Outline

Messages Page 448 of 2471: 1; ...; 445; 446; 447; 448; 449; 450; 451; ...; 2471; Prev; Next; Last

#4468 of 24700 merc1 by ljflx Mar 19, 2004 (5:59 am)
I guess I was briefly an enthusiast when I drove MB's in the past. Funny thing about the S-class, It handles a whisper better than the LS430 (the euro susppension LS430 blows it away though.... I know its a sport but it costs $100 more not $7k more like MB's sport) and rides a whisper worse. Blindfold some people and put them in the passanger seat and they probably can't tell the two cars apart - unless you put the CD player on. But the MB name qualifies the S-class driver as an enthusiast even though the car is far removed from an enthusiast car. Now those who have one car of each brand are 50% enthusiasts - I guess. I should call up Ray Romano - this would make for a hillarious episode on "Everyone loves Raymond".
#4469 of 24700 Jeez, by warthog Mar 19, 2004 (6:53 am)
Can we get over the obsession with the word "enthusiast?"
#4470 of 24700 luxuryist by edspider1 Mar 19, 2004 (7:23 am)
Ok, warthog. I must be a luxuryist. merc1. I think the germans are big in luxury. All cars costing 60K and up must both drive well and be luxurious. I think the S is the best looking. The 745i is second. LS is last. But all are nice. BTW. I am a german convert. I've owned E and S classes. I moved to the LS because I thought it was more luxurious on the inside where it counts (to me). I stayed in the LS camp because it was so reliable. I'm picking up 04 LS ultra to replace my 01 Ultra in three weeks. It it weren't for the Ultra trim, I'd still be in an S and living with its mechanical problems.
#4471 of 24700 by pat HOST Mar 19, 2004 (8:07 am)
Well, what we really need to "get over" is the characterizations of each other, and stick to the cars ....
#4472 of 24700 ljflx by carnaught Mar 19, 2004 (8:09 am)
I am one of those 50% enthusiasts you speak about, owning an E-Class and LS430. That said, I do not believe that you, as simply a Lexus owner, are any less of the enthusiast that me or one of our "arm-chair" enthusiasts. As aggie76 pointed out above, we are all auto enthusiasts by virtue of the fact we are on these boards. 'nuff said?? Sorry Pat
#4473 of 24700 by pat HOST Mar 19, 2004 (8:14 am)
Actually, that's a very good stopping point before we get into too much trouble. There isn't anyone participating in this discussion that cannot be considered an enthusiast - else they wouldn't be here. Frankly, it's just silly to accuse anyone who is a regular contributor here of not being an enthusiast. You might not agree with the person's opinions, but that doesn't make the person any less of an enthusiast than anyone else. So let's move on and get back to the cars.
#4474 of 24700 Hear, hear !!! by oac Mar 19, 2004 (3:18 pm)
Pat: "There isn't anyone participating in this discussion that cannot be considered an enthusiast - else they wouldn't be here" Exactly my point. OK enough already. My colleague's 2003 C230 Kompressor/6-speed was a blast to drive. Did I tell you already ? As an LS owner, that was a different kinda ride for me. Taut steering, crisp and precise gear shifts, handles curves like a champ. I thought I was driving a 5-er. A little annoying problem with the electrical didn't do much to dampen my enthusiasm (that word again) for this car. MB makes darn good cars, just sad to see it messed up with little stuff like electrical circuitry.... Would I do the LS again ? Let me just say that I cannot wait for MY 2007. I will pay CASH for a 2007 LS4/5xx. I have been saving for it (thanks to home valuation here in San Diego hitting the roof), and although I have the cash right now, I won't sweat the 2004 model. I like it, but not as much as the promised MY2007 version. Did I tell you I cannot wait for Oct 2006 ? See, I plan to put my money where my mouth is, no armchair quarterbacking for me. Have a good weekend everyone.
#4475 of 24700 Thanks, syswei! by cornellpinoy Mar 21, 2004 (1:37 pm)
I signed up for the C-Spot drive party right after your posted it here last month. Just got back from the event and it was a LOT of fun!
#4476 of 24700 Was reading through a lot of the above posts by seminole_kev Mar 21, 2004 (6:49 pm)
and while I get plenty of Lexus versus Mercedes talk up a work and don't need the extra above, I'd like to venture off just a tad on some of the Jag X-type comments. Just curious why the general disdain for the X-type. I don't own one, but I've spent a little time in one. I just don't get the hatred of it. Really size, luxury and peformance wise it is very similar to the old Mk I and Mk II Jag sedans of the 50's and 60's. Good decendent if you ask me except for the AWD part. I would prefer the more traditional RWD. I actually don't mind the platform sharing (just something that we're going to have to accept in today's market) but the car seems well composed and for those that knock the interior, it seemed much nicer that the c-class and 3-series that it competes against. The only big thing I can think of is that people have come to think of Jaguar as only being the XJ8 and anything other than that they reflexively don't like as a "cheap" Jaguar. I'll have to try to look it up, but I wonder what my '67 Jag Mark II cost in relation to the rest of the market? Probably was a "cheap" Jag then too.
#4477 of 24700 To add just a bit on Jaguar by seminole_kev Mar 21, 2004 (6:53 pm)
I think part of the problem is that you could ask 10 people what a Jaguar "should be" and you'll get 10 different answers. Anything from "sports cars" from people that think of the old XK's, E-types and the XK8.....to sporty cars (the previos and the light, fast sedans of the 60's) to "Luxury" the old Mk V through X's and the XJ6, XJ8 and XJ12's. I'm guessing that's at the root of the issue.