You have saved this page | See all saved pages
High End Luxury Cars
24723 messages, Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum.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.
#5396 of 24723 lexusguy by merc1
Jun 14, 2004 (10:06 pm)
I had been meaning to ask you what you thought of the facelifted 2005 XK cars? I really like what they've done to the lower body. I've seen a coupe in White and a convertible XKR this very rick looking Blue, absolutely stunning. No arguement about the interior, asthetically it was all Jaguar. The Germans then were just leather appointed board rooms in which to conduct the "business" of driving. I look for the 2007 XK to vault to the head of this class giving the SL much to worry about.sv7887l,
"Any thoughts?"
Yeah plenty. Truthfully no Benz has been immune from problems over the last 4-5 years. The current SL has been less than stellar also, especially the early build 2003 models. Some of the SL owners on the other boards are reporting much better goings with 2004 models. One poster in particular (Shoes) can tell you all about the current SL, I think he's owned 3 of them now! The first one he had was not so great, a 2003 model, but his 2004 SL500 has been very good so far, he also had a SL55 AMG if I'm not mistaken.
The current S-Class (2000) was one of the biggest offenders along with the 2001 C-Class and the omg 1998 ML, which I personally detest. I'll start with the S-Class and the facts: Mercedes doesn't do "cheaper" too well. The 1992-1999 S-Class is the car Mercedes knows how to build and even that car wasn't perfect because they sought to decontent it from 1995 foward, but still it had a build the current S simply doesn't match, it was generally more reliable (read a lot less electronics) than today's S. The problem was that people complained about it being to expensive, big and heavy so Mercredes responded by making the new car cheaper, lighter, and somewhat smaller (outside), but the quality went way down. I got a chance to examine one of the last 1999 S500s next to the 2000 S500s when they first arrived. I was truly startled at the compromised they'd made in order to save a few bucks. Needless to say the body, interior, fittings and finish all went down quite a bit with the 2000 S. They addressed a lot of these things for the 2003 with the facelift, but it's like to retrofit the quality that should have been there in 2000 and it still doesn't match the LS, A8 or Phaeton in certain area where the old S wouldn't have had a problem doing so. Hopefully they've learned their lesson and the 2006 S will be built with the traditional quality in mind and less glitches like the current car. I'll say again though the 2003+ S-Classes are much better in build quality and reliability from the 2000-2002 models.
The ML, and I'll be brief here. Mercedes sold their soul to the devil of volume. Instead of build in a true 50-70K truck like they know they wanted to (and can) they built the ML to a price point to compete with a Ford Exploreres and Jeep Grand Cherokees, at 33K in 1998. The 1998-1999 models were unbelievable cheap inside and out. I remember it like it was yesterday, me and a salesman looked at each other in disbelief at a ML unveiling at the then Loeber Motors on the near-north side of Chicago. This this is so freaking cheap! Needless to say the ML truly showed its colors after the sales boom put them in the hands of traditional MB and new customer alike. One problem after another, and I don't mean electronics. I mean fuel leaks, brakes, radiator leaks, differential failures, you name it. Now 6 years later it places in the top for initial quality. I don't buy it. The basic chassis has proven itself in various motorsport events around the world, but everything Mercedes sub'd out was of dubious quality to say the least. I've never so worried about a new Mercedes in my life as I am the new ML, R and next G, which will all be build in Alabama.
The C-Class is basically the same as the S, much improved with it's facelift (2005) in the area of build quality and features too, but the 2001 model was far less then right.
Industry analysts have theorized about Mercedes' quality decline and come up with many things. I think electronics, Chrysler's finanical drain, and more models all led to their quality fall. Remember in 1990 there were only the 190, 300, S-Class and SL. Today there is the SL, CL, S, E, CLK, C, ML, SLK, G, Maybach and more new models (CLS, R) on the way.
There are signs that things are improving, especially when a Mercedes is redesigned. The CLK and E-Classes are not being knocked about their interiors like before, thought the new E has had a few initial problems. Ditto for the SL. The new SLK and CLS look to have the proper build of a Mercedes. The upmcoming Bama made vehicles worry me the most.
M
#5400 of 24723 merc1 by lexusguy
Jun 15, 2004 (9:10 am)
To be honest, I was curious if Jaguar would do anything with the XK to make it more competitive. Nope. A new front end air intake ooo boy! What about the wollowy suspension, numb steering, mushy brake pedal (and brakes that shouldnt be in any car with a letter "R" on it), manual tonneau cover, and certain substandard interior materials. Still there. I was not even remotely impressed by the '05 XK that I saw at the NYAS. I've been thinking of basically getting rid of my LS and having a single car for myself, and the '05 XK did nothing to sway me from planning to buy an SC430 as my daily driver\weekend car. Plus whats with the J-gate? Every magazine in the world has literally screamed at Jaguar to get rid of that damn J-gate, but they just cover their ears and try and figure out how to make the X-type sellable. Im finished with Jaguar.#5401 of 24723 XK8 by seminole_kev
Jun 15, 2004 (9:53 am)
Yeah, the XK8 is definetly on its last legs. Still one of the best looking cars out on the road (in my opinion at least).Starting to hear some rumblings that the Jaguar F-type may be coming back around. (For those that remember, this was a smaller, more Porsche Boxster sized roadster that was axed a few years ag while in developement.) I think it would do Jaguar a lot of good to get a smaller roadster more like the orginal XK's and E-types back on the market.
#5402 of 24723 by lexusguy
Jun 15, 2004 (11:34 am)
That would be nice, but what platform is it going to go on? Ford doesnt have anything good enough to go up against the likes of Z4, Boxster, SLK350, etc.#5403 of 24723 lexusguy by seminole_kev
Jun 15, 2004 (2:21 pm)
I suppose it could be a new platform as was originally planned.#5405 of 24723 lexusguy by merc1
Jun 15, 2004 (9:54 pm)
Yikes! No waiting for the 2007 model I guess huh. I too think its still one of the best looking cars around, but the design/mechanicals are outdated. Though I am surprised about the SC430. What happened to the Maserati Coupe Cambiocorsa or 911 (I think that was you?).M
To POST a message, please
Sign In.
Advertisement
Most Popular in Forums
Search Forums
Enter Keyword(s):
Learn More, Do More
Edmunds Community
Advertisement