Last post on Jan 28, 2013 at 6:55 PM
You are in the Sedans
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.
#6521 of 24723 michael_mattox
Aug 01, 2004 (10:15 pm)
This is amazing. (Last Post)
"In your previous post the chart showed 700+ units and you said that was US sales???? I accept 1700+ for the SL500....Allante sold 6700 in 93."
No chart or link I ever posted said anything like that. Period. It said (they MBUSA.COM) said 1721 sales for 1993. End of story. You said 700 or 800 in your confused state. The link didn't change from one posting to another, you simply got confused. The only reason the Allante sold 6700 copies is because it had a 18 month-long 1993 model year. The 93 model was intro'd in the spring of 1992 and you're acting like that doesn't make a difference when adding up model year sales.
I cannot for the life of me understand how one can appreciate Lexus on one hand and can't accept the truth about a Cadillac on the other.
The Allante was cancelled because:
1. It debuted with a truly sorry 140hp V8.
2. It was fwd in a sea of rwd competitors.
3. It had the worlds most ridiculously cheap convertible top.
4. It in the begining was built like an outhouse.
5. It never sold because of the above.
6. The car had a ridiculously expensive production process that involved flying bodies-in-white from Itality to Detroit, how stupid could GM have been. This costs them $$$$ that they didn't have back then.
When you look at the two cars just on paper it seems to be common sense to everyone else that the Allante at best wasn't even competitive with the 500SL, at worst it was junk.
It has taken 10+ posts to understand the SL was the same car from 1990 onward and that the SL500 and 500SL is the same exact car. Once it was proven that the Allante having sold 20K units in 7 model years compared to 23K for just 6 with the SL, the theory change to the 1993 model year. It was implied that the 1993 Allante could outpeform any SL, yet when the 600SL was mentioned it was never heard about again.
"I think Three things seperated the 93 Allante from the 93 500SL....1)Luggage space and room generally, you could actually tour with the car take two sets of golf clubs or ski's and still bring luggage and a significent other. 2) The Northstar system and the innovations mentioned in a previous post. 3) It was a far more Beautiful car.
1. Nobody cared, obviously.
2. The 32V DOHC V8 in the 500SL still outperformed it. The 600SL V12 would obliterate it.
3. Purely subjective.
This is the what the superiority case is based on?
The Allante was never placed over the 500SL in any comparo by any of the major U.S. mags. Those being Car and Driver, Road and Track, Automobile, Motor Trend, or any others like Autoweek, Sports Car International or any other sane publication anywhere.
Car and Driver placed the Allante over the 300SL, not the 500SL or 600SL in a comparo, which I'll have to find now because this is a truly stunning denial of everything. The only thing that the Allante was superior in was accleration, obviously.
If this had been a Mercedes vs a Lexus with the Mercedes having the track record of the Allante, you'd believe everything written about the Lexus being superior. It is amazing you haven't said anything about the market, press or anything else you use when saying Lexuses are better. It is painfully obviously that those usual Lexus specialities can't be used. Nothing in any of those articles say anything about the SL, much less than the Allante was better.
Lastly, you never even drove the 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994, 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002 SL. How could you possibly know how it drove or was built? You prove that you had no experience with the 1990-2002 SL because everyone who ever drove the car will tell you it was indeed built like a tank, heck your own ratings for the Allante showed it to have a inferior body and interior.
The boast about having the fastest front wheel drive car in the world is the silliest thing in the automotive world. Nobody, and I mean nobody else was dumb enough to put 300hp to the front wheels of a luxury roadster, in short.....nobody else was competiting so the Allante was the fastest in a class of one. Jaguar, Mercedes, BMW, and Porsche all had 2-door cars during those years and you didn't see any of them saddled with fwd.
The SL model you drove was designed in the late sixties for a 1971 debut and was out of date by the time the Allante came on the scene in 1987.
"In practical terms this means that the 1993 Allante will go from 0-60 in 6.9 sec."
I know for a fact that the 500SL was faster than that. I know you don't believe it without the comparo, and I promise I won't post again until I have the comparo in front of me. I'll just put up the numbers and their notes, none of my opinion.
The sad thing is that I still have the 500SL roadtest by Motorweek from 1990 on tape. Don't know how to get that on here.
#6522 of 24723 princeabubu
Aug 01, 2004 (10:25 pm)
I thought that was the JDM version of the new Acura RL for a minute. It does indeed favor the Maybach from the rear. Curiously there a number of cars with this rear end, trunk-hump styling theme. Even Hyundai's XG350 looks similar:
This is not a good styling trend, imo.
The best view of the Crown Majesta is from the side because from the front and rear looks like an Acura RL or something Korean. They (Koreans) seem prefer a look that says updated Lincoln or something at least at the rear and unfortunately the Maybach has a similarly unattractive rear.
Aug 01, 2004 (10:58 pm)
I rather like the trunk on the Maybach. I think it looks very elegant. And if you've seen the Spy pics of the New S, which I'm sure you have, the S seems to be going in the direction of the Maybach in the rear. I do agree though, both the XG350 and the Elantra have that trunk shape. I think if done right, such as on the Maybach it looks elegant. Toyota didn't accomplish the same effect if you ask me with the Crown Majesta. I think the Maybach needs more work in the front than in the rear, personally.
Aug 02, 2004 (1:14 am)
This Crown is a very interesting car, though we'll most likely never see it in the NA market. It would obviously step on LS's toes. Previous crowns have been REALLY boring designs, so it is a major step forward in that respect, and yes, the interior is gorgeous. The Koreans still have not developed any sense of style. This can somewhat be excused because of their relatively short time thus far as global players, but the blatant rip-offs of Japanese and European designs always pale to the originals and make them look as second rate as they still are. The worst of which that comes to mind is the Kia Sorento, which steals so much from the RX300 that I was a little surprised Toyota didnt take them to court over it. I guess since the RX was going to be replaced when the Sorento showed that they figured it wasnt worth it.
Aug 02, 2004 (1:45 am)
We had a trivia topic on the News and View board once.
I asked: Under what sigle brand can you find a Maybach, Saab, and Ferrari all for less than the originals?
The Answer: Hyundai.
The Elantra GT is a dead-ringer for the old Saab 900/9-3 5-door hatchbacks. The Tiburon GT is a Ferrari 456GT clone and the XG300/350 is your Maybach knockoff.
Their sister brand Kia has what has to be the largest number of borrowed styling ques of any car on the market in their Amanti model. The front is either Jaguar or Mercedes, and the back is either Lincoln or Buick. What a mess of a car.
I tried not to say this, but Toyota of all companies can't take anyone to court because of copied or borrowed styling. In the Chinese market where some Chinese companies have blatantly taken designs from them (GM and Honda too) maybe, but not here. Toyota has too many arguable knock-offs of their own to take anyone to court over anything.
Aug 02, 2004 (6:38 am)
The front grill is a bit too Acura like. But the side profile, with those beautiful wheels is stunning and looks like a very regal and expensive car. The rear lights and decklid look good on the car but I tend to agree with merc1 that this is not a good overall movement in design. The interior is beautiful and will probably be similar to the next LS. Toyota has never brought the Crown here and if it wasn't for the Lexus styling change I would have thought that it could be the next LS.
Isn't the Crown the Toyota that has a V-12 or a V-12 option?
Aug 02, 2004 (7:15 am)
Do we have to go thru this again?
Please list all the knock-offs Toyota/Lexus makes! I bet you you can only come with 2-3, even somewhat legitimate knock-offs.
#6528 of 24723 Re: This forum is generally interesting to read... [princeabubu]
Aug 02, 2004 (8:01 am)
I am posting only in response to others who insist on telling me what EVERYBODY thinks...If you guys stop I will...How simple could that be.
#6529 of 24723 Re: michael_mattox [merc1]
Aug 02, 2004 (8:32 am)
Were are compairing the 1993 Allante with the 1993 SL...Something you seem to be afraid to do.
1)The car had the Northstar engine with 290 to 295 HP.
2)It had the advantage of being the fastest FWD car on earth...Was ideal for a touring car in the northern parts of the country.
3)The top was expensive and well engineered NOTE: you could also get it with a hard top option.
4)The 93 Allante we are discussing had a build quality comparable to the 93 Mercedes 500 SL as evidenced by the data I have posted from Edmonds.
5)In 1993 (the yr. we are reviewing) the 500SL sold 1700+ units and the Allante sold 6700...hard to make the case that nobody bought it.
6)The car sold for $40,000 less then the 500SL. Shipping those bodies in by 747 didn't seem to deminish the Allante's price advantage.
Even on paper the 93 Allante was more technically advanced then the 500 was more practical because of the advanced traction system and fwd
and the massave trunk (when was not made smaller when the top was down) (even had a pass through from the trunk) and storage. The SL was a fine car but as you have stated was outdated (and looked it) and was just not as good as the ALLANTE in 93. I am sure it was updated in later yrs. (at least I hope so)
The fact that the SL was an established prestige make and only managed to out sell the Allante by 3,000 units over those years is not a very impressive argument for your side.
Find the consumer report link or cut and paste...I will have to see it for the 1993 model year....Note I believe Allante rated above the Mercedes in a yr. prior to 93 in addition to it's obvious superiority in 93. Perhaps 1990 was that yr...
Never said I did drive all those model years...your method of attempting to make your point is to jump from model and year to different models and years, rather then make a straight compairson...I am sticking to the 93 model year in the Allante and the Mercedes 500SL.
It is true putting a lot of HP into fwd was very creative and innovative ...The fact that no one else COULD do it is a testiment to good old American engineering....IT WORKED GREAT. The Car is classically beautiful even today.
Don't care about the 1990 SL we are compairing the 93 models...No more bait and switch..