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: ctsang (Feb 20, 2005 10:52 pm) I was waiting for someone to bring that up  If you knew any of the details, you would know that this only proves how safe MB is. Let me explain: The 1994 S-Class that Princess Diana was riding in had the most advanced safety features and structural design of its day. The estimated speed of impact into the concrete pillar was over 80 mph. Only ONE person in that car was wearing a seatbelt... Guess who survived? Yep, the body guard in the front passenger seat lived to tell the tale. Everyone else who wasn't wearing a seatbelt perished... including Diana. If you don't wear your seatbelt, ANY and ALL of a vehicle's passive safety features are rendered next to useless. It doesn't matter how well the crumple zones or airbags were designed because they all depend on seatbelt use to work effectively. This crash is really a testament to Mercedes safety. The fact that the only person wearing his seatbelt survived a head on crash into a concrete pillar at 80mph is simply amazing. Kudos to Mercedes for engineering such a safe car... it's really a pity that Diana chose not to take advantage of it.
|
|
|
Exactly! That really was a desperate (and thoughtless) move to even mention that because the facts speak for themselves, in favor of Mercedes-Benz! M |
|
|
Replying to: michael_mattox (Mar 09, 2005 9:29 am) This is precisely the problem; it doesn't exist. There isn't any data collected by any agency that illustrates relative fatality rates for different cars. And because there is no data to analyze that would tell us which car produces fewer fatalities, we have all the more reason to trust MB instead of Lexus. It makes a lot of sense if you think about it. In case you didn't catch it the last 20 times I posted, we have several basic premises to consider when evaluating the relative safety of MB and Lexus vehicles: - Mercedes is consistently on the forefront of safety innovation and has been for 100 years. - Mercedes introduces new safety features and structural designs before anyone else (as do Volvo and BMW). - Mercedes makes new safety features standard on all models when other make them optional. - Mercedes offers more standard safety features than Lexus. - Mercedes has an accident investigation team that analyses real world crashes to improve the designs of its vehicles. - Mercedes conducts internal crash testing rivaled only by Volvo in its extensiveness. The converse is true of Lexus: - Lexus is never on the forefront of safety innovation. - Lexus takes many years to adopt new safety features after its rivals have already done so. - Lexus makes many safety features optional or half-assed when rivals have already made them standard. - Lexus currently offers fewer standard safety features than Mercedes across the entire model line. Given these facts, it seems pretty obvious what the priorities of each company are. Clearly, safety isn't a priority with Lexus while it most certainly is a TOP priority with Mercedes. Think about it this way: Pretend you have no prior brand bias towards either Lexus or Mercedes. Based on the truths outlined above, who builds a safer car? All the evidence points to Mercedes. Nothing would suggest that Lexus is even remotely concerned with safety in the way that Mercedes is. Now I'm not saying that the LS, or any other Lexus, is a deathtrap. But, given what we know about these companies the evidence suggests that Mercedes has a greater concern for safety than does Lexus. I would hedge my bet towards Mercedes offering better crash protection in the real world. And as far as safety is concerned, I only want the best... I don't want "almost" or "good enough" for myself or my family.
|
|
|
"Mercedes has an accident investigation team that analyses real world crashes to improve the designs of its vehicles." I forgot about this! Mercedes, Volvo and Saab all collect cars in Europe after accidents to see exactly how they perform in real world crashes. If that doesn't lead to a safer car I don't know what does. A controlled test environment to conduct crash tests is something that every carmaker has, but how many actually collect real world wrecks and study them to improve them? That is most telling about how serious European brands in general are about safety. These three in particular have been recovering their real world wrecks for years and years long before anyone else even considered safety to be an important part of their car building process. A lot of makes jumped on the safety bandwagon after it become popularized by brands like MB and Volvo. M
|
|
There is a rear end picture floating around on other websites:  Can't really see much but everyone elsewhere is convinced this is the butt of the real thing. That looks to be the rear of a Maybach in the background. M |
|
|
Replying to: tiag_m5 (Mar 09, 2005 10:35 pm) Can I refer you back to my post #7999: "Sometimes in the heat of discussion, we lose sight of the obvious. But note that it is rare to see someone argue here that the LS is safer than the S, or has better driving dynamics, or has more prestige. Nor do you see many people saying the S is really more reliable than the LS, or that its electronics are better, or that you get more bang for your buck in the S. That disagreement may be true in comparing the traits of other cars, but not these two. We just disagree about how to weigh the importance of the different factors, not which car possesses which dominant trait." Folks, there is simply no basis for arguing the LS is safer than an S. Can't we all agree that MB has placed a great emphasis on their engineering of safety features-- and this is just one of many things that Lexus has sought to emulate about the MB, but perhaps has not stressed as much as MB (or even Volvo). That still doesn't make the LS unsafe. But one argument I have seen made by the German fans that drives me crazy is that when choosing a car, somehow the German cars should be given points for the 100+ years heritage of the brands. That's absurd. Name one engineer, designer, line assembly worker, or whatever that had a hand in a car from the 1920s that worked on a car being sold now. Heritage only means anything if you trace it into the present and you can DRIVE it! Heck, if International Harvester or John Deere came out with a better driving, safer, better-looking, cheaper, more reliable, better warranted and supported luxury car tomorrow, I would buy it and not give one twit about the "heritage" of Daimler, BMW, Rolls, LS or any other company. The sad fact is that MB has forsaken its heritage, not respected it. It's just a question of "What have you done for me lately?" |
|
|
"But one argument I have seen made by the German fans that drives me crazy is that when choosing a car, somehow the German cars should be given points for the 100+ years heritage of the brands. That's absurd. Name one engineer, designer, line assembly worker, or whatever that had a hand in a car from the 1920s that worked on a car being sold now. Heritage only means anything if you trace it into the present and you can DRIVE it! Heck, if International Harvester or John Deere came out with a better driving, safer, better-looking, cheaper, more reliable, better warranted and supported luxury car tomorrow, I would buy it and not give one twit about the "heritage" of Daimler, BMW, Rolls, LS or any other company." I hear what you're saying, but with me it isn't always a question of heritage, but experience. I think that European brands in particular have a lot more experience to draw upon when it comes to things like safety for example. The things MB/Volvo learned and pioneered back in the day are still present, only updated in their cars today. This same argument will be made 20 years from now regarding Toyota/Lexus and Hybrids. Don't you think Lexus is building their heritage based on quality like Mercedes did back in the day? You can be sure that years and years from now after we're all gone that Lexus will have heritage too, but it likely won't be for design, racing victories or safety innovations like Mercedes, but for quality, hybrids and anything else they manage to excel at compared to the other luxury car brands. Times change and Mercedes others like Audi can't help it that some consumers aren't interested in the great racing victories and innovations that made these companies great, but I to say they don't matter at all I totally disagree with of course. Even their styling, MB and Audi particular has stayed true to this. That new Audi grille that most Lexus folk here don't like is a direct link back to the great Auto Union racers of the 30's, a time where Mercedes and Auto Union beat the best from every other brand in existence at the time. For the people who are draw to a Euro brand for these reasons, this stuff is priceless. Are they the majority of course not but debating the merits of this stuff with an enthusiasts is pointless, they'll never disregard it. This is why I've always said these types of view points seperate the enthusiast from the survey chasers. I mean really everything automotive is a survey or worse a sermon about earnings, thing so far removed from the mind of a person wanting a particular car for what it is, not what the company earned last quarter. One group will never, ever agree with the other, so your original point about what is more important and how to weigh it is very correct and stands. Pure heritage alone like it or not is a part of the luxury car experience for a lot of buyers and I've always felt that Japanese luxury car buyers/fans knock this because they are buying into the only group of luxury car brands that don't have any heritage. Its the same thing as styling be disregarded on this board because Lexus doesn't accel in this area so it is deemed unimportant. If Lexus had these two things I don't doubt for a minute it would be listed as reasons to buy. M |
|
|
Replying to: merc1 (Mar 09, 2005 11:07 pm) Yep. It wasn't until the late 80s or early 90s that anyone else in the auto industry cared about safety. GM, Ford and others had been building poorly engineered deathtraps for decades (and sometimes still do) and just didn't care because "safety didn't sell." Ford was still trying to figure out how to keep its cars from exploding upon impact in the late 70s while Mercedes had already been mounting and reinforcing its gas tanks forward of the rear axel for decades. It wasn't until public awareness about auto safety became more mainstream that companies changed their tune. Now everyone wants to be the best and the safest...
|
|
|
Yes this so true. Ford's saving grace is that they have Volvo under their belt and Volvo does the safety engineering for everything new in the entire Ford empire. Really shocking that the Crown Vic, a traditional Ford product still has trouble with rear impacts popping the gas tank, while on the same showroom floor sits the Ford 500, which is an updated Volvo S80 platform which easily obsoletes Ford's other home grown products in safety design. Very interesting indeed. The U.S. media particularly only started reporting about safety issues once GM and Ford starting investing in safety, before that they never, ever mentioned safety because they new all those safety-box Volvos and MB in the past made American cars look like the deathtraps they were. M |
|
|
Replying to: sv7887 (Mar 09, 2005 3:41 am) The reason that the Elantra, Forenza, Spectra and Beetle received poor ratings despite the airbags is because of their structure. I understand that structure play a crucial role in the performance of a vehicle in a crash. But it seems to me that airbags are just as important. A car with a good structure will still perform poorly in a side impact if it doesn't have side airbags... just the same as a car with side airbags will perform poorly without a good structure. For the sake of simplicity, we'll hypothetically assume that the structure of the LS and the S are the same. With a side airbag, you're going to suffer less trauma to your torso and pelvis than without. If that isn't an admission what is? You're comparing someone wearing Reeboks to ballerina shoes...This isn't rocket science...BTW Euro Sport is a no cost option, whereas the S500 is a 30K price difference. I still don't think C&R would shame themselves and completely discredit their own review by saying that it was unfair. I do remember the quote you were referring to, but I thought it was little more than a disclaimer... after all, they did award first place to the car with lateral grip worse than a Silverado. Even if the LS did have the sport option it certainly wouldn't be any BMW. Lexus' approach to "sport" isn't exactly impressive either. Someone needs to post the full performance specs from the CR review with the S430 and LS430 w/sport... The Euro-Sport package costs $220, not to mention you won't be able to find one anywhere. The difference between the S430 and the S500 is roughly $10k, and some of that translates into more standard options aside from the larger engine. I just hope Mercedes drops the 430 from its lineup and puts the 500 as its base when the new S comes out. It wasn't impressive at all. If I remember correctly the CD changer was still in the trunk as well. I didn't see what is so "Athletic" about it. Maybe the S500 is different, I didn't drive it so I don't know. Having the CD changer in the trunk is a very minor detail in my opinion. I would rather have the rear side airbags and forgo the convenience of an in dash changer. You probably didn't see what was so "athletic" about the S because you didn't push it. With the ABC sport mode activated and ESP off, you'd be surprised how fun the S can be to drive. For $78K you are getting more because you are paying more! Compare a $71K LS430 Ultra to get a better idea of value. Well there are a few more optional features on the S class that aren't available with the LS... Granted you do pay more. The $7k difference between the LS430 Ultra and the S430 is justifiable enough for me. I don't mind paying a bit more for the added safety, performance and style of the S regardless of how large or small the difference really is. If reliability and value were what I was after I would get the LS... Different people have different priorities I guess. Maybe BMW has the highest residual value overall, but the LS430 has the best in class one of 64%. So not only does it cost less, it holds its' value better too. I don't mean to nitpick but according to ALG the Mercedes-Benz CLK has the best resale in the "luxury" class. Granted the LS probably does have the best residual out of the S, 7, A8, etc... Just an FYI. I think you will all agree spending $60K on any car is not a fully "Logical" decision. So it is no surprise we see alot of emotional debate on this board. Amen. |
|
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
