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 Luxury Performance Sedans
9978 messages, Last post on Nov 02, 2009 at 1:30 PM
You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens
|
CR checks all individual reliability data from owners against an average for all cars rated that year. Some areas, like transmission, are weighted more heavily than others. Even if a car does "pretty well", if most other cars that year did better, it wont get the "recommended" tag. Here's CR's words on it: "Sometimes a vehicle (especially a 2004 model) will have seemingly high Ratings, such as full red or half-red, in the 14 trouble spots, but gets a below-average (X) reliability verdict. That’s because at least some of the trouble-spot Ratings didn’t compare well with the average ratings for that model year, as shown in the average vehicle chart. For instance, the 2004 Saab 9-3 was rated full-red in nine categories half-red in four categories, and white in one category. By comparing that with the Ratings for the average 2004 model, you can see that the 9-3's Ratings are worse than the average in five areas, one of which--transmission--is weighted more heavily. The result is a below-average (X) reliability verdict." According to CR's average 2004 vehicle chart, vehicles must get full red (meaning less than 2.0% of owners reported problems in this area) in every catergory and half red in the body integrity catergory (2 - 5% owners reported problems) in order to make the "average" reliability cut. The 2004 5 series got a white circle in "Power equipment" meaning 5-9% of owners reported problems in that area, which killed any chance it would've had for a recommended tag. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kyfdx (May 04, 2005 9:35 am) Claims the only thing more dangerous on the (wet, slick, whatever) highway than a BMW is being on foot on the highway. Several of my friends abandoned their BMW's for FWD, SUV or "pickuptruck" cars because they "were useless" in the moderate winters that we have here in SW Ohio. The BMW sales rep seemed genuinely pleased to have the X3, X5, 3x and now 5x to sell -- she says the 5x (with its expected $2K upcharge for AWD, plus its new 255HP 3.0L engine) will "hurt" Audi's sales (presumably of the new A6 and of the new A4 with both new 3 and 5 coming to market with AWD, 2 engine choices and stick shift availability). I imagine she is right. She pokes "a bit" at me for getting the M35X (but truth be told my BMW sales rep drives a G35X herself -- until, as she says, the lease runs out later this year -- she's been with BMW for about 1+ years).
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: kyfdx (May 04, 2005 9:35 am) |
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (May 04, 2005 7:12 am) OTOH, if your source is something like that, I'd be surprised that you took it at face value. If the figures are for real, they exist on another source somewhere.
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: pat (May 04, 2005 12:03 pm) Although usually updated here AFTER other sites, this site is, as they say, "the horse's mouth." http://www.audiusa.com/about_pressreleases And of course it can be found here: http://media.audiusa.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=9578 Several other automotive web pages carry this data and also cite these same URL's. |
|
|
Replying to: pat (May 04, 2005 12:03 pm) Audi Sales Numbers LIY |
|
|
|
These are the three I'm down to and I am having a heckuva time making up my mind. I just got back from test driving the M45 Sport and I was very impressed. It's got neck snapping speed, a lot more grunt and much more responsive sterring than my current ride (GS430). I was just really hoping for AWD. I put on some long commutes in the dead of winter, and it's not just the snow that gets you, but the ice patches as well. As to the M35x, it's got fully adequate acceleration--what I did not like was the engine noise- the V6 was a little more intrusive than I'd like. Finally, though I prefer the looks of the A6 it lacks some of the cool technology of the M series (rear-view camera, lane departure warning, front load CD stack). Perhaps the deciding factor should be reliability. I really wonder how much more time I'd be spending at the Audi dealership vs Infiniti....
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: mikestevens (May 04, 2005 1:20 pm) It gets me what I would want most -- V8, AWD, Sport, nice looks. My choices were more, pedestrian, if a $50K+ car can ever be thought to be thus -- the A6 3.2 vs the M35X -- plus money was an object. I went with the Infiniti M35X -- if your pocketbook permits the purchase of an A6 4.2 -- don't even worry about the reliability. My recent Audis have been easy to live with. |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: markcincinnati (May 04, 2005 11:03 am) A coworker had a 5 series that he got rid of after the first winter here in DC. He only had one way out of his development and it was up a slight hill. If we got even 1/2" of snow, he couldn't drive it. He says he'll never buy another RWD car until he retires to Phoenix.
|
|
| Sheez, RWD is not THAT bad. I wont take my LS out in a snow storm, but with a set of Blizzaks and VSC, it does fine in mild to moderately snowy conditions. If you're trying to drive with the 18 or 19" Z rated rubber bands that many RWD cars come with, then yeah, RWD is worthless. | |
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
2007 Lexus GS 430
2011 Acura RL
2011 BMW 5 Series
2010 Volvo S80
2010 Audi A6
2010 Infiniti M35
2010 Infiniti M45
2011 Mercedes-Benz E-Class
2010 Cadillac STS
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
