You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans

Luxury Performance Sedans

10006 messages,  Last post on Nov 26, 2009 at 6:59 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Lexus GS 430, Acura RL, BMW 5 Series, Volvo S80, Audi A6, Infiniti M35, Infiniti M45, Mercedes-Benz E-Class, Cadillac STS, Sedan

#7667 of 10006 Re: german [lexusguy] by calhon Jul 02, 2006 (3:34 pm)
Replying to: lexusguy (Jun 30, 2006 12:53 pm) "Volvo's CR scores are no better than Mercedes, BMW, or Audi, so I wouldn't pick them if you're seriously concerned about reliability. In fact, the S40 has much worse scores for '05 than the 3 series, A4, and even the C class."   CR ranks the brands on the basis of predicted reliability as follows: Volvo 12th, BMW 21st, Audi 27th, and Mercedes 32nd of a total of 36 brands. Incidentally, Infiniti is 28th, largely due the SUVs.   The predicted reliability of the S40 is "average"; same as the the A4 Avant (Audi's most reliable model) and the Z4, BMW's best model. Mercedes' most reliable model is the SLK which is rated "below-average".   That said, I will remind you that you cannot judge how much better/worse something is from purely relative data such as rankings, percentages above/below average, or little colored dots. You need absolute numbers for that.   On the 2006 JD Power IQS, Honda is ranked 6th while Audi is ranked 19th. Looks like a huge difference, doesn't it? Until you look at the actual numbers to find that it's 1.1 versus 1.3 problems/car. The same holds true for the CR data. A 45-point difference there is 1 problem/car over 3-5 years. That's the difference between "average" and "much above/below average" - the clear versus the solid red/black dot.   Brand reliability differences is largely a dead issue, except in (mis)perceptions where it thrives. Replies to this message: cdnpinhead (Jul 02, 2006 9:45 pm) markcincinnati (Jul 03, 2006 5:55 am) lexusguy (Jul 03, 2006 7:37 am) calhon (Jul 04, 2006 12:12 pm) lexusguy (Jul 04, 2006 3:11 pm) and 7 more...
#7668 of 10006 Re: german [calhon] by cdnpinhead Jul 02, 2006 (9:45 pm)
Replying to: calhon (Jul 02, 2006 3:34 pm) Very well put.   Thank you.
#7669 of 10006 Re: german [calhon] by markcincinnati Jul 03, 2006 (5:55 am)
Replying to: calhon (Jul 02, 2006 3:34 pm) Brand reliability differences is largely a dead issue, except in (mis)perceptions where it thrives.   Polite Golf Applause, please!   CR is also relatively dead insofar as this kind of information regarding automobile choices. Now using them to find a spouse, NOW THAT makes sense! C'mon, we don't really buy $50,000+ cars based on the passionate prose from CR do we?   Better yet:   Did anyone check Better Homes & Gardens for their take?   How about some other erudite auto publication, such as Money Mazine, Men's Health, Towne & Country or Ladies Home Journal.   There, I feel better now.   Happy Fourth everyone!
#7670 of 10006 Mark by dhamilton Jul 03, 2006 (6:19 am)
hilarious.....
#7671 of 10006 The dead horse beaten again by lansdownemike Jul 03, 2006 (6:27 am)
It's been cool among car enthusiasts to disrespect CR's auto reliability numbers for a very long time, so I'm entirely used to these discussions. Remember, I'm not talking about CU's verbal descriptions which are entirely irrelevant to people who like driving. It's the statistical summaries of reported problems and comparison of models using those summaries that are the useful numbers here. They're reliable.   Those who take their M3s to the track and have set up their garages to repair recalcitrant transmissions need not worry about such things. But the rest of us, who like driving but who rarely if ever get the last 2% of performance out of their rides, and don't want to go to the dealer more often than absolutely necessary, should pay attention to CR reliability numbers. Among the best LPS's there are differences in CR-reported reliability that over four years of ownership can make a big difference in the "ownership experience." (And to those who want to say you can have a lemon Lexus or a magnificent Mercedes, I suggest you take a good remedial statistics or probability course. At the very least, don't go to Vegas with more than you can afford to lose because you will.) Replies to this message: markcincinnati (Jul 04, 2006 5:50 am)
#7672 of 10006 Re: german [calhon] by lexusguy Jul 03, 2006 (7:37 am)
Replying to: calhon (Jul 02, 2006 3:34 pm) The predicted reliability of the S40 is "average"; same as the the A4 Avant (Audi's most reliable model) and the Z4, BMW's best model. Mercedes' most reliable model is the SLK which is rated "below-average".   I really have no interest in what the "predicted" reliability from CR is, or what the brand average is. As you pointed out yourself, the QX56 drags otherwise very reliable Infinitis into the gutter. Volvo's most recent introduction with reliability data on it is the S40. In its first year, 15%+ of owners reported electrical problems. Thats not unusual, the first year S60 in '01 and S80 in '99 were also problem prone cars. It shows that at least as recent as '04, you're taking a risk with a Volvo in its first year of production.   If you're the type of person who could care less about reliability, more power to you. However, if you're thinking of buying a first year Volvo because you're nervous about the Germans, (which will all have been in production quite awhile when the '07 S80 comes on the market), you might want to think about that, as chances are it will be less reliable than an A6 or 5 series.   I think we've already proved around here that JD Power IQS is useless when "I dont like my NAV system" is considered a "defect". No one is going to buy a car that blows up after 3 months, no matter how fantastic the driving experience is. Using IQS data to decide on what car to buy that you may keep for 5 years or more doesn't make a lot of sense. Brand averages in IQS are largely meaningless anyway, just as they are in CR. You're buying a car, not a brand. Replies to this message: calhon (Jul 04, 2006 12:12 pm) lexusguy (Jul 04, 2006 3:11 pm) calhon (Jul 04, 2006 8:23 pm) and 6 more...
#7673 of 10006 Maybe we're not talking about cars by sfcharlie Jul 03, 2006 (1:07 pm)
This is obviously not a discussion that anyone can bring to a conclusive end.   It's not, at its foundation, in my view, about the validity or reliability (two different statistical dimensions) of CR and JDP reports. It is, rather, about what it takes for a potential car buyer to achieve a confident enough state of mind in which to initiate (in the case of this forum) a $50,000 (or $500-$800/month) action -- expecting to have to live with the choice for two to five years, or more.   All the possible positions have appeared here several times: ignore CR and JDP; give CR and JDP some weight in the buying equation; avoid cars that appear to increase probability of trips to service department, according to CR and JDP. Whichever of these positions is felt to have contributed (in the past) or to be contributing (in the midst of a current buying-decision-making situation) to someone getting into a lower-anxiety or higher-confidence state of mind will be a very appealing position for that person and it will be hard to shake them from it.
#7674 of 10006 How about adding another car to the mix? by quemfala Jul 03, 2006 (1:33 pm)
Made it to the local Cad store and found what I was looking for; a 2006 STS, 8-cyl and AWD. (Quite a feat here in South Florida -- like hen's teeth!)Had the 1SF Luxury Perf. Pack & the K59 Adaptive Cruise. Car drove like it was on rails. Quick, responsive, great brakes, quiet and loaded with technology. I loved it; but my wife didn't. Actually, she didn't like anything about it at all, seats not comfortable, didn't like the looks of the car, didn't like the color -- should I go on? Of course she said, "but, if YOU like it, go ahead!" Bottom line, and what saved me making the decision, the store wouldn't "deal". They wanted too much and I wasn't really in the mood to spend the day haggling.   But then I really surprised myself with a trip to the Jag dealer. Wow! I started with the XJ8. Probably not what some of you would call a LPS (no manual tranny, a bit staid in design) but it was really a great ride! Fast, smooth and quiet. Great around the curves (no mountain roads around here to try), and with adequate stopping power. Not as much technology as the Caddy, but I could live with that. This car is a bit larger than the STS, but it's aluminum construction has it at about 700 lbs less. That makes it pretty nimble with great EPA mileage numbers.   But then, (and I shouldn't have done this) I moved into the XJR. Supercharged and 400 H.P. Nearly broke my neck! All of the above, but more! What a pleasure. I didn't realize that one could move down the road that quickly.   This IS a car my wife could like, and she might even drive it.   Lastly, only to look and not to drive, the brand new, 2007 XK coupe and/or convertible. There are a couple of stunning beauties! All I was able to do was sit in them and admire! (I think the test-drive schedule was a bit too long!) Maybe the next time. Again, for some of you the lack of a manual transmission may be a put off, but my left leg is getting too old to drive a standard shift in heavy, city traffic; so a six or seven speed auto is just fine with me.   Anyway, do yourself a favor. Take a look!   And remember -- Life is Better at the Beach! Replies to this message: lexusguy (Jul 03, 2006 9:37 pm)
#7675 of 10006 Re: How about adding another car to the mix? [quemfala] by lexusguy Jul 03, 2006 (9:37 pm)
Replying to: quemfala (Jul 03, 2006 1:33 pm) 2004 XJRs are pretty amazing deals right now. You can get one with <20K miles on it for $45K, or one with 30-35K on it for $40K.
#7676 of 10006 Re: The dead horse beaten again [lansdownemike] by markcincinnati Jul 04, 2006 (5:50 am)
Replying to: lansdownemike (Jul 03, 2006 6:27 am) You are most likely correct -- car enthusiasts often do disrespect CR's auto reliability numbers.   Also likely to be correct -- if you buy your car based on CR's numbers you may not be quite as "enthusiastic" about cars.   And, either position, as far as I am concerned is OK.   But, "can he/she cook?"   In the scheme of things, cars and mates are overwhelmingly chosen for emotional reasons first and practical reasons secondarily (or maybe the practical is tertiary, indeed that may be even more on the mark.)   These are Luxury Performance vehicles that we argue, preen and wax poetic about.   I'd wager a heavy weight (the heaviest?) is given to the styling of the objects of one's desire we discuss here.   CR is, for some, of value -- and if you buy a car that is not the most attractive and fun that you would have bought otherwise because CR said it was in the bottom quartile of reliability. . .good (for you.)   CR is, for others, without value -- and they often buy a car that is the most attractive and fun or most fun and attractive (whatever) without regard to a score bestowed upon it by CR.   It takes all types. There are mail-order brides, there's love at first sight, there's the courtship of Eddie's father too. There's even unrequited love.   Most of us [here at least] are passionate about our cars and buying cars for these folks is mostly a right brain affair.   LPS cars are luxurious and offer at least a nod to performance. Using a ranking to acquire them probably does not occur to those who lust for the luxury and performance in a car that catches their eyes and steals their hearts.   Doing so is perfectly acceptable, however.   When I read posts that rank a car that I would (or wouldn't have) regardless of CR's rankings, it just (for me) decreases my enthusiasm for anything they say.   I know some cars are ranked higher than others -- I want whatever it is that I am driving to be more reliable (don't we all?), but cars, friends and spouses simply cannot be neatly evaluated by circles with black innards, dots or red innards and dots.   One of the folks I work with was in the market -- she was looking at a Cadillac CTS. She asked me to help her pick some other "comparable" cars to consider.   To make a long story short, she wanted the CTS and short of a free car from Audi or BMW or Infiniti, she was going to go for it (in Blue, no less.) She trotted out her CR, and of course the Infiniti was the best of the bunch -- the Cadillac was just OK.   "I really like her," was said about the Cadillac.   I knew it was over right then and there.   Three test drives and a weekend later, she pulled in with her new Cadillac.   It was not logical -- it seldom is.   She is happy.   I submit that most folks buy cars cause they are, to them, "cool."   It's all about the big "L."

You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans