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
| Tuner MTM has put together an MTM-TT where the 2.0 TFSI, after being souped up by MTM, outputs at least 245 bhp (355 Nm at 1,850 rpm). In addition to this, MTM offers 250 (363 Nm/1,850 rpm), 272 (370 Nm/1,850 rpm), and a 313 bhp (395 Nm/ 3,230 rpm) versions. | |
A reporter from a large daily newspaper is looking to speak to Mercedes-Benz owners in the Washington DC area about the expectations you have with the car when you purchase it and any problems you’ve had to deal with. Please provide your daytime contact info to ctalati edmunds.com no later than Monday, October 16, 2006.
|
|
|
|
|
Although, as one recent post pointed out, CR isn't as simple-minded in its "ratings" of cars as it sometimes seems, or as sometimes is alleged (for example, they often rate the Passat first or second on family sedan list, despite its not being near top of their reliability scoring), nonetheless, I believe there are enough people who are mostly swayed by the reliability ratings themselves or by CR's "recommendations". When CR puts a group of cars together and says: "we recommend you buy this one, in fact, it's the only one in the group that we recommend," that's a powerful market force. For example, CR has a category "ultra-performance & luxury sports cars". The category includes everything from Porsche 911 Carrera S to BMW 650i coupe to Cadillac XLR Base. The only car they recommend in this class is the $65,0000 Lexus SC, which they find to have "handling that feels no more agile than on ordinary sedan," with "a harsh ride that doesn't befit a luxury car," and overall performance that makes it not "game for driving with enthusiasm." If a CR reader was considering venturing into one of these "ultra-performance & luxury sports cars," to whatever extent they were influenced by CR, they'd probably tend to back off and not buy any of the cars. The magazine's rhetoric, which is the total deciding factor for a significant number of car buyers who have described their decision-making to me, has made a big contribution to a mind-change about cars: aim for 365 days of trouble-free, emotion-free driving and look elsewhere to be engaged with the world around you. |
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Oct 13, 2006 5:33 am) Mercedes boss Eckhard Cordes launched a costly quality offensive designed to cut the number of defects and catch them before cars leave the factory. That involved forging a new quality unit and making sure engineers, designers, and production and assembly managers make no key decision on engineering or purchasing without the approval of quality managers. Long-term, the fix lies in designing cars that are less complex, stripping out excess electronics and bolstering testing before new models go into production. Paul Halata, president and CEO of Mercedes USA, insists the company's efforts to improve quality are finally showing. In the latest J.D. Power initial quality survey, Mercedes moved up from tenth in 2004 with 106 problems per 100 vehicles to fifth with 104. Many analysts are skeptical. "It's really too soon to tell on Mercedes quality," says Albrecht Denninghof, an analyst at HVB Group in Munich. "We need about 12 months to see if there are still problems." Moved up by reducing problems from 1.06 per vehicle to 1.04? What can such a jump mean? Most readers will just see "moved from tenth to fifth". Like checking in on a stock you own. |
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Oct 13, 2006 5:33 am) I think CR's influence at that level is marginal at best. I seriously doubt that anyone who is genuinely interested in a 911 or 650i is going to back out because it doesn't have the "red check". CR probably has a part in helping Camry and Accord to dominate the family sedan market. Those are the cars that CR readers actually buy. Anyone who buys a SC430 over the competition was going to buy a Lexus anyway. I don't think CR would really be a factor there.
|
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Oct 13, 2006 5:33 am) I'm not a real CR proponent especially when it comes to cars, but their description of the SC430 was right-on. (I had one.)
|
|
|
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Oct 13, 2006 5:33 am) For myself, I've just had a 4 1/2 year reliability nightmare with my BMW X5 4.4. I've had a new transmission, I've had it in for work on the fancy suspension 4 times, and I could go on and on. I knew that the X5 didn't have a great reputation for reliability (thanks to CR) when I bought it and I'm paying the price. For my next ride, I think I'd like a few years of a reliable LPS, so I'm ranking the M a little higher than I would have had it not been for my personal experience. I'm also thinking about the Volvo S80 because they (like BMW) are putting new processes in place to address the reliability issues. I'm not suggesting that everyone should follow CR slavishly, but for me reliability is a useful piece of information, and for my next car, after a really ugly few years, it's a piece of information that is particularly important. PS: they also recommend the Nissan 350Z and the BMW z4 in addition to the SC430.
|
|
|
Replying to: carnaught (Oct 13, 2006 1:15 pm) |
|
|
|
|
Replying to: lansdownemike (Oct 13, 2006 1:21 pm) I was looking at the October 2006 issue of CR, in which the Nissan 350Z and the BMW z4 were not including the comparison, although they are recommended on the sidebar chart. And, also, as you say, CR routinely talks about handling, engaging drive quality, fun-factor, etc. My main point was that, in the end, they convey the sense that, when it comes to recommending a car, the only solid basis is their reliability rating. I think that they have been believed by many buyers (although, again, I agree with your toning down of my comments, in that they are probably less influential with buyers of this particular group of cars than with buyers of family sedans, where they exert enormous influence). It would seem more honest to say that they cannot recommend any car, in a comparo where the only one that meets their reliability standard is, according to them, a mediocre driving experience (that's what led to the comment with which you took issue, about what is implied when you suggest someone buy a car with what you yourself have assessed to be mediocre driving quality). To do what they do, does seem to me to imply that, taking all factors into account, they recommend you choose a car they don't think is engaging or enjoyable, just because you'll avoid a few unscheduled service visits. That's how it reads to me. My main problem with CR and JDP is that such ratings are presented by them in ways designed partly to inform and partly to inflate, through over-dramatizing of the statistical significance of the ratings, the importance of CR and JDP.
|
|
|
Replying to: domenickamarc (Oct 13, 2006 7:03 pm) Yeah, I can see that. I think what CR is trying to say is that while we didnt necessarily like the car, owners say its reliable, so if you like it, by all means. Perhaps they should change the "recommended" tag to "reliable" or something like that. Something to further differentiate the reliability score from the overall score.
|
|
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
