You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance 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

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

#8969 of 9978 Re: Need advise on what to buy please! by danny318 Jan 02, 2007 (6:49 am)
Replying to: psychh (Dec 30, 2006 9:54 pm) Thanks very much to all who have provided advise and insight. This past weekend I tested the Volvo S80 (AWD), Lexus GS350 (AWD), Caddy STS V8 (AWD), and the Mercedes ML320. The SUV was not really where I was looking, but the AWD combined with their new diesel had me interested. I still plan on checking out the Audi A6, Acura RL and the Infinity M class before making my choice.   The Volvo was a blast to drive and was very comfortable, the Lexus not as powerful, but just beautiful inside and out, the Caddy turned me off (rude salesperson, thumping noise on the front left, not thrilled with the styling either). The Merc was impressive...their new diesel was quiet and really jumped when you asked it to. Considering the mileage I'm faced with (35-40K per year) I'm leaning toward the diesel as I think it'll have a longer life span.   I'll be back with final decision by next week (for anyone who cares), and thank you all again for your time and thoughts.   Happy New Year Replies to this message: allagaroo (Jan 02, 2007 7:37 am) lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 8:06 am) lansdownemike (Jan 02, 2007 8:58 am) markcincinnati (Jan 02, 2007 10:45 am) lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 7:52 am)
#8970 of 9978 Re: Need advise on what to buy please! [danny318] by allagaroo Jan 02, 2007 (7:37 am)
Replying to: danny318 (Jan 02, 2007 6:49 am) You must have driven the S80 8 cylinder, right? The 303hp lexus is quick. Was the Volvo technology on a par with the Lexus? I don't like the idea that the Volvo AWD is based on front wheel drive and has FWD emphasis. Haven't driven it and I am interested in your comments after you drive the M. I've ruled out the RL. Right now I'm between the GS and the M35X.   Jerry Replies to this message: lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 8:06 am) lansdownemike (Jan 02, 2007 8:58 am) markcincinnati (Jan 02, 2007 10:45 am)
#8971 of 9978 Re: Need advise on what to buy please! [danny318] by lexusguy Jan 02, 2007 (7:52 am)
Replying to: danny318 (Jan 02, 2007 6:49 am) Considering the mileage I'm faced with (35-40K per year) I'm leaning toward the diesel as I think it'll have a longer life span.   Considering its a 'Bama Mercedes, you're probably going to run into electrical problems and other issues LONG before any engine problems show up. If you like the ML, drive the X5. It's just a better car in every way. The FX35 is also worth looking at. Nissan VQs last forever.
#8972 of 9978 Re: Need advise on what to buy please! [allagaroo] by lexusguy Jan 02, 2007 (8:06 am)
Replying to: allagaroo (Jan 02, 2007 7:37 am) You must have driven the S80 8 cylinder, right? The 303hp lexus is quick. Was the Volvo technology on a par with the Lexus? I don't like the idea that the Volvo AWD is based on front wheel drive and has FWD emphasis.   Perhaps the S80's torque advantage makes it "feel" stronger off the line, but the GS350 is the faster car, at least to 60mph. With most AWD cars, you really can't tell where the torque is in normal driving conditions. The Volvo's system despite being almost entirely FWD still eliminates any torque steer, which is a big problem with their T5 FWD cars.   The only AWD cars in the class that are willing to oversteer like a RWD car are the M35x and the 530xi, although I haven't driven a GS AWD with VDIM turned off. Even then, it wouldn't be as fun or have the control of the M or 5. Replies to this message: lansdownemike (Jan 02, 2007 8:58 am) markcincinnati (Jan 02, 2007 10:45 am)
#8973 of 9978 Re: Need advise on what to buy please! [lexusguy] by lansdownemike Jan 02, 2007 (8:58 am)
Replying to: lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 8:06 am) I'm sure you're right that it's the S80's torque. The V8 AWD really pulls in low rpms, and strangely enough, that's where I usually need it since I don't do track days. You're right about the lack of torque steer. In a 20 minute drive I felt none. Also, for me, the lack of RWD oversteer is just fine. After driving AWD and 4WD vehicles for 25 years, I really prefer the precision of going where I'm pointing without any "funny business," and it seems that the Volvo delivers that. (My X5 does that extremely well for an SUV.)
#8974 of 9978 Next thing you know, I'll be quoting Consumer's Reports -- naaa! by markcincinnati Jan 02, 2007 (10:45 am)
Replying to: lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 8:06 am) I read with keen interest the C&D comparison of the three middle cars from Audi, BMW & Mercedes. The Mercedes won with a one point greater score than the Audi. The BMW brought up the rear.   As I read the article, I thought, "well for the money, the Audi almost could be called a bargain, if a car costing over $70,000 could ever be called that."   Then Motor Trend tests the same three cars and I was nearly certain the Audi would, this time, be a "close third place." I would still think, so I predicted, the Audi would be the "economy" car version of the German super-sedan (third place or no.)   What's this? Motor Trend, despite its conclusion that the Audi is the "least quick" of the three, declares the Audi the winner ahead of the BMW and the Mercedes.   Then, I read the text closely and I see a word that I find difficult to associate with almost ANY Audi (especially when there is a BMW in the mix) -- the word: "Balance."   The S6 has ~60% of its weight on the front end, the engine is ahead of the front wheels, it is a bit heavier, underpowered and AWD (although it IS Rear Biased AWD this time) -- how in the wide wide world of sports could the word balance(d) be part of the text used to describe this car?   You read it, thus far I can find no link to the article; but, nevertheless, there it is "balance" in English for all the world to see.   Next up, Consumer's Report on frequency of repair and mean time between disk drive crashes, etc.   Now, when I think balance, I do indeed think of a capability to "oversteer," more like a proper RWD car. Yet, with my hand and arm vertical, I CAN attest that at the Audi driving schools with 50 50 quattro cars (which is to say nose heavy and not exactly RWD biased), we get them going essentially in oval shaped turns, steered almost entirely with the throttle (a la RWD oversteering.)   What is this world coming to?   Now, in a perfect world (if ever one could be,) wouldn't there be some reason for grave concern on the other German's part, if Audi were to move its engine back (say just a few inches) and re-bias all TorSen diffs to 40/60 F/R?   Then, just for spite, if they decided to put two tiny turbos on their I4, V6, V8, V10 and V12 engines, and call them "R"S "whatevers." . . .I wonder what something like THAT would perform like?   Oh wait, they've decided to do all that -- and more (think Torque Vectoring Technology) in upcoming models.   The point of all this, besides some revelation of incredulity on my part (upon seeing both C7D and MT praise the new S6 so highly), was to remark that my personal experience (which, thus far has been with 50 50 F/R torque "splitted" quattros) with Audis is they will oversteer, wag their tails and powerslide around corners.   Perhaps you are correct that only the M35X and 530XI are the "only" LPS cars (here on edmunds) willing to oversteer. Perhaps my experience and some of these kind of reviews are the exceptions -- but I must confess to a bit of a grin developing upon reading the reviews of the über Audi A6.   Finally, having tested the M35X EXTENSIVELY before plunking down my deposit (even though I later cancelled and went with the A6), I am hereby proclaiming the M35X, Audi A6 q and the 530XI as "willing" driving partners, far more alike than different.   And, glad to know the Volvo despite being FWD biased has apparently tamed torque steer.   Which leads me again to declare, these guys all produce very fine, very similar LPS cars that even with disparate AWD systems and philosophies will, as a group, acquit themselves well against virtually all contenders.
#8975 of 9978 Mark by dhamilton Jan 02, 2007 (11:07 am)
I thought at one time you where saying something about Audi re-engineering quattro. I know that it's getting rear drive biased across the line. But I thought you where saying something different was in the works. Did I make this up?   Also, what do you know about the new A4?   Sorry for the off-topic post. Replies to this message: markcincinnati (Jan 02, 2007 1:21 pm) lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 10:24 pm) markcincinnati (Jan 03, 2007 5:06 am)
#8976 of 9978 Re: Mark [dhamilton] by markcincinnati Jan 02, 2007 (1:21 pm)
Replying to: dhamilton (Jan 02, 2007 11:07 am) quattro is the name Audi gives to its AWD systems.   All quattros are not the same, all AWD Audis, thus far, are quattros however.   Most quattros use one of two flavors of TorSen (torque sensing) mechanical diffs: the majority of TorSen quattros have a 50 50 F/R torque split.   Several quattros (more and more are in the pipeline) use a TorSen diff with a 40 60 F/R torque split. A few Audis use Haldex systems (these Audis have transverse mounted engines) and they are, as I understand it, FWD biased (I believe as much as 90 10, but I am willing, ready and able to stand corrected on that torque split.) Regardless, these Haldex system equipped Audis still receive a quattro badge.   Audi AG's board, apparently, has vetoed a "suggestion" for Audi to offer a pure RWD car. Perhaps more to the person, Dr. Piech, still one of great influence and power within the corporation, has quashed such an idea.   However, what is in the pipeline is:   o all audi AWD diffs will be 40/60 F/R torque split [TorSen quattros] in the next few years (possible exclusion/exception for the Haldex equipped cars until or unless this too can be changed.)   o better balanced weight distribution (probably not 50 50 with the current north south engine layout, but more than incrementally better than 60 40 F/R weight distribution)   o adoption of a new technology: "Cross-Axle Torque Vectoring(TM)."   I look at this technology as the opposite of ESP, in that ESP essentially is about applying brakes and reducing engine power, not literally redistributing engine power.   Here is what little I can find about what might be another Audi innovation:   "Torque Vectoring technology enables moment-by-moment redistribution of drive-torque in response to driver demand, vehicle speed and road conditions. In doing so, it enables the vehicle to follow the driver's intended path, ultimately leading to a potentially safer, more enjoyable driving experience. . . .   System actuation is flexible depending on vehicle architecture, compatible with hydraulic, electro-hydraulic and electro-mechanical control strategies. The Torque Vectoring technology in the demonstration system is capable of delivering a cross-axle torque bias of 1,400 nanometers and differential wheel speed delta of 20 percent. Response time targets for the demonstrator vehicle have been set at a maximum of 50 milliseconds from request to start of torque activation and 100 milliseconds to achieve 90 percent full torque demand."   For more information, visit Ricky Ricardo   Couple all of this stuff with diesel technology innovations and implementations and throw in a 7 speed DSG transmission and some other neat features in the pipeline and, well, competition is very good for the LPS customer set (like many of us here on this forum.)       P.S. Who knows about the new A4, I have seen the spy photos, write ups and conjecture on the Web and in print. Ditto the Q5 addition to the Audi SUV lineup (or is that crossover?)   The new A4 and A5 seem to be coming to market with their engines pushed back a few inches, improving F/R weight balance, also will offer rear biased TorSen quattro diffs in the AWD models. Rumor mill does not mention any new engines (other than those we already know about.) I find this latter data point confusing now that BMW has a 3.0L turbo engine with 6 in-line cylinders pumping out an "easy" 300HP with better miles per gallon than the previous normally asipirated 225HP 3.0 engine and this new blown engine has bags of torque, darn near weapons grade if it is only asked to power a car as heavy as a 3 series.   BMW, coming soon a 535 model. You would think Audi with only a 3.2 (maybe a 3.6) a 4.2 and then a V10 (in the A6 at least) would consider something hotter than the current 3.2 and smaller than the current 4.2 to keep up with their Munich competition.   The new A4 moves the bar in lux and performance up a notch or two. At some point, of course, the A6 sized cars will have to move up a notch or three unless we will accept the smaller siblings as members of the LPS club (the 3 series, A4, C class, G class, etc?)   Lots of speculation on this engine thing, thus far, BMW seems to be in a league of its own. I mean it, if you do nothing else in the near future, you must drive a BMW with the "35" engine in it. Wow! Replies to this message: lexusguy (Jan 02, 2007 10:24 pm) markcincinnati (Jan 03, 2007 5:06 am)
#8977 of 9978 Yeah by dhamilton Jan 02, 2007 (2:09 pm)
One of the things I was saying on the S4 board is that the 335 renders the S4 pointless. like performance, for a lot less. Replies to this message: markcincinnati (Jan 02, 2007 2:29 pm)
#8978 of 9978 Re: Yeah [dhamilton] by markcincinnati Jan 02, 2007 (2:29 pm)
Replying to: dhamilton (Jan 02, 2007 2:09 pm) The S4 would be my first choice for something slightly over $7,000 less apples to apples.   This, sad fact, does not make the S4 pointless, IMHO. Just overpriced.   And, we can all go down THAT path if we're not careful.   There is a new SUX 6000 from "someone" that matches the LPS specs (on paper), looks (subjective anyway), features and creature comforts (mostly objectively) and even "apparent" build quality.   Yet, most of the LPS class cars are threatened not.   Heck, I took a LOOONNNNG test drive in a new BMW X5 this weekend (the thing was just south of $60K and it had the 6 cylinder engine in it), I also tested (for the fun of it) a Jeep SRT-8 (with all options it was barely $46K.)   On the "grin meter" the SRT-8 was 10 teeth, the Bimmer maybe 6. The BMW was over a $1000 a month on a lease. The Jeep was a lot less.   The gas mileage would suck on the Jeep.   The Jeep well, is a Jeep -- but I doubt the valet at my country club would care one way or another just as long as I tipped him equally.   The old folks at the country club are moving to Escalades and gussied up GMC versions of the same; the younger folks have the entry level or LPS cars du jour but certainly would ooh and ahh the SRT.   No one would confuse them however. And, I doubt BMW fears the Jeep -- even though the Jeep would always show it tail lights. The BMW was a bit more comfy, but it was also more like a big sedan -- it had lost a little bit of its BMW-ness in the transition to a bigger (sort of) Lux SAV. The Jeep gained a lot of crispness and save for the back up camera seemed about at the same equipment level from a creature comfort standpoint.   Overall, I liked the BMW a lot -- but damned if I could find the $14,000 difference for a vehicle that had some trouble getting out of its own way (power wise.)   And the beat goes on: the S4 is, to me, a bit better performer and more to my tastes. But for the money, a 335xi sedan (March 2007) would get my $ vote over the S4 anyday for that kinda $ difference.   Drive it like you live.   Can't wait til they starting spreading the "35" engine across more and more Bimmers.   Audi? Are you listening?

You are here: Forums Sedans Luxury Performance Sedans