Article Comments - Comparison Test: 2007-2008 Sport Sedans

475 messages, Last post on Jul 25, 2008 at 4:41 PM

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

What is this discussion about? Cadillac CTS, BMW 3 Series, Infiniti G35, Mercedes-Benz 350-Class, Mercedes-Benz C-Class, Car Comparisons, Sedan

Comparison Test: 2007-2008 Sport Sedans - This is exactly why we gathered this group of sport sedans. That is, to find out if the 2008 Cadillac CTS, 2007 Infiniti G35 Sport, 2008 Lexus IS 350 or 2008 Mercedes-Benz C350 Sport can topple the Bavarian champ — the 2007 BMW 335i. In the spirit of the segment, each car in the test is outfitted with sport package hardware — usually a stiffer suspension and bigger wheels and tires — and an automatic transmission. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 40 of 48: 1; ...; 37; 38; 39; 40; 41; 42; 43; ...; 48; Prev; Next; Last

#385 of 475 Re: A Few Observations... [habitat1] by drtravel Dec 08, 2007 (8:02 pm)
Replying to: habitat1 (Dec 08, 2007 10:53 am) the previous (pre-i-drive) model received the highest score ever given from, of all places, Consumer Reports I have to agree with Pat that we are getting a little off-topic here. My bad, but just one last correction before I retire from this forum - the highest score ever given by Consumer Reports is for the current Lexus LS. The previous record holder was the Infiniti M35x. These scores are freely available at your current new stand. top premium sport sedan by just about every enthusaist magazine Magazine comparo results available on-line paint a different story: Motor Trend March 2005, C & D May 2005, and R & T June 2005. Happy holidays to all Replies to this message: kdshapiro (Dec 08, 2007 9:41 pm)
#386 of 475 Re: A Few Observations... [drtravel] by kdshapiro Dec 08, 2007 (9:41 pm)
Replying to: drtravel (Dec 08, 2007 8:02 pm) "My bad, but just one last correction before I retire from this forum -" And I'll give one last correction to your correction. Before CR started this score stuff, the best car they every owned, according to them, was the 530. These impressions are clearly available to the general public. Why are you citing stuff almost 3 years old? They have no relevance at this point.
#387 of 475 And this is the problem by pat HOST Dec 09, 2007 (2:37 am)
with the "one last" correction/comment, whatever. Everyone always has one more last one of 'em. Let's stop now and get back on topic - please.
#388 of 475 C350 by cbauer71 Dec 09, 2007 (8:50 am)
I find it funny when automotive writers describe a 0 - 60 time of 5.9 sec as "lazy" even when it is qualified by using "for this crowd." Give me a break. The IS350 does 0 - 60 in 5.3 sec. In the REAL WORLD, a tick over 1/2 a second difference is barely noticable, if at all. It doesn't seem like that long ago that when a car broke the 8 second to 60 mph barrier it was considered "blazing quick" or "lighting fast." I understand the standards have changed, but a .6 second differnce shouldn't be considered "lazy." Just a thought. Replies to this message: habitat1 (Dec 09, 2007 12:58 pm)
#389 of 475 Re: Real-world winners & allegiances [drtravel] by cbauer71 Dec 09, 2007 (9:23 am)
Replying to: drtravel (Nov 13, 2007 10:10 am) Take a look at this link! http://www.caranddriver.com/comparisons/12514/2007-infiniti-g35-sport-vs-2007-bm- w-328i.html link title Replies to this message: kdshapiro (Dec 09, 2007 10:18 am)
#390 of 475 Re: Real-world winners & allegiances [cbauer71] by kdshapiro Dec 09, 2007 (10:18 am)
Replying to: cbauer71 (Dec 09, 2007 9:23 am) That was one of the more interesting comparos, bottom line is more horsepower is not necessarily better. However, these comparos are just all opinions and in the end the opinion of the buying public is what matters most.
#391 of 475 CTS weight problems by albook Dec 09, 2007 (11:59 am)
I hate in comparison tests when these vehicles are compared and the CTS is said to be overwieght compared to the others. This is a vehicle that should be compared to BMW 5's and MB E classes, and M's and GS's- not their smaller siblings. The only reason CTS is in this test is because of its low price. Replies to this message: habitat1 (Dec 09, 2007 1:10 pm) lonestar2 (Dec 09, 2007 3:34 pm) habitat1 (Dec 10, 2007 2:52 am) and 6 more...
#392 of 475 Re: C350 [cbauer71] by habitat1 Dec 09, 2007 (12:58 pm)
Replying to: cbauer71 (Dec 09, 2007 8:50 am) In the REAL WORLD, a tick over 1/2 a second difference is barely noticable, if at all. It doesn't seem like that long ago that when a car broke the 8 second to 60 mph barrier it was considered "blazing quick" or "lighting fast." I agree that performance - at least in terms of acceleration - has increased significantly over the past 25 years. My 1984 Toyota Supra, a highly regarded "sports car" was only capable of 0-60 in 8.3 seconds. That wouldn't get you noticed in a comparison of 7 passenger SUV's today. But I don't think that 0.6 seconds is "barely noticable". That's the difference between a 911S and a Boxster S, which I can tell you from 1st hand experience, is huge. If anything, the fact that all acceleration times have improved, makes 0.6 seconds, relatively speaking, a greater difference than it was 20 or 30 years ago. The fact that my old Datsun 1978 B210GX might have been 0.6 seconds quicker to 60 than a comparable Toyota Corolla was nearly imperceptible. Both would have had a tough time breaking 15 seconds. So in absolute terms, while 5.9 seconds certainly isn't slow, it will feel a lot slower than a car capable of 5.3 seconds.
#393 of 475 Re: CTS weight problems [albook] by habitat1 Dec 09, 2007 (1:10 pm)
Replying to: albook (Dec 09, 2007 11:59 am) I hate in comparison tests when these vehicles are compared and the CTS is said to be overwieght compared to the others. This is a vehicle that should be compared to BMW 5's and MB E classes, and M's and GS's- not their smaller siblings. Say what? Although exterior dimensions are larger, the 2008 CTS has 1" less in rear shoulder room than a 3-series. And over 3" less than a 5-series: CTS: 54.1" 3-series: 55.1" 5-series: 57.3 And yet, the CTS weighs nearly 300 lbs more than the 335i and over 400 lbs more than the 2007 530i (2008 535i weight not listed in Edmunds). It even weighs more than the V8 550i: CTS: 3,874 lbs 335i: 3,594 lbs 530i: 3,472 lbs 550i: 3,803 lbs. Sorry, but you can put as much lipstick as Jeffifer Love Hewitt has in her cosmetic bag on that CTS, but it's still a PIG. Period. Replies to this message: lonestar2 (Dec 09, 2007 3:34 pm) habitat1 (Dec 10, 2007 2:52 am) circlew (Dec 10, 2007 5:28 am) and 1 more... lonestar2 (Dec 10, 2007 2:08 pm) and 3 more...
#394 of 475 Re: CTS weight problems [habitat1] by lonestar2 Dec 09, 2007 (3:34 pm)
Replying to: habitat1 (Dec 09, 2007 1:10 pm) "Putting lipstick on pig" reference to CTS is out of line. I'm a current Bimmer owner - have an 03 330i, sport/premium, man.trans., and am considering the CTS. Looking to go from a compact to mid-size sedan. Also looking at 5 series & E Class. Some other interior diminsions of note between the three: Interior Vol. C.F. Front - Rear - CTS 54 CTS 42 5 52 5 44 E 53 E 44 Front Headroom - Rear Headroom - CTS 38.8 in. CTS 37.2 in. 5 37.7 in. 5 37.0 E 39.1 in. E 37.8 Front Legroom - Rear Legroom - CTS 42.4 in. CTS 35.9 in. 5 41.5 in. 5 36.0 E 41.9 in. E 35.6 Weight - CTS 4032 lbs. 5 4048 E 4039 Source: Car & Driver 11/06, & 9/07. the 5 was a 550i, & E was E550. Also in the last C&D, 01/08, CTS was named one of 10 Best. 535i, nominated & was not chosen. I don't recall this current 5 being chosen in it's current style, starting with the '04's. You don't have to care for the new CTS, but shouldn't trash it. I have really enjoyed my 3, and not sure what my next choice will eventually be, but I am giving the new CTS a hard look. Check your own cosmetic mirror in your bag before you put lipstick on something else. Replies to this message: habitat1 (Dec 10, 2007 2:52 am) circlew (Dec 10, 2007 5:28 am) habitat1 (Dec 10, 2007 6:21 am) lonestar2 (Dec 10, 2007 2:08 pm) arby1 (Dec 10, 2007 6:17 pm) and 2 more...