Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

High End Luxury Cars



  • ctsangctsang Posts: 237
    2006 top 10 manufacturers in retaining customers as reported by J.D. Powers:

    Toyota -- 63.9%
    Lexus -- 63.2%
    Honda -- 60.3%
    BMW -- 56.5%
    Scion -- 56.3%
    Cadillac -- 55.5%
    Chevrolet -- 55.3%
    Mercedes-Benz -- 53.6%
    Ford -- 53.3%
    Hyundai -- 51.6%
  • sysweisyswei Posts: 1,804
    If a Toyota customer "moves up" to Lexus, I wonder if that counts as a non-retained customer?
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Any idea what Benz's rating was pre '00? I'm wondering if the "dark" years have affected that in any significant way.
  • sysweisyswei Posts: 1,804
    MB did better in the first study, back in 2003:
    link title
  • tagmantagman Malibu, CaliforniaPosts: 8,441
    This is interesting. A genuine purchase incentive that has nothing to do with leasing. Imagine that! ;)

    click here for the article


    Maserati claims it is a one time offer. Don't all rush at once.

    The real deal-breaker, however, is that the offer is on the '06 Q's... obviously to make way for the '07's much-improved automatic transmission.

  • Yep, some guys like brick Tudors, tassle loafers, blue blazers and a portfolio that is tilted toward the return of the principal. Other guys are into Armani, car lease deals, and houses right out of AD.

    This is why they have horse races (and on-line forums).
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Dewey, I'm very surprised, for someone who claims to be a working pro in the financial industry, you would even make these arguments, much less without studying the numbers that I presented.

    Well, well aint that a shocker. Yes I am a financial professional who makes a livelihood in picking stocks.
    Unbelievable isn’t it? So since we want to talk numbers, why dont we? Unfortunately the numbers you have provided are BUNK .

    You state the following:

    1) That's more than 8.5 years, when you are finally coming out even on a per month cost basis with someone who is about to turn in his fourth new car in that same time span.

    Oops have you not forgotten something in that comparison of yours above? You've heard of resale value, haven't your? I realized a 35 percent resale value on my 8 year old BMW. In otherwords your breakeven analysis is 35 percent off in my particular case. YIKES!!!! Brightness this is a bit of an embarrassing oversight on your part don’t you think?

    2). I stated the following: The lease deal you are mentioning above may not apply to the car that someone actually wants especially a hot selling car

    You stated the following: The same residual applies to every model of the car, regardless what configuration you pick; in fact

    I was talking about your self made capitalizations not residuals. And in the case of certain cars there is no way you are going to get a 92 percent capitalization (not in your wildest dreams).

    2) That's assuming not having any major problem at all, which is unrealistic for an 8+ year old BMW.

    Nope that is no assumption. That is based on my actual experience of 8 year BMW ownership.

    3) 1) ever heard of gap insurance? It's like $40 a year; some leases include gap insurance.

    Yes I have. But I did not include gap insurance in my prior post since I did not know they were so cheap (in fact I found out here in Canada gap insurance for some brands are included in the lease). I was not updated on the low quotes available for gap insurance since I’ve never leased a car before. Shocking eh! Imagine a financial professional not knowing that?

    4) different residual rates are available for different mileage allowances; average mileage by definition is applicable to most drivers. In case you did not notice, BMW and MB are heavily skewed towards the prosperous urban areas on the coasts (for Canada that means lake coast and Pacific coast, within 75 miles of US border), not the great interior where people actually do drive a lot of miles

    The mileage for that BMW lease you used as an example was set at 10K miles per year. Let me inform you that people do not have to live in the great interior to drive beyond that mileage. Annually I drive far beyond 10K miles a year. And I do hope you are informed enough to know that high mileage can kill the benefits of a lease.

    5) (4) but why? if getting a new one every 27 months is cheaper? That also cures the urge to dive into hot deals like the 335i prematurely at MSRP before M3 comes along and depress 335i prices. Your near-100% MSRP over the next 8years (96 months) can not begin to compare to someone who picks up a 328i for 27mo at 18% MSRP, then a 335i for another 27mo at 18%MSRP, then another 338i (with higher boost), then a 340i, all assuming average driving pattern

    I don’t care? I look forward to driving my car many years ahead. Why would I sell my 335i and expose myself to the high depreciation costs through leasing or buying a brand new 09 340i? It makes no sense to me whatsoever. Although I do salute Howard who likes driving a new car every two years. I repeat that such a choice is a lifestyle choice not a shrewd financial choice.

    6) Brightness what on earth do you know about Warren Buffett? Sounds like you are mixing up Warren Buffet's lifestyle with the lifestyle of an Arab Sheikh named Abdul Al Beffett.

    7) Well, buying hot cars at MSRP certainly does not jive with shrewed money management,

    As I said I think you are mixing up life style choices with financial choices. Who the hell buys luxury car for shrwed money management reasons anyways? I buy my cars strictly for pleasure.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Yep we're talking about 350-400K for this thing, only 100 per year.

  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    I get ya. My "extreme" statement followed your. "The Audi is outperformed" The Benz handles nicely, I'll give you that, but it doesn't outperform on anything other than acceleration. Cool?

    Nope, because that isn't totally the case. C&D seems to think the E is more agile too, while the Audi has more grip. I still haven't seen the MT test yet either.

  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Welcome back Tagman.

    Thanks but no thanks. What is a performance car with a compromised transmission? Not much in my opinion.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Thanks but no thanks. What is a performance car with a compromised transmission? Not much in my opinion.

    Maserati needs it to sell cars. Their biggest competition is the 750i and the A8, both of which are automatics. If people hate the SMG in a car like the M5, they're really going to hate it in the QP. If they get it right, a conventional autobox can still be a lot of fun (Jag XK) while being smooth as butter.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    If people hate the SMG in a car like the M5, they're really going to hate it in the QP. If they get it right, a conventional autobox can still be a lot of fun (Jag XK) while being smooth as butter.

    As pointed out by Designman and others it appears even perfection has its shortfalls. There is a whiff of negativity about a manual BMW M5 (I never thought I would see that day in my lifetime).

    As quoted by Automobile Magazine:

    , BMW took away the ability to fully disable the stability control system. Many enthusiasts will find that unacceptable, and there will be no Ford Shelby GT500-style smoky burnouts at stoplights.

    OUCH! Pretty damaging IMO. I used to ridicule the Lexus IS and GS for VDIM. Now the BMW M5's stability control system cannot be disabled :sick: Oh well at least I can disable the stability control in my two current BMWs (Sigh of relief).

    It appears the Development Chief of the M Division is miffed with us North Americans for demanding a stick:

    Gerhard Richter, the development chief of BMW's M division, practically gnashed his teeth in frustration when he told us last spring that the BMW M5 would be made available with a six-speed manual transmission in 2007. He knew that rabid BMW purists in America had forced the M division to make the six-speed available as a no-cost option for the U.S. version, even though this transmission makes the M5 slower than the car with the standard, seven-speed, electrohydraulic-activated, sequential-manual gearbox (SMG).
    And Richter is right: the M5 is slower and even clumsier with a conventional six-speed manual gearbox and a clutch pedal. But the six-speed M5 is also better to drive in almost every way.

  • designmandesignman Posts: 2,129
    Also from Automobile:

    "Surprisingly, the six-speed's clutch action is as light as you'll find in a BMW 3-series..."

    Heresy and pure sabotage. One of the great things about the M cars is (was?) their heavy clutches. They're trying to force SMG on us. Either that or they're just not thinking clearly or taking the market for suckers. I will never buy a car with an automatic clutch. If I choose to rattle my teeth it's done with my left foot.
  • dhamiltondhamilton Posts: 873
    OK feel free to step on that banana peel of a lane change test. Track tests proof this out. Your clinging to a ridiculous lane change test? Your a better car guy than that Merc.
  • tagmantagman Malibu, CaliforniaPosts: 8,441
    Welcome back Tagman.

    Thanks, Dewey... it's good to be back.

    Thanks but no thanks. What is a performance car with a compromised transmission? Not much in my opinion.

    Exactly my point. I knew you'd understand it. But, especially with the '07's solution staring the '06 in the face.

  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    I am amazed at the persistence of these E AMG vs. M5 vs. S6 arguments? All three are turkeys when compared to an overpriced Audi RS4 which is far cheaper than the E AMG, M5 and S6. I am confident that the new BMW M3 will beat the RS4 and at the same time the Bimmer will be offered at a price that does not border on the side of RS4 ridiculousness.

    If you want luxury then buy a heavy oversized MB S550 /S600 or even a Audi A8. If you want performance in a sedan than buy something that is nimbler, lighter and smaller like a Audi RS4 or BMW M3(although these vehicles are not exactly light).
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Video of the Jaguar CX-f:


    Nearer to production CX-f was recently spotted:

    Winding Road

    Pardon my last post: I meant to write oversized turkeys not just turkeys.
  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243
    Funny Rolls Royce advertisement.
    Funniest one is a Toyota ad from Latin America.

    World's Funniest Car Commercials
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Here I am thinking you had a point to begin with. I'm looking at the MT comparo and in your precious figure 8 test the Audi did a whole 5 tenths of a second better than the E63, yet they both produced the same amount of G's. Talk about making something out of absolutely nothing. Talk about a ridiculous, you trumped this nonsense up to be some great difference and it ISN'T. I do see a 9 tenths of a second difference in their 0-60 numbers and almost 10 mph difference in their 1/4 mile traps speeds. You know good and well that if there are any "major" differences between the performance of these 2 it is in acceleration, not your figure 8 or the lane change test. Braking the Audi has a slight advantage, about 3-4 feet in both comparos.

    What nonsense you're tried to trump up here. You're clinging to a figure 8 test that show about the same amount of difference between the two cars as C&D's lane change test did, but I'm clinging to some nonsense? Pot, meet kettle.

  • deweydewey Posts: 5,243

    I regretfully have to inform you that you lost our MB E vs. BMW 5 2006 sales bet. Oh and by the way how did that brochure taste after that other MB S Cabrio bet of ours ? At least I am glad you are still alive. :P

    During Dec. Audi sales grew 39.7 percent
    During Dec. BMW sales grew 21 percent.

    What the hell is wrong with these buyers? Have they never read CR or JD Power before? Dont they know that Lexus is number one in reliability? I just dont understand it? :confuse:
Sign In or Register to comment.