Howdy, Stranger!

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





High End Luxury Cars

17071737576771

Comments

  • aki86aki86 Posts: 15
    Oh. Your post made it seem like you expected BMW to win. I know what you mean though.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Yeah...we're talking about Car and Driver....BMW's biggest fanclub.
    I expected the Benz to win, but when I read C&D and there is a BMW in a comparo I assume it will win always....though there are better cars in the comparo (as in this case). This the rare instance their BMW lust didn't take hold.

    M
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    C & D would deny that vehemently, by the way.....
  • kjllawkjllaw Posts: 2
    I currently own 528i which I purchased about 3 years ago. Aside from the loose exhaust, constantly squeaking doors(probably due to the door moldings(?) made of cheap rubbers) and blown climate control fuse, I did not have much problems with the car. I was actually planning on purchasing the new 745i in September when the new 5's goes on sale. (I actually loved the new exterior design). I thought the great performance and the prestige was worth a few trips to the dealership from time to time... UNTIL NOW.
    I've just witnessed a brand new (3 month old) 745i parked right next to my 5'er burnt to the ground. The car's engine caught on fire RIGHT NEXT TO MY CAR as he was trying to pull out of the parking space of a shopping center for no apparent reason.
    The fireman (came in 2 minutes after called. Good work!) after putting the fire out said that it is probably due to a bad electrical wiring. The owner of the 7, an asian man probably in his mid 50's, was almost crying as he saw his babied 7 go down in flames. Luckily, my car was fine except for the inches of dust that fell on the car from the fire.
    I was aware of the electrical issues with the new 7's. But seeing it in person was an awakening experience. I've owned 2 BMW's during the last 7 years and I was dead set on purchasing another one. Today's incident TOTALLY made me change my plans.
    WHen you purchase a BMW, they subscribe you the BMW magazine for free as a compliment to the owners. It almost always contain pictures of totalled BMW's with owner's letters thanking them how the car saved their lives. May be so. But it would be nice to see the totalled 7 with the owner face in shock in their magazine.
    No matter how great the performance is, it is not worth the risk you are taking in terms of reliability.
    I was never a fan of Toyota's (I used to despise them). But right now I think my hard earned dollars are probably going to go to Lexus the next time around. It just makes sense.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Wow. That's a bit unsettling.....thanks for sharing. My partner has a 745i, he's down in San Diego with it right now. Has had a ton of little problems with it so far. But this is a big one.
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Posts: 539
    My point (above) was the magazine editors have opinions about the cars that they drive, and when they do a comparison, they probably do have a favorite. I think BMW earned the position they have had. I also think the editors try to be objective, but there is going to be some bias creeping in. Most of the magazines have not added a CTS to their long term test fleets. Perhaps they are waiting for the 2004 3.6 liter engine, which is going to be available only with the automatic (at least to begin with).
  • ljflxljflx Posts: 4,687
    I've been around - I got back from Chicago on Thursday - but I'm staying out of the merry-go-round discussion on the Lexus vs. MB board this time. Some Saturday this summer I'll get around to a local dealer that sells RR's and Audi's. It's where I tested the old A-8. I'm actually interested in taking a look at the new RR. I did think the paint job on the A-8 I saw at the auto show was the best I've ever seen on a car. Audi doesn't skimp on anything in/on the A8 - that is for sure.

    Everyone of these cars is up to auto excellence standards and I can't imagine that anyone of them will disappoint the buyer if bought for his/her desired automotive reasons. I've gotten used to great reliability so I'm spoiled by it. The fact that Lexus LS delivers the ride and quietness I love coupled with that reliability leads me back there.

    I think autospies is 50% guess and 50% real on facts. I'm interested to see how accurate they are with the 2004 LS redo they talked up a while back. I did read it there first and it was quite a while before anyone else picked it up. By the way I'm curious as to what you thought of the GS redesign they showed. I thought it was a great looking car.

    Lastly - where is the A8 redesign in the mix of S,LS,7 and A8? Is it first and in the lead or last and catching up. I always thought it was in the lead on the redesigns followed by MB, Lexus and BMW. If that is the case than you have to measure it vs. the redos of the other 3 as they come out. One great thing about the A8 is its scarcity. With only 2k a year sold here you are rather unique on the road when you drive one.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Ok I'll go for that. I do think the editors already had it in their mind about the 03 CTS so it's probably best that they get the improved version for a long-term test.

    ljflx,

    That board will never be the same without your participation!! Anyway I haven't seen the autospies picture of the GS redo. I'll have to look it up.

    It's hard to say who is where with redoing their flagships. The A8 came out in 1994, but wasn't sold here until 1997. So it was out before all of the current S/7/LS models. I guess I don't look at it like that with Audi because the A8 had been around so long.....it's probably safe to say they've leapfrogged the current group of cars. It's a stunner. I want to hear about the RR Phantom the minute you take a look at it.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    You know what I just read your post again, did you mean Rolls-Royce or Range Rover?

    M
  • fjk57702fjk57702 Posts: 539
    Well, I for one, would not buy the 2003 CTS because of the opel V6, knowing that the 2004 model would offer the new 3.6.

    The magazine editors probably have their minds made up before any of their comparison tests begin, so it takes a very good car to over come their bias.
  • ljflxljflx Posts: 4,687
    Range Rover.

    If you want to do a 50-50 deal I'll buy the Rolls with you. I'm sure neither one of us will mind driving it back and forth to where we live. By the way I like it more everytime I see it in pictures.

    I'll post on the other board but not in a circular discussion where everyone has already made their points. I do agree with you on your BMW 7 "fire" point - its a quick jump to a conclusion that may be dead wrong.

    If you check autospies for the GS take a look also at the S redesign for 2005 or 2006 they showed. I also thought it looked great though I saw a post on the S board - I believe - where someone said they didn't like it at all. It looked like a logical evolutionary design for the S so I thought it might be accurate. Let me know what you think.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Yeah right....you're in a much better position to get a Rolls than I am. I couldn't come near the 50/50 deal...I probably could afford about %10 of it...lol.

    Well you know I think the Range Rover is the best lux-suv on the planet. I personally don't like it's exterior mainly because of Civic-racer tailights and side fins...but the interior is off the chain. I know you think the TLC is the best so I'm really anxious to know what you think about the Range Rover.

    I'll check those pics.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    I looked at the pictures of the furture S-Class and GS. The GS looks more or less like the HPX concept crossover. That makes sense considering Lexus has stated they are going for a unified family look now. That picture of the S-Class I'm not so sure about, looks too much like the current car to me. I don't trust that website too much anymore because the majority of what they report is pure bs through and through.

    M
  • sysweisyswei Posts: 1,804
    Agreed, merc1, imho alot of the stuff on autospies is pure conjecture or sensationalized for the sake of building traffic to their site. I think they will have egg on their face when the 2004 LS comes out, because I highly doubt it will be the "totally new" exterior that they proclaimed a few months back. I also agree that their "scoop" picture of a next-gen S is nearly identical to the current S and so I doubt that story too.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Posts: 1,289
    Autospies is mainly B.S.

    I remember before the last LS430 came out, they showed supposed pics of the 2001 LS430 and they rendered it as having a sloping rear deck like a Jaguar's. They were completely off the mark.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    My opinion - the Range Rover is the best SUV on the planet ONLY for rock crawling. It's probably the very best for going straight up a mountain, because it's designed for that. But if you drive an SUV for more routine transportation, hauling, towing or just light mountain camping, etc., nearly anything is a better choice. The Land Cruiser would be better, certainly more reliable, better engine, etc. Personally, I don't like the looks of TLC at all, but there's no denying it's a good truck.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    The Land Crusier has a better engine? Oh really, they must have upgraded it since last I checked it was THE weakest engine of any SUV in that price range.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    The Mercedes site that *used* to be right on the money everytime:

    http://mbspy.bacosys.be/index2.html

    Traffic has slowed considerably at this site for some reason. They were without question the best site for insight into Mercedes-Benz.

    M
  • This may be a day late and all, but regarding the problems with a circa 1995 7 series BMW....

    I was recently looking into this, and from 1993 to 1995 (think that's correct) BMW used a nickel alloy engine, called Nikasil. This alloy, combined with the relatively high sulphur content of gas sold in some US regions, hastened pitting of the cylinder walls. BMW extended the warranty, but if you buy it used, you're probably not going to be covered.

    BMW evidently had some success with this engine/alloy in their motorcycle line. It did not translate well to automobiles, however.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    I have no personal experience with TLC because I don't like the looks of it, but I hear tell the Rover's engine is trouble prone. I'm betting TLC, though weak, is dependable. But if I'm wrong, I stand corrected. I know the Sequoia is weak from personal experience, so you may be right.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Well.......

    TLC/LX470 - 235hp
    Navigator - 300hp
    Escalade - 345hp
    Range Rover - 282hp

    I clearly see the inferior engine in the Toyota products. You'll have to do a little better than "hearsay" as far as the RR having engine problems. It's the same engine as the current BMW 540i, thats been around since 1997 so I hardly think it's bug ridden now.

    M
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    Sorry merc, having not owned one, all I have to offer is what my friends who own one have said.
  • ljflxljflx Posts: 4,687
    Inferior horsepower - not an inferior engine. I know two people who have had Range Rovers and they had terrible experiences. One's in a TLC now and the other is in a LX470. They would clearly not share your view as both had engine problems.
  • nvbankernvbanker Posts: 7,285
    That's all I'm saying too.
  • tasillotasillo Posts: 51
    Please take the comparison of SUV engines to the proper forum. The fact that the RR has a BMW V-8 doesn't make this the place to discuss.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    If hp isn't a trait of an inferior engine then you'll need to explain what you're talking about a little better than coming up with that "I know people this and I know people that" stuff. From a pure engine design standpoint 235hp is pitiful in a class of vehicles that all push 280hp or better. Two experiences CERTAINLY don't make an inferior engine either, not at all. Then I have to ask whether or not you're talking about the new RR, because it doesn't share anything with the previous model.

    M
  • ljflxljflx Posts: 4,687
    I learned a long time ago that where there is smoke there is fire. Everything I've read over the years states that a Range Rover is a trouuble prone vehicle. Then the only two people I know who've had one (one was a 99 and the other was a 2000) have problem after problem. Proof enough for me. Technical prowess and beauty isn't worth much if you can't or don't have confidence in the automobile.

    If I'm going to spend $60k plus on a vehicle I expect perfection or something real close to it. I think in the future you'll see that cars that don't live up to that will lose market share - MB included. People may look past things once but most don't get burned twice.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Thats too bad that you don't realize that new Range Rover is a new from the ground up vehicle and shares nothing with the previous generation. The 1999 and 2000 model is completely irrelevant to the current model. Yes the old model was trouble prone. I'm not sure where the new model stands in the all-important surveys. I suspect its not setting any reliablity records, so I have to ask why even bother looking at one?

    Sometimes (like in this case) I can't believe that you're seriously holding those two cases against such a fine and completely new vehicle. Since you already have what 3(?) Lexuses I think you should really check out something that isn't a Lexus. Live a little. Even I wouldn't have all Mercedes-Benzes if I were in your postion.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    Maserati Quattroporte:

    http://car.kak.net/modules.php?op=modload&name=news&file=- article&sid=1045

    Set to take on the S-Class, 7-Series, A8 and XJ.

    M
  • jagboyxtypejagboyxtype Posts: 241
    I expected it to be a little more volumptuous somehow, probably because of some of the concept sketches I've seen, like the ones below:

    http://car.kak.net/bilder/maserati/maserati_quattroporte03s.jpg

    http://car.kak.net/bilder/maserati/maserati_quattroporte02s.jpg

    http://car.kak.net/bilder/maserati/maserati_quattroporte01s.jpg

    Maybe I'll have to see it in person and get the full effect of mass and proportion, but right now, the XJ and S-Class are my picks for best looking cars in the class. I do like the Buick-like vents along the side (I'm not being sarcastic - I think they really jazzed up the Park Avenue and look good on the Quattroporte too). The way the doors meet the bottom of the car reminds me a little of the 7-Series though, along with the rather bland, blank sides themselves, and that's not a good thing.

    http://car.kak.net/bilder/maserati/maserati_quattroporte04s.jpg

    I really want to like the car, but it just doesn't seem "fresh" or "new" or inspiring enough from these pics to capture me yet. The Maserati coupe/convertible were already a few years old before they came here (well, the coupe and its general styling which transfered to the convertible that was new), and I had already seen the coupe in Europe with the different rear end styling - which was more unique and desireable than the U.S. version IMHO. This Quattroporte carries a lot of the same theme, and I find it a little dated already. The interiors I've seen elsewhere were beautiful though. I think I just have to become more accustomed to it, but Maserati's designes seem bland IMO. Just get a volumptuous Ferarri and be done with it, or a Jag or Merc.

    http://car.kak.net/bilder/maserati/maserati_quattroporte05s.jpg

    I do like the hood proportions and the way the A-pillars meet the body of the car - looks a little Aston Martin to me, but the rest of the exterior of the car dissappointed me.
Sign In or Register to comment.