Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

robr2

m6user said:

I really don't know anyone, myself included, that consults with or cares what class the EPA designates a car. Manufacturers seldom market their cars using the EPA categories.

I'm sure that not consulting the EPA class is true for the vast majority of car shoppers. But it is something that is common across all vehicles that can be measured. The fuel economy listed on the Munroney sticker uses it as a guide.

As for manufacturers seldom marketing using the EPA categories, I disagree. You will often hear the phrase "Best whatever in it's class." That typically refers to the EPA category.

qbrozen

Agree, now that I know how its done, EPA classes are useless.

Do the euro classifications work? Not sure I have time to sift through them all, but specifically dividing C-segment from D-segment. At first glance, it appears to be CLA/A3 in the C-segment and C-class/3-series/A4 in the D-segment. They don't list Acura since it doesn't exist there, but Civic is C-segment and Accord is D-segment.

m6user

"You will often hear the phrase "Best whatever in it's class." That typically refers to the EPA category."

I think they use whatever "class" they can construe to fit their advertising. I recall a discussion about the Ford Taurus which everyone knows is a large family sedan. I believe the EPA had it as a midsize based on interior volume but Ford markets it as a large family sedan. As it should IMO.

tlong

Let's not forget that size impressions change over time. The Accord was a compact that went to a midsized and then a borderline-large car. The current Civic is larger than earlier Accords. And so Honda has introduced the Fit, which is larger than the first Civics. You can use the same analogy for the Corolla and then Yaris, or the A4 and then the A3, or the C-class and now the CLA.

The vehicles we used to think of as "entry-level" have gotten larger and new smaller models have been slotted in below them. In a lot of cases those new models are made more cheaply than the original grown models, so that adds a bit of additional complexity. For example my new '98 A4 was a similar size to the current A3 sedan, but I've sat in the A3 and I would say that the old A4 was a much more luxurious vehicle than the current A3, and it also performed better.

m6user

It seems like the luxury makers have new entry level cars that are not up to the same level of luxury nor performance of the cars that preceded them. So an argument could be made that they are not ELLPS because they don't have the luxury or performance level expected of the brand. I wasn't impressed with either the CLA or the ILX at the auto show from a luxury viewpoint.

markcincinnati

qbrozen said:

Actually, the ILX/A3/CLA/1-series are subcompacts. Then you have your compacts (A4, C-class, 3-series, ATS), your midsize (5-series, etc), and your full-size (7-series, etc). There is the microcar class below all of that, but the luxo players haven't ventured there yet.

So, yes, I agree with where I think you are going ... boards that divide by class and forget this whole pesky "entry level" tag, since that obviously varies by manufacturer for the time being.

My head hurts less, now that we can go back to what I presume was actually intended from the get go:

ELLPS - Compact Sized Premium Sedans with Performance capabilities that are not an afterthought or based on trim, badges, decals and chrome

LPS - Mid Sized Premium Sedans with . . . .

Let's keep the Sub-compacts together but differentiate the "LPS" Sub-compacts by virtue of pedigree or genuine Luxury and Performance content. If the A3, despite it pedigree, for instance, can't muster anything else than its name to differentiate itself from a Jetta (or whatever), well it would be left out. I think we're all trying to allow, again for example, the ILX to be in a given class but simultaneously exclude the Civic despite the family resemblance.

SCLPS, EL or C LPS and LPS in short.

I would suspect the 3 series and A4 and C class and ATS buyers are more "birds of a feather" as would others of the Sub-compact size be birds of a feather. The price range, for example, of the ELLPS is so very wide, but the "class" as noted by the original post still seems to my old-fart's brain to be the one that's "just right." We've come full-circle.

Thank you.

Signed,

Goldilocks.

sweendogy

I agree with goldie-

markcincinnati

Coming Soon

Picked up the S4 after the 25K service interval where it received an oil and filter change plus a brake fluid flush and refill. New battery for the smart key and a hand wash and front mat vacuum rounded out the "no charge" service. I had a new RED S4 as my loaner for the day. Things are going well, the brakes are said to be at 80% of new.

My rep tells me the new S4 will "certainly" have a horsepower and torque jump. The reason? The S4 is ALWAYS more powerful than the top of the line A6 (not S6, 3.0T supercharged A6). The new 2016 A6's on the floor have the same 333HP as my 2014 S4. In my mind, however, it just won't do for the S3 to outgun the S4, just like the S6 "must" outgun the S4 and so forth.

So, I'm thinking the new S4 will simply adopt the same motor as is in my wife's SQ5 -- 354HP. Apparently that is a no go -- it won't fit under the hood of the S4. So we're looking at what? 10%; would bump the S4 to 366 HP -- and with a bump in torque to 350, or so, wouldn't that be "sufficient" to out gun the S3, be bigger than the A6, but still be outgunned by the S6 and S8, etc.

Well, if my sales rep knows some bump is a certainty, don't you think BMW does too? The 335 is due for what a 15% bump? And so forth?

The horsepower (and torque) "wars" continue and continue and continue.

How many speeding tickets does it take before your insurance company dumps you or you end up in jail? Making a lighter A4 line and bumping the power by "only" 10% is certainly a recipe for "license and registration please . . . Mark." God I hate it when the traffic cop knows you by name.

Can't wait for the new uprated power -- coming soon to a [German] car near you.

graphicguy

This was a few years ago, but I was doing a little stoplight wars with my (then) relatively new Mustang GT. Not a slow car by any stretch. Until, I got into a little friendly throttle blip war with an F150 in the next lane.

Lite goes green. Throttle mashed, good shift from 1st to 2nd, an even better one from 2nd to 3rd until we both backed off. But, he was 100 feet ahead of me when we did. Ended up he had debadged and chipped what ended up being an F150 Lightning.

From that p;point forward, as long as my vehicles were quick, I was happy.

Loved my time with the Mustang, the S4 and my 335i. Emphasis for me these days is the whole package. If it doesn't go well, if it doesn't handle well, if it's not put together well, if it isn't relatively pain free from a maintenance and reliability standpoint, it's not on my radar.

roadburner

graphicguy said:

This was a few years ago, but I was doing a little stoplight wars with my (then) relatively new Mustang GT. Not a slow car by any stretch. Until, I got into a little friendly throttle blip war with an F150 in the next lane.

Lite goes green. Throttle mashed, good shift from 1st to 2nd, an even better one from 2nd to 3rd until we both backed off. But, he was 100 feet ahead of me when we did. Ended up he had debadged and chipped what ended up being an F150 Lightning.

From that p;point forward, as long as my vehicles were quick, I was happy.

Loved my time with the Mustang, the S4 and my 335i. Emphasis for me these days is the whole package. If it doesn't go well, if it doesn't handle well, if it's not put together well, if it isn't relatively pain free from a maintenance and reliability standpoint, it's not on my radar.

Agreed; that's what I like about my MS3 it's relatively quick(especially since I boosted the horsepower and removed the ludicrous top speed limiter), handling is very good(if you don't mind the slow in-fast out point and shoot driving style), and it's still a comfortable cruiser. I also like the fact that it is a true sleeper. Right now I'm trying to decide my next car will be a focused track toy or a more luxurious Grand Tourer. In either case it will almost certainly be a RWD coupe with at least 350 bhp and three pedals.

flightnurse

I think people are missing the point on price, the prices people are quoting is MSRP, who pays MSRP? So a 320i with premium package, Leather, Sport Package and Lighting Package $41,400. Can be had easily for $38,400 and right now BMW has $1,500 debate on cars on the dealers lot, $36,900. I'm sure you can get said 320i for even less then this. So for under$40K you can have a ELPS this is with manual transmission... Lease Payments for said BMW with mim down of about $1,100 for tax's and fee's would be roughly $350/m. Now a 328i with Sport package, Premium package (includes Leather) and lighting package is $45,500 (MSRP) Could be has easily for $40,800 this includes $1,500 rebate BMW has, and I'm sure you could get this price down even more.. With mim down, lease payments would be roughly $375/m

So when you guys are throwing around prices, lets be realistic, who on this board pays MSRP for their cars? No one... Real world data is showing that people are paying a lot less for their cars.

m6user

Nobody is missing the point. Everyone realizes what you're saying but some deals are better than others for a variety of reasons. That's why people use MSRP for reference. It's like using the EPA MPG numbers. Everyone knows that peoples mpg varies some but for comparison purposes the EPA numbers are best to use. There is always somebody that got $10k off or pays close to MSRP for some oddball reason or gets 40mpg in a car rated for 32. Better to deal with verifiable numbers for comparison sake.

qbrozen

exactly. And deals vary throughout the year. MSRP is the only way that makes consistent sense.

By the way, @markcincinnati, I still think pricing is part of the equation. I'd like a combination of size class and pricing. B-class cars with starting MSRP under $40k, for example.

markcincinnati

QB: wouldn't that mean that the Audi S4 (not RS) and the BMW 335 (not M) would be ineligible? I know we can (and do) discuss pretty much whatever we want here (within certain parameters) but we would really narrow the category and the forum(s) down quite a bit if we put a cap of $39,999 as a starting point; unless of course you meant the 335 would be allowed in because there are 3 series cars that do fit this criteria.

Thus: a 320 "invites" all "3" class cars along with it.

I do not have access to "unlimited" funds (as a practical matter, few of us do, even the 2%-ers) -- but my search and the folks I know and "fraternize" with (middle and upper-middle class earners) typically buy/lease within a 2 class range. Example: my neighbor says he's looking at BMWs. I say "what model?" He says, "probably a 5 series, the 3 is too small, maybe a 7 series, I'll have to see what kind of deal I can get."

One day, I see what I presume is a new 535ix with dealer plates in his driveway. As I pass, I roll down my window and stop to ask, "is that the new ride?" He says, "they gave it to me for the weekend, I have to take it back Monday, I dunno." I say, "you'll really appreciate the X-drive if we have another winter like this one."

He says, "no poop?!?" (not really).

Next time I drive by -- a few days later, I see a new 7 series in the driveway with temp tags on it. When I see him next, I ask him about it. He tells me, "the lease payment on this car wasn't much more than the payment on the 5 and this thing is loaded -- I couldn't turn it down."

Now, for all I know he was set on a 7 series all along -- he is a tall drink of water. But I think he was assuming the 5 series would be fine and fit the financial parms he and his wife had set. Well, when for a "little more" he could have a 7 series, well it was probably NOT an agonizing decision.

The thing that cracks me up is what "always" happens (and if you don't believe me, spend some time on Audiworld's forums): the new fill-in-the-blank is acquired (purchased, financed or leased) and about 15 minutes later, the proud new owner is browsing Tire Rack, APR, (fill in the blank for your brand of LPS car) etc for "all the stuff" that this brand new owner will buy to modify his (or her) new ride.

I have seen -- again, over on Audi World -- folks announce the new A4 they've just ordered, then announce that the car is at the dealer, then post picture of the new car (while it is still at the dealership) with the title of the post "Let the Mods Begin."

Folks (broad generalization) buy/lease any of these cars that can genuinely and without qualification be in the "something" LPS class and then dump another dump-truck of money on aftermarket tires and wheels, engine management chips, pullies, exhaust systems, brakes, lights, spoilers, coil-overs, audio systems, nav systems, headlights, tail-lights, interior treatments, and . . . (the list goes on and on and on -- thank you SEMA).

It seems to me if you have "graduated" to the luxury performance sedans (etc), that you can, practically speaking, pretty much afford anything you damn well please.

The wheels and tires alone "y'all" spring for on an otherwise very well equipped 335 or Q50 or S4 cost a young fortune -- yet "y'all" go ahead and plunk down the forty-nine, eleventy-twelve thousand dollars on the car and then just for grins put on a $2,400 set of rims with $1,200 worth of rubber on them without batting a freakin' eye.

What really cracks me up is the folks who acquire an A4 and then spend thousands on engine, suspension and tire and wheel mods so that they can create what they designate as an AS4 -- when for another $50 a month they could've had an S4 and be done with it (and the warranty would still be in full force, too).

One A4 buyer purchased one without navigation and then worked and worked until he found all of the parts required to retro-fit the Audi OEM nav system into the thing -- talk about costing a fortune. I often wonder, why not buy an A4 and see how much money and sweat it will take to fit the DSG transmission in place of the 8-speed tiptronic.

It ain't the money that compels "our" actions in this class of car -- at least as far as the fan site participants are concerned. Some of the aftermarket audio systems, too, cost more than a new 4K 79" UHDTV.

AMEX - don't leave home without it.

These are LPS cars we're talking about -- within middle and upper middle class lunacy and normalcy you're just gonna have to get rid of the notion of $40K -- it jus' isn't a thing anymore (if it ever was).

sweendogy

I like the idea of a bmw that's sporty for under 40k....but el cheapo with auto (which some herd have ) is not it. Talk about sport all you want- and I like the MS3 becaus in many ways it's a better car then the 320. The Manual 320 (never driven) Prob a nice rig,328 manual even better I guess. Talk lease leader ad deals- guys who get 10-15k of cts - but real world when you need a car you take msrp and subtract an amount- usually 10-% or less depending on car. I love cars- I love cars with passion more. Do you feel the love (tonight?)

graphicguy

BMW is all about the lease payment. I was not a typical customer for them, since I don't lease. When I bought my first one, a fair amount of time ago, my sales guy was a little taken aback by me negotiating based on a purchase. He said they always negotiated payment. He's a good guy. Whenever I walk into the dealership, he knows I'm seriously looking and not just kicking tires. We go straight to the "dealer sheet", allegedly with his cost and MSRP on it.

Point of all this, you guys are right. The only consistent price point you can depend on is the MSRP. We don't pay that. But, it's the only consistent number you can reliably use, that has no bearing on geography, lease vs buy, demand (or not), etc.

I still say the "base" price can't exceed $45K for EL. That means the A3/4 gets in, but the S4 doesn't, for example.

qbrozen

I could be talked into $45k, which allows the 335i, but not the 335ix. I could go either way, frankly. I think $40k would make more sense after BMW releases a smaller class here in the US to compete with the CLA/A3

markcincinnati

What is the issue with the base price? The class of car which means "who knows" what the base price will be is what this is all about. The A3 is a sub compact, the A4 is a compact. If this is to be about sub-compacts, well I guess that is OK, but then we would need yet another cubby hole to poke the B8 Audis and the entire lineup of 3's. These are LPS cars -- but a bit smaller. In some instances it is easily possible to have the 3 series priced at more than the 5 series.

Is there a debate about the "maximum" MSRP (base) for the full sized LPS's?

It may well be true that a 335 would fit a $45K ceiling (for an RWD only version), but -- according to the BMW dealership here in River City -- over 40%, of all 3 series sold are AWD. And, here in our climate, I was told the number now favors the x - drive versions as the majority sold.

The 3 series -- from bottom to top -- are in the compact class. MSRP ranges from a number beginning with a $3 to a number beginning with a $6.

There are NO 335's with a window sticker under $50K, unless someone has deliberately ordered one totally stripped. There are no S4's under $50K either -- but I have seen S4 manual transmission versions with but one option that squeak by at a hair over $50K.

Likewise, I shopped the IS350 Fsports and they were ALL over $50K (if they were AWD).

We need to talk about either sub-compacts or compacts here. Since the MSRP's (from a practical standpoint) are all over the board, we need to think, for example, 3 series, not 3 series until they exceed $40 or $45K.

Those who lease (apparently the majority) shop mo pay, not MSRP. And those who do buy, well, of course they're welcome too. I am simply arguing to be inclusive.

Spend some time on the Mercedes build your own board and see how quickly the C class heads up up and away. Even the ATS when well equipped goes ballistic with aplomb and ease.

nyccarguy

I think the 320i is going to be a tremendous value once they start coming off lease ans selling as CPO BMWs for the low to mid $20K.

dino001

markcincinnati said:

What is the issue with the base price?

There are NO 335's with a window sticker under $50K, unless someone has deliberately ordered one totally stripped. There are no S4's under $50K either -- but I have seen S4 manual transmission versions with but one option that squeak by at a hair over $50K.

Likewise, I shopped the IS350 Fsports and they were ALL over $50K (if they were AWD).

We need to talk about either sub-compacts or compacts here. Since the MSRP's (from a practical standpoint) are all over the board, we need to think, for example, 3 series, not 3 series until they exceed $40 or $45K.

Those who lease (apparently the majority) shop mo pay, not MSRP. And those who do buy, well, of course they're welcome too. I am simply arguing to be inclusive.

Spend some time on the Mercedes build your own board and see how quickly the C class heads up up and away. Even the ATS when well equipped goes ballistic with aplomb and ease.

Mark, I think it seems there is a vantage point gap between you and some other guys here. You seem to be getting mostly top of the line, or at least well into the options, whereas a lot if other guys seem to be fishing in much less equipped ponds and get freaked out by anything more than 50 on the sticker. They said so repeatedly. It may be because they live by their memories (what it used to cost), or perhaps by simply how much they could afford. For myself, I don't look at cars at their base. If I can't afford its mid-to-high option version, the car is not for me. I see no point is a stripper, but I understand why somebody may actually go for it. But that vantage point difference is very real. I generally agree with inclusion of 335 in this class, but it barely squeaks into. S4 used to be IMHO above 335, but that was before they eliminated V6 version of A4 and S4 took its place, giving space to RS4/5. I totally disagree on M or RS. There is absolutely NOTHING entry level about it, from pricing, to chassis, to engineering. ZERO. Other than superficial likeness, those are different cars than their lower cousins, essentially from ground up. Small size? Porsches are even smaller, so what? That's not enough.

qbrozen

markcincinnati said:

What is the issue with the base price? The class of car which means "who knows" what the base price will be is what this is all about. The A3 is a sub compact, the A4 is a compact. If this is to be about sub-compacts, well I guess that is OK, but then we would need yet another cubby hole to poke the B8 Audis and the entire lineup of 3's. These are LPS cars -- but a bit smaller. In some instances it is easily possible to have the 3 series priced at more than the 5 series.

Is there a debate about the "maximum" MSRP (base) for the full sized LPS's?

It may well be true that a 335 would fit a $45K ceiling (for an RWD only version), but -- according to the BMW dealership here in River City -- over 40%, of all 3 series sold are AWD. And, here in our climate, I was told the number now favors the x - drive versions as the majority sold.

The 3 series -- from bottom to top -- are in the compact class. MSRP ranges from a number beginning with a $3 to a number beginning with a $6.

There are NO 335's with a window sticker under $50K, unless someone has deliberately ordered one totally stripped. There are no S4's under $50K either -- but I have seen S4 manual transmission versions with but one option that squeak by at a hair over $50K.

Likewise, I shopped the IS350 Fsports and they were ALL over $50K (if they were AWD).

We need to talk about either sub-compacts or compacts here. Since the MSRP's (from a practical standpoint) are all over the board, we need to think, for example, 3 series, not 3 series until they exceed $40 or $45K.

Those who lease (apparently the majority) shop mo pay, not MSRP. And those who do buy, well, of course they're welcome too. I am simply arguing to be inclusive.

Spend some time on the Mercedes build your own board and see how quickly the C class heads up up and away. Even the ATS when well equipped goes ballistic with aplomb and ease.

I'm not sure of everything you are trying to say, but it comes down to the same thing some of us have been saying over and over again: ENTRY LEVEL is price-dependent. Something with a base price starting with a 6 is not entry level, no matter what it shares its underpinnings with. And, yes, of course a car can be optioned up with a ridiculous amount of gee-gaws, but that's largely irrelevant to the discussion. You can take a $16k Honda and put $20k of electronics, custom paint, and custom interior on it, but that doesn't change its class. Lipstick on a pig, in other words. Base MSRP provides a consistent basis of comparison.

flightnurse

markcincinnati said:

It may well be true that a 335 would fit a $45K ceiling (for an RWD only version), but -- according to the BMW dealership here in River City -- over 40%, of all 3 series sold are AWD. And, here in our climate, I was told the number now favors the x - drive versions as the majority sold.

Mark every car magazine has disproved this whole "If you live in snow country, you need AWD" Car's today and the electronic nannies have helped so much that AWD isn't really needed, plus these same magazines have shown how people have a false sense of security with these cars.

Michaell

flightnurse said:

It may well be true that a 335 would fit a $45K ceiling (for an RWD only version), but -- according to the BMW dealership here in River City -- over 40%, of all 3 series sold are AWD. And, here in our climate, I was told the number now favors the x - drive versions as the majority sold.

Mark every car magazine has disproved this whole "If you live in snow country, you need AWD" Car's today and the electronic nannies have helped so much that AWD isn't really needed, plus these same magazines have shown how people have a false sense of security with these cars.

Yeah but the magazines don't buy cars. My wife will not have a car without AWD here in Colorado even though we really only "need" it about 10-15 days per year. 

markcincinnati

Michaell said:

flightnurse said:

markcincinnati said:

It may well be true that a 335 would fit a $45K ceiling (for an RWD only version), but -- according to the BMW dealership here in River City -- over 40%, of all 3 series sold are AWD. And, here in our climate, I was told the number now favors the x - drive versions as the majority sold.

Mark every car magazine has disproved this whole "If you live in snow country, you need AWD" Car's today and the electronic nannies have helped so much that AWD isn't really needed, plus these same magazines have shown how people have a false sense of security with these cars.

Yeah but the magazines don't buy cars. My wife will not have a car without AWD here in Colorado even though we really only "need" it about 10-15 days per year. 

Here's "a" thing -- not the thing, a thing: The list of BRANDs we discuss here (and elsewhere) that do not offer AWD versions of their models has diminished to an incredibly small number. Perception is reality is the phrase we live by, even if we don't always agree. The perception is that the higher performing models from Audi, BMW and Mercedes (just to name the Germans for an example) now offer AWD virtually if not literally and I think we're closing in on literally, across their entire lines. Porsche, clearly not an LPS generally speaking, has 20 different cars for sale all called 911's -- I believe they are all offered with AWD. And, often the ones (of any ilk, brand or type) that achieve the most "wins" are the AWD models.

But, even if that were not true -- what really matters is what people buy. Pull into a parking lot of a high zoot country club and look at the trunk emblems on the carefully parked high buck LPS (or, of you ike ELLPS) cars -- the majority of them will be xdrive, CTS or ATS4's, or quattros or four-matics or AWD badged in some way.

Let's assume that my wife and your wife, knowing that they can only actually REQUIRE AWD for about 2-5 days per year (for go power in snow); and that they could probably go if they would use winter tires with FWD or RWD, just fine, were asked if they would give up AWD. I am positive the answer from my wife would be, "don't take away my AWD."

The perception and the sales have been pointing to AWD, automatic transmissions, not naturally aspirated engines, more than 6 speeds in the transmission (or at the very least, nothing less than 6 speeds) and more and more electronic driving aids.

Entry level may have started off as meaning "cheaper versions" of higher line cars from a given mfg. And, as a practical matter, at base, no options, that is, MSRP, that is still true. But I am today convinced (by virtue of what the dealer folks tell me) that the only reason for a given BASE MSRP is the tv commercial and the lease price. And, even that is changing -- now the tv ads tout the car that is being advertised for $X pre month is "nicely equipped" -- if you hit the pause button and read the fine print, the cars being advertised are more and more likely to no longer be base models. Unless mandated to do so, you would be hard pressed to even find a base price model at a dealership.

The reason is no one will buy one of this class of car NEW at least without the "premium" package on it, so dealers stock their lots -- since most Americans won't orders cars, cause they have to have it today -- with cars that are popularly equipped. This translates to a lot, but not all, of the options on the check sheet.

I spoke to a German dealer rep who thought we (Americans) were crazy for "always" putting sunroofs in our cars since those of us who have them rarely, if ever, open them. Big bucks for a vestigial options. It is virtually impossible to get a German car sans sunroof -- and if you try, well you for sure throw yourself into a class of car that the leasing organizations will not sub-vent, because they have the experience with a market that won't buy a car that doesn't have a sunroof, even if no one ever opens them.

The point of all of this is to say, OK, I'll concede the historical meaning of ELLPS meant "low cost" -- but what is now ELLPS, then would have to be A3's, but NOT A4's (the B9's will certainly cost more than the B8's, even at base, strippie levels.) Then we need somewhere to put the A4's, 3 series and C class's -- to say nothing of some of the other "premium" offerings from Asia and America.

If you agree about the use of the term Entry Level as not necessarily being about $, the M3, for instance is the Entry Level M car -- and, at this point in time, there is no Entry Level RS car, unless you accept that Audi has chosen for whatever reason to only offer an RS4 as a "station wagon" -- and one, even at that, that cannot be had in the US.

We can go on about our business, and as long as we do not violate the terms of use of the Edmunds organization, who cares if we agree or disagree or agree to disagree about size or base MSRP.

I'm interested in speaking with, in print, folks who love (or at least like) luxury performance sedans -- and, here, luxury performance sedans that are compacts -- thus ruling out their big brothers and sisters, the 5's, E's, etc.

Even then, if someone is shopping for a 5 and goes with a 3 or a 7, I would find their thoughts and comments of interest.

If LPS is supposed to include "I wish I was an LPS car" type of vehicle, I'm not interested so much.

I think the VW CC or Passat are good cars -- interesting cars, perhaps even desirable cars, but today I don't think they are members of the LPS club. But they certainly are priced lower, for the most part. It's just they aren't LPS class cars. If we're looking to discuss them, we all know where to go.

The reason for the A3 and CLA (for example)? According to the two dealers I spoke with, the reason for these new, less expensive models is that the ELLPS variants typically sell for a number beginning with either a high four number or a low five number -- these new models allow folks who want to be in the Mercedes family to join for $37,500 rather than $57,500 -- and hopefully will trade UP next time.

I believe Mercedes is just following the Alfred P Sloan model -- start them out with a Chevy and hopefully they'll eventually buy a Cadillac. Start them out with a CLA and maybe someday they'll be back for an S Class.

It could work.

I think entry level is a name that needs some rethinking. The lower cost of the ELLPS vs the LPS is, apparently, a function of the wheelbase, length overall and width of the model -- back to the EPA classification, if you will.

m6user

"these new models allow folks who want to be in the Mercedes family to join for $37,500 rather than $57,500 -- and hopefully will trade UP next time."

That's exactly what an "entry" level car is. ELLPS is the lowest price performance sedan of a given maker. If a car qualifies all the alphas then it should be included. I don't personally see the CLA, ILX and 320 for examples as performance sedans even though they are entry level luxury.

graphicguy

All good points. The starting numbers, for all cars, are now in the high teens. Those prices are populated by the Fiat 500, Kia Soul, Hyundai Accent, Cruise, Fiesta, etc. Most, if not all, sacrifice one or the other portions or power, refinement, quality of materials, material quality, etc. Sometimes sacrificing a lot of everything. That's how they get to those price points.

Some manufacutrer have become quite clever. They'll wrap their "cheap" cars in innovative styles. Look close enough, and it's hard to mask the underlying cost cutting.

When you move up that ladder, into the Civics or Accords, Corollas or Camry, Fusion, Malibu, Mazda 3 or 6, etc., you crack that $25K price, with the best of them hitting the low $30s.

From my perception, that's where the A3, CLA, 320i, ILX, probably a 2.5L ATS want to play (I suppose you can throw the Infiniti G in there, but that's pretty old these days). Not the best those brands can do, but it gets you in the door of the brand. 3 year lease is over, You think, I'm making a little more money, and boy was that C Class ever sexy looking when I was last in the showroom and hopefully, if you had a good experience with the previous car, you're driving off in a $45K C Class, or A4, or 328, loaded up TLX, or an ATS with the better drivetrain, with more options.

All of a sudden, all those promises of having a good portfolio and compound interest are starting to bear fruit. Now, you're in the $50K-$60K bracket. Now, you're looking at E Class, A6, CTS. You wouldn't dream of sullying your driveway with an Impala (even though it's every bit as good as an XTS).

Mark, you're right. That's what Sloan started, and the hope for all these brands, how they want to "hook" you from the start.

Where Mercedes and BMW seem to have an advantage, they've positioned themselves as aspirational brands. Cadillac used to be there. I think some of that is still there. Their missteps have cost them some of that, though. I've not driven an A3. But, I have driven an S3. Fun car. To live with it everyday? Probably wouldn't be my choice. Test drove a CLA. That is not a good car. An Accord is better in every way. But, you have a Mercedes, an aspirational brand. And, you're in it for about the price of a loaded Accord.

I'll accept that the 320i is a good car based in FN's reports. But, I've only driven one when my sister was shopping them (she ended up with a C Class.......BECAUSE IT WAS A MERCEDES...320i was the better car, IMHO). Audi wasn't on her radar based on my experience with them.

Audi and Acura are FWD architectures. Today, these platforms are SO GOOD, it really doesn't matter to me. I know for many of you, it does. The Mercedes, Cadillac (ATS/CTS) are RWD platforms. But, Mercedes is bringing their FWD platform here, too.

What does any of this have to do with ELLPS? Probably not diddly....except everyone in here will be in the Audi, Acura, Cadillac, BMW, Mercedes showrooms sometime in the next 24 months....guaranteed.

stickguy

Lots of us open the moonroof all the time. And many people that don't still open the shade to get more light in. Especially important in the typical German black cave interior!

qbrozen

markcincinnati said:

Entry level may have started off as meaning "cheaper versions" of higher line cars from a given mfg. And, as a practical matter, at base, no options, that is, MSRP, that is still true. But I am today convinced (by virtue of what the dealer folks tell me) that the only reason for a given BASE MSRP is the tv commercial and the lease price. And, even that is changing -- now the tv ads tout the car that is being advertised for $X pre month is "nicely equipped" -- if you hit the pause button and read the fine print, the cars being advertised are more and more likely to no longer be base models. Unless mandated to do so, you would be hard pressed to even find a base price model at a dealership.

Started off as and still is the "cheaper version." However, that doesn't necessarily mean no options. That's why I've been stressing BASE MSRP. I absolutely concede that some luxury options are almost a necessity to make it feel like a luxury car. The only thing the limit on base msrp does is exclude other models that start much higher, such as the M, AMG, S, or V examples.

markcincinnati said:

The point of all of this is to say, OK, I'll concede the historical meaning of ELLPS meant "low cost" -- but what is now ELLPS, then would have to be A3's, but NOT A4's (the B9's will certainly cost more than the B8's, even at base, strippie levels.) Then we need somewhere to put the A4's, 3 series and C class's -- to say nothing of some of the other "premium" offerings from Asia and America.

So, like I said earlier, the only reason I'm thinking the cutoff is cost, not size, is to allow BMW and Caddy to play here on equal ground. I mean, I suppose its not unrealistic to compare a 328 to an A3, but then folks would be arguing those two don't directly compete. Then we have to say "ah, but you can't discuss the A4 because its not the entry-level model." It just makes things more confusing.

markcincinnati said:

The reason for the A3 and CLA (for example)? According to the two dealers I spoke with, the reason for these new, less expensive models is that the ELLPS variants typically sell for a number beginning with either a high four number or a low five number -- these new models allow folks who want to be in the Mercedes family to join for $37,500 rather than $57,500 -- and hopefully will trade UP next time.

BINGO! As m6user pointed out, that's EXACTLY the point of "entry level." To get you into the brand and keep you coming back for more. Its a gateway drug.

stickguy

Q nailed it. These are the models to get the budget challenged into the category/brand. Not the highest performance or most luxurious, but with reasonable quantities of both. Size is not that important. Nor is drivetrain configuration. Badge and price are.

stickguy

My son is a good example. First job, new car, tight finances. He got a Jetta. SE. Wanted a GLI, but got in fold and hooked on German cars. Already planning next one. Drools on an S3. Will probably settle for an A3. After that, will depend on how his budget (and family if one comes along) grows! But he does aspire to move up the ladder.

Michaell

stickguy said:

My son is a good example. First job, new car, tight finances. He got a Jetta. SE. Wanted a GLI, but got in fold and hooked on German cars. Already planning next one. Drools on an S3. Will probably settle for an A3. After that, will depend on how his budget (and family if one comes along) grows! But he does aspire to move up the ladder.

Other than AWD and a few extra HP, what's the difference between the GLI and the A3?

m6user

Nicer interior, better warranty, dealer experience and luxury brand. For a young guy, pulling up to pick up your date in an Audi versus a Vdub could be a game changer. LOL.

roadburner

Back to AWD, I can understand why you might want one in the mountains or the Northeast; but even in my neck of the woods people spring for AWD.(the reason we have a Jeep and and an X3 truck is because our 1500' gravel driveway rarely sees a plow- but note that my Wrangler made it through over 18" of snow in 2WD thanks to BFG All Terrain KO tires with the Severe Snow rating).

What I find to be incredibly pathetic are the hopelessly inept souls who say that they can't own a RWD car because they need a vehicle that they can drive in the rain.
What they really need is their license pulled in exchange for a handful of bus tokens...

stickguy

m6user said:

Nicer interior, better warranty, dealer experience and luxury brand. For a young guy, pulling up to pick up your date in an Audi versus a Vdub could be a game changer. LOL.

I was going to say "4 rings". Though in a performance oriented car, the AWD can come in handy (he does live up in a heavy snow area in upstate NY). Something like a GLI where you are getting into low profile performance tires would likely require snow tires, and he has no place to keep those off-season.

m6user

Yeah, well since he said "besides AWD and a few extra HP" I didn't address the AWD part. But that would be a large factor in that neck of the woods.

As far as people wanting AWD. A lot of people had RWD cars when they were younger and they remember the horrible situations in snow covered streets where they just spun and the rear end kicked out all over the place(I had a 1980 Camaro, loved it but not in the snow) because that was before better all-season tires, ABS, traction control, etc. And after FWD cars took over the availability of RWD mainstream cars is somewhat limited. A lot of people haven't driven a RWD car since then, so the memories are their perception.

robr2

m6user said:

Nicer interior, better warranty, dealer experience and luxury brand. For a young guy, pulling up to pick up your date in an Audi versus a Vdub could be a game changer. LOL.

Perhaps the young man should reevaluate his date if that's what the measure she uses....

...and that brings us back to the reason the vast majority of these ELLPS' are sold - prestige and the look at me factor.

Mr_Shiftright

Any AWD system can be completed neutralized by the wrong tires and the wrong driver.

These are, after all, the two things that actually keep a car on the road.

Another factor is that many AWD sedans don't offer any greater ground clearance, so deep snow is going to defeat you anyway.

nyccarguy

roadburner said:

Back to AWD, I can understand why you might want one in the mountains or the Northeast; but even in my neck of the woods people spring for AWD.(the reason we have a Jeep and and an X3 truck is because our 1500' gravel driveway rarely sees a plow- but note that my Wrangler made it through over 18" of snow in 2WD thanks to BFG All Terrain KO tires with the Severe Snow rating).

What I find to be incredibly pathetic are the hopelessly inept souls who say that they can't own a RWD car because they need a vehicle that they can drive in the rain.
What they really need is their license pulled in exchange for a handful of bus tokens...

So many times I hear someone say: "my car stinks in the snow or my car drives terribly in the snow." For the longest time I responded with: "its probably not your car that drives terribly in the snow, if equipped with a proper set of winter tires you should have no problems." That usually got the "deer in the headlights stare" at which point I would just say: "You are right. you need AWD or 4WD."

roadburner

robr2 said:

m6user said:

Nicer interior, better warranty, dealer experience and luxury brand. For a young guy, pulling up to pick up your date in an Audi versus a Vdub could be a game changer. LOL.

Perhaps the young man should reevaluate his date if that's what the measure she uses....

...and that brings us back to the reason the vast majority of these ELLPS' are sold - prestige and the look at me factor.

Yep- the "wearers."

m6user

If given the choice of driving the same exact vehicle with the same exact tires in a winter snowstorm, I would choose the AWD vehicle every time. People always say "well if you used the right tires and drove like me you would have no issues". Actually getting tired of hearing that. And there is a big difference between "need" and "nice to have". Do I need AWD in the winter around Chicago?.....not really. Is it very nice to have in certain situations where you need you need to get out of someone else's way or get going from a light in slippery conditions? Yes, it is very nice to have. Of course, I can get around without AWD as I occasionally drive my RWD v-8 truck in the snow but it isn't a lot of fun.

Mr_Shiftright

Well that's an argument that isn't as strong as it first sounds because invariably over-confidence in AWD often leads to mishaps. If you doubt this, I invite you to talk to any tow truck driver who operates in or near a popular ski area. If nothing else, and it doesn't convince you, you'll get some entertaining stories.

No matter how you cut it, your car is kept on the road by four small patches of rubber--if that rubber has no grip, it woudln't matter if you had ten-wheel drive. Same with mud, or sand.

So my advice to anyone with AWD is to choose your battles wisely, and if you do, then you'll have the edge--all things being equal.

nyccarguy

I have got to tell you, the more I think about it, the more I like the Audi S3 Premium Plus. Look at the standard features you get:

2.0 Liter Turbo DOHC 4cyl
292 hp - 280lb/ft torque
6 Speed DSG
Quattro AWD
0 - 60 mph 4.7 sec (audi website)
Dual Zone Climate Control
Panorama Roof
Heated Seats
Xenon Headlights
Leather Surfaces
Bluetooth

All this for a starting MSRP of $41,100

Michaell

m6user said:

Nicer interior, better warranty, dealer experience and luxury brand. For a young guy, pulling up to pick up your date in an Audi versus a Vdub could be a game changer. LOL.

Only if the lady in question is a snob .. she might prefer the VW due to the IQ of the owner, understanding the value...

Michaell

nyccarguy said:

I have got to tell you, the more I think about it, the more I like the Audi S3 Premium Plus. Look at the standard features you get:

2.0 Liter Turbo DOHC 4cyl
292 hp - 280lb/ft torque
6 Speed DSG
Quattro AWD
0 - 60 mph 4.7 sec (audi website)
Dual Zone Climate Control
Panorama Roof
Heated Seats
Xenon Headlights
Leather Surfaces
Bluetooth

All this for a starting MSRP of $41,100

And I'd rather get a Golf R - all of the above (I think) and the practicality of a hatch!

m6user

"Well that's an argument that isn't as strong as it first sounds because invariably over-confidence in AWD often leads to mishaps."

OMG, really? Never heard that one before. I see yahoos all the time thinking they can drive faster because of AWD. Sorry, but I'm not one of them. Didn't feel I had to put that qualifier in the argument. OK, same vehicle, same tires, same careful driving then. AWD is easier to get around in heavy snow and slippery conditions given the same type of driving. Does it allow one to drive like a maniac. Absolutely not.

And invariably means that it will always happen sooner or later right? Don't think you can say that about all drivers.

m6user

That does seem to be a nice price for the S3. Is that price good for all that equip??

stickguy

Bradd, from reading about the ride on that, you might not enjoy it on the I95 bomb craters very much.

stickguy

AWD is not just snow. Vs. FWD, it can also give better handling and balance on wet roads. And dry. The WRX is AWD for a reason!

roadburner

nyccarguy said:

roadburner said:

Back to AWD, I can understand why you might want one in the mountains or the Northeast; but even in my neck of the woods people spring for AWD.(the reason we have a Jeep and and an X3 truck is because our 1500' gravel driveway rarely sees a plow- but note that my Wrangler made it through over 18" of snow in 2WD thanks to BFG All Terrain KO tires with the Severe Snow rating).

What I find to be incredibly pathetic are the hopelessly inept souls who say that they can't own a RWD car because they need a vehicle that they can drive in the rain.
What they really need is their license pulled in exchange for a handful of bus tokens...

So many times I hear someone say: "my car stinks in the snow or my car drives terribly in the snow." For the longest time I responded with: "its probably not your car that drives terribly in the snow, if equipped with a proper set of winter tires you should have no problems." That usually got the "deer in the headlights stare" at which point I would just say: "You are right. you need AWD or 4WD."

You nailed it!

robr2

stickguy said:

AWD is not just snow. Vs. FWD, it can also give better handling and balance on wet roads. And dry. The WRX is AWD for a reason!

Because it's a Subaru and the purists would have a conniption if it were anything else!!