Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Economics dictates that BMW will keep manuals within the next decade at least. Why?
Supply and demand. BMW would cherish the day when it will be the only company offering manual sport sedans. Once the manual market is monopolized by BMW, the profit margins for such a narrow niche will be too tempting to give up.
Active drivers who want to be engaged even if it means pressing a clutch during traffic jams every single day. In fact I have nostalgic memories of driving a VW GTI without power-steering.
Passive drivers who prefer electronic nannies and conveniences that will minimize the level of driver input involved with commuting.
Ofcourse the above two categories are a bit extreme in describing a majority of drivers but I am willing to wager most driver have more in common with the passive description.
I, for one, have test driven an Audi TT 3.2 DSG and I found the feeling when depressing the go pedal to be "strong" -- there was NO driveline "lash" or whatever that slightly disconnected feeling is that one gets with even the best autos today.
I, for one, will be quite happy with that outcome, considering that I am doubtful that BMW will really continue to pay the price to certify their 5's (for instance) for the US market in both auto and manual.
Perhaps it is that they will "rule the world" by virtue of being "last man standing."
We'll see.
I read an article, wish I could remember where, that proclaimed (well, sort of) at least a near term cure for our energy woes (and it wasn't a hybrid nor was it a fuel cell since they are not yet ready for prime time -- neither are hybrids if you asked me):
Super efficient turbo diesel engines mated to [7spd] CVT transmissions -- offering immediately the best of all possible worlds (so the article suggested.)
CVT provides the ability for an engine to maintain essentially a steady RPM level (result, better economy gas or diesel) and diesels can provide the requisite torque to make almost all of us giddy with the power.
The two technologies are here, unlike battery and fuel cell technologies.
I can't remember what, if any, drawbacks there are, but heck, there must be something wrong, it seems too easy, too logical, too affordable.
When I saw the test report on the speed channel of an Audi A8L 4.2 diesel that went on a round trip from London to Wales and back (800 miles) on a single tank of diesel fuel(which means it achieved, in traffic, 40+mpg) -- and it was just a "normal" A8L 4.2 (not some super efficient mule that had been stripped of all the power do dads that an A8L would come with) with one very determined journalist behind the wheel, I became darn near a believer.
And, that one didn't even have a CVT transmission, just a plain ol' tiptronic.
Give me strength. :confuse:
I'm waiting to hear from anyone who negotiates a 30-45 minute "drive" every day at 0-30 mph (on a supposed 55 mph "freeway) for all that time say that a manual shift is the best thing since sliced bread for said commute.
I'm not one who can afford a beater and a weekend driver, so my daily driver is it. And that commute very unfortunately swayed me to an automatic transmission in my last purchase. I don't like it and in just the last six months I find myself pressing an invisible clutch, trying to shift into 5th and reaching for an emergency hand brake that is not there. These things are happening after a number of (not tellin' ya how many!!) years driving an automatic tranny.
I'm thinking my muscle memory is telling me something!!
So where the LPP (Luxury Performance Pulman) board?
Ok here is my excuse for manual driving in slow congested traffic:
Medically clutches are good for your left leg blood circulation. Healthwise double-clutching would be even better(although neither clutching or double clutching has been recommended by the American Medical Association)
I guess to each their own.
Yes. They made the conscious decision to go with a standard 6-speed manual. As I recall, Porsche commented that the 6-speed manual was more pure for the car, or something to that effect.
I don't think they will get that luxury. Lexus offers a manual in the "down-market" IS250 and even Mercedes offers a 6-speed manual in its C350 Sport as well as Cadillac's CTS.
Anyway, this is not what this discussion is about, is it. I'll get out of here with this thread now.
Mark, I've been following this forum for a little while now waiting for my new 2006 A6, and I am glad to see how much you are behind the Audi brand. But, when you mentioned that you would switch brand loyalties based on the fact that others are now offering AWD, I was a little let down. Especially, after reading this article:
http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/05259/572879.stm
"We were surprised to find marked differences between one all-wheel-drive car and the next, both on and off the ice, thanks to obscure-sounding factors buried in their spec sheets (see: "torque split"). While the Audi A6 traveled the 60 feet in our ice-rink test in a speedy 6.25 seconds, others were so pokey we wondered if they could beat even the rink's ice-resurfacing vehicle. (The result? BMW 0, Zamboni 1.)..... Out on the slick ice of Northford Ice Pavilion's "Red" rink, the extra power to the rear made the wheels spin, making the BMW feel the least steady of the models we tested..... its front wheels often locked under light braking while the rears kept pushing. Either way, it's far from the fastest machine on the ice. We asked rink employee Chris Ardito to hop into the Zamboni and run a few time trials. He crossed the line in 7.6 seconds, beating even the all-wheel-drive GS by a second."
I too was looking for an AWD, and after test driving the Audi I was happily surprised by the control. The other AWDs that I drove did not even compare, as is supported by the article above.
So, I would say that even though you repeatedly state that the new crop of LPS are more equal then not, there is still a lot of catching up to do on the AWD side.
So....
If you want a stick go for the BMW.
If you want an AWD you have to stay with Audi.
(Deal Breaker?)
The following assumes similar "deals" and content.
If there are no manual transmissions: Audi A6, BMW 530xi, Infiniti M35X (or whatever they may call them then.)
If there are manual transmissions only in the BMW: BMW, Audi and Infiniti.
If there are DSG or SMG transmissions (and who has them):
the test drive would tell the tale.
Audi has had superior AWD technology. They have, however, decided that marketing rather than engineering will win (and they have the evidence to prove it?)
Audis need to be better weight balanced. BMWs already are. Even the Infiniti is better balanced.
Audi has caved into the RWD biased AWD camp for the main reason, I assume, to be able to say "we are RWD biased AWD" because unless or until they do that it may be implied that Audi is really FWD with a nod to AWD (like Volvo and Acura, for example -- Volvos brochure says 95% FWD 5% RWD with the ability to redirect power.)
Audi has used a more expensive instantaneous mechanical torque sensing system with a 50 50 split for years.
Audi squandered its differentiation (when it was virtually the only AWD premium car it made too little noise, IMO -- at least here in the US market.)
Now that the majority of the LPS crowd offers AWD and AWD has been the fastest growth segment (from 0 to 40% in 6 months in the case of BMW's 5 at least locally in SW Ohio; and of course in the case of Acura from only FWD to only AWD in one model year, etc,) Audi is or has been IMO forced to say "we too are offering RWD biased AWD -- or will soon. . ." across the model line.)
Today my A6 is special, my 29th and best (although for emotional reasons only my second favorite -- my '95 S6 holding the top spot) but it is no longer (or shortly will no longer be) differentiated from the other LPS cars the way Audis used to be just one or two short years ago.
The playing field with the 2005 model years of most of these guys has been leveled greatly.
I was going happily down the M35X path (at the price) until the Audi deal financially leveled the field and the car itself won out.
Audi and BMW and Mercedes have to be looking over their shoulders and seeing the M's and even, perhaps, the RL's and STS's feeling the pressure to improve the breed, needing to differentiate themselves.
My concern (which is actually good for those of you shopping) is that there is more, much more, alike in the group of AWD LPS cars than there is different. Audi WAS, past tense, in a leadership role -- now they are in the crowd.
The differentiation by virture of manual transmission and very favorable f/r balance afforded by the BMW design is, at this frame of the movie, the best choice. Again, if the steptronic is all you can get in the BMW, I'm back in bed with Audi (or possibly the M35X.)
I always wanted an AWD convertible that was a stellar on the ice!
-Paul
Zambonis Rule! But are they really performance cars or merely luxury sedans?
At least Audi is more distinguished in the crowd than Volvo. In the past Volvo catered to people who were more inclined to driving safe environmentally friendly cars.
That may not be the case today!
The safest cars are no longer Volvos. Audi/VW is known to have some of the safest cars in the industry based on a recent insurance study.
People who are inclined towards environmentally friendly autos are likely to drive Toyota or Honda hybrids. I read that the next generation of Priuses will be mainly composed of recycled materials. The new Volvo V8 XC90 refutes the notion of a environmentally friendly auto.
So what is Volvo's distinction?
Performance--No
Handling--No
Luxury--No
Interior or Exterior fit and finish quality--No
Desigh--No
I cant figure out why anyone would favor buying any Volvo model over the competition? Especially when Volvos are priced like LPS vehicles that have far more to offer.
I am curious as to what the next iteration of the S80 will offer with regards to the other attributes you mention. Unfortunately, Edmunds spy shots make it look like a Taurus (hopefully that is at least partially due to the camo).
Right, but as previously mentioned, Volvo no longer wears this crown, as rated by IIHS and other "crash-test" groups. Safety is Volvo's legacy, but they are no longer the best at it... It's only a matter of time before the general public majority realizes this.
I've driven the M3 with SMG and the A3 with DSG, and I can't say that I would rather drive them over a traditional stick. It's a neat technology, but nowhere near as engaging and enjoyable as a true manual....
Everyone has a point of view, therefore I can only report that I read that the hybrids have -- at best -- a possible enviornmentally friendly posture (I assume the author was at least attempting to be objective,) more likely they have an enviornmentally UNFRIENDLY posture due to the issues associated with the batteries some 6 - 8 years from date of service.
Moreover, hybrids, even at today's gas prices are an inefficient use of money and this goes even with the tax incentives that were offered.
Hybrids are not quite as "dumb" as burning $10 dollar bills to keep warm, but they are in the "inquiring minds wouldn't do this" category AT THIS POINT IN TECHNOLOGY.
Diesels, FSI small displacement and forced induction engines coupled to CVT transmissions both TODAY can better the financial and environmental arguments put forth by the Batteries are Better crowd.
This year the US will move a step or two closer to ever cleaner diesel fuel -- even though it would represent a small dent (small being better than none), encouraging diesel adoption, CVT technology, cleaner and cleaner diesel, etc etc etc, we have at our technological and financial disposal the means to make that dent.
From my perspective and my readings hybrids are doing more harm than good and besides they are not an evolutionary step, they are a side step -- like it or not the diesel coupled with volumetric efficiency coupled with transmission efficiencies that we now can produce at an affordable price are the way to go in an evolutionary fashion, until we can put fuel cells into production and/or come up with something new altogether: "Mr. Fusion" (or Mr. Fission) perhaps?
:shades:
350 horsepower from the naturally aspirated 4.2L V8, direct injection.
They need to get that bad boy into the A6 4.2.
I also think that sooner or later all these crash test ratings by the government and such will become irrelevant too because every new car that comes out seems to score pretty well nowadays. Volvo, Saab, Audi, MB and other European makes made way on safety long before others (or the government) had a clue about it. This I think shows up in better real-world crash survival, but that data is harder to come by. I seriously doubt a "5-Star" Buick is a safer car than a "4-Star" Volvo outside of a crash test facility. Volvos are still sturdy as hell, they just don't look it anymore. I think some carmakers engineer their cars to pass regulations and then call it day, especially the Koreans. I don't care what the government says about a Hyundai, I still wouldn't want to be in one in a real world accident.
M
Audi of America Reports 2005 Sales of 83,066 - Up by 6.6% - Source AoA.
Audi of America has closed 2005 on a high with the best sales month of last year. December sales of 8,842 units were up 15.6 %, almost all model lines reported a significant increase compared with December of 2004. 5,505 sales in December meant the new A4 range (A4/S4 sedan, Avant and Cabriolet) was up 11.6 % month over month, the new A6 sold 17.4 % more (1,767) than last December.
On an annual view, Audi of America reported 83,066 units sold, one of the best results in Audi’s US sales history. Again, winners were the A4 and A6 model lines, with an impressive 48,922 units of the A4/S4 range (up 3.7 %) and 18,074 of the new A6 sedan and Avant sold year over year.
Someone here, soon, will report the rest of the guys performance I suspect. I'm rooting for Audi to be again in last place!
:shades:
Edit: no, they were not.
"We used the standard all-season tires that came with each car"
Of the Premium cars, it is my understanding that Audi is a triple winner in the safety ratings sweepstakes. Volvo may indeed ace the rear crash tests -- politics, marketing hype, etc, who knows -- Audi and the "news" are blowing the Audi safety horn at this time.
Some come to think safety sells -- I think this is true, but at the auto dealers this attribute seems to wax and wane as a sales weapon in the aresenal.
Let's see, today it seems to be on the rise -- take heed the new BMW copy promoting the safety and sure footedness afforded those who buy a BMW w/X-drive, bla bla bla.
It is good stuff, it is true and it is, at this moment, selling cars.
All things being equal, people will buy the safer car -- usually (I said all things being equal, which they hardly ever are.)
The LPS cars (and higher) seem to be the showcase for the tech, safety and performance content though of that there is little doubt.
why is it that you anti-hybrid folks want to hold hybrid owners to a different standard than you hold ALL OTHER CAR BUYERS? Stop making them out to be single-issue voters. Almost no one is really a single-issue buyers.
Diesels are NO Tbetter in Californa. You can't even buy a new one. And the emissions are not as good as with a hybrid, INCLUDING the emissions associated with making AND recylcing the battery.
It's been analyzed. It's on the web. You can find it if you care to.
How the heck are they doing more harm than good? Why are you people so afraid of battery recycling? I've been having industrial batteries recycled for years. It is not rocket science. It can be done very safely if they recycler cares to comply with the regulations. If they don't, yes, you can have problems. What a surprise.
It's fairly insulting to categorize hybrid owners as non-inquiring minds. I am sure the IQ of the average hubrid owner is significantly higher than yours. Want to bet on it? And all the ones I know personally, except one, would run rings around your logic. Believe me, I've pushed them pretty good. Two of these guys have been EEs for many many years, designing stuff that has saved lives every day. But they are just "stupid," I guess.
I am sure the Cayenne drives nicer on curves, but I don't plan to race my SUV.
The BMW X5 is nice, but has no cargo capacity and is worthless in the snow and ice compared to the Volvo.
The Lexus RX330/400 will not seat 7, and it has less capability than the Volvo.
The bigger Lexuses drive like trucks.
The Mercedes? Um, not until they have decent reliability.
The Land Rover? no response needed (reliability)
The American products? Again, all too trucky for my tastes. The Cadillac SRX is a sweet vehicle, but I wanted some (limited) off-road capability.
I'm not sure why you have an anti-Volvo axe to grind. The Volvo XC90 does everything well. It may even do some things "great." I haven't seen anything that it scores poorly in. YMMV, I guess.
Anyone who buys a car for any environmental reason is a dork. The very act of driving a car is about as anti-environment as you can get. Granted there is less enviro harm from driving a Corolla than driving a Hummer. But those are pretty much the extremes. The difference from an enviro perspective between driving a Volvo XC90 V8 and the Volvo XC 90 2.5T are nominal and not significant in any way. And if the V* drivers has chosen to have a short commute and the 2.5T owner has a long commute, then who is causing more enviro harm?
What I thought the following implied:
"Everyone has a point of view, therefore I can only report that I read that the hybrids have -- at best -- a possible enviornmentally friendly posture (I assume the author was at least attempting to be objective,) more likely they have an enviornmentally UNFRIENDLY posture due to the issues associated with the batteries some 6 - 8 years from date of service.
Moreover, hybrids, even at today's gas prices are an inefficient use of money and this goes even with the tax incentives that were offered.
Hybrids are not quite as "dumb" as burning $10 dollar bills to keep warm, but they are in the "inquiring minds wouldn't do this" category AT THIS POINT IN TECHNOLOGY." was that I had read something that put these points (facts and vues?) forward.
However, with the exception of the Prius (and perhaps a couple others) the trend in hybrids does NOT seem to be for the economy the electric motor can add, but for performance improvements that it can offer.
And, just to note -- there are plenty of "articles" on the web and in the print magazines that suggest there is currently NOT a realistic economic reason to consider hybrids even with the tax incentives that have been offered to attempt to stimulate their adoption.
I am not opposed to hybrids per se.
I wonder, if as the article I read suggests, that if hybrids are NOT an evolutionary approach and NOT economically defensible (until or unless we reach considerably higher costs per gallon of petrol) why we haven't undertaken the coupling of clean diesel engines + CVT transmissions at least as ardently as we have hybrids.
Clean fuel seems to be the issue here in this hemisphere, but this very article suggested that 2006 was the beginning of clean diesel in the US.
It seems to me that we are not given the full story -- and I am not suggesting I know the full story. I am suggesting I have seen additional parts of the story that makes me ask questions about hybrids.
If I called or implied someone was stupid, I can only retract that, for I do not have anyway of knowing if someone is or is not stupid.
I hereby profess and confess that I, however, do have much to learn and hence by some measure could be considered ignorant. That is one reason (to reduce my ignorance) that I participate on these and other blogs.
But for heaven's sake, I am not Crazy Miranda (who lives on propaganda), I am just trying to figure out why we sometimes don't get the whole story and sometimes why we (collectively) don't ask "why?" more often.
The LPS cars would be a great laboratory for all kinds of tech -- hybrid, diesels, hybrid diesels, CVT transmission deployment, etc.
I love the speed channel's host who proclaimed "Audi's 4.2 turbo diesel seems to be a new kind of engine, one that appears as if it can run, literally, on air." This while driving a stock A8L from London to Wales and back in UK traffic congestion on a single tank of diesel, a trip of some 800 miles (mileage then was in the 40mpg range) -- makes me wonder what my 3.2 Audi if it were instead a 3.0 TD with a 7-effective-speed CVT transmission could do 50, 55 mpg?
I love the "argument" I love to stir things up, I do not relish the thought that I might have offended someone's intelligence quotient. :surprise:
5-series 6,396
E-series 6,334
GS 3,431
M 2,552
A6 1,767
RL 1,278
Partial score just in:
USC - 31
Texas - ....oops my computer just broke
What do you think of your "I am sure the IQ of the average hubrid (sic - sure looks a lot like hubris) owner is significantly higher than yours" comment now?
The efficiency mostly isn't there for hybrids, once the (total life-cycle) cost of the battery system is included, to say nothing of the significantly higher up-front cost or the real-world duty cycle of most vehicles. When all the numbers are run, the message to many of us is that hybrids represent a lifestyle statement, not something that saves resources.
I'm an engineer also, with a few decades of hands-on experience, so am possibly qualified to touch the hem of the garments of your "EEs for many years," or perhaps not.
I could go on, but won't. Something about protesting too much comes to mind.
As Merc said, I'd much rather be driving a car from a company with a proven history of safe vehicles (be it Audi, Lexus, Volvo, M-B, etc) than a Kia designed to get 5 stars on the NHTSA test.
I consider myself a systems engineer, but frankly I don't know nuthin' about birthin'. . .er about hybrids other than what I read which seems to agree with your comments.
We're all experts in some way and all ignorant in others. . . .
I must be largely in the latter category.
But I am thirsty to learn -- from EE's and non-EE's alike.
Thanks, however, for adding to the information and for me at least education.
:confuse:
The BMW 5 series is the USC of LPS'.
Thank you Chris Bangle for one heck of a great coaching job.
On steptronic! On steptronic! Onto victory....
The Volvo XC90 sounds like a vehicle that suits your criteria quite well and if I had similar criteria I probably would have chosen a XC90 myself.
Having said that my prior post was about Volvo in general and not the XC90 in particular.
Historically what was it that made Volvos distinct enough to attract a large number of academics and journalists? Was it SUVs? I dont think so.
Can people choose a auto based on environmental considerations? Go to the hybrid forums and you can find out yourself! Many people do think that they are making a pro-environmental statement by buying a hybrid. Whether they are justified or not is another question altogether.
Currently you are correct. But 2008 should be different.
Toyota intends to introduce more fuel efficient HSD systems during 2008 that costs 50 % less to manufacture than the current systems. Hybrids will become economically justifiable when hybrid price premiums drop significantly and they become more fuel efficient.
Maybe the mfgr's knew this was coming -- hope this is so. If they didn't know it still does not explain why the lack of enthusiasm for turbo diesels and CVT combos as the author I cannot place suggested would be a current and more viable alternative.
In any case if costs do drop 50% this will be of more than symbolic importance even if its adoption is not widespread, for it will certain foretell of "what's possible."
Currently it appears this (economic viability) is NOT possible without serious "faith and tax incentives."
This post has some seriously interesting information, 2008, after all isn't that far off.
link title
M
The BMW 5 series is the USC of LPS'.
Thank you Chris Bangle for one heck of a great coaching job.
Yeah you did manage to beat my E-Class by a few sales, congrats. I'll be heading up the face-lift committe for the E-Class during 2006 for 2007, rematch a comin'.
M
The BMW 5 series is the USC of LPS'.
Thank you Chris Bangle for one heck of a great coaching job.
BMW gives dealers big incentive to sell 5 series
Henning Krogh
Felix E. Bauer
Automotive News / December 19, 2005 - 6:00 am
Munich. BMW dealers will get bonuses of up to 3,000 euros, or about $3,600 at current exchange rates, if they can find customers for the slow-selling 5 series. Bonuses of up to 1,500 euros, or about $1,800, will be given for other BMW models.
The bonuses only will be given for sales contracts that take effect starting Jan. 1.
The details of company's incentives program for the first half of 2006 are outlined in a document obtained by Automobilwoche.
Under the program, the dealership gets the following bonuses for selling the 5 series:
3,000 euros, or about $3,600, when the customer trades in an Audi or Mercedes-Benz
2,000 euros, or about $2,400, when the customer trades in a used 5 series
1,500 euros, or about $1,800, when the customer trades in a non-BMW vehicle (except for an Audi or Mercedes)
1,500 euros, or about $1,800, for a conquest sale without a trade in.
This just in.....USC loses too.
As I've said before, plenty of manufacturers could benefit from tearing apart a Volvo seat and copying it.
The BMW 5 series is the USC of LPS'.
I guess you mean that BMW is second best :P
They are second to Porsche.
As for the hybrid debate, I'm not going there entirely. But needless to say, at some point, fuel will become very scarce. 70 MPG may not be efficient enough at some point, so alternatives will need to be sought.
Hybrids may reduce emissions and such, but there is still the issue with recycling and what to do with that waste (thankfully non-nuclear!
NONE of the solutions to this point are entirely feasible from a long-term sustainment point of view. Diesel, hybrid, electric. None. As the demand for fuel goes up worldwide (look out for China), the need for less dependence on fossil fuels is going to grow. Even hybrids use too much right
now.
The insinuation about only smart people drive hybrids is ridiculous, and honestly rather rude. Kind of smells like a holier than thou attitude. If you want an argument for hybrids to work, lose the attitude. It turns people away from your point of view quicker than a Porsche Carrera GT going from 0 to 60.
-Paul
The Rand Corporation claims that we have "recoverable" petroleum in the 48 states that would equal 25% of our current consumption for 400 years or 100% of our current consumption without importation of oil for 100 years.
Of course, if you read the entire report (I read the summary on their web site), as optimistic as this may sound (they even claim we have triple the known Arab oil reserves in the US and we know where it is), they also claim that it will take years (10's of years) to build the reclaiming and refinining capacity -- the good news is, apparently, the good people of Colorado and Wyoming are keen for the build up of this industry in their states.
OK, here is the Near LPS news. At first I thought it was a typo. We have all (?) heard the news about the Johnny Come Lately SUV/SAV/Crossover -- whatever -- from Audi that ostensibly is based on the A6, allroad, Cayenne and Touareg called the "Q7." The concept (the body's looks, the style) was shown a few years ago and the claims for this vehicle certainly made it seem as if it would be priced well above what most of us would probably call "the range" expected for LPS vehicles ($45K - $65K, eh?)
It was said it would come with 550 HP and so on -- it was to be the over the top entry into a market that Audi had, even with the allroad, failed to address.
A month ago I got a "cool" DVD a 4+ minute movie (commercial, really) about the Q7. No price points, just info about two engines a 3.6L and 4.2L both FSI and coming in at 280HP and 350HP with impressive torque and economy (relatively speaking.)
Much as I love my SEDAN, I also love my wife's X3 (which is all optioned to the hilt) and loved my [stick shift] allroad 2.7T -- would I reconsider an LPSUV, I wondered, after seeing the cool video.
Nahhhhh -- who needs an over the top, overpriced gas sucking 2+ ton vehicle. Heck I'm thinking the A4 or BMW 3 is looking mighty attractive.
Until this press release from AoA:
"LOS ANGELES - With the North American debut of the 2007 Audi Q7 performance SUV at the Los Angeles Auto Show this week, Audi announced pricing for the Q7 4.2 quattro model starting at an MSRP of $49,900 (not including $720 destination charge).
“The all-new Q7 is truly making the impossible possible in the luxury SUV segment,” said Johan de Nysschen, Executive Vice President, Audi of America. “Its combination of dynamic performance, versatility, innovative technology and luxurious appointments is unparalleled.”
The 2007 Audi Q7 4.2 quattro is equipped with a 4.2-liter V8 FSI engine with gasoline direct injection technology producing 350 horsepower. A six-speed Tiptronic automatic transmission and the latest generation of quattro all-wheel drive confidently sends the power to the ground. Power delivery is now split 42:58 front to rear under normal driving conditions, adding to the dynamic handling capabilities of the Q7.
As with all Audi models, the 2007 Q7 4.2 quattro has no shortage of standard luxury features. Such items as automatic Adaptive Bi-Xenon headlights, seven-passenger seating covered in leather seating surfaces, power tailgate, Audi’s intuitive MMI system, automatic dual-zone climate control, 18-inch alloy wheels, 5,500 pound towing capacity, cruise control, and keyless entry are only the beginning of the impressive list of standard features."
I yawned at first -- it was after all the V6, right?
Nope -- this price with this content is for the V8.
This is less than an A6 V8!
How much less will the 280HP version be?
Maybe we will need an LPSUV board after all, he thought outloud.
Until I find differently that there's a "but" -- I am officially impressed. :shades: