Howdy, Stranger!

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





Luxury Performance Sedans

13567335

Comments

  • pg48477pg48477 Posts: 309
    I have not seen any facts that 2005 G35 will get more HP, but if it's the case it will make already loud engine even more louder. I don't think it's an option for midsize luxury vehicle for around $50K to have noisy engine, do you?
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    The '05 G35 sedan has 277hp, and the G35 coupe gets 295.
  • saugataksaugatak Posts: 488
    jrock, I think all of your speculation is solid and right on.

    I'm sure Nissan could get over 300HP out of the VQ. It has the same displacement as the RL's 3.5L SOHC but the VQ is a DOHC so Nissan should be able to get more than 300HP, and they're not that far away with some of their other VQ offerings.

    pg4877 is repeating my basic point. The VQ is on the loud and gruff side regarding NVH, so to up the HP will make it probably even louder and gruffer, and cars in this price range typically have very low NVH.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    The VQ's noise hasnt impacted sales of the Z, or G in the slightest. I dont think they are worried.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    That noise sounds darn right good in the G35 Coupe and 350Z. I doubt that Nissan will skimp on the refinement when it comes to the M35, they know (or should know) that it can't be loud and gruff in a upper-middle luxury sedan.

    M
  • saugataksaugatak Posts: 488
    I have a lot of respect for what Ghosn's done with Nissan so I don't think he'll screw up the M35 either.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Ghosn is genius. He took a company that maybe 5-6 years ago was written off for dead, and not just survived but came back with enough of a vengence to grab the #2 spot away from Honda. Apparently Renault is happy with him, as he is going to become chairman of the joint Renault\Nissan.
  • saugataksaugatak Posts: 488
    Moreover, he is a non-Japanese that took over a Japanese company and made it fluorish.

    There can't be too many people in this world, of any race or culture, that can go into another country without speaking the language and do what Ghosn did.

    It's too bad Ghosn's not in charge of GM.
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    Nissan was nearly broke and desperate. They needed a savior and were receptive to all the money and new ideas.

    Japan, Inc. has a long history of working with outside car companies. Mazda has close ties to Ford and has for a long time. Isuzu, Subaru and Suzuki have close ties to GM. Heck, GM buys Honda V6s for the Saturn Vue! Mitsubishi has long-term close ties to Chrysler (which are coming apart). (And don't forget Ford started in Japan before WW II and was a key player until their assets were appropriated by the Japanese government during the war.)
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    The reason there is no new SVT Focus is that Ford actually killed off its own Zetec 4s in favor of Mazda engines (big surprise there). Nobody in the world does 4 cylinders like Japan. Isuzu is a mess. They basically have one car, and its a rebadged Chevy Tahoe (as if the world needed yet ANOTHER one of those). GM has not been able to handle its foreign partners nearly as well as Ford has.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    I'm seeing adds about Isuzu and they're giving like 7K off everything, but they say they aren't leaving the U.S. market. Yeah right!

    M
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Supposedly they plan to add another model for the '07 year or something like that. I'm rather curious to see how the Saab SUV is received by the press. The Raineer has gotten a very tepid response (Tahoe + "quiet steel" = $10,000 more?), and since the Saab will essentially be another Raineer...
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    There is comparo in MT's Aug issue of the 545i and STS V8. The STS costs 63K, the same as the BMW. That is way too much for a Cadillac. That said, the STS was impressive and didn't get slaughtered by the BMW like the old STS would have.

    M
  • laurasdadalaurasdada Posts: 2,687
    I'm sure that the STS discounts/incentives will be along soon. At least that's what seemed to happen in the Boston area.

    '13 Jaguar XF, '11 BMW 535xi, '02 Lexus RX300

  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Perhaps, but I still dont understand what all the fuss is over that car. The exterior is one of the most boring designs I've seen in years, its like a big-box CTS without the edgy. Its a big slab sided brick like the 300C, minus the character.
  • merc1merc1 Posts: 6,081
    In all fairness a lot of people feel the same way about that new GS. So different strokes for different folks.

    My problem with the STS (without having actually "seen" it) is the price. There is no way I'd pay that much for a Cadillac sedan.

    M
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    I guess you have a point. Even though I would never buy the Cadillac myself, I'm happy for the competition. Having yet another qualified player on the field means that the companies I WOULD consider buying from will have to work that much harder to get their products to stand out. There are no more free rides in this industry.
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    lexusguy... I'm always confused when people write things like you did:

    "Even though I would never buy the Cadillac myself... the companies I WOULD consider buying from...."

    So if Cadillac built the best car for the lowest price, you'd still pass? And if some other company built a worse car you'd buy it? Just because of what? Brand loyalty? Snob appeal?

    Never understood slavish devotion to a car marque. Do you think the car marque is so slavishly devoted to you?

    I say buy the best car that meets your needs and fits your budget, regardless of who makes it or where it is made!
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    "if Cadillac built the best car for the lowest price, you'd still pass"

    Thats a hypothetical question that your saying I'm saying yes to. Cadillac doesnt build the best car, nor is it the lowest price, so it doesnt really apply does it? I'm not blindly devoted to one brand. Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura happen to be my favorite three auto makers, so their cars are the ones I would consider actually buying. Cadillac needs to work on their styling, interiors, and pricing before they would get my serious consideration.
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    lexusguy... I can't understand your thought process. You write:

    "Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura happen to be my favorite three auto makers, so their cars are the ones I would consider actually buying."

    Actually, to be accurate, you should have written Toyota (Lexus), Nissan-Renault (Infiniti), and Honda (Acura). They are the manufacturers. Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura are just the marques, subsidiaries of the parent corporations. For example, an ES330 is essentially a Toyota Camry. An Infiniti I35 is essentially a Nissan Maxima. An Acura TSX is essentially a European Honda Accord.

    What does the auto maker have to do with the specific automobiles for sale? Do you like their corporate politics? Profit margins? Environment and social policies? Unionization stances? Logos? Letterhead? Web sites?

    If you love the auto maker but not the cars, would you still buy the cars?

    And we in America/NA have to buy specific cars from franchise dealers. The dealers aren't even owned or controlled by the manufacturers. What if you love the auto maker but hate the auto maker's dealers?
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    I'm well aware that Infiniti, Acura, and Lexus are the luxury marquees of their respective companies. Perhaps I should've phrased that response differently. What does the automaker have to do with the specific cars? Well for one, they kind of MAKE them. 20 years of embarrasing quality levels, uncompetitive engines and cheap Cadillac interiors are GM's decisions, not the dealers.

    When Volvo was telling the world how great seatbelts are, GM fought tooth and nail to not have to put them in their cars. Safer to be thrown (through the windshield) from the car, said GM. Several more Mercedes and Volvo innovations GM was either slow to adopt, or literally fought in the courts to have them NOT adopted. Lately, when the feds propose an increase for CAFE economy, Toyota and Honda are happy to comply. Who's there to fight it? Why good ole GM, wanting to keep CAFE as low as humanly possible so they can keep from having to modernize. Toyota and Honda I feel are responsible companies, trying to HELP a bad situation, not hurt it. These are part of the reasons why I would NOT buy Cadillac. I generally dont like GM. On top of that, I dont like any of Cadillacs products, so that makes the decision pretty easy.
  • saugataksaugatak Posts: 488
    It's Lexusguy's money. He can blow it on whatever he wants.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Lol. Um.. thanks?
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    lexusguy... Keeping in mind that GM owns Saab and Ford owns Volvo... Still not following the logic. We are comparing cars. Not corporations or history. You write:

    "20 years of embarrasing quality levels, uncompetitive engines and cheap Cadillac interiors are GM's decisions, not the dealers. When Volvo was telling the world how great seatbelts are, GM fought tooth and nail to not have to put them in their cars. Safer to be thrown (through the windshield) from the car, said GM. Several more Mercedes and Volvo innovations GM was either slow to adopt, or literally fought in the courts to have them NOT adopted."

    What does any of that have to do with the cars we are comparing today and buying today? GM owns Opel, Holden, and Saab, and has financial ownership interests in Isuzu, Daewoo, etc. Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Aston Martin, etc. and has ownership interests in Mazda.

    BMW (who now own Rolls Royce cars) used to be part of the Nazi war machine (the Allies hated BMW so much for their great jet engines that the Allies gave England's Bristol BMW's car designs and engineering) and built Isetta bubblecars in the 1950s. That was then. The past is long over and done. We are talking about buying today's cars. Not cars from the 1950s or 1970s.

    Once again, buy the best car that meets your needs and fits your budget. Don't worry about who builds them or where they are built or what that company used to do 25 or 50 years ago.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    You are entitled to the way you think about things, as am I. I am well aware of who owns who, and that there are essenstially 3 Americans, 3 Germans, and 3 Japanese (isnt that wierd?) who own everyone else. (Certain Italians and Citroen\Peugot not withstanding) At the time I was refering to though, Volvo was an independent company. Fuji heavy industries also had plenty to do with WWII, and we've forgiven them as well. The reason I brought up those things is because I feel that GM only cares about its bottom line, and things like safety take a back seat to that. Just recently GM began removing ABS as standard features on its cars to save themselves a few bucks. The CAFE thing is current events also. I've also noticed that GM issues another recall literally every few days.

    The best car that meets my needs, fits my budget, and is built by a company I actually respect is the LS430, which is why I own one.
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    lexusguy... At least we agree that the comparison is between cars ["luxury performance sedans"], not car companies.

    The LS430 is a very nice LUXURY sedan. But the LS430 is NOT a nice luxury PERFORMANCE sedan. Is unfortunate that Toyota/Lexus won't create a decent Sport Pkg for the LS to give it some performance capability. LS400/430 is a magnificent sedate highway cruiser. Eats up miles of smooth, flat roads and coddles the driver and passengers. Almost narcotic-like. A car designed to separate driver and passenger from the road.

    LS400/430 is for those who love to ride, but not for those who love to drive.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    I have to disagree there. The '04 LS with the 18" wheels and Euro sport suspension (yes I know its hard to find) is actually rather nimble and fun to drive for its size. Its no 745 in that department, but I think its as good as a non Sport package equiped Benz S or Jag XJ8.
  • riezriez Posts: 2,361
    lexusguy... Does your LS430 have the Euro-suspension? Can't say I've read a review of an LS with this option. Are you aware of any published review with this option? Don't think any of the doctors and other professionals I know who have LSs have ones with this set up.
  • saugataksaugatak Posts: 488
    Didn't know the LS had a Eurosport suspension. Lexus and sport kind of don't go together in my mind.

    But I'm glad Lexus is around. Although I have no interest in anything they make, I think Lexus has scared the snot out of MB, BMW and other luxury brands and the competition will force all of them to make better cars at more affordable prices.
  • lexusguylexusguy Posts: 6,419
    Mine's not an '04, this is a package that Lexus began offering just this year. Mine just has the air suspension. I'm not sure that there are any reviews of the Euro-suspension, C&D mentioned it in their comparison test, but their car was not equiped as such.
Sign In or Register to comment.