Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

1…205206208210211…435

Comments

  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    Yeah, too bad that grandpas don't get free passes in my book...
  • sjaievesjaieve Member Posts: 252
    I know there are some pretty intelligent people on this board, its pretty easy to see who cant control their emotions and its easy to ignore such comments. Otherwise, I have great respect for a lot of people here.
  • lockgiantslockgiants Member Posts: 29
    Personally I think that, although they are in the same entry level class, both the G and TL serve slightly differenet markets, and the choice should really depend on what you want. I bought a TL for a simple reason: value and location. I didnt want a rear wheel drive car since im in chicago, and a fully loaded G35 w/ awd would have cost me 36k. and to those who argue the opinions here are biast, i actually liked the G better, but i simply could not say no to a fully loaded tl for 31.5k (with 2k back). if youre someone who is willing to pay extra for the power, the G or the IS350 are better options. but the TL is a much quieter ride, and has much more bang for the buck. not to mention the fuel economy is better, especially with gas at record highs. but like most say, you cant really go wrong with either.
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    how 'bout we back to these cars now?
  • chirocatchirocat Member Posts: 73
    I really liked the G35, the studio on wheels is a nice concept and the compact flash slot was a better idea than an Ipod jack IMHO. The biggest complaint I have with the G35 is the pathetic lack of overdrive in 6th gear. My previous car was a 98 Maxima and it was tiring having the engine at 3300 rpm for my entire freeway commute. The G35 gearing was almost the same, whereas the TL-S is much more relaxed on the freeway, cruising well under 3000 RPM (2750). A few milder negatives with the G was the lack of smoothness in the clutch and some vibration in the shifter, and the insurance was also a good chunk more, at least with my company(interestingly, the R32 was the most expensive). I added all these together with a lack of enthusiasm for a good deal and the TL-S got the nod. I probably would have loved the G35 too, and might have taken it if the gearing had been better. Either way, you can't go wrong, they are all awesome cars. :shades:
  • scwmcanscwmcan Member Posts: 399
    Actually it's the entry level luxury sedan thread, not a TL thread, so there should be a balanced opinion, that said the one to buy is the one he like best, there really is no wrong answer.
    Scott
  • patpat Member Posts: 10,421
    This started out in one of the TL discussions. I moved the thread here. :)
  • adamr001adamr001 Member Posts: 95
    I test drove a lot of cars before I chose the G35.

    The TL was one of them. My main complaint about the TL was / is FWD. The car has all the usual FWD problems and didn't handle being "upset" in mid-corner nearly as well as the RWD cars I tested (nor as well as some of the other FWDs (9-3) either).

    I liked the car, I liked the price, but I couldn't get past the FWD and handling.

    If you test drive a G35, make sure and test drive one with 4-wheel Active Steering. Seriously. The difference between a Sport and 4WAS-Sport still amazes me.

    Some of the other cars I test-drove were:
    Lexus IS350 : Only complaints, rear seats slightly too small, no Manual Transmission option, otherwise this was the "best" car I drove from an overall perspective.
    BMW335i : Excellent car, but it felt a bit soulless. It didn't leave me just drooling and wanting to get back in and drive. I can't really explain it better than that. I just didn't wow me.
    BMW328i : Not in the same ballpark as the other cars I drove. Lacks the power.
    Saab 9-3 Aero : FWD again, but otherwise this was a fun car and was 3rd in my ranking.
    There were a few more, but they were more sport than luxury (WRX STi, VW STi, etc.)

    Ultimately, it's all about what you want.

    I wanted (in order of importance)
    4 doors
    Sport
    Luxury interior + toys
    Manual Transmission

    Thus I chose the G35.
  • scwmcanscwmcan Member Posts: 399
    My applogies to the original poster then.
    Scott
  • bruceomegabruceomega Member Posts: 250
    ... The biggest complaint I have with the G35 is the ... lack of overdrive ...

    FWIW, The Infiniti web site says the 2009 FX-35 / FX-45 are going to have a 7 speed automatic. It's probable that will (eventually) work it's way over to the M cars and G cars.

    Bruce
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    I thought I'd chime in here, since my main decision was between the TL and G35.

    I have been a Honda guy, so at first was not even considering the G35, and so was looking at the TL, especially considering the great deals that were possible considering the desire to clear out the 08's before the 09's came in. A friend recommended I look at the G35's, so at first I just went to the dealership and looked at them (on a Sunday so I couldn't test drive one), and I thought the looks and interior were very impressive looking, and so decided I would consider it.

    I test drove the TL (not type S) and, while it was solid, I was not swept away. I was a bit disappointed with the low-end power and responsiveness. I then test drove the G35 and was blown away with how the engine performed. Very responsive, and I like the way the transmission adapts to the driver's driving style.

    I thought I'd end up paying a lot more for the G35 given the incentives offered on the TL's, but actually found that the G35 incentives were even better, assuming you are financing a large % of the total cost of the car. The 2.9% financing for up to 63 months (incentive until 3/31) saves me about $2000 vs. the 5.24% rate I could get from my credit union, plus this month they have added an additional $500 cash rebate, for a total "incentive saving" of about $2500, greater than the TL incentive. Also, I was able to get a deal for slightly below invoice even before the incentives, so ended up with the exact car I wanted (Journey with Premium, no nav, wood trim, garnet ember with charcoal interior) for $32,150 or so, and considering the financing deal, over the length of the payments the cost is the same as buying a car at $30,200 and getting the 5.24% rate. This is not far from what I could get on a TL, even with the model changing, and this way I get a car that is a new body design (as of 07) and is the car I like better.

    Anyway, I think both cars are great, but I prefer the G35. My main issue was the engine's performance and exterior styling.

    Jeff
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    That won't help those of us who are manual transmission bigots. ;)

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    You might want to consider fuel economy given the price of fuel these days. The TL is well known for delivering decent fuel economy in spite of its powerful motor; the G35 not so much.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Excellent post! Enjoy your new ride!

    Regards,
    OW
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    Good point on the fuel economy.

    The G35 seems to average 17-19mpg in mixed driving, while the TL is in the low 20's. I think the 5-speed automatic has something to do with that, since even on the highway it revs at a pretty high rpm.

    Jeff
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    Thank you, I am! :shades:

    My wife was against the purchase (gas mileage/cost) until she actually drove the car. Now she loves it and wants to take it (instead of our 07 Odyssey) whenever she runs an errand without the kids

    Funny thing, since a few weeks ago she always wanted to take the Odyssey out on errands (instead of my previous car, a 1993 Geo Prizm) :P
  • adamr001adamr001 Member Posts: 95
    Well my observations are that even with the 6mt gas milage is determined by how often you keep your foot on the accellerator. If you can avoid on/off your milage will increase. It doesn't seem to matter (again, anecdotal evidence) if I accellerate hard or soft. It's the simple matter of accellerating that consumes the fuel. If I maintain speed / cruise milage climbs immediately.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    To be sure, for any given car, if you keep your foot out of it, it will deliver better fuel economy, however, some cars are still more adept at getting better mileage than others, and in this class of cars, the G35 seems to consistently deliver the worst fuel economy.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • adamr001adamr001 Member Posts: 95
    Oh, I didn't say that it didn't. The G35 is more sports car than performance luxury sedan.

    It's just that I can make my G35 hit 20mpg in mixed driving or I can make it hit 17mpg. All by how I keep my foot on / off the pedal. On the highway, under cruise, I have no problems hitting 27mpg. Without cruise I run about 23mpg.

    To be sure, the G35 isn't a fuel efficient vehicle.
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    I think that all who look into this issue will unanimously agree that the G35 tends to get worse gas mileage than the TL -- by 2-3 mpg or so. One must weigh this into the decision they are making -- if an individual likes the G35 better, they need to ask themselves whether they like it "enough better" to pay a little more for gas.

    I drive about 800 miles/month, so for me the difference of 2-3 mpg means about an extra 4.5-6 gallons of gas a month, which at current prices here in Houston ($3.20/gal for 93 octane), is about $14 to $19 a month. For me, I liked the G35 at least that much more than the TL, so I don't mind paying the extra gas $$. Even if gas goes up to $4/gallon, the difference will be $20-$24 per month, and I am still OK with that difference.

    If all else was equal and I liked the TL just as much as the G35, then I would clearly have chosen it for the better gas mileage.

    Mileage is definitely a factor to consider, and each individual has to weight each factor by their own relative utilities.

    Jeff
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Yeah, well I guess my comments were colored by the fact that I often drive 800 in a single week (with 500 being typical). There is no doubt that if the montly mileage isn't huge, even gas for a Hummer won't be significant. ;-)

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    Yes, driving that much, the price difference is much larger ($50-80 a month or so).

    But the thought of driving my G for 500 miles a week makes me smile! :)

    Jeff
  • alltorquealltorque Member Posts: 535
    I wonder if the choices/preferences posted here will change once you guys get the full range of Euro/Japanese diesels. Will the modern torquey oil-burners sway you away from your current picks, I wonder ? M-B, VW/Audi, BMW, Volvo etc have some excellent diesels. My favourite is possibly the Audi 4.2 V8 TDi as fitted to the Q7 SUV - 322bhp and 561lbft according the mag I'm looking at. Or you could have the VW 5.0 V10 from the Touareg @ 309bhp/554lbft but I'd still go for the 4.2.

    Would be interested in your views.
  • adamr001adamr001 Member Posts: 95
    Doubtful, for me at least. Diesel pumps are harder and harder to find in the city. Easy to find in small towns / on the highway, but hard in-town. When I had a Cummins I routinely had to travel 15-30 minutes out of my way to get fuel. Not keen on doing that again.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    I'd buy a BMW or Audi diesel in a heartbeat. I've driven them in Europe and and entirely impressed, especially in their abilities to accelerate from say 20 mph to speeds of well over 100 mph. Forget the issue of fuel availability, if diesel cars start becoming popular (and I predict that they will), gasoline stations will increasingly start offering diesel as well. Case in point, of the three closest gas stations to our house, none of them carried diesel when we moved here in 2002, now they all do. Why? Well in our area, diesel trucks pickups and SUVs are quite popular as are VW TDIs and Mercedes-Benz E320 diesels.

    Best Regards.,
    Shipo
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Heck, you must have a few million miles on you by now. Does your better half logg in that high as well?

    I'm at about 300/week but my wife is a SAH mom but surprisingly she drives 200/week jockeying kids all day.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Shipo, will you consider one for your current consideration or is your buy decision closer. I was thinking 335d when it comes over toward the end of the year. What do you think?

    I was pondering it but wanted your view.

    Regards,
    OW
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Not shipo but I must say the 335d is very attractive to me. well, all diesels are. Gas here is $4 a gallon for premium. Diesel is about 20 cents more a gallon and the same station is a quarter of a mile from my house. If I can get 30 mpg with a diesel 335d v. 22 mpg with a 335, it's an easy call.

    $2100 a year for diesel and $2700 for premium. The diesel may cost more upfront but for me the idea of stopping less often is also really attractive. As prices go up, the savings will increase too. So if I'm looking at $5 a gallon in 2010 (seems reasonable to assume), my savings increase by hundreds.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    Wifey and I have a combined million and a half or more miles, so yeah, she racks them up pretty quickly as well. ;)

    Regarding the 335d, if rumors are to be believed, the 335d is only coming over here with an automatic transmisson. As you know, I am a manual transmission bigot, so no dice on the first incarnation of a 3-Series diesel over here. :(

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • gooddeal2gooddeal2 Member Posts: 750
    Yeah, well I guess my comments were colored by the fact that I often drive 800 in a single week (with 500 being typical).

    If I put 800 miles/week, I will be worry more about the depreciation than the gas. 800 miles/week x 52 weeks = 41600 miles/year = a lot of depreciation. I rather buy a small/sport economy car (~18K) instead of a luxury car.
  • plektoplekto Member Posts: 3,738
    I've come to the conclusion that the best car for the OP is actually none of the above.

    He wants something affordable and sporty and luxury, that's also reliable and gets good gas mileage. Unfortunately, they stopped making this car 2-3 years ago, but that's fine, because used like-new examples run about $20K.

    Get a Mercedes C230K Sedan with manual. This is the *4 door* sedan with the 1.8 supercharged engine in it. It was the exact same model that they sell in Europe(slightly larger engine) and is actually fairly reliable. Mercedes makes two types of cars. Cars and Taxis/Rentals. The way you can tel the difference is if it comes with stick-shift, since 90% of Germans get a license that allows them to drive manuals. If you are one of the 10% that gets an automatic-only license, you are literally laughed at and considered to be a child driver.

    Mercedes puts no effort into their fleet sales and models, and especially their automatic transmissions. Just enough to get by and no more(S class aside of course). This is why an E class, well, *is* a Taxi in 90% of the world. And it's why their SUVs suck. They are made for basically U.S. markets and taxis.(see a pattern? heh)

    In Europe, it's all about the A, B, and C class. Manuals are the norm and diesels are better. The closer Mercedes you buy to this sort of vehicle, the better it will drive and last.

    In Europe, it's called the C200 Kompressor and is a great car. Unfortunately, you have to go back to the previous generation in the U.S. to get that engine.

    Of course, the BEST Mercedes is this:
    C 220 CDI 4-cylinder 190 hp 460 Nm
    If we got this over here, it would obliterate the entry-level segment. 460Nm is an outrageous amount of torque, and 190HP is equal to the IS250. All while getting 30+ mpg.

    http://autocar-show.blogspot.com/2007/06/first-drive-experience-mercedes-c220.ht- ml
    Bummer we can't get it here...
    ****

    Now, if you're looking for automatic(sigh), get couple of year old IS300. This car has the IS250's looks and feel, yet is lighter and lots more powerful, plus it has a nice I-6 engine as well. It'll blow the doors off of a new IS250 or A4 in overall driving, and is somewhat useable in the rear for kids.

    Note - while the IS300 was good, it honestly reminded me exactly of the Volvo 850, but with RWD instead of FWD. It had a very "European" feel to it. Something abot the balance and suspension and size and all the rest - it felt better than the base 3 series.

    The Lexus messed up. they made a compromise version that's honestly not any better than the stuff GM puts out, and they put a mega-speed transmission and a V6 in the IS350 in a quest for power, when all it did as turn it into a muscle car.

    Remember, the original luxury performance sedan was... a BMW 2002. Light, agile, and well rounded are musts. Bloat, muscle-car power, and in search for a purpose... that's most modern cars.

    Or you can get a classic. :) There's no shame in driving a classic car.
  • louisweilouiswei Member Posts: 3,715
    they put a mega-speed transmission and a V6 in the IS350 in a quest for power, when all it did as turn it into a muscle car.

    For some reason MB agrees with Lexus' strategy as they are doing exactly the same thing with the new C-class.
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,504
    ". . .once you guys get the full range of Euro/Japanese diesels."

    As if. . .

    I can guarantee you that the car I bought this week would have been different if we had access here in the land of the EPA and the state of California to "the full range of Euro/Japanese diesels." I don't think it's ever going to happen, but I'll be very happy to be wrong.

    Bring me a 2.0 - 2.5 litre turbodiesel with a manual transmission & RWD with room enough in the back (fold-down seats or wagon/avant) for my bicycle, and I'll be happy. Several vehicles which meet these requirements have been available in Europe for over six years that I know of, but aren't here even yet.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    "If I put 800 miles/week, I will be worry more about the depreciation than the gas. 800 miles/week x 52 weeks = 41600 miles/year = a lot of depreciation. I rather buy a small/sport economy car (~18K) instead of a luxury car."

    Yup, one of the several reasons why the 530i went back to BMW-FS at lease end, and why, instead of replacing it, I chose to drive our old "spare car" (home depot/dump run hack with ~80,000 on the clock at the time) for the duration of that contract. During the 21 months that I serviced that client I put on just shy of 80,000 miles in spite of the fact that I was occasionally traveling and it sat in the garage.

    I'm now in the market for a new contract, and the two companies that seem to be the most likely candidates will have my mileage drop to a more normal 15,000 to 20,000 miles per year. Assuming one of those two actually happen, I'm thinking the 2009 Audi A3 (which will have the new "clean-sheet design" EA 888 engine), with a 6-Speed manual of course. The only rub with that car is that it is "wrong wheel drive", however, it does sport a spare tire well complete with a donut spare (but room for a full size wheel/tire), a jack, real GFTs, a dip-stick tube for checking/changing the oil, and room in the back to schlep around our new mutt.

    The flip side is that the company I was with for those 21 months is, A) talking of giving me another juicy contract, and B) has moved their offices some 20 miles further (each way) from our home. If I end up back there, geez, I'm thinking either a new Honda Civic EX-L 6-Speed or a 2009 Jetta TDI 6-Speed, cars I can put 100,000 miles on in two years and not suffer too much from the depreciation.

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • nyccarguynyccarguy Member Posts: 16,421
    I'd buy a BMW diesel in a heartbeat if I were in the market. As blueguydotcom said, diesel costs a bit more up front and a bit more to fill up, but you get tremendous range and they last forever and a day. It is amazing how quiet modern diesels are. One of my customers has a Freighliner Sprinter with an MB CDI engine in it and you can barely hear it idling from 5 feet away.

    By the time I'm ready to pickup a new car for me, BMW will hopefull get their wits about them and offer a diesel with a stick shift. I'm a manual transmission bigot like shipo :shades:

    2001 Prelude Type SH, 2022 Highlander XLE AWD, 2022 Wrangler Sahara 4Xe, 2023 Toyota Tacoma SR 4WD

  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    Blueguy, what about the driving dynamics of the 3? You were not overjoyed with the '06 330i. I assume not much difference in the 335d. Would you still give it a shot (if MT gets built in)?

    I remember that the actual mileage of the d is around 28 - 30 mpg combined for the US version but I have also read Euro versions of 37 mpg.

    Regards,
    OW
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I don't mind the AT but the better half would destroy it. The AT is good for me anyway.

    I would consider the d along with the 3'er on my ext leas in December. You guys are steering me but I wonder the cost trade-off if the d runs in the low $50'sK verse ~ $47K I could get a NA version. The one I drove was a rush compared to the 255 hp 330.

    The diesel twist is very tempting also but I need to get a better handle on the drive difference on the power curve vs. each variant. Once the fuel savings is measured vs. price and driving pleasure I can make a move after testing each one.

    My next monkey wrench is the 1 series thrown into the mix! I am reeling but the availability of the d might make my decision easier and the one will be well documented by year end.

    Regards,
    OW
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    When I consider a 3 again it'll mean a kid is on the way I have to have a car bigger than the cooper. For the sake of having a vehicle that can fit the family, I'd suck it up. The far better mileage of the diesel really raises my eyebrow. I love the idea of 30 mpg and 16 gallons...stopping for gas every 1.5-2 weeks sound great!
  • chirocatchirocat Member Posts: 73
    Count me in as well. I remember seeing a magazine article on a Tuner 330d and 530d a few years ago, and it was damn impressive. Impressive enough is this C@D article, it says volumes. Near gas performance with up to 40 mpg? Cool!

    check this out;

    http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/hot_lists/high_performance/performance_files- _tested_by_c_d/2006_bmw_330d_road_test

    When I was looking for car last year I was a total manual trans biggot and actually sneered audibly at any "performance" sedan on the lot that had an auto. :P

    I only considered 2 cars that were not manuals; a R32 with DSG, can't call it an automatic if it doesn't have a torque converter though, and a pre-owned C55. The badass V-8 in that Q-ship almost made up for the lack of a clutch. :blush:

    Hopefully America will pull it's collective heads out and realize diesels are not what we saw in the crude 80's gas conversion crap? IMHO all trucks 3/4 ton and over plus large SUV's should all be diesel. If we had more diesels, maybe the price of the damn gas would come down because they would have to refine more and can't artificially keep the price up with that old "supply" rhetoric.
  • circlewcirclew Member Posts: 8,666
    I knew you had at least some satisfaction form the E90 bloated version of what you would consider the ultimate sports sedan. More than my eyebrows raised with the torque numbers. I gotta try that equation for myself.

    My problem with test drives is the limited feel you get from driving a few miles. The 335i I drove for 1 day ~ 40 miles was much more of a drive to understand the car. It's an easy sell for me because the extra weight doesn't bother me as I am accustomed to US fare, sloppier handling and control. Stepping into the '06 3'er did it for me.

    Now if I can get 30 MPG, it just depends on the cost trade off of a lease verse the efficiency gain.

    Regards,
    Ow
  • pcampospcampos Member Posts: 12
    I don't have much experience buying cars (I bought a new Corolla in 1987, drove it for eight years, then bought an Accord which I've driven ever since). I've decided I want to get something nice. Situation: I drive about 8000-10,000 miles a year. For the next three years I don't want to spend more than around $300 a month on car payments. After that, I'm going to be in a far more flexible financial situation and will be able to afford a very expensive car if I want to go that way. So I'm considering the following options: leasing something for around $300 a month for 36 months, or buying something used but fairly nice in the the 12K-15K range, and then trading up three years from now. So far I've looked at the Acura TSX and the Audi 3 to lease, plus a five-year-old SAAB 9 to buy. Thanks in advance for any feedback!
  • blueguydotcomblueguydotcom Member Posts: 6,249
    Buy used. A used TSX will run well, serve you nicely and in the end you'll have something, unlike a lease.
  • pcampospcampos Member Posts: 12
    I've noticed the TSXs don't seem to depreciate much at all in the first 2-3 years. I also understand that a redesigned model is coming out in a couple of months. So maybe I should be looking at something around five years old? It's tempting to lease, which I've never done, but since I'm a low mileage driver and am pretty easy on cars in general maybe it makes more sense to own something used for three years and hope it doesn't depreciate much in the interim.
  • jpstax1jpstax1 Member Posts: 197
    Instead buy a Buick LaCrosse Super. It has all the features of most of the entry level foreign-made cars for a lot less money. Test drive one if you don't believe me.
  • shiposhipo Member Posts: 9,148
    I assume that you're joking. Yes, no? Ain't no way a Buick anything should be mentioned in the same breath with any of the cars categorized as "Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans". :P

    Best Regards,
    Shipo
  • cdnpinheadcdnpinhead Member Posts: 5,504
    ". . .Acura TSX and the Audi 3. . ."

    Since I decided I could tolerate FWD this time around, I ended up looking at exactly those two cars. Since the RWD choices may improve over the next few years, I wanted something that wouldn't depreciate horribly over a 3-4 year period. I went with the TSX, and that'd probably be your best bet as well -- Audi depreciation is nothing to write home about. Going used, as has been suggested, is the only way to keep the payment as low as you want it.

    Honda depreciation is amazingly low; I'm shopping for a car for my mother-in-law, and Civic vs. Corolla used car prices have to be seen to be believed. A 1-2 year older Civic with 40-50K more miles sells for the same money as a newer much less used Corolla. Audi isn't even in the same ballpark.

    You'll enjoy either car, by the way. The TSX is working out nicely; it's meant to be an interim solution, but if I bond with it in a big way, I may still be driving it in 8 years, as I did my last car. I've driven rental A3s in Europe & really loved them. I did serious Audi research, going back seven years, as a result.

    Let us know how this turns out.
    '08 Acura TSX, '17 Subaru Forester
  • ucalucal Member Posts: 2
    Can I install Alpine after market head unit in my 2003 Acura TL Type S ?
    What installation kit is needed ? and what are the pros and cons of installing such a head unit ?
  • tayl0rdtayl0rd Member Posts: 1,926
    ... (instead of my previous car, a 1993 Geo Prizm)

    Nothing wrong with a '93 Prizm. I had a '92 back in '93. Wanted a '93, but was duped by the salesman. (Oh, the joys of youth and inexperience!) Anyway, Motor Trend wrote of the '93 Prizm that it was Lexus-like in it's quietness. I drove one and agreed whole-heartedly. How has yours held up? Is it still quite and smooth?
  • jeffmo2334jeffmo2334 Member Posts: 23
    It has been a great car for me -- the engine is still very smooth, and the transmission is also OK. In 14 years, I have only had one repair issue (electrical). It has been a GREAT car, and also gets very good gas mileage (28mpg in mixed driving).

    It is not quiet -- my main complaint about this car has been the plastic inside is very cheap, so all of the door handles are cracked or broken, several knobs have broken, etc. When it runs, it has lots of rattles, and is noisy with all of the vibrating plastic. Also, 3 of the 4 rims are slightly bent, so that also makes the ride quite rough.

    It only has 116k miles, so I wouldn't be surprised to see the engine/transmission to last another 60k or 70k miles at least. I will sell it to someone fully confident that it will be a good car for them. Do you want to buy it? :) Just kidding. :P

    Jeff
  • jpstax1jpstax1 Member Posts: 197
    The LaX Super IS categorized as a "luxury performance sedan". And it IS head and shoulders above any other 2008 Buick LaX. However, a Caddy, Lexus, BMW, or Mercedes it is not. But, it's a great performance sedan at a bargain price, with a lot of the same equipment and amenities found in higher priced sedans:

    http://www.edmunds.com/new/2008/buick/lacrosse/100900863/researchlanding.html
Sign In or Register to comment.

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles