Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
1. Putting money down on lease is defeating main lease advantage (which is transfering depreciation risk to the finance company). If car gets totalled, the downpayment is gone, gone, gone, whereas if you put nothing down, GAP (included in lease) will pick it up. Other advantages are businesses don't need to commit capital and get better tax treatment (not really applicable for consumer). That's why banks loooove people putting money down on lease and manufacturers advertise leases structured that way - they just picked up the tab and shows lower monthly payment on ads. Doesn't mean that one has to go for it - quite to contrary, it's generally bad idea, period.
2. People who put money down to lower payments on lease by definition demostrate that they do not undestand lease, which means they should not lease. Lease is much more complex financing instrument with more variables that can be manipulated to create illusion of lower price. There are cases when lease may be cheaper than financing - but not because of lower payment, but because of hidden price break that is included in residual inflated above real predicted actual market value (after return, the manufacturer's bank has to eat the price difference).
One who decides to lease has to understand every single aspect of it, otherwise they may be for very rude awakening at the end of the term, when they owe 3 grand outright for mileage overrage and another two for scratches. All of that has to be factored in. That's why you read those comments from people saying that if one buys based on payment, most likely they can't afford the car ("don't deserve"). It really is a simple rule of thumb - if you can't afford to buy it (loan/cash), you can't afford to lease it, either. There are some exceptions for very low mileage users, or subsidized leases, but just because monthly payment is lower, it doens't mean it's cheaper.
I went through it with my recent purchase. I got 328 wagon with a few options ($45K MSRP). Correctly structured lease (0 down, 15K/yr) was about $200 per month less than 60 month loan with small ($2500) downpayment (yes - loan downpayments are making perfect sense, as they lower overall financed amount and risk of being upside down in case of a total). To me $200 per month is absolutely not enough, especially that effective finance rate was higher on the lease than on the loan. I made some quick math and it was evident that low interest loan was a better deal. Higher monthly payments, but better deal overall. Now, if somebody lives in monthly payment world, they may not really understand the concept, but that's a different discussion.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
We can agree to disagree, you can put down $4K on a lease and waste your money to drive a car that you can't really afford. I'll use BMW's money and put nothing down on a lease and use my $4K for my trip to Germany when we do the European Delivery of our 2012 535i
For instance, 5-6 years ago, my leases used to have great residuals and buyouts so that if you really feel in love with the car and wanted to buy it, you could without it breaking the bank. Some companies would even work with you to lower the buyout. That is no more. Now, the car companies inflate the residuals making the buyouts thousands of dollars over msrp and put disposition fees, etc because they want you to return the car at the end of the lease and get something else from them, thus never ending the cycle.
I found this out the hard way and one of my vehicles is still on lease. It is going to be my last lease as I'm switching back to financing.
I just sign a lease with MBUSA on 2012 C250 Sport Sedan with MSRP$43.9k on 24mo/12k mi/yr. I walked out $1k drive off incl. 1st Mo.+ Registration + 2yr srvc plan and $400 per mo. incl. tax (8.75%). Of course every deal is different but dealer is making a lot of money on these FEES!
What's up with you assuming to know what people can afford or not afford?
The act of putting money down on a lease has absolutely no indication as to whether the person can afford it or not. It may indicate that they either don't understand the advantages of not putting money down or they just want a little smaller monthly payment. I don't think anyone should assume that just because they may prefer a smaller payment that they "cant afford it". It's kind of like the old saying that people that can't afford to buy the car will lease it. Kind of like how you took affront when, because of your screenname, people assumed you were female.
They could very well be much better off than you, the one accusing them of not being able to afford one of these cars. Making blanket statements like that is silly and very condescending!
Complete understanding of the leasing process and concern about all the possible risks involved indicates one is more knowlegeable.....not better off.
I never mentioned anything about downpayment or anything about lease specifics - so i don't know what we disagree about. The only thing I stated was that Infiniti has better posted lease prices then the BMW- pointing to company listed current leases- not blanket statement -
Add paid maintenance (dealer oil changes are over hundred bucks each, add set of brake pads, wipers perhaps some other things). I think it's a tie with 328 having slightly lower cost, but G37 being faster and perhaps better equipped).
2018 430i Gran Coupe
BTW, Infiniti has lease return fees. Directly from Infiniti website "Disposition Fee due at termination of lease". All lease companies do, no exceptions. They may sometimes waive them if you get another car of same brand.
I get it- you like Infiniti. Fine, there is a lot to like. Just don't oversell it. It is not really as inexpensive as you would like to make us believe. Still 40 grand.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Maintenance for a car is great but let's not get blinded by the fact that BMW does this for a reason- they want you to lease and this service helps them resell the car when it comes bac for a premium as certified- its a fantastic model of how to sell cars- and caddy has followed this lead.
Oil changes - well click link, 40 bux - no that fat. Now you know.
http://herbchambersinfinitiofwestborough.com/Service_and_Parts_Specials
Again, G37 is a good car All I'm saying it is probably not as cheap as you want to believe. And I know you are not selling - well perhaps just your beliefs . All I'm doing is to clarify your clarifications, trying to level the comparisons to same benchmarks. Manufacturers are great when it comes to muddy the comparisons to their advantage. Doesnt mean we have to believe everything they say.
Again:
1. Infiniti offer is good, but it already requires dealer's "participation" in discount about $2500. Lower BMW price by that amount and then recalculate lease to get the offer comparison leveled.
2. Both have disposal fee.
3. BMW pays all but tires and wheel alignment (which is strange) maintenance. Infiniti does not. Just periodic inspections (based on your link) will sum up to a few hundreds over the lease period. Add oil changes and some rubber and other fluids and you may go over 1000 bucks easy.
4. Infiniti has better features and power. BMW has better resale. If you want comparable BMW, 335 would cost you more, no doubt.
Altogether BMW may come a bit cheaper (total cost), but probably not by much. In my town BMW dealers are far superior to Infiniti in customer service and sale experience.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
Smarty you had an Infiniti? Weren't you the same guy talking up the TL as well?
I think the with the 10 plus thou I saved not getting the 335 I can afford 3 dealer trips a year for oil.
2018 430i Gran Coupe
If Infiniti was the better car, then BMW wouldn't be in business. However when it comes to leasing, no one wins but the banks.
Just a FYI, BMW and Infiniti, Audi, Lexus, MB all drop the return fee if you lease another one of their cars, but BMW is the only one who will do it without asking. My First BMW I leased was a 325is and when I bought my 330i the fee was dropped and I never said a word.
Has this then changed with newer Infiniti leases?
http://www.infinitilakecounty.com/specials/service.htm
I've owned an Infiniti for almost ten years and I don't believe I have ever paid over $35.99 for an oil change and of course that is not synthentic but it seems to work just fine for all this time. As I scan through my maint folder on the vehicle it seems it ran between $25 and $36 all these years. Can't account for the Infiniti dealer you frequented but I'm sure some are better than others. How many links are you going to need before you basically stop calling people liars? What does one have to do....scan and post invoices?
Um, oil changes at 3k? Who does that anymore. Most newer cars have a 7500 mile change schedule. If people are going to continually exaggerate to make a point what's the sense in trying to have a discussion.
Service prices have nothing to do with whether one car is better than another and I don't think that was the jist of this conversation anyway. Someone was just trying to point out the lease cost differences.....not whether one car is better or not.
I will say that some of the maintenance items were pretty high, but I suspect they're in line with other vehicles in this class. Then again, I put 108,000 miles on it without a single repair (just maintenance), so overall it was a darn economical vehicle.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Need help navigating? kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
Share your vehicle reviews
Also, take a chill pill and chillax. I only questioned one thing. Don't get all huffy about it.
i am looking to buy a 2012 TL with Technology Package. I drove both the FWD and SH-AWD versions, and there was no comparison. The handling on the SH-AWD was quite impressive. The FWD had more torque steer than my 2005 TL which is not surprising given that it has more horsepower and torque than the '05 had.
my question is could someone who owns a 2012 SH-AWD TL please tell me what mileage they are getting according to their trip computer. The EPA raised the MPG numbers on the 2012s, presumably due to the six speed tranny.
any information would be appreciated, as i am a bit concerned about fuel economy. i have not owned an AWD car before.
BTW the selling my '05 and moving up to the 2012 will be bittersweet. i have loved that car!!
Okay, it must have been added to lease inceptions of 2009 or later as I say my son did not have it with his recent Infiniti lease turn-in.
Oil changes are $45 at my Infiniti dealer... for a 36K lease, we'll have four services... I'm guessing around $500 total for all four...
If the 30K service turns out to be outrageous, we'll just do an oil change then, or another 15K service... That's what I did on my Subaru... no issues with the leasing company on turn-in..
Edmunds Price Checker
Edmunds Lease Calculator
Did you get a good deal? Be sure to come back and share!
Edmunds Moderator
I am at 30% of oil life left and am going to switch to Mobil1 5W-20 at the first oil change; I would expect a very slight bump in mileage due to that and due to the car reaching approximately 7,500-8,000 miles at the first change.
Coming from a 2009 Audi A4 2.0T quattro (6 speed tiptronic) -- I am impressed as my mileage is slightly better on the Acura and the Acura has 305 HP compared to the Audi's 211 -- the torque (max) is better on the Acura too, but, in fairness to the Audi, since it was a turbo, the torque was available at sub 2000 rpms -- the Acura has to spin a lot faster to reach its full torque.
So, net net: the Acura, IMHO, is not exactly a sipper of fuel, but it is damn close considering the power and the AWD system.
No complaints from me!
Drive it like you live. :shades:
http://www.edmunds.com/acura/tl/2012/road-test.html
Much of the driving was Interstates [ typically posted 70 MPH and maintaining 75-ish ] or divided rural routes [ typically posted 55 and running 65-ish ] – with some ‘in town’ driving as well.
Currently at just over 2,000 miles.
Car: 335iS – trans. = seven speed DCT.
EPA rating is 17 \ 24.
Not bad, methinks, not bad at all.
- Ray
Unable to calculate the MPG for the 1,000+ miles in Europe, because I did not realize until I returned that 2 receipts did not include the number of liters purchased . . .
thanks for the info. i appreciate it. i agree that the MPG is good for a car with that amount of power in an AWD version. I imagine the car's FWD bias is partly responsible for that, as is the V-Tec technology. I don't mind the FWD bias as long as the car moves power toward the rear in more spirited driving. The test drive I took proved it does just that.
The sales rep knew that I didn't like the amount of torque steer in the FWD model I had previously driven, so he suggested an open route with a lot of curves and he had me push the car to limits beyond what I would normally do with a stranger in the passenger seat. The car was rock solid throughout. i was really sold on the handling.
I have not had a BMW or an Audi, so I don't have a true benchmark comparison, but I can safely say the car handles much better than any of the cars I have owned in the past.
The Acura, upon first test drive (in a day with several test drives over identical routes and speeds, etc) was "close to" a 2011 Audi S4 Premium+ without any additional options (that is, it did not have the torque vectoring option called Sport Differential.)
Many -- myself included -- scoff or repress a scoff (that's me) -- whenever I utter or type those words. But damnit Jim, I'm a doctor, not a plumber, no wait, I'm a software guy not a professional car reviewer.
But there it is -- a $47,000+ Acura TL drives and feels pretty much like a potentially $59,000 Audi S4 (if they are equipped similarly the Audi's price shoots up, big time.) A serious Automobile magazine comparison of the two cars may not convice you that the Acura should be shopped against the Audi, but the numbers (produced and recorded for both cars) are not that far apart -- and it feels as if the Acura and the Audi are twin-sons of different mothers or something akin to that.
look here:
http://www.automobilemag.com/reviews/driven/1008_2010_acura_tl_sh_awd_vs_2010_au- di_s4/viewall.html
In any case, I was driving a 2009 Audi A4 2.0T Prestige w/sport package and 19" wheels and tires with Audi Drive Select for Pete's sake -- and I wanted a new 2012 Audi. A reasonably well equipped A4 (not S4) could be had for about $47,000, so the Acura, at the price, seemed a good place to compare.
Problem was, the Audi came back at a 42 month lease point that was much higher than the Acura's lease point for 36 months.
Bzzz. A 4-cyc Audi w/211 HP (and it seemed smaller than the Acura) vs an Acura w/305 HP with every possible do dad that Acura throws on these cars?
Even the loyalty and "pull" of 29 previous Audis could not make me cough up the extra money (which would have been about $200 per month).
In any case, given an identical deal, I probably would have re-upped for the Audi (at the time, in fact, I am certain I would have); but the dollar done me in. Hell, at the time, for the exact same money, I probably would have gone for a Volvo S60 T6 AWD with a few option boxes ticked off.
Now, 5,000 miles later -- I am, I admit it -- very pleased with my decision and love to press down on the accelerator and be rewarded with great power and power delivered as if it were coming from an ultra smooooooth turbine.
The Acura TL SH-AWD Advance may not quite know what it wants to be, but for the time being it is the bargain of the bunch for performance and content methinks.
Still loving the Germans, but temporarily on vacation with the Japanese.
-- Mark
Oh yea, drive it like you live.
:shades:
http://m.automobilemag.com/reviews/editors_notebook/1106_2012_acura_tl_sh_awd_ad- - - vance/index.html
Here is an interesting blurb:
"I appreciate Acura's offering a manual transmission in the TL, but I was not nearly as enamored of it as my colleagues seem to be. Perhaps it felt a little out of place to me because I don't really see Acura as a brand for enthusiasts. Keep making your cars heavier, cancel the development of your V-8 engine, unleash the ZDX on the world, and it's no wonder enthusiasts are more interested in BMW, Audi, and Cadillac these days"
This is similar to what I wrote 3 years ago before I got kicked out of a tl chat
That's nice, but you should separate the CAR from the BRAND. One poster says the CAR is 90% of the Audi. No arguments about the BRAND, but development of a V8, the existence of the ZDX have nothing to do with whether the TL is a good car or not.
The overall brand, Acura, faces its detractors and challenges. By the time Acrua had a V8 in the market, "everyone" would be writing "why bother" as even BMW and Audi are moving to fewer cylinders and blown engines instead of naturally aspirated ones.
I give nor take any points away from Acura due to its lack of a V8.
It remains true, today, however, that Acura is typically not considered an enthusiast's brand. Some of this perception could change however now that Tony Stark is getting an Acura in the new Avenger's movie (who'da thunk he'd turn in his R8?)
:surprise:
Spent a bit longer before boarding in Germany and
longer at port \ dist. center here than I
had expected. [ hoped ]
OTOH, they replaced a front wheel I scraped up in Italy!
BMW estimates 6-8 weeks for East Coast.
So....
- Ray
Really enjoying the drive!
I used to subscribe to Car and Driver several years back, but I realized that if the car does not have a BMW emblem on the hood the reviews went south- hence, I cancelled my subscription.
How's the search for the E65 going? Us 99% ers could only dream.
Mark- I agree the V8 is no longer needed for the brand.
My point is more to the practical notion that "what was once a V8 is now a 6" (either I6 or V6) with a turbo, twin-turbo or super-charger. Likewise, we are increasingly seeing these companies moving from a 6 to a 4, also with forced induction.
These changes are being done for a variety of reasons, but the one that seems to get press, is they are using smaller CI engines (with forced induction) to improve the car's efficiency (without sacrificing performance.)
Acura may well skirt the "marketing need" for more than 6 cylinders by taking the approach of further refining the current 3.7L and then breathing on it, one way or another, to get the HP and torque needed for a flagship vehicle.
When I was in Germany I noted the D class cars all over the place, but mostly with smaller engines (an A8 with a V6? yep.)
Maybe Acura will pull the covers off of a new "Honda" V8 and put it in their flagship car (assuming they can muster, or, better said, WANT to invest in a complete re-do of the RL.)
At this point, I care not -- and I have no idea if I will get another Acura.
I really like the TL in SH-AWD Advance trim -- but a lesser TL didn't do it for me; so who knows, maybe the next gen Audi (B or C class) will draw me back. In other words, I was passionate about Audi's, but I am much less inclined to be thus insofar as the TL is concerned.
The hell of it is, the Acura TL SH-AWD advance is "more car" a better performing car (gulp, please forgive me oh Ingolstadt gods) and a more efficient car. Add to that "everybody" says Acura's are both reliable AND durable (especially when compared with Audi's, eh?)
"Everybody" says so, anyway.
But this claim, at least, is left to be seen. At 5,000 miles the Acura feels "new" (actually better than new now that the engine is a bit looser); but, so did my last 10 Audi's and my wife's last BMW (a 2008 X3 with all the toys on it.)
I would tell you my Audi's were reliable (for 50,000 miles), but damn, out of warranty they were breathtakingly expensive to maintain and repair. I have only an opinion as to their durability, and, well, I assume Audi's are simply not as durable as some other cars, once the miles climb well above 50K.
So, will Acura survive and THRIVE as an LPS or ELLPS without a V8? Beats the heck outta me -- customer's memories are short and most shoppers will probably be unaware of the lack of a V8 offering (if that is what happens) if there is a buttery smooth, powerful and quiet engine that responds to the touch of the accelerator. Any of these companies is now capable of doing that with 4, 6, 8 or more cylinder engines.
Acura needs, more than anything, to figure out what it wants to be when it grows up -- the current "Advance" campaign is pretty good, but the entire product line needs a refresh and to keep and build a marketing campaign that imbues the brand with a positive image. Currently, the image, if you asked me, is "We're the Bucky Beaver Brand" -- with the exception, perhaps, of the ZDX and who knows what the hell that thing is and who it is supposed to "speak to."
The current TL is a band-aid -- the upcoming generation of all of their vehicles needs to refine the styling cues across the board and update the technology offered.
Hopefully the budget and the will to do this becomes evident.
In any case, I'm sticking with the "who cares about offering a V8?" theme for them.
Drive it like you live.
:shades:
The RL has been the problem child for Acrua, and why? For me, no flagship car should have a V6 as its only engine, and second, the styling doesn't say Flagship. Yes, we all now the factory;s can make lots of HP from a good 6 cyl but many people want a V8.
If I'm off base, I would love to hear why..
Tony
I believe most folks care more about the way the car feels when the accelerator is pressed down (a little or a lot.) If the car feels as if it has weapons grade torque, is smooooooth and quiet (except at full cry), and does not require frequent fill-ups or fill ups that rival a car payment, well what the heck. If the car has a 6 and an electric motor and it is able to meet the requirements noted above -- to hell with what is under the hood.
In my observation, which is just that, mine, folks that buy the big buck luxury cars (like the A8 or 7 series, or Lexus barges) are often not enthusiasts.
I'd take a 5 series for the most fun over a 7, any day -- especially if I were footing the bill to care and feed it.
So, no, to repeat, you are not TODAY off base -- but your statement strikes me as being dangerously close to becoming an historical observation, not a current event for too much longer -- now cut a buck off the price of gas, well, maybe.
I remain: Often wrong, but never uncertain.
Drive it like you live.
:shades:
would of had a couple of test drives or maybe read a mag or 2 before purchase - I guess live and learn- bonus coming soon and soon will be the e550