Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

alibajalajaula · August 2004

Rack'im.

m4d_cow · August 2004

"this topic is titled Entry Level Performance Sedans, not Value Oriented Performance Cars"

kd, that really is the best way to describe it. were talking about luxury AND performance, not luxury OR performance. there are differences between them, subbies are about performance, but not luxury. honestly things got weird ever since subbie legacy got into this category, in a place it shouldnt be.

jrock65 · August 2004

Why is there even a debate about this?

Whether you agree with it or not, the forum moderator has clearly stated an exclusive list of cars to discuss in this thread.

pat · August 2004

thematrixhasu, please send me an email, thanks.

mariner7 · August 2004

cnn projects Z convertible to have best resale value:

http://money.cnn.com/2004/08/23/pf/autos/kbb_resale_value/index.h- tm

I'm rather surprised. That class has some amazing German machines, with everyone, including Porsche, represented.

dhanley · August 2004

And is the Z convertable a sport sedan?

What sport sedan in this group had the highest (projected) resale?

kdshapiro · August 2004

I'm making commodities future contracts due in 2010 based on those predictions. I think someone had a diving rod out.

kyfdx · August 2004

diving rod?? or divining rod??

kdshapiro · August 2004

PHHHHFT!

jrock65 · August 2004

2005 G35 "rumor":

Softer leather.
Auto Sedan and Coupe both with 280 HP.
6MT Sedan and Coupe both with 298 HP.

Not that the G's problem is power...

m4d_cow · August 2004

well i bet most people have been waiting forever for the softer leather, since imo the current leather is darn stiff/hard, and the harsh ride just makes it worse.

dhanley · August 2004

Any of you guys spent time behind the wheel of an s60R?

I sat in one at the autoshow and thought "nice interior, too bad it's a boat." I didn't think it was a 0-60 in 5.4 and 65mpg slalom car.

dave

minnehaha · September 2004

S60R is a boat. It may go fast but it doesn't like it. The turbo lag is impressive. The brakes felt mushy. It is very quiet (good) but it makes it hard to shift (bad). I actually got quite sea sick driving it! The radio designer should be shot. Still it is pretty, you wife with like it, it is safe and resell is good. You just will hate it until you resell it. Save 10 grand and look at the Subaru Legacy GT if you want performance or the Acura TL if you want comfort. Both are good balanced players in power verses comfort.

volvodan1 · September 2004

A boat? I haven't heard that one yet. It is fast, handles well, and is more comfortable than the Legacy or TL. Both are very good but to call the S60R a boat is crazy.

ephemere · September 2004

minnehaha: The Legacy GT is a fine car, especially going in a straight line on the highway, where it reaches extra-legal speeds in no time and feels good doing it. Significant body roll and understeer greatly reduces the fun factor for me, but it is a car I might recommend as a comfortable family hauler.

The Volvo S60R/V70R, however, is in a different class altogether. Faster, way more stable, feels lighter, much more agile, very fun to drive. In addition, the exterior and interior aesthetic design, as well as the quality of the interior materials (particularly the leather), are in another league.

johncdnrockies · September 2004

Enjoy the banter and wouldn't want to take you folks off the track of approved vehicles, but the S60R is a very nice package indeed. I bought an '04 XC70 in July (a dog by comparison), but drove the R series many times for comparison. It flies and has a nicer interior (vs the Legacy) to boot. If it hadn't been for the narrow seats (my problem with a cracked spine) I would have plumped for it.

For the record we also owned a 325 and currently have a C320. Both are different from the S60R but I sure wouldn't describe the latter as a boat.

John

m4d_cow · September 2004

not a boat i say, though the extremely complicated audio controls really turn me off

kinda like volvo version of i-drive
its a decent handler though no match to beemers or audi

buddhabman · September 2004

If you are gonna call these boats then they are nice speed boats. :-). The interiors are great, for these 2 models they are equal to the A4 / A6 Audis and better than the corresponding BMW and MB sedans.

I like these cars and the XC90 although I will probably never buy a Volvo due to the crappy treatment I got from a dealer in Santa Monica a few years back. I might eat my words when the XC90 with V8 comes out.

I do question the lighter feel and nimbler handling perception versus the Legacy. The Legacy is lighter by 300 lbs. They are way stable though and track turns well but nimble is not in Volvo DNA. The steering feel in a Legacy is more precise IMHO. Good brakes are standard for Volvo though. Comparing to the Benz or BMW in the price range for snow duty I would get the Volvo.

Comparing it to the Legacy GT, if you got the extra dough the Volvo is awesome.

r34 · September 2004

I think Volvo did something good to have S60R and the new S40 (esp T5).

For the other Swedan car maker, Saab, they need to work harder. Many people think that their technology is outdated and the 9-3 interior not not good.

Well, I looked at the 2006 A4 report in Edmunds yesterday. It mentioned that Audi added twin balance shafts that spin at twice the engine speed to A4 to minimize vibration.

"Balance shafts" ? Sounds familiar. I checked both my 2001 9-3 & 9-5 owner's manuals and found that both cars were equipped with 2 balance shafts at that time. I am not sure when Saab put those in their cars.

I remembered I asked an Audi Salesperson whether the auto tranny of an A4 can learn the driver's driving style (adaptive transmission ??) and he told me no.

I think Saab has some nice and unique features that they didn't mention to people. Not that many people know Saab came up the idea of headlight wipers, heated seats, etc. The Marketing dept should be responsible for that.

Now 9-3 is more mainsteam. Maybe most people like it better than the old one. I missed the hatch. It needs something more than 210hp. Saab should create something like the Viggen with AWD for the 9-3 (I heard there will be a 9-3 sport hatch but AWD may not be an option).

dhanley · September 2004

Hmm--that was how i felt about the '900 i used to have. That car had lots of great features with a few glaring oversights/shortcomings. I also had the BMW then, which had fewer "gee, neat" features and less utility ( hatch, interior room ) but no real shortcomings i cared about. For example, the BMW engine didn't have that hammer-you-into the seat torque blast, with that cool motorcycle sound, but it didn't have the turbo lag either. The saab was sort of a headache and i chose to keep the BMW but i miss that car in general.

I recently seriously considered getting either a 9-3 or a 9-5. I really like them both but each had something that made me say "wait" although i was contemplating pulling the trigger in each case, once with a 9-5 aero ( used, 3000 miles ) and the other time with a new ARC. Both manual transmission. The 9-5's bane was handling/turbo lag and the 9-3's was the el cheapo GM interior. Both could be fixed, of course. I think simply sticking the ecotec in the 9-5 would improve it a lot; it's a lighter smaller engine ( for better weight distribution) with less turbo lag. The ecotec is also smoother. Another thing that irked me is the nature of the turbo with stick. You have to shift really fast or boost is largely lost between shifts. It's find if you're driving "all out" but not so great for maneuvers in traffic. Sort of the opposite of the GTO my cousin wants me to get.

Even with my BMW i can start moving without using the gas, just easing in the clutch, while i felt quite choppy in both the saabs when starting off.

The lack of the hatch also miffed me.

Still, I'd rather have a car i really like with a few bugs than a car that is mostly "reliable." Kind of like dating the awesome girl with a few issues vs miss boring. And there's something about the saab that i at least want to like.

The new s40 really intrigues me. It seems to have impressive environmental credentials, which i know a lot of you probably don't care about that much so i'll shut up about that.

dave

m4d_cow · September 2004

saab 9-3 isnt bad actually, ive driven one and id say its equal to volvos in handling, im not a fan of hatchbacks so i surely wont miss it

the only problem is im kinda concerned about the reliability...
the new S40 is a great handler, better than any other volvos, seems like its time for them to start competing w/ the germans.
but the problem is its unusually shaped, its skinny/narrow and tall

and the leather seats are overly firm for my taste.

pg48477 · September 2004

I always thought that by seating in the car in the showroom you can only say how comfortable the interior is. You on the other hand managed to get how the car performs, that is impressive.

As for me, I think that S60R has the most comfortable seats of any vehicles I had a chance to drive. I'm not to crazy about the looks in and out, but this car has so much to offer that I will consider buying it anyway. It performs just as good and in many cases better than cars discussed on this board (handling on the same page as 330 with performance package) and at the same time if you switch suspension to comfort it's as soft as a lexus. Not only it handles grate it also give you grate acceleration 0-60 in 5.5 and almost no turbo lag.

dhanley · September 2004

"I always thought that by seating in the car in the showroom you can only say how comfortable the interior is. You on the other hand managed to get how the car performs, that is impressive."

Where did i do that?

pg48477 · September 2004

"I sat in one at the autoshow and thought "nice interior, too bad it's a boat." I didn't think it was a 0-60 in 5.4 and 65mpg slalom car. "

Did not you call it a boat? It's not a full size vehicle and you did like the interior, so I guess boat would refer to the way the car feel on the road.

dhanley · September 2004

I thought i made it clear that i guessed that, but learned otherwise from sources i'd quoted.

You know, like how i might assume a ferrari is fast, although i've never driven one? Volvo has a rep and a lot of reviews.

I didn't say anything that implied in any way that i could tell how it drives by sitting it it. It might be a language issue, if you're not a native speaker.

Anyhow, no reason to get upset, i wasn't insulting the car.

dave

pg48477 · September 2004

Why don't you go back to post and see what was quoted, I'll give you a hint "nice interior, too bad it's a boat."

Anyway, I don't own the car and sertanly don't get insulted that easily, it just looked funny the way you wrought it. Don't you get upset either, it's just a car forum not a wrighting class.

bmbmw · September 2004

Hi All;

I am getting close to making a decision on the above cars. I had the 325i for a test drive of 2 days and must say it is very nice. I found its over all ride and handling superb. I will test drive the 240 (Elegance, here in Winnipeg, Canada) next. I would like your thoughts and feed back on a few things...

What are you impressions of the upgrades to the '05 240? I think they are great and long over due, esp in the case of the CD player. To me they really enhance the quality/appearance of the interior.

What options have you purchased and would purchase again, and which would you not get again? I intend to keep my options (esp electronic) to a minimum as I find the models well equipped and the less electronics (IMO) the better.

I have found the stereo on my 14 year old toyota very good. I am not an audiophile, so would I notice or appreciate an upgraded sound system on either of these cars? I don't expect the standard system to be excellent, but is is at least "Good"?

I have to say I find the exterior of the BMW very appealing over that of the MB, but the interior of the MB has the BMW beat. I love the comfortable sumptuousness of the MB interior.

My travel needs are modest. I will only put low city miles on it, will get the extended warranty, will "baby" it, and hope to keep it for 8 - 10 years.

While I think and feel both cars are excellent ( I find both engines more that adequate for my driving needs) I am inclined towards the 240. However my biggest reservation comes from concerns over MB quality. I understand it is not what it has been. I also understand that they are intentional about addressing this issue. I also read the the C class was early on plagued with "bugs". This was esp true in the 2001 and possible 2002 model years. Can I assume that most of these C class "bugs" have been addressed? What has been the experience of those who own 2002/03/04 vehicles? I dont expect a MB to be a good as a Japanese car, but I do expect it to be reasonably good and to hold its value over the long term.

I appreciate your thoughts...thanks.

B

m4d_cow · September 2004

if youre gonna take good care of it, both cars should last quite long with only minor problems.
reliability, like you said, will never beat japanese brands, but quite good overall, with MB being a bit more reliable in my case. 2005 MBs have new interior and seats, since a lot of people complained about the seats hurting their back on long trips.
Sound systems in both cars are quite good if youre not an audiophile, it has decent sound quality.
options id choose will always include xenon headlights (a must), wood trim (now std in bmws), and leather. i usually opt for premium package, but since you choose to skip the electronics, you might not need it afterall
hope it helps

eman6628 · September 2004

If I were still living in Winnipeg and consider getting a RWD car, I would first consider the ground clearance, the more the better (I think the 240 has more clearance than the 325), then the next factor is winter tires options for the cars considered. All season tires are not very safe for winter driving in a city like Winnipeg and especially if you are going to baby it. I would consider looking at the 4matic and the xi too. Just my 2 cents.

gordonwd · September 2004

Ive had my 04 325i for about 5 months now, so I feel qualified to evaluate it and compare it to my previous car, a 98 Audi A4 1.8T. These cars are similarly equipped, manual trans, non-sport package with all-seasons, about the same size and performance category, so a comparison seems fair at this point.

ENGINE  Well, the 325 is rated at 35hp over the A4, so its pretty much no contest. The engine is also smoother and really begs to be revved. The Audi would spool up pretty well, too, but I always felt like I was straining it a bit. I am also not sorry to lose the turbo, as I have always felt they add complexity under the hood that could be a long-term problem. In fact, the only major repair that I had to pay for on the A4 was a $500+ turbo-related issue.

TRANSMISSION  Pretty even here with both being 5-speeds. The Audi had a bit softer of a clutch vs. the BMWs abruptness. I am only now at the point where I can consistently make a really smooth 1-2 shift.

HANDLING  This is my first RWD car in many years, and I forgot how different it feels. The crisp turn-in is especially noticeable, and the steering overall has better feel than the A4. Ride-wise, the cars are pretty comparable: well controlled, firm but never harsh over rough pavement, typically German. The one thing the A4 had going for it was of course the Quattro AWD. One of my favorite things to do (youre never too old to be immature) was to out-drag someone at a stoplight on wet pavement. I could pretty well mash the pedal to the floor coming out and the car would just GO, leaving the other guy spinning his front (or rear) wheels. Even with traction control on a RWD or FWD, youre not going to beat AWD in slippery conditions.

INTERIOR  Audi is known for interior design and the A4 did have very nice styling and controls layout. The BMW is not as well coordinated, but is a bit more business-like in its appearance. However, I like my particular color combination better than the A4s. The sand leatherette along with black floormats and dash, set off by the premium wood trim, makes for a nice look as opposed to the A4 that was all gray with some silver trim pieces. The leatherette in the BMW is also a bit nicer-appearing than the A4s.

The automatic climate control on the BMW is not quite as good at regulating temperature and air movement as the Audis. The fan seems to blow too high in some conditions and not fast enough in others. The Audi definitely had the best auto-temp control that I have experienced.

EXTERIOR  At the time that I picked out my A4, it was the E36 that I compared it against and I thought the A4 was better looking. But ever since the E46 came out the next year, my eye was always drawn to them when I spied one. I still think, though, that the A4 has classic good looks that I prefer to the newer model that was released in 01. Likewise I expect that I will still prefer the E46 after the E90 comes out.

RADIO  No contest here: the Audi had a much superior standard radio. On a few occasions, Ive wondered if the CDs that Im playing in the BMW are the same ones that I used to play in the A4.

INTANGIBLES  I am not a status seeker, but from the reaction of many people that I know I can see that the BMW nameplate carries a lot more prestige than most others. Everyone knows what a BMW is, whereas I think that Audi is less known and tends to get lumped with other second-tier European cars. There is something about seeing that roundel on the steering wheel that makes me feel extra good about my choice.

SUMUP  The 325i feels like a small performance sedan with luxury appointments and options; the A4 is more of a small luxury sedan that performs well. And there you have it (my opinion of course).

newdriver2 · September 2004

Does the engine use in this car is designed by GM or is it a join design from GM and Toyota?
I know Toyota have the VVT technology and this car use a 3.6L VVT Engine which make me wonder did I bought a GM design or a Toyota design.

newdriver2 · September 2004

I mean the Engine use in the Cadillac CTS, does it design by GM or by Totoya

dhanley · September 2004

It's a GM engine, if a slightly unusual one--a large OHC job.

It's a "world engine" and is supposedly going to power the saabs soon, bumped down to 2.8L and turbocharged.

r34 · October 2004

SAAB 9-3 earns 'Double Best Pick'

Four of eight midsize cars earned good ratings in side impact crash tests recently conducted by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety. None of the cars received a poor rating. The 2004 Saab 9-3, 2004 Acura TL, 2004 Lexus ES 330, and 2005 Mitsubishi Galant are rated good for side impact protection. The 2004 Saab 9-5, 2005 Mercedes C class, and 2005 Volvo S40 earned acceptable ratings. The 2004 Jaguar X-Type is rated marginal.

The better performers among vehicles that earn good ratings are designated "best picks." The Saab 9-3, which also earned a "best pick" designation in the Institute's frontal offset crash test, is the first car to earn this designation in both front and side crash tests. It's a "double best pick."

"Earning a 'double best pick' is a rare achievement," says institute chief operating officer Adrian Lund. "The only other vehicle to have done this is the Toyota RAV4, a small SUV, and then only when it was equipped with optional side airbags."

jamesspot · October 2004

First off, hats off to Lexus for such a high class event and willingness to set up their 9 cars and 2 competitors in each category for the public to drive on a closed course. I went Saturday morning to FEDEX Field's (Redskin stadium) parking lot. There was a quick registration, orientation, Lexus autoshow display, cooking demo, kid's corner, a great buffet lunch, and golf pros to work with your swing, but the main event was driving on three different courses: luxury, performance, and SUV. I drove 10 of 27 different cars in 3 hours. All were automatics, traction control was required to remain engaged, and the rule was do not exceed the car's or your ability.

My notes on the cars of interest to this forum:

Lexus IS300: Underpowered six compared to the BMW and G35 with a transmission that had longer shift delays. Competent handling and decent brakes, but tended to understeer at the limit, leading me to plow one hard corner. Racy interior with easy to use controls. A "good value" choice if price and reliability are your top concerns in this segment. The car for my younger brother.

Infiniti G35: POWER! Oh, baby, this one has an engine. The interior was not as bad to drive as others would lead you to believe, but the handling is beneath the balance of the BMW and the Lexus. This is a car that makes the average driver (me) look bad. Saved by ABS and the traction control system from a potentially scary rear end spin. G35 owners have a reasonably priced, family-sized car with V8-like power, but you can only put it down on the track if you really know what you are doing. The car for a coworker who drag races on the weekends and takes four to lunch during the week.

Acura TL: If I were picking a car for my wife, sister, real estate agent, etc., this would be the one. Beautiful, jewel-like interior with state-of-the-art sound and ALL the features at a decent price. Plenty of power for the street. It just doesn't handle like a sport sedan with front wheel drive.

Mercedes C320: Softer ride, less-powerful engine, smooth transmission, nice interior. Others do different parts better at lower price points. Nice car, but nothing special for the money, pass. If you got the bucks and want the star, think AMG.

BMW 330i: OK, I'm biased, but this car makes the average driver look good with an ideal balance of engine, transmission, handling, and braking in a driver-oriented interior. Drove a premium packaged car with steptronic. Moving the shifter inboard to Sport and touching the DSC once (I didn't turn it off iaw the "rules"), and the car performs: powerful acceleration (outmatched only by the G35), quick redline shifts that were the best, great brakes, and incredibly BALANCED handling. I was foot to the floor, threshold braking, hands spinnning the wheel, and having the time of my life. Much faster car for me because of the control available. The standard 330i is under tired (get the sport package for the performance tires, sport seats, and steering wheel). The steptronic (evaluated in "S" mode) was much better than I expected. Give me a little more power, more tire, and a manual - oh, that's my ZHP. I was still amazed at what a standard 330i can do, driven much harder than I've ever driven my car, which I have yet to track.

riez · October 2004

jamesspot... What were the MSRPs for the respective vehicles? Too bad they were all automatics. (Amazes me that Lexus didn't use the 325ia. 325i outsells the 330i by about a factor of 3-to-1. 325i prices out, with similar options like an IS300. A decently optioned 330i can quickly push $40,000. Did the IS300 have optional LSD and VSC?)

jamesspot · October 2004

We just went from car to car. They had info posters highlighting the specs of each of the automobiles. Lexus was amazingly fair in their presentation of all the cars.
The class groupings had the IS300 with the G35 and the 330i, the ES330 (which I didn't drive) was grouped with the C320 and the TL.
The G35 and IS300 are low 30's cars, while a 330i step with premium package and the C320 are pushing 40k.
The IS300 did have traction control, I didn't know whether it had LSD or not.
I agree - the 325i is an even match for the IS300 price wise, the 330i is a much more expensive and capable car.
Since the event was for the general public invited by Lexus marketing, automatics were the only game in town for every car there. I think I was invited as I went to the Lexus web site and a dealership when I was looking at cars in the Spring. It did make me want to drive my car on the course!

dhanley · October 2004

I was recently at the "autoshow in motion" run by GM. It was pretty similar; in luxury cars there were all the saabs(9-2,9-3,9-5), the CTS, c320, TL, 325i, and the 530.

I thought the TL really plowed dissapointingly much in turns. Even my buddy, who's a huge honda fan, didn't like it. I think the TSX is significantly more fun. OTOH, the TL compares quite well with the c320.

The CTS is allright, i just think the interior needs to be upgraded, and it definitely needs the sport package. Same with the 9-3.

I may be biased, but even my honda-loving GM mechanic buddy liked the 2 bmw's the best. The 530 with the sport package was simply phenomenal.

But that's off-topic.

I also had a chance to drive the s40 t5 AWD. I really like the design, cabin, and volvo's environmental focus. I think it's a pretty good car, aside from fairly significant turbo lag. Oddly, it seems to me to have more lag with it's 2.5L than saab's almost-as-powerful 2.0L. It also still feels like a FWD car even with AWD. So, pretty nice, but not quite as sporty as i like. I like that you can get a "high end" car without leather and wood, neither of which i really care for.

I think i'll end up waiting to test the new 3-series before i order anything. And by then saab will have the 270hp turbo v6.

Well, driving different cars is fun!

dave

scott1 · October 2004

[quote]I mean the Engine use in the Cadillac CTS, does it design by GM or by Totoya [/unquote]

The 3.6 L engine used in the CTS is pure GM designed and built. Its a great engine too, with plenty of HP and torque. Nice and smooth running too. GM is planning on using that same basic engine in lots of variations of size and power, as premium engines in their up market cars.

I owned an 04 CTS with that engine, and never had anything but good feelings about it. There were other aspects of my Cadillac buying experience that were far less satisfactory, but the engine and 5 speed auto transmision were world class.

nkeen · October 2004

I own an '04 TL with 6 speed but have driven the TSX (auto only). My thought is that the TL is a Japanese implementation of an American concept whereas the TSX is a Japanese implementation of a European concept. The TSX is great fun to drive, but the TL has deep down power, is seriously fast, and is as relaxing on a long drive as a large Volvo, albeit not quite as comfortable. A couple of hundred miles passes with ease, which, despite their many supposed faults, is true of larger American vehicles. The TSX is more alive in your hands, less relaxed, ultimately not as fast.

The TL's clutch is fierce, but the shift is nice once you get used to it. Drive something else for a while and I guarantee you'll engage 1st with a bang when you next drive the TL. The TL's Bridgestone's aquaplane too easily -- makes me wish for my GTi's excellent Continentals.

cybersol · November 2004

October Sales:

Acura TL: 6717
Lexus ES300: 5997
Mercedes-Benz C-Class: 4748
BMW 325 Sedan: 4324
Cadillac CTS: 3798
Audi A4: 3359
Infiniti G35 Sedan: 3188
Acura TSX: 1870
BMW 330 Sedan: 1278
Lexus IS300: 556

Enjoy, cybersol

kdshapiro · November 2004

Just wanted to add to the above post that BMW reports best October ever. As far as the 3 series 8714 in total were sold.

Here's the link to the information:

http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=109&STORY=/- - www/story/11-03-2004/0002353664&EDATE=

jrock65 · November 2004

Almost every luxury brand is reporting best ever sales--Infiniti, Acura, Lexus, and BMW. We like our luxury cars and SUV's I guess.

cybersol · November 2004

Including Nissan, Infiniti, Honda, Acura, Toyota, Lexus, Hyundai, Volvo, and BMW. Suprisingly neither Audi nor Mercedes had record October Sales.

My BMW 3 series figures above are accurate for sedan sales (this being a sedan board). I left out that Infiniti sold 2258 G35 Coupes while BMW sold 1105 3-series coupes. The rest of BMW non-sedan sales were M3s, wagons, and convertibles.

Perhaps my presentation was not biased enough for your strong BMW affliation Kd.

Enjoy, cybersol

cdnpinhead · November 2004

Not that it's especially relevant to this discussion, but how did the Lincoln LS do in October?

Several of us bought (literally) into the LS concept when it was first introduced. Had Lincoln done everything they said they were going to do (much like Cadillac actually did, two years later), the LS would belong here.

Well, they didn't, and it doesn't, and 99% of the people driving an LS (and 95% of the dealer staff) haven't a clue regarding the weight balance, suspension, vented rear brakes, or all the rest. Oh well. . .

Anyway, TIA.

Kirstie_H · November 2004

An Edmunds.com reporter wants your opinion: What are the coolest cars for soccer moms? Please email jhelperin@edmunds.com with which vehicles you like and why. Please respond by this Monday, 11/8, with soccer moms in the subject line.

kdshapiro · November 2004

Hey cyber not a matter of biased. But BMW themselves lumps a number of different configurations under 3-series. I would think if you are telling a story, the whole story needs to be told.

Having said that the different G35 configurations (coupes, sedans, Xs) should be included etc.

riez · November 2004

Combining marque sales--October Sales:

Acura (TL/TSX): 8587
Lexus (ES330/IS300): 6553

BMW 3 Series Sedan (325i/330i): 5602
Mercedes-Benz C-Class: 4748

Cadillac CTS: 3798
Audi A4: 3359
Infiniti G35 Sedan: 3188

Having multiple platforms benefits Acura and Lexus sales. Interestingly, the more luxury-oriented, less driver-oriented larger/heavier car wins (ES over IS and TL over TSX).

kdshapiro · November 2004

riez - disagree combined 3 series is 8714. See above link. BMW has a number of configs under the moniker 3 series. TL/TSX two totally separate vehicles.

cybersol · November 2004

"Interestingly, the more luxury-oriented, less driver-oriented larger/heavier car wins (ES over IS and TL over TSX)."

I too noticed that luxury seems to trump performance when it comes to total sales (look at the ES300 for example). It's sad but true that enthusiasts are a minority to the appliance drivers.

Enjoy, cybersol

Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles