Luxury Performance Sedans

msu79gt82 · July 2005

A good suggestion of a Luxury Performance Sedan would be:
It must have sold at least 30,000 copies a year

Well I guess we can rule out at least half of our current list then :surprise:

pat · July 2005

...what it is about what I am saying that some of YOU are not understanding.

The subject cars are defined in the "What is this discussion about?" line at the top of the page. Six vehicles are the maximum there. I can't change that, you can't change that, continuing to argue about redefining the parameters cannot change that.

IF YOU WANT TO COMPARE A DIFFERENT SET OF VEHICLES CLICK HERE AND FIRE IT UP. It still will be limited to six vehicles - you can add 3 and I can add 3 more, the end, that's all. Go back and read my earlier posts on how things are intertwined with our host site and why keeping the conversation about those six vehicles is necessary.

If you want to discuss the numbers of categories allowed, go to the Forums Software - Your Questions Answered discussion and have at it. I can't change any of these restrictions and continuing to argue about them here is not going to get any of them changed.

This is THE end of this line of conversation. If you need to say something else, if you need to respond to this post, email me, do NOT post here. Further posts debating what vehicles should be discussed will be removed.

Thank you!!! :confuse:

pat · July 2005

We can discuss vehicles that are not in the "What is this discussion about?" line on occasion. We may not continue to argue that some vehicle or another deserves to be a major player in this discussion.

Anyone who does not understand my point needs to read these posts:

pat, "Luxury Performance Sedans" #2940, 6 Jul 2005 7:05 pm

pat, "Luxury Performance Sedans" #2957, 7 Jul 2005 8:40 am

pat, "Luxury Performance Sedans" #2980, 9 Jul 2005 8:25 am

pat, "Luxury Performance Sedans" #3014, 15 Jul 2005 5:42 pm

After reading all of those, if you still have questions about what I am saying, EMAIL ME, DO NOT POST HERE. (Gee, I'm getting a sore throat from yelling this morning!)

If this discussion is going to continue, we need to get back to talking about the cars without further off-topic commentary. Without any further off-topic commentary starting right now.

I sure would appreciate everyone's cooperation.

msu79gt82 · July 2005

we need to get back to talking about the cars without further off-topic commentary.

Wow, discussions have slowed. so back to the grind...

I got to go to a local BMW grand opening event the other night (free food and drinks and no pressure looking at cars). I for one kind of like the new 5 Series styling - exterior wise. Where BMW loses me big time is in the interior :surprise: What's up with BMW interiors :confuse: They all suck: 3, 5, 6, 7, X - I must confess the lineup has consistency

Oh well I can definietly rule out the 5; so still deciding between the M, RL, and GS.

newaudilover · July 2005

If interior design and comfort are important, don't rule out the A6. It can compete with any of those you mentioned and keep you happy with the performance as well.

frisconick · July 2005

However, the M, RL, and GS have exteriors that suck. :confuse:

lexusguy · July 2005

Of the cars you mentioned, the M is the closest to the 5 series in terms of speed and handling. The A6, like the RL, is hurt in this department because its derived from FWD architecture. The GS "coulda been a contenda" but the nannies and pointless electronic replacements for perfectly fine mechanical gear ruin its otherwise good intentions.

frisconick · July 2005

Consumer Reports had a similar review of the GS, should be a contenda but just isn't, also they say it just does not handle as well as the 5. The M is just too big IMHO.

lexusguy · July 2005

Er.. too big? Its 2 inches longer than the 5 series, and also 2 inches narrower. I dont get why that makes it big, especially since its still an inch shorter than the RL and A6.

frisconick · July 2005

I test drove it and it feels much bigger than the 5.

jjacura · July 2005

Lexusguy.....Just curious if you ever drove the RL...I'm thinking you did but can't remember.

newaudilover · July 2005

Here is the link to MSNBC that just aired on Sunday night for the front and side impact crash results of both the A6 and M35. Looks like the premium price we pay has more meaning than just creature comforts and performance.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8606592/

markcincinnati · July 2005

I read the brochure on a Volvo -- the one that would, apparently, compete with the Audi A6. The model was the Volvo V60 type R (300 hp 5 cylinder, turbo).

The brochure said the car was 95% FWD and 5% RWD "until a redistribution of power was needed," then an "instantaneous" switch would occur.

The RL which touts SH-AWD is similarly FWD biased.

Audi states the A6 quattro provides a 50% - 50% split with the ability to instantaneously move the majority of power front or rear.

Although Audi has announced the move to 40 60 power distribution for future quattros, I fail to see how it is reasonable to relate quattro to the RL's "FWD derivation."

Audis are "nose heavy" -- but there are RWD cars that are nose heavy. Audis, by design have offered 50 50 F/R power split. Acuras, also nose heavy offer FWD biased AWD, NOT 50 50 AWD, nominally. Although I am not certain this FWD bias hurts the RL in some way, to read some articles and some folks posts, you'd think FWD biased AWD is lame, lamer even than the 50 50 split currently offered by all Audis except the RS4.

I read so much about the "virtues" of RWD biased AWD I wonder if the reason for such comments from my fellow posters are more "theoretical" than real world.

The S60 type R did not seem to me to be a lesser car because it was nominally 95% FWD. The M35X did not seem "remarkable" due to its F/R power distribution, indeed its major visceral advantage over its competitors would seem to be its extra power. I can no more sense an advantage offered by the M35X's RWD biased AWD than I can sense a disadvantage of the FWD biased RWD offered by the RL.

The issues these AWD cars in this class may have are based on their overall weight AND the "balance" they can bring to the table.

The M35X is RWD biased and it is pretty well balanced.

It is probably me, but it just seems that companies (Audi leaps to mind) are shifting to RWD biased AWD more for "image" than for any pragmatic reason.

If I had my magic wand, it would be waved over all the LPS cars and they would offer AWD AND "nearly" neutral balance first and drive line power distribution "bragging rights" second.

Much ado.

lexusguy · July 2005

"Although Audi has announced the move to 40 60 power distribution for future quattros, I fail to see how it is reasonable to relate quattro to the RL's "FWD derivation."

Thats not what I meant. I wasnt talking about their AWD systems, I was talking about the fact that the A6 Quattro is the AWD version of a FWD car. Its sold that way in Europe. The RL also could be offered with FWD if Acura wanted to. The RL and A6 are the only FWD based cars in the class, and they both suffer the bad weight distribution because of it.

markcincinnati · July 2005

. . .the bane of many cars today is that they are nose heavy. Of course there are nose heavy cars of all drive line configurations.

When reading about cars here and in the popular car magazines, the sense I get, however, is that [some] "understeer" (at least partially attributable to a car having more weight on the front than the rear) is desirable. Further, cars that have "oversteer" are often characterized as "being a handful."

Audi, for one, shifting from 50 50 to 40 60 will not, by virtue of this shift in power bias, be any less nose heavy. So, again, what, as a practical matter, is the big deal? Now, I also read that Audi is working on the balance issue, too -- first by moving the engine back a bit, relocating the battery in the rear and probably some other subtle changes. I applaud this.

Frankly, I applaud the efforts by any manufacturer to give their AWD variants a slight rearward bias of power (so that the car feels like a "proper" RWD vehicle.)

Yet, I must be thick (as a brick) because I don't get what all the brouhaha is about with respect to the type of driving most of us do -- the type that never includes any track time, for instance.

What is inherently superior or inferior (based on how you want to address this) in the RL's FWD biased approach? Or, for that matter, same question with respect to the BMW 530xi? I read that SH-AWD is "the real deal" and I also read that the BMW cannot put "the majority" of the power to the front wheels (even if they need it) due to the AWD choices their engineers made.

With all the LPS guys either already having AWD (or coming soon) how do we make informed decisions. As I noted, I did drive, for instance, the S60 Type R Volvo and an S4 Audi -- the V8 in the Audi was great. But, in terms of drive line characteristics, I couldn't detect much if any differences.

Ditto, when I drove the M35X and the A6 3.2 -- the main difference was that the Infiniti had more power and the A6 seemed to have less body roll. Again nothing that I could put my finger on as an AWD bias trait.

Perhaps, I don't get it, after all. . . :confuse:

bondguy1 · July 2005

Audi A6 and Audi A4 are two of the four cars currently rated a Double Best Pick for safety. It outscored the M35 which is what I was saying all along. Slam the doors on a new Audi A6 (which are extremely heavy and solid) against slamming the doors on a new M35 and you can absolutely hear as well as feel the difference. The A6 is a solidly built car that looks great and is one of the best looking interiors of any car at any price IMO. And, they won some interior of the year award recently at a show that's held each year including all new 2005 models (M35 was present and so was the new Lexus GS).

markcincinnati · July 2005

For several years now, Audi's interiors have been lauded as "the ones to beat."

Some of the folks posting here on the LPS board will not quarrel with your (or my) assessment of the Audi's fit, finish and style.

Most of the issues folks here (and elsewhere) have about Audis have to do with the "R" word -- reliability. Although I would consider my Audis over the years to successively improve on the reliability of previous models, I am told (by some of my fellow posters here on ETH) that Audi, in essence, has so lowered my expectations that I put up with "issues" that people with Acura/Honda, Infiniti/Nissan and Lexus/Toyota would not tolerate.

Since I did not end up with the M35X, as I had thought I would, I can only continue to suggest that the Audis that are in my garage at this moment (a 2003 TT 225HP coupe and a 2005 A6 3.2) have been trouble free (of course I just turned 2,000 miles on the A6; but, the TT has 42,000+ miles on it and the only issue with it has been the battery life in the key fob.)

The new A6 has won many "impressive" awards over the past 9 months or so. One award that has eluded it, however, is to finish in the top three of "sales success" of the LPS cars. Indeed, month after month, Audi battles tooth and nail with Acura's RL for last place. BMW, Cadillac, Infiniti and Lexus all outsell Audi in the Premium Class.

IMHO, the Audis are Premium cars, without question. Having said that, however, doesn't erase the overall spotty reliability issues that have plagued them -- regardless of my personal experience to the contrary.

I'm enjoying virtually everything about this new A6.

I have one issue with it: the Bose Surround Sound system settings revert to "normal" if the car is not started for two days. It is a small adjustment, but it has to be done for the CD and the Satellite radio. This issue may be my fault for all I know -- I haven't bothered to look it up in the manual and if this is the extent of my issues with this car, hip hip hooray.

Thus far, despite what I just said, this is the best car -- of any brand -- we have ever had; but, my wife's new BMW X3 also would qualify for that exact sentiment.

ksoman · July 2005

Thought i'm not going to speculate about how solid an A6 is compared to the M35 (i currently have an A6 in my garage that i'm literally trying to dump due to cost of ownership issues), i've to say that the "thud" of the door has nothing to do with how solid or hollow the car is built. It is easily possible to engineer a lovely solid thud sound irrespective of the quality and quantity of material put into the thudding door.

Overall I'll say that the A6 is an amazingly pleasing car to sit and ride in, when there are no headaches to worry about, of course.... but then on that quotient, my bmw 3 convertible is the same, a car that'll consistenly make me grin while driving, given i can get past the other ownership irritations.

ksso

docnukem · July 2005

Well, technically, it outscored the M on the side test with all "good" ratings for the Audi and mostly "good" with 2 "acceptable" ratings for the M (and these are the only two large sedans that have been tested with the side test). The M edged it in the frontal test (all "good" ratings for the M with one "acceptable" rating for the A6). The intrusion measurements on the frontal are all better on the M. (They didn't list intrusion measurements for the side).

The point of the article was that both cars are extremely safe, not that the doors of the A6 slam with a more solid "thunk". I believe others have discussed this before saying that the aluminum alloy in the doors of the M contribute to a different sound than the steel in the Audi. Someone please correct me if I am recalling this wrong. Remember, both Audi and Infiniti asked for these tests. They wouldn't ask for the side test unless they knew they were going to get high marks. I don't think the side test is performed unless requested.

Don't get me wrong, the A6 deserves praise for the double best pick. If only I could learn to not stare at that grille...

bondguy1 · July 2005

Mark....have you seen any previews lately in the movie theaters that show the new Audi A8 up close in the opening shot and show the guy driving it, rolling it and just abusing the heck out of it. I can't recall the name of the movie.
I think that what's really interesting is that this test shows that both Audi and Infiniti know that they are the ones to beat in this price segment and feature for feature, the best two cars out there. Now, I won't deny that BMW has great performance...but, for thousands less, you could get a new M35. Or, if you prefer the European style ride, go with the Audi. I happen to like the new grille on the front of the A6. And, as for how many they are selling, that's OK with me too. I enjoy having a car especially when it's a new style that is less seen on the road. I can't even believe that this car has all the bells and whistles it does (the A6).
Years ago, German cars were all about performance and no bells and whistles. Now, you get the performance, style and a lot of gadgets (voice command, NAV, satellite radio). Some manufacturers will sell a car that is pre-wired for satellite radio (like the LS 430's my parents got last year) and then charage you $1,000++ if you actually want the system installed. Well, who's doing that on a leased car.Also, as someone else pointed out about the thud when slamming the doors, it's not just the sound of the thud when you slam the doors on the Audi, it's a really heavy door and this car has an eerily quiet ride...no rattles or squeaks even on uneven pavement. I was cruising at 90MPH this weekend and didn't feel like I was even doing 60. Much quieter than my 02' A6. It seems that a lot of the cars I was looking at (including the one I leased) are now discounting heavy. I remember looking at the Lexus GS when it first came out and they were talking about $700/month area for a lease...Now they are probably doing them in the mid 5's. I think all this competition in this class of cars is going to be great for the consumers...think about when the last time all these manufacturer's came out with relatively brand new models all in the same year...it's great!!!

markcincinnati · July 2005

The movie trailer is TRANSPORTER 2 -- the first movie had the star driving a BMW, this time he uses an A8.

My two faves, at this time, in the LPS crowd are the Audi and the Infiniti in alphabetical order -- and FOR ME in order of preference.

I wouldn't pay a big premium for the Audi over the Infiniti, even though I think it is a better overall package.

If someone stole my Audi on Tuesday and gave me an M35X, I would be OK with that. But, given a choice, my first pick is still the Audi.

gohorns1 · July 2005

I've read the great reviews of the A6. However, a family member has a 2002 A6. Beautiful car but in the shop way too often. His salesman (and I realize the source) is trying to convince him that Audi has addressed this issue and the new model should be much better. I am having a tough time accepting this. Does anyone have any info to support this. I don't have time to run back and forth to the dealer, and frankly if I did I would hate thinking I should have known better.
Any thoughts?

garyh1 · July 2005

Audi A6 and Audi A4 are two of the four cars currently rated a Double Best Pick for safety. It outscored the M35 which is what I was saying all along. Slam the doors on a new Audi A6 (which are extremely heavy and solid) against slamming the doors on a new M35 and you can absolutely hear as well as feel the difference.

I saw the NBC Dateline show the other night about this. The testing official stated and showed that the Audi did slightly better on the side crash test because it had a small airbag on the side of the seat bolster that protected the hip of the crash dummy from a slight touch that happened in the Infiniti. In fact, it had nothing to do with the body strength; they both were considered equally excellent on that score.

I have to say add me to the list of folks who are turned off by the Audi's front grille. At least on the Chrysler 300 the oversized vertical grille goes along with some of the other visual cues of the design. To me, it doesn't fit at all with the rest of the Audi's design.

dphi · July 2005

Check out both the J. D. Powers and Consumer Reports (for both editors and consumers) ratings. There are NO top ranked european cars at all. Of the group BMW does better. In short, you are right, they are hangar queens. JDP had the groups as Japan #1, US #2, Europe a distant #3.

newaudilover · July 2005

I hear sooo many people complain about the front grille of the new A6. Here is one solution that might help some people accept the new design.

My dealer in Scottsdale paints ALL the front grilles (the portion where the license plate holder belongs) to the same color as the car. This breaks up the appearance of the huge grille and give it a very subtle look. I get compliments all the time about how appealing it is and how it accents the the original design intent in a very pleasing way.

So now not only is it a safe bumper, it is a visually pleasing bumper.

lexusguy · July 2005

The previous A6 usually did ok in IQ scores, but tanked in the mid-term test. All of those recalls certainly didnt help. Interestingly, the 2005 A6 managed just average scores for IQ, scoring lower in two catergories than the 2004 A6. Obviously there is no long term data for the new car yet, so its hard to say wether its going to be as bad as the previous car.

Edmunds consumer reviews for the car are generally pretty positive, though about 6% of people complained of major transmition or electrical problems.

Leasing the car is probably pretty safe, but as with any Audi, I wouldnt recommend keeping it out of warranty.

cstiles · July 2005

Mark--you stated that there are rear drive LPS cars that are nose-heavy. Exactly which models would these be?

markcincinnati · July 2005

Infiniti and Cadillac come to mind -- source Automobile magazine, as I recall.

Indeed, the ONLY usual suspect brand that consistently comes close to ideal balance remains BMW.

But, in fairness, my "hopes" for balance would be for the 50 50 split or a 51 49 split. I have read some tests (that do include Audi) that are as much as 60 40 (snow plow anyone?)

The benefits of better balance, electronic aids and AWD are known -- and it isn't an engineering miracle to pull this off. This isn't rocket surgery.

lexusguy · July 2005

According to Motortrend, A6 3.2: 56\44, BMW 530i Sport: 49\51, Cadillac STS V6: 54\46, Infiniti M35: 53\47, Jaguar S-type 3.0: 52\48, Acura RL: 58\42.

Additionally, they list the M45 at the same 53\47, and the GS430 at 54\46.

Interestingly, the Jaguar has the closest balance after the BMW, yet pretty much ever other car in the class will destroy it in terms of real world handling. Balance apparently isnt everything.

kdshapiro · July 2005

"yet pretty much ever other car in the class will destroy it in terms of real world handling. Balance apparently isnt everything."

Only if you exclude the precision feel and handling of the BMW. I grant you some cars may be faster than the 530, but they do not have the road feel and BMW beats by other metrics that mean more than straight line acceleration.

lexusguy · July 2005

Huh? I was talking about the Jaguar S-type. It has a near ideal 52\48 weight distribution, yet has poor overall handling.

ksoman · July 2005

i see bmw still pays their defendants to come back and praise...

oh hell, i forgot i'm a fairly grinning bmw owner.

ok.. has anyone really looked at what happens with all this weight distribution crap when us heavy heavy americans sit behind the seats? Ok most car's don't carry more than 1 or 2 people, but if you take an average of 180-200 lbs sitting behind the steering, what does that do to the balance and what if you got two people, lets say adding about 320-400 lbs behind the wheels?

hmmmm...

ksso

kyfdx · July 2005

My front seats are between the front and rear wheels... so, I'm guessing my fat a** doesn't make that much difference... evenly distributed....

kyfdx · July 2005

Where the heck are you sitting?

markcincinnati · July 2005

If you care and have some time, I posted a 4 part "subjective" review of my first 2000 miles impressions of my new A6 3.2 over on the Audi A6 forum.

Be forewarned, it is a very long post, even by my standards. :shades:

kdshapiro · July 2005

"oh hell, i forgot i'm a fairly grinning bmw owner."

Well wipe it off your face soldier. There will be no grinning BMW owners in this forum. :P

cstiles · July 2005

I guess I would not categorize a rear drive car that happens to have 54% front weight bias (STS and G) or 53% front bias (Infiniti M) as being "nose heavy." As it is, it is difficult to achieve 50/50 balance, and carmakers resort to creativity and innovation to get there. Kudos to BMW for consistently baking that into their chassis DNA. 56..57..58%...sure, that's bordering on too much weight over the front axle. But anything less is not "nose heavy," IMO.

Although nose heaviness is a factor, the biggest challenge faced by cars with primarily FWD architecture is the simple fact that (1) propulsion and (2) steering must be managed from the same point. The laws of physics work against that combination, especially when its coupled with the presence of high horsepower and torque running through that same axle.

lexusguy · July 2005

"The laws of physics work against that combination, especially when its coupled with the presence of high horsepower and torque running through that same axle."

FWD has all kinds of problems. Its only advantages are that its space efficient, and generally has better poor weather traction than RWD. That makes it great for mainstream, mild to moderately powerful cars, and not much else.

cstiles · July 2005

But let's also give FWD its due credit. For the vast majority of drivers and applications, it's benefits far outweigh its problems. FWD's increased traction has prevented many thousands of accidents for the average driver trying to navigate poor conditions, and improved interior space delivers greater comfort and convenience. Only in the most extreme fringes of sedans and driver demands (ie: high performance) does it pose the types of problems we've been discussing.

ksoman · July 2005

yeah, and here's more credit,
FWD really became populare in the 70's oil crises because drop for drop, they tend to have slightly better fuel economies atleast.
also, i still believe 99.91106 % of drivers dont use more than 20.274% per of the real power their engines can provide to their ummm
also, i strongly believe 98.7293% of drivers are basically sub-par drivers... should i add i'm sitting on the fence

also, i strongly feel 87.56% drivers are so poor that the goverment should just snatch their licenses away?
also, i believe 99.787% of luxury sports sedan owners only buy their sedans to boast and toast (you all might be part of the other minority)
also, i believe since all of us well-to-do-who-can-afford-50K-car types are hanging out here, we are making greenspan report 0.002872% less productivity than what he could if we go back and really work for our money's worth?

ok, i'll shut up.
ksso

docnukem · July 2005

I am a little confused as to why all your percentages seem to have differing degrees of accuracy/uncertainty. Some seem to have 5 or 6 significant digits to the right of the decimal, while one (poor drivers) only has 2.

...wasting a little more than .002872% of my time...

ksoman · July 2005

differing sources of information.

ksso #2.01beta

jjacura · July 2005

KSSO, sorry, I researched your Greenspan numbers and they correct to 0.002572 less productivity because you didn't account for those of us LPS owners that are retired and don't have to be accountable for our time, unless you adjust for important time useage on the golf course or on a racquetball court....and maybe that would skew those numbers by another 4.065%.

PS I for one get along with "Grinning BMW owners"! My son took us to Lake Geneva in his M3 Saturday and :shades: grinned all the way.

lexusguy · July 2005

I normally do too, unless one blows by me at 140mph in the right lane. I'm grinning, but only after I see the bimmer nailed by the cop.

kdshapiro · July 2005

"but only after I see the bimmer nailed by the cop. "

Change to Lexus and we're on the right track.

jrock65 · July 2005

With the "lowly" 2006 Passat getting the 280hp/265 torque 3.6L engine, is it likely that the 2006 Audi A6 will get this engine as well?

lexusguy · July 2005

Unfortunately, no. The new VW's engine is transversely-mounted. The Audis use longitudinally-mounted engines. That means no VR6 for Audi.

jrock65 · July 2005

That's too bad. It's weird how carmakers are making mainstream sedans that are significantly outpowering its luxury cars that cost 1.5 times more.

For example, Passat 3.6 > A6 3.2, and Avalon > GS300.

jrock65 · July 2005

BMW announced the price of the 2006 550i.

2006 550i MSRP: $58,095

lexusguy · July 2005

Or how about Corvette > Cadillac XLR

Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles