Luxury Performance Sedans

lexusguy · July 2006

Youch!

Quite. It's got the full black from CR, and not only that, but it has their absolute worst predicted score, of any brand, in any segment. Nissan clearly has serious problems with their North American plants, as the Titan, Quest, and Armada all have quality issues.

purplem46 · July 2006

At the risk of beating this horse to death, just a small clarification on that earlier post of mine. I don't believe Nissan/Infinity intend (at least to my knowledge) to open a performance division such as M or AMG. Just that they have finally allowed the one car that competes in that division, Skyline, into the states. This car has been around for many years in different iterations, but never here. At an estimated 400hp, and it's rumoured body style, it should compete directly with the likes of M3 or RS4. AMG with its stubborn reliance on auto tranny's may yet be in a different class. It may have a little "boy racer" in it, but again, in the same vein as M3 and RS4. I've heard it will likely sell at north of $80K, and I don't think the buyers of this vehicle will care what badge it carries. The name Skyline will carry much more weight than either Nissan or Infinity. I really want one, and I haven't even seen it yet, outside of artists renditions and concept models.

dewey · July 2006

Reliability is a recurring theme here so what would this forum be without another reliability list? Here is a list of the least reliable luxury cars?(there are no MBs, BMWs, Audis or Porsches on the list)

link title

purplem46 · July 2006

They all appear to be SUV's outside of a Saab 9.3. Forbes is a little "free and easy" with the term luxury car.

lexusguy · July 2006

Yeah that report was a little strange. They seemed to pick and choose info from JD and CR that they wanted for their findings. CR ranks the E, the SL, and the CLK far worse than the Saab 9-3 that they chose to pick on.

sfcharlie · July 2006

A British review of the Audi Q7 emphasizes: Before we move much further into this report let me convey a message from Audi to you, our readers: "This is not a Touareg-based vehicle. It's not a Touareg wearing the Audi badge. It's a unique platform all its own." That being said, the Audi Q7 does share about 15% of the Touareg components, but the similarities indeed stop right there.

So, the discussion about the Skyline GT-R has iterations within other brand families. BMW and Mercedes are much better positioned than Audi to avoid that.

tagman · July 2006

Forbes is a little "free and easy" with the term luxury car.

Well said. Forbes list of top luxury cars is quite mid-tiered.

TagMan

sfcharlie · July 2006

"The 4.2FSI hasn't even begun to show its capabilities."

The first road test review from the UK that I've read reports 26.1 miles/gallon(UK) = 21.7 miles/gallon(US) with the 4.2 FSI in the A6.

sfcharlie · August 2006

In an early road test of the Audi A6 4.2, reported in an Australian website that has "cheeky" and witty reviews, they wrote:

"Why you'd buy it: Contrary to public perception, Audi makes better quality cars than BMW and Benz and has done so for about the past five years. The trouble is . . .

Why you wouldn't: These new and improved Audis are still paying for the sins of Audis of old, which were not as well built. Car valuers hit Audis unfairly hard because the public and the industry are stuck in a time warp."

dewey · August 2006

Is the LPS segment racing towards the path of oblivion :confuse:

I looked at the latest July sales figures for the BMW 5 series, Infiniti M and the Lexus GS. And what do they have in common? All three are afflicted with the same double digit sales declines.

Take a look at this MB sales report linked below:

link title

MB appears to be quite evasive in terms of revealing their E Class sales figures? Sounds like a double digit sales decline cover-up to me!

The Acura RL sales dropped a whopping 24 percent. When will Honda have the audacity to replace the RL with a AWD TL?

The Audi A6 is a pleasant exception to the above misery? Sales levels for the A6 are close to Lexus GS levels.

bartalk3 · August 2006

Who's got the figures?

jrock65 · August 2006

I do, but I'm too busy/tired to type them all in. Let's just say that the E outsold the 5 by more than a thousand, and the M outsold the GS by a couple hundred.

sfcharlie · August 2006

http://media.audiusa.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=9772

merc1 · August 2006

E-Class - 4479
5-Series - 3474
M - 2293
STS -
GS - 2075
A6 - 1652
RL - 1272
S-Type - 570

M

dewey · August 2006

I stand corrected! E Class sales were not as badly affected in July as BMW 5 series sales.

shipo · August 2006

I find myself wondering if folks are waiting for the new "Lifted" 5-Series.

Best Regards,
Shipo

lexusguy · August 2006

Poor Jaguar.

hpowders · August 2006

The E Class sales are -2.9% for the year through July, 2006
The 5 Series sales are +12.8% for the year through July 2006.

One must always keep the big picture in mind.
The trend of 5 Series sales is up, up, up!
A whopping 15.7% over the E Class for this year.

merc1 · August 2006

I will see and you Dewey when the December press release is issued during the first few days of 2007 regarding the E and 5-Series. The 07's Es are just arriving, stay tuned!

M

merc1 · August 2006

Poor Jaguar.

Yeah I know. I noticed that Jrock does the totals he doesn't list the S-type...lol! No one lists the S-Type on their shopping list anymore either I guess.

M

dewey · August 2006

find myself wondering if folks are waiting for the new "Lifted" 5-Series.

Maybe?

A real sales booster would be a twin turbo or/and a diesel 5 series. Unfortunately there is nothing official yet about such a 5 series on our shores.

dewey · August 2006

will see and you Dewey when the December press release is issued during the first few days of 2007 regarding the E and 5-Series. The 07's Es are just arriving, stay tuned!

I am staying tuned. And the odds are still in my favor

shipo · August 2006

Hmmm, I hadn't thought of the new engines, yes, folks could well be waiting for them as well. What I was referring to was the new (and less controversial in my mind) "Look" for the E60.

http://www.leftlanenews.com/wp-content/plugins/iimage-gallery.php?idpost=2741&id- g=1&idi=1

Best Regards,
Shipo

dewey · August 2006

Poor Jaguar

You can say that again. Here is the latest from the Wall Street Journal (Aug. 2 ,2006)

Ford Motor Co. is launching a strategic review of ailing operations such as the Jaguar brand that could lead to the sale of assets or broader alliances with other companies, according to people familiar with the situation.

The appointment of Mr. Leet comes as Ford faces difficult decisions about whether to continue pumping money into Jaguar. The storied franchise has become a big thorn in Ford's side.

Beset by design problems, among other issues, Jaguar has missed a boom in sales of luxury cars world-wide, its sales plummeting in recent years through repeated restructurings of the unit. Sales are down 30% this year after falling 34% in 2005; the brand is on pace to sell 24,000 vehicles in the U.S. in 2006, down from 45,000 in 2004.

Jaguar sales also are down globally. In the first half of this year, Jaguar sold about 41,000 vehicles globally; in all of 2004, it sold 118,000.

lexusguy · August 2006

Sales at Volvo are also slowing as of late. The XC90 and the S60 are getting pretty old. They definitely need the new S80 to do well. One has to wonder, in the current climate of 6-7 year cycles, if brands like Volvo and Jag that operate on 8-9 year cycles can survive.

sfcharlie · August 2006

"Stuttgart, Germany - Statistics released by the German automobile association, ADAC, show that Mercedes passenger cars are among the most reliable vehicles in Germany. Six model series achieved top rankings in the statistics, more than from any other automotive brand. The most reliable medium-sized car was the C-Class; top rankings were also achieved by the E-Class, S-Class, M-Class, CLK-Class and SLK-Class."

drtravel · August 2006

YTD figures

5 - 31,309
E - 25,199
GS - 15,568
M - 15,421
A6 - 11,036
RL - 6,932

Don't know about STS est = 14,750 (need July figures)
Note that BMW's leasing program is not quite as subvented as usual - remember BMW rents most 5 series.

For the past 4 months BMW outsold MB 17,202 to 16,540

purplem46 · August 2006

Poor Jaguar.

Serves them right for slapping a cat ornament on a taurus (mondeo, whatever).

knowspinzone · August 2006

Wow, I didn't realize Jag was slumping that badly. My wife has a 2001 S-Type. She loves it and I love it because its run flawlessly (I'm the one who has to deal with any problems).

Well maybe if Jag closes down, it'll be worth more than i paid for it someday, LOL!

markcincinnati · August 2006

New "3 liter" engines are either already announced or coming soon: X25 (215 HP) X28 (235 HP) X30 (255 OR 265 HP) and X35 (300 OR 303 HP depending on who's talking.) Only the "35" version is artificially aspirated.

The local BMW dealer believes the latest generation of the 3.0 (nominally at 255 HP) is being tweaked for higher HP and torque, lower emissions and better economy. At 255 HP, BMW's 3.0L like Audi's 3.1L are great and wonderful engines brimming with great and wonderful technologies. And, they are pretty much competing against cars that offer higher HP numbers in their ad copy.

I would look for upgrades to the 3.0 engine to show up first in a 3 series model (e.g., the coupes) then show up in the X and 5 series vehicles.

A US spec BMW 3.0L with a turbo that outputs 300HP would find a welcome home in a 335 SEDAN or a 535 or an X3 or even X5 SAV.

The "28" version, too, at 235 HP, would make a fine as wine entry level powerplant -- replacing the somewhat lackluster 215 HP "25" configuration (lackluster especially when it is in a 525 package, i.e.)

Both BMW and Audi could easily up the ante with these engines and their manufacturer's capabilities with respect to FSI + turbo technologies. Moreover, a turbo version with an electric "helper motor" (for the turbo impeller) that would keep the turbo "on full boil" would literally eliminate turbo lag. Both Audi's and BMW's 3L engines could easily creep up to very high "3" numbers (395 HP and like torque numbers), remain quite docile around town, achieve good to very good fuel and emissions numbers and be perfectly happy in stealth mode (not at all temperamental).

Of course the cars with these "pumped" up German power plants in them would be very capable indeed when called upon to be so.

The main issue with Audi and BMW's 3L six cylinder engines, is that when artificially aspirated and when equipped with FSI and the accompanying higher compression ratios, is that they threaten to make a non blown V8 almost irrelevant.

A 3.0L BMW 6 easily and comfortably putting out 300 HP and 295 pound feet of torque from a sub 2000 RPM spin encroaches on the non blown V8's -- big time.

Of course, what can then happen is: the V8's can add FSI and bi-turbos with electric helper motors for the impellers and crank the V8's power well into the stratosphere.

For the time being, a 3 or 5 series with AWD and the 300HP turbo 6 from BMW would be, er, ummm, AWESOME!

Don't you think? Or don't you? :shades:

shipo · August 2006

"Don't you think? Or don't you?"

Oh yeah, I "think". ;-)

One of the things that bug me about this current horsepower race is that I'm already hearing rumblings of the question "How fast is fast enough?" Thinking back to my dear departed 530i SP 5-Speed, which only had 225 HP and 214 lb-ft of torque; that car was actually a tad heavier than the current E60 530i, and yet I very rarely found myself wishing for more power. Said another way, the following is how it fit within bounds of my typical performance metrics:

- Would it get to and hold 150 for as long as I desired? Yes. Do I need/want/desire to go faster? No.
- Would it go 0-60 fast enough to make the local constabulary wonder if I was racing? Yes. Do I wish even faster acceleration? Well, it would be nice every now and again but hardly necessary.

Given the above two sets of questions and answers, and assuming that the 5-Series is soon going to become the 528i, 535i and 550i, I'd probably opt for the 528i SP 6-Speed Manual. Why? Simple, my bet is that it would be just a hair quicker than my E39 530i.

Now, if I was living in Colorado or some other geographic area that had roads that were 6,000' MSL or higher, then the 535i would be the only car that I'd consider. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

markcincinnati · August 2006

I am a big time fan of a "mild turbo."

A mild turbo, and I mean really mild, would easily crank the HP number of the 530 or 330 or X3 or X5 to 275 -- but of course the torque number could potentially rise by at least 50, and come on at a lower RPM. That the HP number would still remain below the psychologically important "300," would probably not raise the hackles of the copy writers charged with writing about the V8.

The thing is, this mildly blown 3.0L engine would have tremendous 0 - 100kph times, which is of course the holy grail here in the US.

It is funny (almost) -- HP is what is "sold" but torque is what is "purchased."

"How many horses?"

"300."

"Wow!"

"Yep, 300 ponies. . ."

"What'll it do to 60?"

"7 seconds."

"7 seconds? That sucks! I thought you said it had 300 HP?"

"Well, it does -- but it only has 180 foot pounds of torque at 4,000 RPM."

"Loser."

On the other hand. . .

"How many horses?"

"250."

"Wow! -- that doesn't seem like much these days. . ."

"Yep, 250 ponies. . . is all she wrote. . . "

"What'll it do to 60?"

"5.1 seconds."

"5.1 seconds? That REALLY does not suck! I thought you said it only had 250 HP?"

"Well, it does -- but it also "only" has 280 foot pounds of torque at 1,800 RPM."

"I'm not worthy, I'll avert my eyes my liege."

shipo · August 2006

Your post reminds me of a very similar conversation that I had with Boxster owner. He and I were working for the same company in Westchester County, NY at the time and spotted each other while crossing over from Rockland County on the Tappan Zee Bridge (which as some of you might know has a toll booth at its eastern terminus). When Mr. Boxster and I cleared the booth we each nailed it, and my lowly 1999 328i easily beat him to the Tarrytown exit (which was probably on the thin side of a quarter of a mile). I think I was as stunned as he was. Once in the parking lot he asked:

How much Horsepower ya got?"
Boxster: 201 @ 6000
Beemer: 193 @ 5500

He said, "I don't get it, my car is probably lighter (it was) and it has more horsepower, how did you beat me?"

I responded, "Probably torque. How much?"
Boxster: 181 @ 4500
Beemer: 206 @ 3500

Then again, as he didn't even know how much torque his car had, we needed to walk over to the Boxster so he could pull out the manual. When we got there I spied a Tiptronic transmission lever between the front seats. Just to add insult to injury I then asked, "Hey, you want to drive the BMW?"

"Nah," he responded, "can't drive a stick." :P

Best Regards,
Shipo

lexusguy · August 2006

Well maybe if Jag closes down, it'll be worth more than i paid for it someday, LOL!

Not unless its a Series 1 E-type.

designman · August 2006

"Nah," he responded, "can't drive a stick."

He can't drive Tip either. Should have beat you!

(Whew, TZ toll... not the best place to do that.)

shipo · August 2006

He can't drive Tip either. Should have beat you!

Really? Why? If anything I would have thought it would have been a close race with the 328i edging the Boxter out.

True, the Boxter weighs in about 300 pounds less than the 328i (although its driver made up for some of that difference), however, the 3er has 14% more torque (even more at lower RPM ranges) and it didn't have a slush box to contend with.

Best Regards,
Shipo

rich545 · August 2006

Well, it's interesting because were that race to happen with current models the Boxter has 240 hp @ 6400 rpm & 199 ft/lbs of torque at 4,700 rpm and weighs 2987 with tip. The 330i has 255 hp @ 6600 rpm & 220 ft/lbs of torque @ 2750 rpms and weighs 3417 lbs. So that's a 430 lb difference and the Boxter does 0-60 in 5.9 secs with manual, 6.8 with tip (doesn't say much for Porsche's tip if you ask me with such a difference). The 330i does 0-60 in 6.1 with manual, 6.3 with auto. So the Boxster now is slightly faster, but back when you raced one I'd say they're very close. If the tip was as much slower than the manual as it is today, I'd say your 328i with stick would beat it everytime. I wonder if he was actually using the tip though or if he was just in auto. I know that makes a huge difference in my Cayenne. I love it, but the auto trans. leaves a lot to be desired. My 545's was much smoother and was much better at selecting gears. The Cayenne goes into 6th gear at about 45 mph (way too early) and stays there even when the rpms are very low (we're talking about 1500 rpms before it downshifts). Plus it always starts out in 2nd gear.

designman · August 2006

I read that as a 528i. So you are right, it should be close, but I still think with drivers of equal skills, the Boxster should win based on more horsepower with less weight, especially if you started the match from anything but a dead stop as the Boxster needs its revs. You can make an argument with transmission and gearing.

The Boxster is 390 lbs less.
Weight/torque ratio is identical at 15.77
Weight/hp ratio is 14.20 Boxster, 16.84 BMW 328i

designman · August 2006

I read somewhere (could have been Excellence) that some hot shot test driver at Porsche claims the Tip is a good performer when driven properly. Also the the new 911 turbo with Tip is rated faster than with the stick... different, modern design though.

boiko · August 2006

The HP wars continue, even the G35 Sedan is going to be coming with 306 HP for 2007.

The HP arms race continues..

pearl · August 2006

Yes, it is interesting that given the HP wars, particularly involving the M vs the GS, that Nissan/Infiniti chose NOT to put the upgraded G VQ engine in the M. Latter has 275HP vs. 306 in the "new" VQ in the G (over 80% new parts, variable valve timing on both intake an exhaust cams, etc), while a new GS 350 is likely out in the Fall with more power and MUCH better gas mileage. Infiniti blew this one in my humble opinion. Not addressing the gas mileage issue is a major blunder(no six speed auto, etc).

dhamilton · August 2006

with the current G [and I hope it isn't continued into the next model] is that the torque isn't in a very "user friendly"
place in the power band. It is in my opinion very european [see autobahn] in it's application. To jump on the Shipo, Mark bandwagon "horsepower be damned, I want useable torque" and down low where all good things "hang"
The 350z was the exact opposite. I heard tell a simple computer re-map/flash was the preferred elixir

dhamilton · August 2006

stories about people owning a porsche and it being an A word. I just can't bring myself to use the full word being a Gentleman and all. I wonder if there is a special place in hell for people that chain up their dog in the yard their whole life, and people who drive a Porsche with that...well you know what I'm talking about. :mad: :sick: :P :shades:

shipo · August 2006

I hate hearing stories about people owning a porsche and it being an A word.

Of course its the "T" word with regards to a Porsche. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

sfcharlie · August 2006

2005 Audi A6 3.2 quattro AT6 - 243 @ 3250 rpm
2004 BMW 530i Sport - 214 @ 3500 rpm
2005 Cadillac STS V6 - 252 @ 3200 rpm
2005 Infiniti M35 - 270 @ 4800 rpm
2005 Jaguar S-Type 3.0 - 216 @ 4100 rpm
2005 Acura RL - 260 @ 5000 rpm

2006 MB E-Class detail, just for comparison: torque of 350 Nm between 2400 and 5000 rpm
305 Newton metres of torque  87 percent of the maximum  is available from 1500 rpm

lexusguy · August 2006

"the problem with the current G [and I hope it isn't continued into the next model] is that the torque isn't in a very "user friendly" place in the power band. It is in my opinion very european [see autobahn] in it's application. To jump on the Shipo, Mark bandwagon "horsepower be damned, I want useable torque" and down low where all good things "hang"

I didnt notice that, at least not with an automatic G35. I found the power delivery to be very smooth from top to bottom, much unlike the Acura TL, which has no low-end torque and feels a bit sluggish off the line.

designman · August 2006

"I hate hearing stories about people owning a porsche and it being an A word. I just can't bring myself to use the full word being a Gentleman and all. I wonder if there is a special place in hell for people that chain up their dog in the yard their whole life, and people who drive a Porsche with that...well you know what I'm talking about."

And I don't care for stereotypes and innuendo. I wouldn't be hitchhiking onto the concept of a "gentleman" with that post.

designman · August 2006

"Of course its the "T" word with regards to a Porsche."

Pardon my ignorance. I assume you don't mean torque? Hmm.

shipo · August 2006

"Pardon my ignorance. I assume you don't mean torque?"

Torque works, however, I was thinking Tiptronic. ;-)

Best Regards,
Shipo

sfcharlie · August 2006

"with an automatic G35. I found the power delivery to be very smooth from top to bottom"

I find that with the V6 in my M35. From what I've read and from watching the tachomoter, my impression is that the car "reaches" up quickly into high rpm range to get that torque at low speeds. That is one way to achieve the effect we experience when driving the G or the M. Another way, which appears to draw more positive attention in articles I read on engines and drivetrains, is to build an engine that reaches into its peak torque range at lower rpms.

Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles