Luxury Performance Sedans

sfcharlie · November 2006

"Apparently Edmunds does not share all the favorable opinions noted here. The S6 did not compare well with their counterparts at MB and BMW. Kind of surprising."

And quite different from the conclusion reached at Automobile Magazine, when they compared the M5, the S6, and the Mercedes-Benz E63 AMG. The found the S6 and the E63 neck-and-neck for first, with the M5 not comparing well: "At an expected $85,000, the Benz digs deepest into the budget, but it is worth every penny--against the stopwatch and in smiles-per-miles currency. It wins on merit and appeal, even though it surpasses the S6 only by a whisker.The fact that the M5 has fallen so far so fast tells you three things: That this is an extremely fast-moving business. That even a well-founded status quo can be eroded by clever evolution. And that the big-engine-in-a-mid-size-car game is more competitive than ever."

Fame is fleeting and and love is fickle in the automotive press.

merc1 · November 2006

This really isn't much of a surprise. The S6 is a in between sort of car like the Jaguar S-Type R. The class has moved on to 500hp and 400hp just wont cut it, but the S6 is still a great car IMO, especially when you take a glance at the interior. Audi is trying to bracket the AMG/M cars with S cars on the bottom almost priced like "regular" MB/BMW models and RS models on top of the M/AMG models in price and performance.

M

rockylee · November 2006

I was dissapointed by it's performance numbers. It however is more handsome than the M5, and almost as stylish the Mercedes. Audi, needs to rework the V-10 to get better performance out of it. That's my only gripe with the car otherwise it's the perfect all-weather, performance luxury car.

Rocky

lexusguy · November 2006

Audi is trying to bracket the AMG/M cars with S cars on the bottom almost priced like "regular" MB/BMW models and RS models on top of the M/AMG models in price and performance.

Im not sure about the RS6, but the RS4 wont be able to hold on to its performance crown for very long. Edmunds test of the 335i coupe had it within a hair of the RS4. That means the new M3 is going to be a 4 second car, and the RS4 cant touch that.

merc1 · November 2006

Well you know how Audi does it with the RS cars, they save the best for last. Last being the end of the production run of the car they're based on...so in about 5-6 more years we're get another RS4 to fight the next M3!

M

domenickamarc · November 2006

"Well you know how Audi does it with the RS cars, they save the best for last. Last being the end of the production run of the car they're based on...so in about 5-6 more years we're get another RS4 to fight the next M3!"

True ... and, in fact, Edmunds comparo ended with: "But the situation might be changing, as a new, more powerful Audi RS6 should debut at the 2007 Geneva Show. Built by Quattro GmbH (an Audi subsidiary) just like the RS4, this new RS6 will be powered by a turbocharged version of the S6's V10. We're expecting an output somewhere around 550 hp, a number that could change the game completely."

cstiles · November 2006

Not sure if this is a logical or an emotional argument. Probably the latter. But so often, the "better" car is deemed to be the one with more displacement. Year after year, it's "who can trump the other in terms of horsepower?"

Although these cars compete in the same segment, they are not exactly apples to apples due to Audi's exclusive reliance on quattro. An AWD car has inherent weight, handling, and design obstacles that dampen outright performance (assuming comparable displacement). Plus, an AWD car just feels different from one with RWD, beyond the understeer considerations.

Weight is the enemy of performance, and Audi engineers start with a 200-300 lb weight deficit. Want 50-50 weight distribution? No way Jose. But as Rocky said, what you get with the Audi is the best performer in virtually all weather conditions. Not sure the others can remotely make that claim.

There are comparos currently pitting the TT vs. the Cayman, with the Porsche winning fairly handily in terms of handling and "performance." But are these cars truly apples to apples? Do they even compete in the same segment? I think it's debatable since the cars feel so differently from each other, and the price points differ.

Quite often, the Audi is a hell of a value in a price-dependent comparo. And if the owner values AWD, it's gravy. Mark---can I hear an amen?

rockylee · November 2006

I was in the entry-lux forum and the discussion of the 07' Volvo S80 vs. Audi A8 as being luxury cars came up. I was defending the S80, as being competitive in this segment while being $30K cheaper. I was told the volvo isn't in the same league. I however am a fan of the S6, and even though I can't realistically afford one I like the car alot. I wished it had a bit more power, but regardless I like it. So as I come across as Anti-Audi, I really am not. I'm not much of a fan of the recent blonde wooded interior of the A8, and think it looks cheap and strange. Maybe some dark Walnut would help it ?

Rocky

P.S. Audi is a best performer in All-weather conditions and is why that special QUATTRO AWD system is banned from the track.

shipo · November 2006

Hmmm, still trolling I see. :P

Don't you ever get tired of being shouted down so often?

qbrozen · November 2006

to be fair, i wouldn't really call rocky a troll.

maybe that's just my definition, but I believe a troll to be someone who drops a bomb and leaves shortly thereafter. Although rocky may have a different viewpoint than alot of folks, at least he has the tenacity to stick around and defend that viewpoint.

fonefixer · November 2006

I drove an Audi A6 2.7T for 6 years/100,000 miles and will say the car was "tired" at the end of my ownership.The turbos needed replacing, the valve covers were leaking, etc.

Maybe all LPS cars, and all cars in general are "tired" and worn out by 100,000 miles? Or was it just my Audi?

lexusguy · November 2006

Maybe all LPS cars, and all cars in general are "tired" and worn out by 100,000 miles? Or was it just my Audi?

I don't think German luxury cars are built to last longer than 100K miles without major life support. Any Legend, Q, or LS though should handle 100K miles in its sleep. Unfortunately Acuras don't seem to be built nearly as well as they used to be. Infinitis I'm not sure about, but the G and M shouldn't have any problems well past 100K miles. I'm just not sure they can do 300K like Q45s of old. My LS400 was still going strong at 150K miles. I got tired of it long before it got "tired" of life.

rockylee · November 2006

shipo,

I don't troll I have a different viewpoint than alot of other people. If I trolled I would never come back.

I just wanted some different opinions is all and wasn't trying to start a arguement....

Rocky

rockylee · November 2006

qbrozen,

Thank-you pal. I don't drop bombs without defending my view points. I know I pour gas on myself sometimes and should keep my mouth shut. I brought up the S80 vs. A8 & LS to y'all....I wondered if y'all think I'm dumb/wrong for thinking the S80 would/could be cross shopped by either of them. If I'm wrong, hey I'm wrong. I think very highly of the new S80 V8 AWD and even though it costs $30k less I think the new platform make it a cheaper alternative to the A8 and LS, without sacrificing quality and driving experience. I'm trying to understand/learn what buyers in this segment think.

Just my $0.02

thanx,

Rocky

qbrozen · November 2006

while I'm not a buyer in this segment, I don't think the S80 would be cross-shopped to those cars. I believe folks looking to spend $80k will spend $80k.

Plus, maybe I'm wrong here, but I believe the S80 is smaller inside than the others. At least a tighter backseat. I'm not sure of the actual specs of the '07 model, however.

rockylee · November 2006

Okay, fair enough. I just wanted some different opinions is all. I also agree the S80 is a lil' smaller over all. It's about the same size as a STS-DTS ? The A8 is the size of the S-Class. Isn't the LS about the same size as the S80 ?

Rocky

fonefixer · November 2006

J. D. Power or somebody should take a poll of 100,000 mile owners of all vehicles and ask if they would buy that vehicle again based on reliability.

I'm not bashing the venerable Audi brand, it is just that after 6 +years of LPS ownership, I would have to agree that the Audi appears to be an ideal lease vehicle, but certainly not a model that would be suitable for long term ownership.

Anybody out there that has driven an individual Audi for 100,000 relatively care-free miles?

lexusguy · November 2006

I brought up the S80 vs. A8 & LS to y'all....I wondered if y'all think I'm dumb/wrong for thinking the S80 would/could be cross shopped by either of them.

The S80 is firmly in the mid-lux class, its competition is the cars on this board. From Lexus and Audi, that would be the GS and A6. The A8 and LS are in the 200" full-size class, the S80 isnt that big.

qbrozen · November 2006

I'm not positive about the LS. I was under the impression it was A8 size, which I know to be cavernous.

As the post above mine mentions, I think the GS is more S80 size.

As it stands, unfortunately, volvo is very much like Acura in the sizing department. Similar to comparing the RL to the TL, the S80 and S60 aren't that far apart. (and, likewise for the S40/60 and TL/TSX.) Its not the noticeable jump in size you see with something like the Benz S-class, Bimmer 7-series, or A8.

I would like to see volvo come out with a large sedan. Unfortunately, however, they'd have to call it the S100.

and that just don't have a good ring to it.

They DID, IIRC, have an S80 Executive, or some such name, that added a couple of inches. I'm not sure of when exactly that was produced, in what numbers, or the added cost, however. But maybe they'll do that again with the new design??

lexusguy · November 2006

But maybe they'll do that again with the new design??

Hard to say. They could bring back the short-lived S90 tag, rather than S100, which I agree is a bad name. I don't see it happening any time soon though, Volvo has too many other cars that need redesigns or refreshes. I also don't think there's any demand for a big Volvo in the first place. They already have one loss-making niche vehicle in their lineup.

markcincinnati · November 2006

The Volvo S80 is Volvo's LPS entry as far as I can tell. It may not rise to the L or the P of the LPS sedans chewed about on this forum. At worst it is a "near"-LPS car.

The newest version with a V8, AWD and most of the features and creature comforts afforded LPS owners probably is a "contender."

But, despite its V8, et al, it probably would not be included in many Car & Driver, Motor Trend, Road & Track, Automobile comparo's.

And it certainly would not be included in the Audi, BMW, Mercedes flagship comparisons (such as the one in the new C&D where the Mercedes was #1, Audi #2 (one point shy) and three other imports bringing up the bottom -- with the new Large Lexus solidly in 5th place (out of 5).

I would probably be happy to take an S80 for a test drive and who knows, I may be so impressed (if it is priced "right") that I might even consider one -- somehow, I doubt it (yea, that is a pre-conception.)

There is no Volvo I know of that would "legitimately" be compared by a shopper looking at a A8L or BMW 7 by any stretch of the imagination.

The Phaeton may it R.I.P., probably was a "legitimate" lux, flagship car -- apparently coming from VW was one of its worst sins, tho. :surprise:

Now if we're going to get nuts here, I looked at the new C&D with its "10 Best" cars and saw (again) the Chrysler 300 listed as "the best sedan money can buy" (or something almost as powerful.) And, when I first saw the 300C tested on the Speed Channel, it was compared (by the host) favorably to both the BMW 7 and Audi A8 cars -- in terms of its size and driving dynamics.

At the time, I thought that was over the top -- come to think of it, I still do. Does the 300C merit an honorable mention or even "wannabe" mention in the annals of LPS-dom? Most of us would say, "probably not," would be my guess.

This "Premium" Saloon Class (LPS as we are wont to call it) is tough to break into. It seems to me that Audi, Saab and Volvo (and maybe Acura) tried to break in for several years. The 2005 models seemed to have accomplished that for Acura and Audi. Volvo is debatable and Saab, well, you know. :shades:

domenickamarc · November 2006

cstiles, I think that's a great observation. What it kicks off in my thinking are two things.

One, when I read a book or an article about "classic cars," a vicarious pleasure is the diversity of auto-desire. Consumers seemed to revel in the many different styles, models, experiments in automotive design and engineering. By comparison, we appear to have entered a chapter in automotive history in the U.S. where multiple forces conspire to make the image of "desirable car" homogeneous in the minds of a majority of consumers.

Two, when BMW introduced the 2002 forerunner of the 3-series in the 1960s, Car and Driver, in particular, really got it. By "it" I mean the excitement of the appearance of a new category of car, not nearly as fast in a straight line as the muscle cars that were generating much of the excitement in those days, but able to provide a type of driving pleasure to a married couple with kids, previously not seen in a sedan. It didn't matter that it wasn't going to go from zero to 60 as fast as a Dodge Hemi or a GTO. There were multiple ways for a car to be great.

Too much now of tsk, tsk, what a shame for all the German cars that, for example, the Infiniti cars accelerate faster; "game over" as one, to me, silly auto-mag article tried to collapse the whole car experience. And, similarly, for most of us here, how much does it matter which $75-$90K car accelerates fastest? Is there even any relationship between some group of editors assessment of the S6 versus the M5 versus the MB E63 and the pleasure any one of us might be deriving (and talking about on this forum) from driving one of the "regular" versions of those cars in our everyday lives?

lansdownemike · November 2006

Well, for a car that no one on this list has even seen, much less driven, those are pretty strong words. I would guess that three years ago much the same could have been said about the upcoming Infiniti M and there is pretty strong evidence that the M is more than a "contender."

How about waiting until the car has been driven by real people for a few months and see whether the car mags are actually going to include it in a comparo with any of the favorites in this neighborhood?

On paper it is certainly a contender. By price it is a contender. Will it drive like one? We'll see soon enough.

cstiles · November 2006

When you consider that 75~80% of LPS cars are leased, longevity may be a moot point. However, reliability is obviously important for 2nd and 3rd owners of certified, pre-owned LPS's.
It's interesting to see the Germans offering V8 and V10 motors with forced induction. That's the only way they can up the horsepower to be king of the 0-60 and 1/4 mile mountain. But turbo's are prone to create longer term reliability issues. So far, the Japanese have eschewed turbocharging (not counting the Acura 4-pot engine).

Volvo may aspire to swim in the LPS ocean, but they have to reinvent their image in the minds of consumers. If anything can scrub away images of IKEA, Birkenstocks, and lutefisk, I suppose it just might be that sweet Yamaha V8!

I'm amazed that Saab manages to stay in business. They must sell a lot of cars on the East coast. In most other locales, you're more apt to see a Saab engine on a commuter plane, instead of on the interstate.

Speaking of changing the image of Volvo, I saw a great bumper sticker in Seattle last weekend. It was on the back of a Volvo V70 and it said "Cheney Satan 2008." Couldn't stop laughing....

cstiles · November 2006

Great points. I'm convinced that the car mags tacitly coexist by disagreeing just for the sake of disagreeing (or to sell more magazines and appease advertisers, of course).

In 1991 the Motor Trend car of the year was the Chevy Caprice Classic. They may be in denial over that today.

domenickamarc · November 2006

"Anybody out there that has driven an individual Audi for 100,000 relatively care-free miles?"

Our family drove a VW Jetta for 130,000 relatively care free miles. Is there a specific reason, other than one forum participant's Audi having worn out at 100,000 miles, to assume that an Audi wouldn't last as long as a VW?

I think it's a stretch to claim an experience with one car is a good predictor of what the majority of owners will experience. It might or might not be.

I cannot find any database of repair frequency and cost for cars post-80K. In the absence of such data, all we have is anecdote and the myth of Japanese cars run forever with little or no repair costs. I find, in conversation, as many believers in the myth than German engines and drivetrains run forever.

merc1 · November 2006

I don't think German luxury cars are built to last longer than 100K miles without major life support.

Totally disagree with that because I've seen otherwise. True a German car may need more maint to get that point, but "major life support" that is stretching it to put it mildly.

The thing is Japanese cars is that they will last that long as far as their guts and hardpoints, but their interiors and bodies usually look awful and the leather has begun to crack in so many places you can't begin to keep track of it anymore.

M

rockylee · November 2006

I appreciate the responses and opinions. So based on size it's not a competitor. The LS 460 L (long-wheel base) is as big as a S-class or A8 I agree. I thought/assumed the LS and S80 were close enough in size to be compared or cross shopped by your avg. consumer. The mid-size luxury market sounds about right to me. I guess I always looked at a Cadillac STS, Volvo S80, Lexus LS, as a large car. I looked at a BMW 3, Infiniti G, Acura TL, more as mid-size.

I personally think the S-Class belongs in a new category called Xtra-large Luxury car. :P The Maybach, would fit in the XXX-Large Luxury car segment.

Well again thanks for y'alls time....

Rocky

markcincinnati · November 2006

. . .one of the service writers at my Audi dealer has an Audi 4000CS quattro -- from the 80's as I recall.

He told me his first "repair" came at 175,000 miles.

I assume this was to distinguish the word from "maintenance." I also maintain that these German cars are breathtaking expensive to "maintain" without the protection of some kind of factory warranty, regardless if it is the 50,000 B2B or the 100,000 mile CPO offering.

Yet, the technicians (who can afford them) seem to be German car fans for the most part and their older models seem to soldier on quite nicely and going over 100,000 miles without "repair" would seem to be more the norm rather than the exception.

I would say this rings true at my wife's BMW dealership too -- lots of folks have "vintage" Bimmers with tons of miles on them.

Maybe when you work at the dealership you can "over maintain" your German car on the cheap -- maybe that accounts for this.

On the other hand, with such a small population sample, these remarks hardly prove anything.

A former employee had a 1980 something diesel MB -- the thing was a dog, loud, smelly and not really much fun to ride in. It was, however, not rusted out, the mechanical and electrical stuff all appeared to work and even the horridly rough shifting autotrans did what it had always done so said my employee. I think that one had over 200,000 miles on it; and, she claimed it had had very few "repairs."

Perhaps when we replace our timing belts or clutches or water pumps or whatever maintenance items as we go along, we may tend to think this is indicative of a reliability problem -- when it might just be high mileage maintenance requirements instead.

Beats me.

If, a big "if" I were to keep my A6 beyond 50,000 miles and if at, say, 60,000 miles I need new brakes, rotors and all the stuff associated with a full-on brake job and it costs a breathtaking amount does that mean the car was or is unreliable. I really don't know what to expect.

My friends Bimmer needed new front brake "everythings" at 58K miles at about a $900 bill. His wife's Olds Bravada needed new REAR brakes at 118,000 miles at a fraction of the cost -- but the new brake job (rears) on it were NOT done at the dealer. I forgot to ask him when the fronts went out, but clearly they went out before the rears.

Another friend kept a Lexus LS400 for 200,000 miles, and it needed few actual "repairs." But it needed at least one paint job (entire car) and the interior (leather) looked worn when it had under 100,000 miles on it.

Doesn't prove anything. . . :surprise:

shipo · November 2006

Double-Clutch? ;-)

fonefixer · November 2006

I believe the issue with general vehicle reliability rests with the fact that we ALL go by personal experience.In my case, no matter what CR printed or what was read around these forums , after 100,000 miles and 6+ years of hands on ownership, I would not buy another Audi. That doesn't mean the next potential buyer wouldn't, it was just my issues, but of course I'm sure the same could be said about ALL the brands, including Toyota, Honda,Mazda and of course Lexus!

markcincinnati · November 2006

I agree! It is YOUR (or my own) personal experiences that almost certainly overpower these forum's, your friends and relatives, car magazines and consumer magazines.

I am, however, pretty much convinced that ANY of these cars (with the possible exception of a Jaguar -- and that is totally rumor-based, I have "no facts") would be reliable for at least 50,000 miles.

As I ride the downhill portion of my lease, I know that I am at the one year out point (plus or minus a couple of months) of "doing it all over again." That being said and with the great and wonderful experience with this Audi I will consider another Audi product without batting an eye.

But my wife's X3 has been a rock (one recall this month, otherwise a rock) and I will look at them. The Infiniti will certainly get my look see since I actually put money down on one last time and only backed-out when Audi made me an offer I couldn't refuse.

I have grown to like the looks of the Lexus GS cars, but my gut tells me they are too cushy and I am looking for more driver involvement and more road feel, not more isolation (which Lexus may provide in spades, but there's that bias showing through.) I'll have to test one just to be certain though.

Heck, I'll probably look at the Chrysler 300C, the Jeep SRT and even the Mercedes "M" class while I'm at it.

I may come right on back to Audi. But now that I know I got the "deal" on this one, I'd be hard pressed to pony up too much more on a $54K car than I am currently paying (on a lease basis, natch.)

The STS, too, may merit consideration.

Point is: I am not very concerned about reliability -- I EXPECT they will all be "acceptable" at the very least.

Hmmm, if GM keeps up the 100,000 mile warranty -- why NOT look at one of their cars (unless they drive like a log wagon?)

These blogs have certainly had their effect [on me], for I cannot imagine I would have gone down the Infiniti path were it not for all the bantering about (both that I observed and participated in.)

What would be an interesting "social" experiment might be to ask the question "were these cars attainable equally (no price incentive reasons, that is) which one would you go for?

Of course that would be totally unfair, since this, in my experience, isn't ever the case -- i.e., our biases would still play loud and long.

I think this is a golden age of car buying. What used to be vices are now virtues, or, what used to be options are now standard, what used to be available only in cars mere mortals cannot afford are now offered almost universally.

This "back up camera" thing, for instance, is now offered on a Chrysler 300 for pity's sake. Heated and cooled seats and ESP/DSC are no longer just for the LPS or High end customers anymore.

Now, if you want a leather dashboard, well, you do have to order an LPS car -- if you want that leather to be factory leather.

I saw an ad, however, in the new C&D or R&T magazine for a company that "tunes and dresses" new Buicks every bit as fine as those German tuning companies (wheels, suspension bits, interior re-do's, etc, and even performance upgrades.) A Buick for pity's sake! Who'da thunk it?

Now does that mean any one of us with the wherewithal to acquire a $50K+ car will suddenly start shopping at $30K+? Perhaps -- especially if, like my buddy who dumped his Mercedes for an Acura -- you care NOT for anything that has to do with the "status" implications.

My other buddy, after years of high buck LPS cars is now in the top 'o the line Toyota mini-van with leather everywhere a virtual home theater for the back and more comfort than a car THAT cheap ought to have (less than $40K with all the toys.)

This is indeed the golden age of car-dom, if you ask me.

But, alas, you didn't. :shades:

rockylee · November 2006

mark,

You will need to take a 500-600 hp. 08' CTS-V for a spin.

A great post !

Rocky

cdnpinhead · November 2006

He would if he could.

cdnpinhead · November 2006

What would be an interesting "social" experiment might be to ask the question "were these cars attainable equally (no price incentive reasons, that is) which one would you go for?

I think this is often the case, not a hypothetical. Price/cost is certainly a factor, but getting what I want is a much bigger one. When I outline what I want (manual transmission, RWD, enough room to carry my bicycle inside the vehicle, some lux features, a hope that it won't spend time in the shop (with or without a warranty)), I end up with a list of vehicles, a quite short one. If the one I want is 5-10K more than one I don't, that's certainly not the determining factor.

If it were $15-20K more. . .

But that's not the case. With my priorities, the list is quite short & the pricing delta falls within 10K. The RWD thing blows away everything cheap & the manual thing eliminates most things really expensive. The need to carry my bike eliminates a couple more (G sedan & Lexus I).

Life is good.

lexusguy · November 2006

But turbo's are prone to create longer term reliability issues. So far, the Japanese have eschewed turbocharging (not counting the Acura 4-pot engine).

Not really. Many vehicles sold under the Lexus badge here were available elsewhere with turbos (the Soarer 3.0T, for example.) While the Japanese luxury brands tend not to use forced induction (yet) in this country, nearly every Subaru has a turbo, and they are not known for having reliability problems.

Supra, 300ZX, and 3000GT twin turbo powered cars also don't seem to fall apart when entering old age.

I'm amazed that Saab manages to stay in business.

Yeah, I don't get that one, either. Their cars are mediocre at best (and don't even get me started on the 9-7X) and somehow people keep buying them anyway.

lexusguy · November 2006

The thing is Japanese cars is that they will last that long as far as their guts and hardpoints, but their interiors and bodies usually look awful and the leather has begun to crack in so many places you can't begin to keep track of it anymore.

True, Japanese interiors generally aren't built for more than 10-12 years of constant use. You never hear "Dont own a Lexus out of warranty!" though.

lexusguy · November 2006

I am, however, pretty much convinced that ANY of these cars (with the possible exception of a Jaguar -- and that is totally rumor-based, I have "no facts") would be reliable for at least 50,000 miles.

I can say from personal experience as a now 4-time Jag owner (although I've only had the new K8 for a week, so I cant make any reliability claims on that one) that each successive Jag has been far better than the last. The XJ-S did ok mechanically, but there were lots of electrical problems, and the V12s (mine was a V6) were known for having loads of engine problems. The '98 XK8 had some electical problems (the seat motors failed, for example) but they were fewer in number and much less serious than on the XJ-S.

The '00 XKR was largely trouble free, other than a supercharger issue that was fixed under warranty. The transmission issues did start to appear around the 50K mile mark though. In the 6 years since then, Jag seems to have continually improved, enough to rank among the best in the IQS. It will be interesting to see how the new XK8 does, as this is the first time I've ever had a first MY Jag.

fonefixer · November 2006

If I can drive 10,000 miles at a crack with only normal maintenance items such as tire rotations, oil changes, and wiper blades, I'll be very happy with my MAzda Cx-7.

Although my Audi A6 2.7T was covered bumper to bumper for the first 50,000 miles, it was very annoying to be visiting the service dept so very often.

I want to drive a car for 100,000 miles that only needs tires,oil, brakes, blades and maybe a few car washes thrown in!

Actually, My 1998 TOY camry is almost there... 90,000 miles and only normal maintenance, tires, brakes, plugs,oil, transmission changes, battery once, and that has been it.

sfcharlie · November 2006

"Although my Audi A6 2.7T was covered bumper to bumper for the first 50,000 miles, it was very annoying to be visiting the service dept so very often.I want to drive a car for 100,000 miles that only needs tires,oil, brakes, blades and maybe a few car washes thrown in!"

We have had a 1999 Audi A4 2.8 Avant quattro AWD Wagon in one of our businesses. Used for deliveries and personal use by various people since purchased new. Not one thing (other than tires, wiper blades, third battery recently, brakes) has been done beyond what is described in maintenance schedule. Manager keeps all records. Called down just now: 152,658 miles through today. Interior and exterior (carefully cared for) are still beautiful.

For whatever that's worth to anyone except the manager.

sidv · November 2006

Saabs are mediocre at best? Please, at least they don't put you to sleep while looking at them like a Lexus. (which are mostly just gilded Camrys anyway) Sure the Saabs have a long way to go to catch Lexus in reliability but there's absolutely nothing else more appealing about a Lexus than a Saab to me. I'd take a Buick over a Lexus, pretty much as reliable, styling is no more boring and cheaper to maintain in the long run.

esf · November 2006

I had an '00 2.7T quattro on a five-year lease. The worst thing to happen to mine was that the headlight washer caps flew off on the highway. No biggie.

I now own an '05 S4 Cabriolet, and have for over a year and a half. I have not yet had a single issue.

I think it's more of how you maintain your cars than the quoted "reliability" they promise to offer. Apparently, the S4 has a "Poor" rating from Consumer Reports. Reliability my @ss.

In fact, the reliability of the four Audi models we've owned in the last five years have proved themselves against the two Lexus RX's we've had. And they've certainly taken wear and tear better.

'06 Audi A3 2.0T  '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet  '04 Lexus RX330

esf · November 2006

I had a Saab 900 Turbo coupe and loved it, but that's just not true. Lexus products, every one of them, are superior to their Saab non-competitors.

I say non-competitors because there's not one serious Saab model out right now. The 9-3 is the most competent, and it's average at best.

'06 Audi A3 2.0T  '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet  '04 Lexus RX330

fonefixer · November 2006

See, now there is one happy and satisfied long term Audi customer! How you maintain the vehicle is of course a critical element in the reliability factor of the car. I always hear about all the broken stuff and never get to see or hear about the "maintenance log" of the same car.

I did maintain my Audi to factory specs, in cluding synthetic oil and all the rest, but as it approached 100,000 miles couldn't hardly keep up anymore.Like within any brand, some are good and some aren't. Maybe it has to do with the day your particular vehicle was put together on the assembly line?

lexusguy · November 2006

Saabs are mediocre at best? Please, at least they don't put you to sleep while looking at them like a Lexus.

Actually, every Saab puts me to sleep while looking at it. I liked the 9-2X the first time I saw it, when it was called the WRX. The 9-3 is 100% generic "Euro car". There's absolutely nothing about it that says "Saab." It could easily have an Opel or Vauxhaul badge on it. Come to think of it, it basically is an Opel with a Saab badge.

The 9-5 is actually worse, an extremely tired design that was recently given a "mean face". Nice try. Finally, the 9-7X looks like the 6 or so other identical GM SUVs that have been with us since the late '90s.

The ES and RX are very loosely Camry based. Thats all. The IS, GS, LS, and SC all ride on unique Lexus architecture. How many Saab specific platforms are there? A big fat zero.

domenickamarc · November 2006

Nothing I wrote, in response to a repeated lament about a bad personal Audi experience, was intended to imply that I'd recommend anyone allow reliability reports or auto-mag raves to override their own personal experience with a brand.

I was responding only to the parts of those Audi-lament comments that generalized to "if you're intending to keep a car up to or beyond 100K (maybe even if you're only wanting to keep it past 50K or beyond an original lease and original warranty) you must buy a Japanese car and avoid German cars, especially Audi. I read that generalization being added to "just" and "only" personal experience and personal decision. If I read that generalization into the thread of Audi-lament postings, then I guess I was talking to myself. If I am now recalling correctly the Japanese-German or even just Mazda-Audi generalizations, then my concerns about that type of rhetoric stand.

I say that, despite the fact, that in my local extended family we have, in the last 8 months, purchased two Mazda 3 cars for younger family members (good price, styling that appealed to the adults and the kids, fun to drive without having the kind of horsepower that sometimes seduces teenage drivers into racing with Porsches on the highway). Including my car, among this collection of siblings, cousins, and high school/college kids, we own two Audi, a new MB SUV, three Mazdas (the two 3s and one 6 -- Mazda is far and away our favorite Japanese brand -- the brand, in our opinion, that really offers what Infiniti purports to offer: a facsimile of European styling and handling combined with the best of what Japanese designers and engineers add to give buyers a lot of bang for much less buck), and a 2006 Buick Lucerne.

We have no reason, based on personal experiences with these brands (and certainly unsupported by anything reported by CR and JDP) to expect the Mazdas to be more reliable than the German cars. We tend to keep cars for a long time and our Mazdas have been no more or less reliable, on average, than our German cars, when driven over 100K. We just love what Mazda does, both in design and engineering.

cstiles · November 2006

I was aware that the Japanese use turbos in non-LPS cars, but mostly in compact sports/GT applications, or to boost smaller displacement powerplants (1.8 to 3.0 litres) in an efficient and cost-effective way.

I was suggesting that (to date) Japanese LPS cars have steered clear of forced induction, like the Germans are starting to push. And more notably, we're seeing turbocharging applied to larger V8/V10 powerplants.

After a certain point, it seems excessive and a questionable use of technology.

markcincinnati · November 2006

. . .there are certainly times when I have felt my 255HP A6 3.2 needs more power. I just can't remember them.

I think the power is adequate. It goes faster than the vast majority of cars on the road and it gets to speed more quickly than most too.

I had three Audi V8 equipped cars and six Audi turbo cars, one of them a V6, two 5 cylinder versions and three 1.8T's, two of those 225HP tunings.

Nothing sounds sweeter than an Audi V8 (4.2) -- to my ears at least. My current V6 does a nothing to be ashamed of imitation of that sound. The V6 had a nice whine to it and my one S6 a 1995 vintage sounded pretty good too. The 1.8T's didn't sound bad, but they didn't have too much sound in the basso-profundo department, if you get my drift.

My point is, I wish my current car had more power. Frankly, my V6 is so good and so strong and sips so little gas, I can't entirely see the extra $5 grand or so the V8 A6 commands as worth it. It seems to buy about 1 second in the sprint to 100kph, which is decent -- but I live in a Big Town (or small city if you like) and it is becoming rarer and rarer that I can even use the acceleration that I have.

"Punching" it on secondary roads still remains an option, but what with sub-urban creep, I have to drive a "fur piece" to actually "play" with my car, the way I used to play with my, then new, 1995 S6 (which I routinely took under full throttle from a full stop to some extra legal speed.)

Time, traffic congestion and perhaps even a mild bit of prudence dictate my driving style.

I do, whenever conditions permit (and sometimes when they don't) drive "fast" (any number higher than 80mph that can be sustained, however, can usually only be sustained for a few moments or perhaps several short minutes.)

Low end grunt (and at least the 3.2 seems medium torquey) is more important to me, all things considered. Perhaps that is why I am so gung ho on having a diesel option.

A 250HP diesel engine with about 375 pound feet of torque routed through a 7spd DSG transmission would be, under these circumstances, the best of all worlds. That kind of power is easily extracted from a 6 cylinder diesel, too.

Insofar as the RS6, which took the 4.2 and applied "lungs", it's power was awesome (I averted my eyes, even), but almost completely useless. No one, well virtually no one, can "run away from me" in my underpowered A6 V6 as it stands.

My god, blowing the current V6 with an ultra fast, ultra quick to spool and light pressure turbo would jump its output to what "an easy 300HP" and give it more torque at lower rpm than the unblown 4.2 V8 (which is probably why Audi hasn't turbocharged the 3.2 since it would show the 4.2 its tail lights.

The previous generation A6 2.7T V6 was nearly a full second quicker than the 4.2 V8 also offered in the same A6 body.

Now we are what? Turboing the V10? Gawd? Where could I use that? I'm sure I'd like to try to find someplace, but not for the extra $25K or more that it will surely command over even the "normal" A6 V8 (at 350 HP.)

I am not arguing against horsepower wars -- I actually to this day cannot figure out why Audi brought out a new car that had 25HP less than the comparably priced outgoing model and bagsfull LESS torque, to boot. Yet, at some point, I just think there are pragmatic reasons (for me) to say "enough is enough."

I'd rather have more "features" for my "X" thousands of dollars, at this point (or at least once I reached the "just a wee bit more" power point.)

I'd like to have my navigation programmable by voice. I'd like to specify the Sirius station by calling out its channel number, heck, I'd like to have a backup camera and heated AND cooled seats.

An $8,000 speaker upgrade, oddly, seems like a better use of my money.

But hey, that's just me.

These cars, well most of them, are AT WORST, adequately powered and are typically able to perform well in all age and ability groups.

550 hp? There is a price point at which I WOULD buy it -- but I'm just not sure I could use it as it could be used and hence would probably "under appreciate it."

I love what BMW has done with their 3.0 engine via turbo charging. I never thought I'd see the day, in fact. I drove the 335i coupe AND that seemed ample, rational (well almost) and was a huge rush, especially at full throttle in second gear. It was also $40 something thousand dollars.

And, just like the upcoming 500+HP German cars, it came, conveniently, with the speeding tickets already in the glove compartment, which saves a lot of time.

I want to spend my money on more "content" not just on extra horses (even though it is an extra THREE HUNDRED horses.)

I want these cars to be better balanced, yea, that's what I want.

Why not put a 5 series out with the 3.0 turbo motor in it and just answer the phone "your order please?"

Naa, we'll have some 500+ HP waka waka zoom zoom German mobile with 1999 electronics and features instead.

:confuse:

esf · November 2006

Wow. Profound.

I had a 2.7T myself. It was a ton of fun to blast down the interstate in.

When it was off the lease (and brought in a paltry $16K at an auction), I drove the then-new A6 4.2, I was instantly disappointed.

Then I drove the S4 sedan. And then I drove the S4 sedan again. I thought about stealing it. For fun, we drove an S4 Cabriolet, because I was feeling frisky. It sold me on the spot, and my confidence in Audi was regained.

'06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG  '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet  '04 Lexus RX330

fonefixer · November 2006

I'm curious why you leased an Audi 2.7T on a 5-year lease. Sounds like the car worked out extremely well, but didn't you drive a leased vehicle for 2 years w/o any warranty? Seems to defeat part of the reason to lease in the first place.My Audi had a 3yr. 50,000 mile bumper to bumper warranty, and extensions could be purchased, but that was on a buy, not lease program.

Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles