High End Luxury Cars

v12power · March 2002

I agree on the fifty issue. I was just trying to illustrate that there are young hot bloods looking at these cars. My good friend just bought an AMG C36, the first factory AMG car here. I am wanting the next one, the C43 very badly. These cars absolutely rip! The newer auto transmissions are awfully quick and pretty smart. They do not hamper the performance anymore, just some of the involvement. I would still prefer the C43 over a similar year M3 just for the V8.

I definately shop MB and BMW against each other. BMW always wins for involvement, they are the only ones big into the manual trans market still. My recent experiences with poor quality led me to choose MB this last time. Oh, it was faster too!

ljflx · March 2002

Nealm1 - I remember reading in a business magazine article on autos that worldwide amg sales are in the teens - that's it. I think the number was 16,000-18,000. If I remember right the company only has several hundred employees. That's why I was also saying many posts back that very few MB cars have ABC. Yes ABC may be standard on many of those models but they are very few and very far between. If my salesman was accurate less than 10% of S-class buyers opt for it. I would assume he was excluding the S-600 where it is standard but that is also a low sales volume car. Sure it'll be an option on the E but I'd bet it sells in 1-2% of the E volume. How many people want to pay more for an E-class car than you'd pay for an S-430?

I also hope everyone remembers that AMG was acquired by MB and not built internally. I doubt it is very profitable because very few custom products,in any industry are. Syndicated products are always where the profits are made. If Lexus goes the tuned route it will be as a loss leader to draw in a younger crowd.

ljflx · March 2002

If memory serves me right MB's acquisition of AMG was simply a logical and, at least in my opinion, a very smart thing to do. Imagine building a brand with as great a name as MB has only to be trumped by a small tuning shop with your very own cars. You have to buy the company and bring it in house.

merc1 · March 2002

I think you missunderstood what I meant. What I'm saying is that sales of the RS6 aren't as important, hence the small numbers make good sense....it's the sales of the regular A6 models that are helped by having a car like the RS6 on board. Yes Audi has issues at the dealership level, but it's not as widespread as some would like you to believe. Your point about what Audi needs is almost correct....actually they need both...cars like the RS6, S8 etc and a good dealer body to compete with Mercedes-Benz, Lexus, BMW etc. The "profits" on the A6 range have probably been made already hence the very late arrivial of a car like the RS6. Profits are not everything, thats what I like about the European makes, they'll build the fun cars...profits not being the main priority, the cars are. Again, Audi will "profit" from those regular A6s that are sold, and at the same time the whold brand is strengthened. M, AMG and S cars are NOT about sales, thats what the regular models are for. These are specialty cars and specialty cars are....well the specialty of most European carmakers. Rare cars like the CL55, SL55, M5, Z8 and the like build the image of the brand which in turns opens the wallets. People who buy S500 with the AMG Sport package get a car that looks very similar to a S55, that has it's appeal. Trust me Mercedes-Benz, BMW and Audi don't build anything they can't make money on. Especially Mercedes-Benz.

I just don't think a person that likes a car like the LS430 will ever see the point of a RS6, M5, E55 etc....again nothing wrong with a Lexus, but the excitement is sorely missing.

ljflx,

Your numbers about AMG's production and employees *sounds* about right, from what I last read on AMG myself. However AMG may have just as well been in-house all along, the two guys that started AMG are former MB engineers. Complete MB ownership of AMG isn't complete until 2007. Mercedes is now working with Brabus (in secret). If you think AMG's cars are over the top check out some of Brabus' work.

M

ljflx · March 2002

I thought they bought it outright in 99. By the way owneship by former engineers doesn't ensure anything though I'm sure they had some key relationships. Remember that Compaq was started by former IBM execs.

Anyone pick-up volume of 7-series sales in February?

bernard1 · March 2002

I don't know if any european car manufacturers build fun cars today where profits are not the main priority. Look at Porsche, every major news release is all about profits.

I also think that people who like the LS/LX versions from Lexus can and do see the point of performace cars. Many of those owners own an M5, AMG or other perfomance auto. Lexus has won over lots of these owners because of their luxury/value.

merc1 · March 2002

Nope, not yet. They own a majority share, something like %60 right now with an increase every year until 2007.

M

ljflx · March 2002

Many high-end buyers like to mix luxury cars and sport cars. The old MB cars were never performance oriented cars nor is a base S-class car much of a performer though it's more so than past generation ones. Yet in the past how often would you see those same owners have a Porsche or an SL or even a Vette in their garages or in their second home. It's a joke for anyone to think an LS430 buyer isn't into or wouldn't appreciate a performance car. But you buy based on your priorities. Luxury, a spectacular ride and reliability are more important to me than performance particularly when you have kids in the car most of time. When I'm driving alone, it's in a NY area rush hour 90% of the time - so good luck being able to have fun in those moments. Lexus scores as high on the scale as possible in my priorities and I'm sure that's the case for most LS430 owners. Given this customer base is mainly $250k per year and up the value side is a nice extra but by no means the main reason you buy the car. Remember how it was impossible to get your hands on a $71k ultra when these cars first came out.

bernard1 · March 2002

I'm not sure what you are trying to tell me. We seem to agree that most Lexus owners appreciate perfomance auto's in addition to luxury autos. I also agree that now and in the past, many luxury car owners also had a perfomance car. I remembe when MB cars were considered a perfomance sedan in the 70's when Cadillac/Contenintal was still king of the road and truly floated like a boat. In fact there were very few large sedans in America at that time that could compete with a 450 SEL or SE.

I don't know where the 250K base comes from or why it would matter especially with leases as popluar as they are. When the LS first appeared (they were termed Near luxury) a lot of previous MBZ & BMW owners started buying them, one of the reasons they would give at the time was "We saved 30K". This was not a reference to their ability to afford the additional 30K, but that they got everything they wanted/required in the LS and they didn't spend the additional 30K, on the S class.

bernard1 · March 2002

One execellent point you make and that is reliability. Lexus has certainly proven it's reliability and has forced MB and BMW to improve their warranties, service and treatment of customers. We own all 3 makes and it's truly a different feel when you go into a Lexus dealership for service. The others are doing better and are really making an effort but they have a way to go to catch Lexus in this area.

ljflx · March 2002

My point was that LS430 buyers are not buying because of value - it's a side benefit and a wonderful one at that. I agree with your point completely on the performance issue re the typical Lexus buyer. Historically, and today as well, only a tiny handful of those buyers who can afford whatever cars they want will restrict their purchases to performance cars.

ljflx · March 2002

As I was driving by the local MB dealership today (BTW it's a MB and Honda dealership - how's that for a combo) I saw the big auto truck off-loading all new SL's. That's all he had loaded on the truck. Definitely a stunning car. Must say I wouldn't mind having one now that I've seen it in the flesh. And unlike the 7 it doesn't matter what color it's in.

You see I can be objective.

I've driven the SC430 and it rides beautifully. I'd love to see how the SL rides. If I get a chance to I'll let you know.

BTW - I've always seen Lexus as standalone dealerships but my business trips are always big city trips. Have you ever seen them in combination with other makes anywhere?

pat · March 2002

Some of you have suggested that we combine this discussion and the other High End Luxury conversation. It's done, we'll continue here.

I had an excellent suggestion for a better name for this discussion that could encompass any number of high end vehicles, so I've gone ahead and renamed this one.

Thanks - have fun!

Pat
Host
Sedans Message Board

merc1 · March 2002

I always knew you could be objective, though the SL is an undeniable car. The SC430 will probably have a "softer" ride than the SL500, at the expense of handling. Yeah a Honda/MB combo is odd since in the Chicago area Honda is almost always a stand alone franchise. Interesting. I did a lot of study on Lexus back in 1988-1989 because I always get caught up in the hoopla of a new brand being launced, and when the Japanese decided to truly enter the game I was most interested. I digress, every Lexus dealership has to be a stand alone affair, it's written into their agreement. In the Chicago area, there are a few Toyota/Lexus combos, but they have seperate sales, service, everything, though many times the Lexus store is only a short walk down the same sidewalk. I dont' know if this has been changed (which I doubt), but anyone wanting a Lexus franchise must provide "exclusive" Lexus facilities.

M

nealm1 · March 2002

" Profits are not everything, thats what I like about the European makes, they'll build the fun cars...profits not being the main priority, the cars are."

Do you really believe that about MB, Audi and BMW? Either I am much too cynical or you are much too naive.

bernard1 · March 2002

Have you read any of Porsche's recent press releases? Everything centers around profits. They will not make a car for fun if there are no major league profits.

ljflx · March 2002

If MB had taken Lexus as seriously as you did they might have knocked them out of the box before they really got rolling. Maybe they thought they would have been another Acura.

Got my MT in the mail today and I briefly looked at the article of MB AMG vs. BMW M. In each case MT opts for the BMW and I must say in each case I'd take the MB. But I do think both should put a halt to the tuned trucks before people start killing themselves in those things. I saw an X-5 lose control on a curve in the rain last week and take out a guard rail. Luckily the only things damaged were the guard rail and the truck. The latter looked like its road days were over.

bobbyknight · March 2002

LOL! Isn't the X5 supposed to be an "off-road" vehicle yet couldn't cut it in the rain? I never saw the point in the X5 anyway. Still looking for why the Porsche Cayenne even exists.

I never understood why BMW touted their X5's handling around an autocross track. If you wanted something that handled like a car then why don't you buy a car instead. Plus, a 5-series wagon has more cargo room inside.

Go Hoosiers!!

merc1 · March 2002

Of course they're aim is to make money, but these cars like the RS6, M3 are also expensive to develop and usually don't make as much money as say a regular A6 or 3-Series model. Is that clearer? A car like a RS6 exists and is driven more so by passion than the balance sheet.
bernard1,

Yep I have, but again...see what I said above. Porsche's GT2 is not for profits primarily it's to prove superiority on the track....while making a profit. The regular 911' s generate the real revenue. What you just stated about them not making a car unless it's profitable is what I stated several posts ago.

Guys, I'm not saying that profits aren't important, because they are. However the European companys are just as driven by making a hell of a car too. The Japanese tend to limit themselves to mainstream products with profits/sales being the #1 reason for their being.

ljflx,

Well who knows on that one. Some say Mercedes did take Lexus seriously in the beginning some say they didn't. I do know that Mercedes was in better shape than either BMW (no V8's at all) or Jaguar at the time to deal with Lexus. Lexus also aimed a lot higher than Acura did too. The Acura Legend of 1986 got creamed by the also new 300E at the time, so Acura didn't really aspire to be at the same level as Mercedes-Benz. They didn't truly have a real "luxury" car until the second generation Legend came in 1991. The first generation legend was barely a step up from a Maxima at the time. Hardly at the level of the first LS400.

M

bobbyknight · March 2002

I hear what your saying and agree with you. If audi was all about profits and sales they would bring over the A3 than produce and certify 500-1000 RS6's.

Acura did the exact same thing to the established luxury marques that lexus did. When the legend came out in 1986, it was just as good as the 300E for almost half the price. Do you guys realize that a late '80s, early '90s 300E was going close to 50K when new? That's amazing! BTW, if you think the '86 legend was anything like a '86 Maxima, I want you to go back and take a look at some Maxima pictures. Also, Acura had the best dealers and customer service at the time.

merc1 · March 2002

I seem to remember a comaparison between the 300E, STS and Legend, the 300E easily walked away from them both. The Legend was no where near being as good as the 300E. What I was saying about the Legend versus the Maxima is that it had precious little (if anything) to make it any better than the Maxima at the time, especially when the 1989 Maxima arrived. I did say Acura did the same thing as Lexus, but they clearly didn't aim as high.

You're right about the 300E, the 1993 model was $49,900, with far less equipment than today's $49,115 E320. That is amazing. I was just thinking, the 1990 500SL debuted at $83,500 and the 2003 SL500 is only $86,665.

M

bobbyknight · March 2002

Yeah, I remember the March 1993 issue of C&D (off the top of my head) that compared the LS400, XJ6, 400E, 740i, and the V8 quattro. The 400E had a price of (Gasp!)61K if I can remember correctly. It would be difficult to option out a E430 to be that much. That IS amazing. Since MB had no competition back in the late '90s they could charge whatever they wanted for their cars and I'm sure they were raking in the profits.

Just think what you are getting now in comparison to in 1990. I wonder what that 61K 400E would cost adjusting for inflation.

gsenthil · March 2002

Some more info on AMGs- seems its true that MB will complete its ownership of AMG in 2009

http://forums.mbnz.org/forums/r170/vthread.asp?messid=57795

Senthil

bernard1 · March 2002

In the late 80's, the price of all E and S class MB's were higher but they had better quality. Vault tight. MB reduced their prices, eliminated most of the bargaining from list price and reduced the quality. Check out BMW, some of there list prices exceed the price of competing model from MB. Lexus forced MB to reduce their price but has had very little effect on BMW. In the late 90's a S500 was about 88K with increases each year. How many cars were they going to sell when those cars hit 100K. They had to reduce their price and still they are about 15K more than the Lexus. Also as the quality has come down, lots of MB owners moved to BMW who's quality was goin up.

No, the X5 is not supposed to be an "off road" Vehicle. The X5 was made to generate additional profits. BMW offers an SAV, emphasis on sport, AWD for light snow, and better traction. It does out handle (on road) the other SUV's and is more fun to drive. It is short on off road abilities and space so we don't expect it to compete with our LX.

Porsche admits the Cayenne is to do the same and keep them independent. In fact the first year's production of the Cayenne will be 1/3 of their total auto production for the year. With plans to expand to 50% of their total auto production within 2 yrs.

merc1 - Porsche has decided that they will produce their new super car. But that decision wasn't made until they received X amount of committed orders to insure they made money. Porsche didn't hide this fact, they said up front, no orders no car. Don't get me wrong, I love the cars that are perfomance based, but if there were no profits to be had, those perfomance cars would not be made in todays market even if it does bring braging rights. In the past, it was about the cars but most of those makers are out of business or have sold out to larger firms like GM, Fiat and Ford.

BMW doesn't sell many M5's but they have sold every one they can produce and the profit margin on the M5 is more than that of a 530i or 540i.

bobbyknight · March 2002

Of course Lexus got BMW's attention. That's why for 1993 they brought out the 740 for 735 money (which by the way was 400E money). The 7-series was considerably more car than the 400E, yet the pricing was similar. This proves that MB's pricing was out of control. Pricing for the 5-series has grown little to it's present version, along with the present E-Class.

There is no doubt that MB in the late 80s and early 90s had HUGE profit margins on their cars. For 1994, MB reduced the pricing for their E-Class by 10K, and the cars were essentially the same.

You're right, the X5 is not an off-road vehicle, but essentially an any-road vehicle. I still don't understand the point of the X5 other than to generate profits. The Cayenne is going to totally tarnish Porsche's image, plus will be a huge failure once the hype dies down. Serves them right if you ask me.

bernard1 · March 2002

Yep the X5 was to just generate profits. But it is fun to drive and works in the snow. It's still a debate if the Cayenne is going to tarnish the Porsche image but I have a feeling it will sell if they price it right.

I'm looking forward to a new Audi S8. I will probably not buy another S class. I didn't have any problems with my previous ones but the news do not seem to offer that vault like substance. If Audi produces a technology leading S8 with a new budy style and maintain the AWD, I'll put it my garage instead of that 745il.

I don't know if Lexus got BMW's attention when it comes to pricing. BMW is selling perfomance which they have no problems telling the world that Lexus can't match them. The 740 is BMW's answer to the S, and they maintained about the same distance in price below the S with the 740 as they did with the 735. Not to mention they stayed about the same $$ above Lexus. In fact in 1993 the LS was still considered "near luxury" and were not an honest threat to MB or BMW. The LS was bearly 3 yrs old.

In the service area, Lexus made them both take notice. Both MB and BMW have improved and offers full maintenance warranties where Lexus doesn't anymore.

Lexus has done a great job I just wish they would work on a fresh idea for the exterior of the LS.

While our Lexus is very luxurious it just doesn't excite me like our European cars.

ljflx · March 2002

If I remember right the LS400 was originally viewed as competition to the E-420/430. In fact on the 95 questionaire as a follow-up to a purchase or lease they asked you what other cars you considered. You didn't have to put E-430 as they already had put it in for you. All you had to do was put an x and list any other cars you also may have looked at. It was the 98 model that started the push to compete with the S and the 2001 that really accelerated it further.

In the bull market of the 90's many people would have been able to afford $100k S-500's. MB had to do something with price, not so much because it was getting too high but because of the big economic difference it had to cars that were winning such high reliability scores and renewing virtually every customer on a new car purchase. If Lexus isn't there MB does not cut prices. The price/value today vs. 1990 is all due to competition. Does anyone really think otherwise?

bobbyknight · March 2002

The 400E was a pipe dream in 1990. When the LS400/Q45 was introduced, the 300E had a 177hp/3 liter compared to a 250hp/4 liter V8 of the LS400 for about 10K less. The LS400 offered the horsepower and luxury of a 560SEL for much less than an E-CLass. Kind of makes you wonder what the MB executives were thinking in 1990!

bernard: BMW's didn't have the same pricing problem as MB did when the Japanese duo came out. A BMW 525i was still reasonably priced compared to it's eqivalent MB. The 5-series was priced similar to the smaller and less powerful 190E 2.6. Lexus and Infiniti did have an impact on the product, V8s became the norm for the 5 and 7 series not long after lexus entered the picture. Don't know if that was directly because of Lexus or not, but it does seem like a interesting coincidence.

merc1 · March 2002

I kinda like the Z4, oh well.

To all: Have a Happy Thanksgiving.

M

merc1 · March 2002

You're missing the point about profits. What you've just stated about the Carrera GT is common sense, orders = car. My point is that Japanese companies wouldn't even bother with a car like the Carrera GT. The Japanese wouldn't see the point of a car like a M5 or Carrera GT, though they have the ability to produce such cars. I would doubt that about the profit margin on the M5, because a loaded 540i is only 10K less, the M5's engine is way more expensive to build than the 540i's. I would think they make more money on a loaded 530i or 525i.

bobbyknight,

Yep the 400E was hugely expensive, the 500E (probably my favorite 4-door Benz of all time) was $80K at the time. The 400E was just a stopgap effort to compete with the LS400 of the time. The W124 chassis was an expensive one, and you could tell....even GM admitted that is was the most solid car built during it's day. These cars are still reguarded by many Benz fans as the best "E" Mercedes ever made. I can't take a definite stance on that opinion, though I think the current W210 E is not as well made structurally or in some of the cabin materials.

Yes Lexus did force the value issue, MB lowered prices in 1994 for the first time in over 100+ years of carmaking. Monumental change indeed. BMW has had performance as their isolation from Lexus, many still don't cross shop the two for this very reason. Mercedes' cars philosphy wise sit in the middle of the two, the most difficult place to be.

M

bobbyknight · March 2002

The 500E was an incredible car, wasn't it engineered by Porsche? That car was the ultimate sleeper.

It wasn't so much that BMW chose their isolation from lexus in that Lexus chose MB as their benchmark.

I might have to agree with you on the margins of the M5 compared to a loaded 540i, that 5 liter is full of expensive technology but I'm sure that engine doesn't cost BMW 10K more to produce.

merc1 · March 2002

Yes it was an incredible car! Yep it was built/tested/tweaked by Porsche. Automobile called it the best car in the world "by which we will judge all automobiles". If I didn't need a "new" car this would be the used Benz of choice, a 1994 model (E500) that is.

True about Lexus and their benchmark target, that's another way of putting it. But you have to admit that BMW's performance angle has spared them direct comparisions with Lexus until the GS400 came along.

Not really sure about the M5 compared to the other 5-series cars. I suspect that type of info isn't available on the web anywhere.

M

bernard1 · March 2002

Maybe I'm missing the point but from what I remember the Japanesse makes a little low sales volume sports car by Acura, Yes? So, they also make cars that are performace based while full well knowing the volume of sales for that car will be low. In 1970 the first Z car hit the US shores, and that was also a fun performance oriented car and it came at a time when no one would have thought Japan would have produced a sports car. They took the risk. Europeans make certain cars for perfomance sake, what II'm saying is hat today it's all about profit. Since I have perfomance based cars I'm glad they do. I use Porsche as my gauge as they make more $$ per auto then any other manufacturer and they are not always ahead of their competition.

I think you may have missed my point about the GT. Sure orders= cars, but rarely has a car company stated that they would not build a car unless they had confirmed orders to insure a profit. The Cayenne, Porsche's new love was designed, engineered and ready to be built before the first order was taken. Most manufactures do the same. I'm just pointing out that while the Europeans believe in perfomance based auto's, profit are now the prime motavator, having the fastest car, etc. etc, is icing on the cake.

Actually a fully loaded 540i 6 sp is 12K and change less than a fully loaded M5 and when you actually purchase it, the difference is even more as you can get reasonable discounts on the 540i. Additionally there is not 12K difference in price on the engine. Something else to consider, very few people buy a fully loaded 540 simply because they don't want some of the extras. Those extras bring profit, the M5 comes with most everything standard, so there is a little extra built in.

You are correct about BMW not having to deal head to head with Lexus until the GS400 came along . Can't speak of the pricing of the 525 vs 190 as I've never owned or even price one of those. Lexus may have had some influence on the V8's at BMW, I don't know, but I know that the 7 series came out as their MB fighter but was deemed under powered.

bobbyknight · March 2002

I think you guys are both right. Sure, every manufacturer is out to make profits, but BMW, Porsche, Audi, Acura, etc. also cater to the consumer by bringing out low volume performance cars. They could aways sell something else to make more profit like bringing the Audi A3 over instead of the RS6(which they are bringing over only 850 units). On the flipside, if manufacturers didn't care about profits then they would be giving cars away. Its not all about profits, its also about giving the consumer what they want.

bernard1 · March 2002

Your're right. I sure wish Porsche would listen and give a little more hp for the $$.

For now, I will attempt to patiently wait for Audi's new S8 and hopefully will not be disappointed when it's released.

What do you guys think of BMW's leap in technology and how Lexus, Audi, MB will follow up?

hungrywhale · March 2002

Outside of the regular Boxster, every single Porsche I'm aware of does 0-60 in 5.5 seconds or less (Boxster S being the slowest at around 5.5).

In my world, that's plenty fast. If you want speed but don't want to drop $70-80k on a car, buy a Corvette. That's why they make them. For people who want Porsche performance without paying for it.

bobbyknight · March 2002

Don't get me wrong, I like the 745i, but I think that time will be a b!tch for it. The gadgets will date this car and I believe hurt its reliablity. I can almost guarantee that there are going to be expensive electrical problems to deal with in the future. Also, resale value will really suffer because of the added complexity.

S8 is pretty sweet!

merc1 · March 2002

I'd have to disagree about the Acura NSX, the car is rare because it's 10+ years old and just doesn't sell. Acura has stated many times that they would love to import more of these. The NSX sold very well between 1991-1993, but after that it's been downhill. I'ts not a rare car by choice.

Well I guess we'll never know about the profit margins on the 5-Series BMW models, but It really doesn't matter what the buyer gets the car for, the only money BMW sees is the money the dealer pays to get the car. I still think the M5's engine eats up more profit on the M5 than the 525i's does. But you/me/we don't have any proof anyway, but it would interesting to find out.

On the Porsche Carrera GT. Cars are shown to the public to gauge reaction all the time and companys often base their production plans on who many orders or inquirys they get on a car, so I don't know what you mean there. Ford just did the same thing with the GT40.

I'm impressed with BMW and Mercedes' push for technology. The only thing really "wrong" with the new 7-Series is the styling. BMW really is rethinking engine and suspension design, I like that. Mercedes has been all about brakes and suspensions lately, I waiting to see their next generation of direct injection, 4-valve gas engines, due in 2004, I think. I think idrive may be a little ahead of it's time, hopefully they won't make it standard on the next 5-Series. Mercedes is turning over development of the next Comand system to Nokia. Should be interesting, though I've never had a Nokia phone (Sanyo) to know how they think. BMW hit MB with pricing like Lexus did, just one year though....the 525i was priced at $34,900, that same as the 190E 2.6.

M

bobbyknight · March 2002

Don't get me wrong, I like the 745i, but I think that time will be a b!tch for it. The gadgets will date this car and I believe hurt its reliablity. I can almost guarantee that there are going to be expensive electrical problems to deal with in the future. Also, resale value will really suffer because of the added complexity.

S8 is pretty sweet!

bernard1 · March 2002

You may be right about the gadgets. BMW's gadgets have not been the most reliable. Even their auto tilt steering wheels have had numerous problems.

Merc1 - I'm not too impressed with the 7's styling either but as most thing do, I believe it grows on us. The new 5's will have the basic same style as the 7, don't know about the Idrive but I think BMW is pushing for a standard. Remember with the E-class fist came out with oval headlights? For MB that was a major departure and created a stir. After awhile most people loved it and the E is the most successful selling car in it's class ever. Admittedly I'm still waiting for the latest S class to grow on me to replace my previous generation, but it hasn't yet. Which is why I've move to BMW and now thinking of giving Audi a shot.

bobbyknight · March 2002

It funny, but when the 745 wears the standard 18inch (huge in its own right) wheels the car looks bloated and weird proportioned. But when the car has the optional 19inch wheels, the car looks beautifully aggressive. But then again there are not many cars that wouldn't look good in 19inch wheels.

On that note, there is a silver Audi TT 225quattro (I can tell by the dual tailpipes) with 19 or 20 inch BBS wheels driving around campus, and it was probably the most beautiful car I have ever seen

merc1 · March 2002

Speaking of which, I saw one today in silver with the 19" wheels, it's a stunning car, caused a few people at the stoplight to do a double take. I think the car will be fine. Chris Bangle may have been on to something here. Bobby, yes the cars many electrical systems would make me think twice about buying a used one down the road, but then again it may not be any worse than the current 7-Series, it too had electrical problems.

M

wishnhigh1 · March 2002

I think the cars more centralized computer system will actually improve electrical reliability.

bobbyknight · March 2002

Isn't the new 7 the first car with 42V(I'm guessing) electrical system? I would think that changing to a new standard(eventually all cars will convert) will eventually take its toll on the reliability of the components, since all systems needed to be redesigned to fit the new standard.

Is this truth or did the elf tell me this in a dream last night?

wishnhigh1 · March 2002

the new S500 is the car that is debuting 48V technology...If I remember correctly.

nealm1 · April 2002

Had my first real chance to look at the 7 in person last weekend (2 actually, a silver and a black). I still haven't driven, or even been inside, the car, so true evaluation wil have to wait.

My impressions on styling alone? I am wildly ambivalent about this car. The interior is orders of magnitude better looking than the prior 7, which (unlike the elegant exterior) had become hopelessly dated. I really like the apparent (deceptive?) simplicity of the design. The cost paid for that (idrive) may well be too high, but the look is an enormous improvement. Much nicer, IMHO, than the S or the A8, and on par with the Lexus, although in an entirely different, more extroverted style.

Outside, the side aspect is graceful and satisfying, if a bit derivative of the 6, the passat, and a handful of other german sedans. Nothing new or breathtaking, but certainly no turn off. (I still don't know what they were thinking with the crease running through the doors, though) The front of the car -- even with the busy grill/light clusters -- does not bother me in person the way it did in print. I could certainly learn to live with it (as I have the questionable design of the LS430 headlights).

The rear, as many here have said, is an entirely different matter. Dark colors, light colors, in person or in a mag, it is just plain ugly. There are so many ideas and design elements competing for attention that it becomes a jumbled mess. I have said before, and this in-person inspection confirmed, that it looks as if the rear quarters and trunk were assembled from spare parts from 6 different model years of the same car; all the pieces fit mechanically but don't look as if they came from the same car. I don't think I would ever get used to that, and would not buy the car for that reason alone (although I suspect that I would not like idrive, and that would probably keep me from buying anyway).

My guess is that they are aggressively working as we speak on a facelift for the rear, to bow next year or the year after. I also guess that they will try to find a way to make idrive an option before too long. I hope I am right on both (and I hope the car proves reliable), since I would like to be able to consider the car when I am ready to trade out of the LS430.

pathdoc · April 2002

I have driven the car and find the major problem not the iDrive or the appearance but rather the shifter. I enjoy using the shifter and the new steering column mounted device on the 745i is terrible. Since steptronic isn't offer in the US (in order to avoid gas guzzler tax) it precludes shifting up and down as indicated. This seems strange in the "ultimate DRIVING machine". Supposedly it will be available in the sport model when it is available. I hope so because otherwise it is a very impressive drive.

v12power · April 2002

They have some issues as well. The keyless entry is not working, you need to stand right next to the car to get it to work. The i-drive is crashing, what else would you expect of a "windows" based system. I am EXTREMELY pleased that I did not replace my 750iL with the new model. My '01 S600 is an awesome car, it shames the 750 and new 745i. I can'timagine any other company in the world releasing such an ugly car with so many initial problems. BMW has some incredible loyalty out there. The 750 is my fourth BMW but, if they continue along the path of the 745 it will surely be my last.

ljflx · April 2002

Where are you hearing/reading about all the problems with the new 7. I haven't seen anything in writing anywhere, not that I doubt you for a second given your knowledge base. I do agree completely with you that the car is a bad looker and tried to conquer the universe with ridiculous electronics. Never go it alone in technology and until they abandon I-drive that is where BMW will find itself.

v12power · April 2002

It is coming from new owners on the roadfly.com bimmer boards. Be careful over there if you go, it is a bit of a "pit of vipers" at times. People are soooo polarized over this new car they can hardly speak intelligently on either side. I am sure there are owners that like their new 745s, even though they are admitting they have a number of issues. Then there is the group that rightfully expects better from a $70k+ new car. Those problems along with the styling is more than I would tolerate.

High End Luxury Cars

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles