Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Most popular vehicles
Popular New Cars
- New Acura MDX
- New Acura RDX
- New Audi Q5
- New BMW 3 Series
- New BMW X3
- New Buick Enclave
- New Cadillac Escalade
- New Chevrolet Equinox
- New Chrysler 300
- New Dodge Challenger
- New Ford Edge
- New Ford Escape
- New Ford Expedition
- New Ford Explorer
- New Ford F-150
- New Ford Focus
- New Ford Mustang
- New Honda Accord
- New Honda Civic
- New Honda CR-V
- New Honda Fit
- New Honda Odyssey
- New Honda Pilot
- New Hyundai Elantra
- New Hyundai Santa Fe
- New Hyundai Sonata
- New Hyundai Tucson
- New Jeep Compass
- New Jeep Grand Cherokee
- New Jeep Wrangler
- New Mazda 3
- New Mazda 6
- New Mazda CX-5
- New Nissan Altima
- New Nissan Maxima
- New Nissan Rogue
- New Porsche Cayenne
- New Ram 1500
- New Subaru Crosstrek
- New Subaru Forester
- New Subaru Impreza
- New Subaru Outback
- New Tesla Model S
- New Tesla Model X
- New Toyota 4Runner
- New Toyota Camry
- New Toyota Corolla
- New Toyota Highlander
- New Toyota Prius
- New Toyota RAV4
- New Toyota Sienna
- New Toyota Tacoma
- New Volkswagen Jetta
- New Volvo XC60
- New Volvo XC90
Popular Used Sedans
- Used BMW 5 Series
- Used Chevrolet Impala
- Used Chevrolet Malibu
- Used Chrysler 200
- Used Dodge Charger
- Used Ford Fusion
- Used Ford Taurus
- Used Honda Accord
- Used Honda Civic
- Used Hyundai Elantra
- Used Hyundai Sonata
- Used Tesla Model S
- Used Toyota Camry
- Used Toyota Corolla
- Used Volkswagen Jetta
Popular Used SUVs
- Used Acura MDX
- Used Acura RDX
- Used Ford Edge
- Used Ford Explorer
- Used Honda CR-V
- Used Honda Pilot
- Used Hyundai Santa Fe
- Used Jeep Compass
- Used Lincoln Navigator
- Used Mazda CX-5
- Used Nissan Rogue
- Used Subaru Crosstrek
- Used Subaru Forester
- Used Tesla Model X
- Used Volvo XC90
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Message well received..I'm no expert on AWD, hence I defer to your expertise..All I am saying is that a set of snow tires will make an RWD sufficient for winter driving. It's worked for me from everything from a Mercury to a Lexus.
I think the reliability issues really do center around the Electronics issue. Cars continue to get more complicated (Needlessly IMHO), and the Japanese have the edge in this arena. You can't deny that MB has taken a hit in reliability across the board. I find it unacceptable to have defects in a $50K+ sedan. I suppose if you're conditioned to occasional service visits then I wouldn't hesitate to buy an Euro brand. I'm very impatient in this regard, hence I drive a LS400/430.
As per the mileage argument..How many owners actually keep their cars that long? At my Lexus dealership I'm one of the few original owners who still has a 90-92 LS. With the advent of Leasing I doubt the original owner even keeps the car that long. I usually trade in a 5 yr cycle, corresponding with major model changes..It really depends on duration. I'd never keep an Euro brand car for 10+ yrs as I've done with my LS400..
SV
If Mercedes free maintanence is costing them so much money that they have to drop it only a few years after implementing it, that tells you something about M-B perceived "quality" right there.
Topspin, if your looking at A6, you should also consider the GS, M, and RL, all of which will offer AWD just like Audi.
My colleague's wife paid $53K for that '03 E320 and it is a shame that it had to spend 3 months, with less than 4000miles on the odo, before MB would figure what was wrong and implement a fix. What would you do if you find yourself in that scenario ? A $53K car with <4000miles and in only 4 months of ownership won't start repeatedly and no one seems to know why ? Personally, I won't ever own such a car regardless of how great it is. I'll have MB take it off my hands and give me back my money.
Give me a break. The 3 valve per cylinder SOHC you're denigrating was one of Ward's Top 10 engines.
Using one less valve per cylinder and one less cam per wing of the V gave MB the room to put an extra spark plug in the engine, which makes more efficient fuel combustion and reduces emissions. That's very creative.
MB's 3 valve per cylinder, SOHC, dual spark plug v6 was also the only v6 on Ward's 10 Best that was a 90 degree v6.
MB's research into the use of dual spark plugs was then incorporated by Chrysler's Hemi engineers to make another Ward's 10 Best, the Hemi engine.
Honda's v6s are SOHC and they're as good as any DOHC v6 out there. So now you have 2 quality companies that haven't gone the traditional DOHC route and yet have done just fine.
There are several ways of designing effective engines, each with its relative strengths and weaknesses.
I applaud MB for taking a different and INNOVATIVE approach to designing and building an award winning power plant.
All types ridiculousness. The ES330 and E-Class taking the award for being the most so.
saugatak,
Comments like that about MB's engine designs make you wonder if they even knew that Mercedes did the whole DOHC-VVT thing back in the early nineties up until 1998. They might actually think that this is Mercedes' first attempt at such an engine design. This isn't the first time such an incorrect assumption has been made on this board. This board is very different from the News and Views boards. This is where the sales numbers, JDP, WSJ, Edmunds' spec comparator and CR write the rules. Engine design, handling, feel, styling and anything else car-like doesn't matter and really isn't understood by most (not all though). It could look and drive like an Amana freezer, long as it is gets the nod from the WSJ, CR, and JDP.
lexusguy,
Someone tried to imply that before about Mercedes' safety innovations not working due to some kind of electronic fault, but never provided anything factual. I've never heard of one instance of a Mercedes or any other brand's safety devices not working, but if you have some proof of this due tell.
M
Obviously they didn't. More importantly, it makes you wonder if they've ever driven an MB powered by the motor they're criticizing.
Unfortunately, I think MB (and every other luxury car company) has no choice but to go with DOHC, 4 vavles per cylinder and continuous VVT on intake and exhaust as anything other than that draws automatic and unjustified criticism in the lux. car market.
Idrive is something altogether different. The safety tech is no where near as razzle-dazzle as Idrive.
saugatak,
Yep they all have to play that game now.
M
Because it's a mercedes or because it's a good engine? Unfortunately/fotunately trade journals/panels often reserve a spot for past winners (like the last gold medalist automaticly get a spot in the finals)
Using one less valve per cylinder and one less cam per wing of the V gave MB the room to put an extra spark plug in the engine, which makes more efficient fuel combustion and reduces emissions. That's very creative.
That must be why the the 3.2 liter MB consumes more fule than the 3.3 liter Toyota and not meeting ULEV standards whereas the Toyota does. That must be why MB is finally replacing the 3-valv/2-spark engines with 4-valve engines in the upcoming lineup.
MB's 3 valve per cylinder, SOHC, dual spark plug v6 was also the only v6 on Ward's 10 Best that was a 90 degree v6.
Being 90 degree unit is a cost-saving meassure because the block is a chop-off of a V8. In other words, it's hardly a point worth bragging.
Honda's v6s are SOHC and they're as good as any DOHC v6 out there. So now you have 2 quality companies that haven't gone the traditional DOHC route and yet have done just fine.
Honda uses the SOHC on family sedans for the low-cost markets like the Accord V6 for North America (the Euro Accord is sold here as Acura TSX, costing more than the North America V6 Accord even having only a DOHC I4). Honda puts a DOHC V6 in the NSX. That goes to show you where SOHC engines belong nowadays (cost savings); it's a damn shame that MB still puts those (and have one less valve than even the Accord V6) in a car that costs twice as much as an Accord V6 (E series, where the most frequent useage of 3.2 V6 is found)
There are several ways of designing effective engines, each with its relative strengths and weaknesses. I applaud MB for taking a different and INNOVATIVE approach to designing and building an award winning power plant.
Did they win on name brand, or low-cost? The MB 90degree 3-valve twin-spark V6 certainly is not a smooth running engine, compared to either the Toyota VVTi V6's or even the Honda SOHC V6's, and make significantly less power than either Japanese competition. No wonder MB is finally moving to 4-valve designs in the near future.
By that logic, no V8 is worth bragging about, since they're merely two very pedestrian I4s put together, right? And indeed they are.
I find it somewhat sad that the basic engine design choices no longer much reflect some brand philosophy, but are merely dictated by baby-boomers naive belief that a V8 is the best engine design out there, simply 'cause they lusted after some big V8 as teenagers. A well designed I6 has better natural balance.
But the car world is poorer because customers seemingly believe that an engine with more acronyms and valves and cylinders is necessarily better. I'd have a blown Bentley 6.8 any time of the day, ancient as it is in design, and I actually prefer the Beemer I6 toi any of their V8s. Incidentally, the old Jaguar I6 engine was smoother than the V8 it was replaced with due to buyer pressure. I know 'cause I had them both.
The 3.3L Toyota V6 is brand new compared to the Mercedes SOHC engine designs came out in 1997 for 1998 models. Everything changes and technology moves one hence Mercedes like anyone else is updating their engines after 6+ years on the market.
To say that 3.2L V6 in say the E320 is not a smooth running engine is complete bs. That engine and the 5 speed automatic it is attached to is one of the smoothest V6 powertrains around. The bottom line is that these engines got the job done and back in 1998 when they were introduced they were seen as a refreshing change from the norm of the day. Is it time for them to be replaced, certainly.
You're right about the V6 and V8 sharing the same design and block construction for cost reasons, I'll give you that. BTW, the 45K Acura RL uses a SOHC engine also so SOHC designs aren't limited to all Accord-based models at Honda.
You do realize that Mercedes has done DOHC, Variable-valve-timed engines before right?
Lastly if you look at Ward's list of engines they range from GM to Ford to BMW to Toyota, they aren't biased to certain brand names.
M
M
M
M
M
albeit most _are_ ;-)
The 3.3L Toyota V6 is brand new compared to the Mercedes SOHC engine designs came out in 1997 for 1998 models. Everything changes and technology moves one hence Mercedes like anyone else is updating their engines after 6+ years on the market.
But even the 3.0 in the last iteration was DOHC VVTi as well; that had been around since the late 90's. MB is a generation or two behind the curve, which was exactly my main point.
To say that 3.2L V6 in say the E320 is not a smooth running engine is complete bs. That engine and the 5 speed automatic it is attached to is one of the smoothest V6 powertrains around.
Not compared to the Toyota V6 offerings costing little more than half as much.
The bottom line is that these engines got the job done and back in 1998 when they were introduced
Only in the sense that it was adequate to get the not-so-auto-literate buy into "cheap" MB offerings with behind-the-curve engineering and sub-par quality control . . .; i.e. getting a snow job done. Needless to say, a large number of disgruntled ex-MB owners was created within a few years.
You're right about the V6 and V8 sharing the same design and block construction for cost reasons, I'll give you that. BTW, the 45K Acura RL uses a SOHC engine also so SOHC designs aren't limited to all Accord-based models at Honda.
Nobody pays 45k for an RL (not yet anyway). Those cars are heavily discounted precisely because they are fundamentally derived from the Accord, FWD and all. People buy RL's for reliability and good value; for that, the 3.5 SOHC derived from the Accord 3.0 SOHC does just fine.
You do realize that Mercedes has done DOHC, Variable-valve-timed engines before right?
Then Mercedes was gripped by the same sort of bean counter machination as Caddies were in the 70's and 80's.
Lastly if you look at Ward's list of engines they range from GM to Ford to BMW to Toyota, they aren't biased to certain brand names.
As a trade journal, Ward's tends to reserve a slot for each major so as not to offend anyone. So it's pretty much redundent to preclaim that MB has an engine in the top 10 by Ward's; even lowly Chevy has that.
"But even the 3.0 in the last iteration was DOHC VVTi as well; that had been around since the late 90's. MB is a generation or two behind the curve, which was exactly my main point."
They had just retired their DOHC-VVT engines in 1997. It isn't like they hadn't done it before or couldn't they just changed directions, unlike what you're trying to imply here. They'd already been there and done that. Behind the curve isn't right, try they had already gone through it.
"Not compared to the Toyota V6 offerings costing little more than half as much."
Totally disagree, so we'll have to agree to disagree on that one.
"Only in the sense that it was adequate to get the not-so-auto-literate buy into "cheap" MB offerings with behind-the-curve engineering and sub-par quality control . . .; i.e. getting a snow job done. Needless to say, a large number of disgruntled ex-MB owners was created within a few years."
These ex-MB owners were disgruntled over these engines? You'll surely have to prove that one. Mercedes has its problems but engines isn't one of them. Like I said before I think you're too caught up on stats in this instance because these engines got the job done and the industry (the same one that pats Lexus on the back for quality) ranked these engines as being some of the best around, at the time of introduction.
"Nobody pays 45k for an RL (not yet anyway). Those cars are heavily discounted precisely because they are fundamentally derived from the Accord, FWD and all. People buy RL's for reliability and good value; for that, the 3.5 SOHC derived from the Accord 3.0 SOHC does just fine."
Now you hadn't made a single "excuse" up until now, you'd been as straight forward and factual as can be, but here you let me down. It doesn't make a difference what the car actually sells for (it still lists for luxury car money at 45K) and I think everyone buys a car (especially a luxury car!) expecting a certain level of reliability and saying that RL buyers are different is just absurd. People buy E320s, 530is and every other mid-level luxury car for the same or similar reasons. If the RL's engine does the job for the few people that seek it out every year, then the E320's (which outsells the RL by like 5 to 1) SOHC engine surely serves it's owners equally as well. The ironic thing is that they come withing spitting distance of each other in power 221hp compared to 225hp, yet the Acura gets an excuse for its output and the E320 gets ripped. Come on now. Clear and present double-standard going on there. They're both luxury cars competing for the same buyers. The RL should be excused because it is fwd? I think not! The RL is poorest "value" on the market. There is absolutely no reason to buy it over Acura's own (270hp from a SOHC engine I might add) TL. No reason at all. You get nothing for what ever premium is actually being paid (over the TL) by RL buyers, the few of them that exists. I think you'd have to be totally clueless to walk into an Acura showroom and purchase an RL over the TL this year or even last year's TL-S, which was a better car. The RL still has a 4-speed automatic for gawd sake!
I already conceded that you were right about the cost reasons regarding MB's engine design switch in 1997.
Ok so if Wards isn't a good source for engines, who is? They have put certain Lexus engines on that list too in the past. Where they wrong then too?
M
Much of your diatribe can be applied to E320 when compared to its competition (or even Camry XLE and Accord EX for that matter). RL has somewhat more supple interior material than TL (and of course bigger and more substantial car), but is that worth the extra dough and lack in performance? probably not, nor does the E320 compared to ES330 and TL, or even the lowly Camry XLE / Accord EX. RL's are literally two generations out of date (not having been revamped for a long time), whereas E320 acts like one.
"Much of your diatribe can be applied to E320 when compared to its competition (or even Camry XLE and Accord EX for that matter).
No it can't because the E320's acceleration isn't behind the class like the RL's is. Look up the stats on the cars. If the E320 is behind the class then the GS300 and IS300 are also behind their competitors too when it comes to engine output.
"RL has somewhat more supple interior material than TL (and of course bigger and more substantial car), but is that worth the extra dough and lack in performance? probably not, nor does the E320 compared to ES330 and TL, or even the lowly Camry XLE / Accord EX. RL's are literally two generations out of date (not having been revamped for a long time), whereas E320 acts like one."
Sorry, but that is a big fact excuse and absolutely no justification for buying an RL and paying however many thousands more it costs over a TL. The RL may be bigger but it surely isn't more substantial, as it failed a crash test a few years back, which I'm sure the brand new TL wouldn't. You're making excuses for the RL, plain and simple.
The E320 is a totally different driving experience from the ES330. The ES is a nice and isolated Japanese Buick. It is equally absurd to even suggest that a E320 isn't up to the level or an Accord EX or Camry based on engine specifications or output. There is so much more to any car and the E320 than just engine output/specs. The Acura TL is a fine car and I have no problem with it other than styling, but it isn't an E-Class either. FWD and torque steer do not a E-Class beater make. If the E320 is not worth the money over those cars, then surely the GS300 isn't either.
M
RL is 400lbs heavier than TL, how is that not "more substantial"? Remember, there was a time when MB's were sold on being "heavy and substantial"? (and poor crash results as we later found out despite their heavy weight). Some people still buy that, and find RL a half-priced S/7, certainly not performance-oriented drivers, but they do exist, in many retirement communities ;-) RL does have better interior material than TL; that's another one of those items MB owners used to brag about until the bean counters got to the recent offerings.
There was a time RL was semi-competitive with S and 7, back two generations ago when RL was designed and introduced, when there were such animals as 735i and S320 (and outside the US, even more perplexing 728i and S280, the latter in which Princess Di died btw; what kind of moribound slow boat was that anyway) Apparently there once upon a time was a market for those slow boats.
A base E320 is actually not quite up to the engineering or quality standards of an Accord EX V6 or Camry XLE V6, and I'm not talking about merely engine, even thought it's a big part of it. Check the panel gaps yourself. Check the reliability record yourself. So what makes the E320 superior if the engine is subpar, the workmanship is subpar, and the reliability record is subpar? Electronic gadgetry count? In a fully loaded E320, at twice the price of a fully loaded Camry/Accord, the interior material (the choice of leather for example) is indeed superior to the latter two (just like RL interior material is better than that of TL; apparently that's of no great concern to you ;-)
If the E320 is not worth the money over those cars, then surely the GS300 isn't either.
GS300 sales are indeed miniscule compared to ES330 and TL. GS300, RL and E320 are all out of date; the problem for MB is that, while GS300 and RL are marginal products for their respective manufacturers and placed on the back burner for updates, the E320 is supposed to be _the_ mainstay of MB sales.
"RL is 400lbs heavier than TL, how is that not "more substantial"? Remember, there was a time when MB's were sold on being "heavy and substantial"? (and poor crash results as we later found out despite their heavy weight). Some people still buy that, and find RL a half-priced S/7, certainly not performance-oriented drivers, but they do exist, in many retirement communities ;-) RL does have better interior material than TL; that's another one of those items MB owners used to brag about until the bean counters got to the recent offerings."
Two things wrong here. The RL being 400lbs heavier than the TL helps it what way? None. It isn't any safer, hell it isn't even as safe as the TL. Does this help fuel economy? Heck no. Weight doesn't automatically equal greater safety, other wise so many SUVs wouldn't be do so poorly in crash tests. Ford Crown Vics are heavy as hell too, but you'd better not hit one in the [non-permissible content removed], boom...gasoline and fire everywhere. Good design is what makes a car safe not weight. Anyway, that the RL weighs more than the TL and has much less hp is bass ackwards and is not grounds for a boast. Secondly, a Benz being heavy was not intentional, but a byproduct of the way the used to build them. The RL having better materials is not worth paying what 10-12K (list price) over the TL. I'm dismissing any and all arguments about the current RL. You may re-submit your case when the 2005 model arrives, until then the current 1996-2004 RL is a dead issue (and duck) with me and the market obviously.
The RL was never competitive with any S-Class or 7-Series, I wouldn't care if the S-Class and 7-Series had 4-cylinder engines!
"A base E320 is actually not quite up to the engineering or quality standards of an Accord EX V6 or Camry XLE V6, and I'm not talking about merely engine, even thought it's a big part of it. Check the panel gaps yourself. Check the reliability record yourself. So what makes the E320 superior if the engine is subpar, the workmanship is subpar, and the reliability record is subpar? Electronic gadgetry count? In a fully loaded E320, at twice the price of a fully loaded Camry/Accord, the interior material (the choice of leather for example) is indeed superior to the latter two (just like RL interior material is better than that of TL; apparently that's of no great concern to you ;-)
Heck no it isn't and the difference isn't worth the price over the TL! They should have given the RL a modern transmission first.
This is a classic case of judging a car by your own criteria. Which is fine, but it surely isn't the only thing I and obviously a many others judge a car buy. The E320 will get an engine upgrade for 2006, it will become the E350 gaining the SLK350's 268hp 3.5 DOHC V6. The reliability angle has been long worn out here. Nothing more to say about that other than the surveys show the E320 to be less reliable than the cars you mention. The side of freeway stuff is bs in my book because I've seen cars from any every brand on the side of the road and I just like you had no real idea of why they were there unless the hood was up and the car was smoking etc.
For me the ES330 could have the best quality in the world and it wouldn't mean squat when I have to look at and/or drive it. The car is a better Buick than the real Buicks. Sorry the comparison with the E320 is far to surreal to me, as is the Honda Accord and Camry, two of the blandest, most boring cars on the road today. Neither of them match the E320 in safety engineering either. The Honda might have tighter panel gaps, but that metal is like tapping on a tin can compared to the E320 or any other Benz.
The E320 isn't supposed to be the mainstay of MB sales, it is the mainstay of MB sales because it (despite your low opinion of it) offers a great driving experience, styling, features and comfort for the class it competes. The Camry and Accord, ES330 comparison is totally ridiculous.
I like how you try to cover the GS300 with an excuse about it not being the mainstay of Lexus sales. Do you think Lexus intended that? Do you not think they wanted to sell as many of those a Mercedes does E320s? Just because doesn't sell doesn't excuse it from the same knocks you've given the E320. Now I know the GS300 doesn't sell now because it is simply old and due for a redesign, but you didn't exactly state that. You tried to cover it by saying it wasn't a priority of Lexus. That is ridiculous. That is the same thing (nonesense) theory I was given about the Phaeton on the VW Phaeton board, that it wasn't a priority, absolutely absurd. Every luxury car maker wants to move their sedans in good numbers, and Lexus is no different. If the car is no priority why are they redesigning it?
M
My point was that having a spot on the Ward's top 10 list alone is no reason for boast; every major manufacturer, including lowly Chevy, has a spot on that list. Ward's has a way of making all the major players content ;-) Does making the list make it a _bad_ engine?
Now you're bashing GM's inline 6 4.2L engine?
Have you ever driven a Trailblazer or Envoy and tried out that engine? It is incredibly smooth and powerful. It's just a shame that such a great engine is mated to a decent looking but shoddily built car like the Trailbalzer or Envoy. The 4.2L straight 6 completely deserves its spot on Ward's Top 10. This is a 6 cylinder engine that slaughters a lot of V8s.
Check out the torque curve on GM's 4.2L straight 6.
http://www.gm.com/automotive/gmpowertrain/engines/vortec/apps/veh- icle/images/ll8curve.jpg
That is one of the flattest torque curves I've ever seen. Plus it looks like that engine is hitting around 235 ft-lb (or 87% of peak) at just 950 rpm! When GM dyno tested this engine, they had some running smoothly on dyno for over 300,000 miles and still going strong. They eventually took it off dyno b/c they needed the dyno to test other engines.
Ward's opinion is that every well made straight 6 belongs in Ward's Top 10 and I fully agree with them.
You make a lot of good points, but bashing Ward's is not one of them. Maybe engines ranked #7 through 10 could switch places with engines ranked #11 through 13, but every engine in Ward's Top 10 is a fine and worthy engine.
LOL.
Well, unless you're in a Porsche or a Ferrarri or are driving a turbo-boosted car, the SOHC or DOHC v8 powered luxury car you're driving would get flat out spanked by the Corvette (and probably the Dodge Magnum/Chrysler 300C).
It's hard to argue with #s like 400HP and 400ft-lb.
Ljflx:
Nothing like a piano to add cheer, music culture, decoration to a home. So from this perspective you can't go wrong with ANY piano. But a Steinway is in a different league and that Fazioli comparison that Shiftright was talking about in the other thread is less than accurate and overly spectacular. In order to keep this as brief as possible, my point is that a Steinway grand not only is the crème de la crème among music professionals and amateurs, it is a proven investment for anyone. I paid $11K for mine in '85. I can now sell it for around $30K overnight. My sister paid $35K for hers about eight years ago, and it commands close to $60K today, that's what, roughly 5%-6% per year and I think they say it's reasonable to expect 4%. Talk about getting some real use out of your money. I know not everyone is ready to drop 30 grand on a piano but both of us have actively played since we were 7 and music comes with our family traditions so it was a no-brainer for us. I think you said you work in NY. If you haven't done so, I suggest taking your family to the Steinway showroom on 57th street off 6th. Not only is it impressive in itself, but listen to the musicians who come in to try them out. Then pick their brains about the piano. Even if you don't wind up with one, I think you will find it to be a most pleasant experience. BTW , the standard ebony (black) is by far the most desirable and sellable, plus it works with any décor from traditional to modern. I don't know, maybe you already know about these things sorry if it sounds didactic.
How's this a Steinway in the LR to complement an MB in the driveway uh oh, here we go again.
;-)
By "dog" I dissed the RL more than it deserved. I guess I should have said that the RL is underwhelming vis a vis the competition in its alleged bracket, but does OK when compared to the competition in its "real" bracket.
Maybe the RL is not a high-end luxury marque per se, but hey, there are people who swear there are $20 bottles of wine that beat the $200 per bottle varieties. I tend to be in that camp.
The MB is more my style in terms of looks, drives great (I like the Euro ride a bit more than Lexus), feels like a tank, and has all wheel drive. I wouldn't be surprised with a few visits to the service dept. for some electrical "adjustments". By the way, on 2 different test drives in 2 different cars, I experienced 3 problems first hand: Tilt steering wheel wouldn't tilt down after I moved it up, air suspension wouldn't adjust and door locks would not close! Each salesman said that it may be a fuse or something.
Am I nuts for still considering anyway.
The real issue for me is that with the heavily incentivised pricing, leasing and interest rate from MB the cars are very close in price. That's a tough pill for me to swallow when it's fixed in my mind that MB is the far more established prestige player and for the same $, it's hard to swallow emotionally if not rationally. Throw in free maintanince and all wheel drive too.
That said, the LS 430 may be the best luxo car in the world for comfort, quiet and quality. The Levinson sound is fantastic and blue tooth is a real plus. In addition, it really gets my goat that on the top of the line S Class you don't get things like xenon lights as standard. The TL has them and blue tooth for almost 1/3 the retail price.
Regarding RL. I think that was their attempt at an LS /Q45 competitor and at the time it probably provided about 80% of those attributes for 80% of the price. Now it's so outdated. The new one looks like it might be a winner.
And by THAT logic, it's OK for MBs and BMWs to be ugly! What's this world coming to!
Yah, suh Bangle cars stink stink unt zay alvays stank!
;-)
Now here's one for you. In machine appliances (washing machines etc) the Germans have as their great brands ASKO (Audi), Bosch (BMW) and Miele (MB). I believe Asko is German. Nice little co-incidence, huh. My Miele Dishwasher which was touted as the best money can buy and which was supremely quiet had reliability problems up the kazoo and lasted 6 years. Somehow I expected a lot more. Our friends Bosch though has been spectacular and that was the one my instincts told me to buy when we built our house. We ended up switching off to a high-end Kitchen Aid which has been great and is just as quiet as the Miele. These high-end appliances are real fickle as well. Our sub-zero has humidity problems in the summmer and repairs on it over 10 years has cost us about half as much as a high quality "ordinary" fridge. Come to think of it we never had a problem with a refrigerator until this sub-zero. These high end things can be so damm problematic.
merc1 - you should note that an S430 is no longer much more expensive than an LS430 in its popular trim - as topspin noted - and the Lexus still easily outsells it. The 7 is even closer or about the same price, less in the case of the LS430 ultra, and it is also badly outsold.
Remember, the key is not to have any regrets after purchasing either of these cars. So go ahead and buy what your heart desires, instead of what may appear to be the more rational buy. Just MHO.
I have many problems but picking out a luxo car is not really one of them, just a hobby.
You are very correct that I wish the MB had the reliability of the Lexus and that the Lexus had the "sex appeal" of the MB.
I also wish that my wife looked like Catherine Zeta Jones and had the personality of... well you get the idea.
Yes, if I ignore what I found on the test drive than I have no excuses. Same as what I read in CR and the others. Funny though if you ask people who own the cars you get different answers sometimes. I saw a woman today who had an S Class 6 mos old and loved it, no problems. I guess you have to be lucky too. But for sure, not as much luck involved with the Lexus.
Decisions, decisions. You know, I have a friend in the high end Swiss watch business and it's very similar in that it's a totally emotional sale. If you want something that gives very accurate time you can use a $50 quartz watch or just use your cell phone. Yet people spend tens of thousands of dollars on mechanical hand made watches that are not as accurate and need expensive up keep periodically. The enjoy them immensely. The "best" product is not always the easiest to own or most trouble free. It's the one that gives you the most enjoyment. That's value and it's very subjective.
By the way, today I upgraded to a blue tooth phone just in case my next car has that option.
Anyone have experience with that.
To be or not to be.....
Whatever you lease make it no more than a 24-36 month deal as both cars will be very different by MY 2006's end. Whichever way you go - don't look back and good luck with your decision.
By the way I don't buy the MB 5th place finish in C&D's lux car comparo. It's No. 2 in my book.
Oh and topspin, precision crafting and engineering and reliability should not be mutually exclusive. If you want to compare watches, I think in many ways my own Breitling Windrider is similar to the LS430. It never lets its superior craftsmanship and engineering stand in the way of its functionality, as its a "watch for professionls" first and a piece of jewelry second. Lexus is kind of like that.
You'd have had your break if you had noticed the past tense in my previous post. The RL was designed for 1996 model year, and hasn't had much updating. Let's see, what MB and BMW had in 1996 for 7 series and S class base models: S320SWB for NA market, S280 for the rest of the world; 740 for the NA market, 735/728 for the rest of the world. Like I said, RL was once-upon-a-time semi-competitive with MB S and BMW 7 when it was introduced.
Every single criticism you worked up against RL applies to MB of the mid-90's too. Mainstream MB cars were always "heavy tanks"; even the S class of that era faired poorly in latter crash tests (contemporaries were not as obsessed with barrier crash tests as we are now). There is a difference between barrier crash tests vs. real life crashworhiness against another car of average weight (not the a heavy car's own weight as the barrier tests imply).
Heck no it isn't and the difference isn't worth the price over the TL! They should have given the RL a modern transmission first.
By the same token, heck no, E320 isn't worth the price over the TL! They should have given the E320 a modern engine first. I like how you try to cover the out-dated engine issue with an excuse about its being upgraded for 2006. Do you realize that RL is getting an upgrade even before 2006?
Like I said, E320 is out-dated in its competitive market segment, just like RL is in its own. The big difference is that RL is a marginal part of Acura's market, whereas E320 is the mainstay of MB's sales (given that the ML320 completely lost its market segment to RX300/330).
Now I know the GS300 doesn't sell now because it is simply old and due for a redesign, but you didn't exactly state that.
That's implied to be common knowledge, no specific mention necessary. GS300 was introduced before RX300, yet the latter got a complete redesign three years before the GS300 despite the latter's fabulous sales throughout its life cycle. That should tell you where Lexus' priority is. When Lexus put out the new SC430, it didn't even bother making an SC300 version. Lexus has the meat of the entry-mid luxury market taken care of with the ES300/330 and RX300/330. MB's offerings in that segment, the E320, E320 wagon and ML320/350 have been losing sales to Lexus in dramatic fashion. That is MB's biggest problem. It's holding tenuously onto the relative small "somewhat sporting" corner of the entry-mid luxury, with what's left over by BMW 330i/530i (and Acura TL at somewhat lower price point); it's not a big slice of the pie to begin with, especially with BMW's dominance in that corner. With GS300 redesign coming soon, MB is in even bigger trouble.
I'm in that camp too, and it's probably true. Wine makers bottle the same wine in different bottles and sell at vastly different prices all the time. The economy of scale and the delay in "vintage" vs. economic cycle dictates that. Car making is rapidly approaching that sort of economy of scale concern. The latest Civic redesign had more R&D funds to play with than that of the Maybach project. That's why MB is busy trying to amortize its R&D cost on Chrysler models.
I wouldn't know. I am proud to say that I am too cheap to spend $200 on wine when I know for a fact that vineyards have overproduced and modern farming techniques have improved quality all over.
Same thing is happening to cars BTW. The gap between the "economy" cars and the "luxury" cars is getting slimmer with each year.