High End Luxury Cars

designman · February 2005

Although improved emissions come with hybrid technology, less dependency on fossil fuel is the major consideration. Not that anyone said otherwise. It seems BMW is really dawdling with this. They have to get their butt going.

kyfdx · February 2005

You are correct... I don't have any knowledge to refute any of those things. (Except that it is more expensive to repair.. I know aluminum is worth more than steel.. refer back to my aluminum can comment).

But, I haven't heard anything from brightness04 that makes me think he knows much about it, either..

Because, if he did know much... we'd hear something specifically about the aluminum body panels on an Audi vs. steel on a Lexus.. and not some irrelevant babble about lower ignition temperatures...

So, I disagree that any of brightness04 claims have anything to do with the safety of the Audi A8.. Regardless if they are factual or not...

If you want to discuss the properties of aluminum vs. steel, perhaps there is some sort of chemical/metallurgical website you could visit.. Because, nothing stated about it so far, has anything to do with cars...

To sum up yours and brightness 04's arguments:

Lexus... GOOD

All others.. BAD

That should just about wrap it up for you... what are you going to talk about now?

regards,
kyfdx

designman · February 2005

Ah, let them all shake the brand pom poms. My car is better than yours... round in circles... yaddy yadda.

Ljflx... I always enjoy your marketing takes. What's your 5-year prognosis for all of the brands in question here?

pat · February 2005

Thanks designman, all this "my car/brand is better than yours" is headache-making and certainly not convincing anyone of anything.

Let's move on with other conversation.

syswei · February 2005

Absolutely, I agree the main point is fuel savings, the emissions reductions are primarily a byproduct of consuming less fuel.

rl81 · February 2005

Please take it easy with your generalizations ala: "Europe is a very nationalistic society" From living in both continents, I can tell you that Europe is wayyyyy less nationalistic than the US for example.

I think that everyone prefers to buy something that has been made in his own country, right? But the real reason, IMO, why for Lexus it's harder to compete in Europe is that transportation from Japan to Europe is longer than from Japan to the US. Are Lexus built in the US (I don't know that they are)?

As for Marketing: what are the German carmakers offering in Europe? A completely customized product. They can do that because they can deliever a car in about a month, if there is no waiting list. They can't do that in the US because Transportation is about a month (or so???). The Japanese have done the only possible thing (I can think of), to offer an (almost) fully equiped vehicle. I give them credit for that. 'Z' Germans believe they can make more profit with their option 'book' (it's too long to be a list).

The other factor we shouldn't forget here is that the US is pretty much a primary market for Lexus (if not more important than Japan). For 'Z' Germans it's a secondary market. You can just see that at the limited product lines.

yerth10 · February 2005

These so-called luxury vehicles like "Audi A8, BMW 7 Series, Jaguar XJ-Series, Lexus LS 430, Mercedes-Benz S-Class, Volkswagen Phaeton"

They dont even have a reclining / sliding rear seat which is available in many smaller Crossover Utility Vehicles like Escape, CRV, Equinox, etc. Such seat provides more comfort for the passenger.

After all luxury vehicles are meant for maximum comfort. Any comments.

syswei · February 2005

Available with the LS Ultra, and probably some versions of some of the other sedans you mentionned.

jvcn · February 2005

Having spent spring of 2004 working and doing research in France and Spain, I can tell you that the EU is more nationalistic than the US with respect to government protections of domestic industry. It's starting to relax now but protection of local industry has been very strong all through the 80s and 90s and to a lesser extent today. For all of Detroit's anti-japanese bluster, the US has been more open to Japanese car competition than any other Western nation.

As for MB's reputation in Europe, it's rapidly going downhill even without Lexus and JD Power to pound on them.

See for example:

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/62b860d0-808a-11d9-bd50-00000e2511c8.htm- l
opening:

Visitors travelling by taxi to the DaimlerChrysler headquarters in Stuttgart used to have one choice of vehicle: Mercedes. The same was true throughout Germany. But on visits in the recent wintry months, the taxi rank has usually been headed by a Volkswagen, Opel or - worst of all - a Mazda.

Jürgen Geier, a Stuttgart taxi driver who used to drive a Mercedes before switching to Audi, explains: "Mercedes has really gone downhill in the last few years.

Other choice quotes include:

For Germany's taxi drivers, this comes as no surprise. "Opels [made by General Motors of the US] are half the price of Mercedes and the quality is now the same," says Anis Ahmad, a Frankfurt taxi driver with an Opel Zafira.

And finally:

However, secondhand sales of older, more reliable Mercedes models are booming in the German taxi market, says BZP - with the result that 70 per cent of all taxis still bear the famous star logo.

syswei · February 2005

I thought the choicest part was "The German Taxi and Hire Car Association (BZP) says that Mercedes' proportion of new taxi sales has fallen since the turn of the century from 70 per cent to 50 per cent."

oac · February 2005

We have what, 7-8k Lexus units sold in the US being over $50k, estimated very conservatively, before even counting any GS model at all. MB only sells 12-13k cars in the US a month. There is simply no way more than half of them are over $50k. MB has a lot of models, but precious little unit sales among its high end models

Brightness:

Thanks for this. You make my point better than I could make it myself, and backed up with some conservative estimates. Merc1's post is far more general and non-specific - more variants does not necessarily translate to more sales.

It will appear that Lexus truly is the numero uno luxury car seller than MB or BMW ! Lexus sells more lux cars/trucks than their competition (they are #1 in sales in the US 3 years running), despite the higher macque/cache/brand recognition of MB or BMW over Lexus. What MB has are niche cars (S600/SL/CLS/AMGs) not necessarily luxury cars, since these sell in so low numbers. The mainstream luxury car seller, at least in the US, is Lexus. The numbers bear it out, and numbers don't lie, or do they ?

Touche.

oac · February 2005

Designman:

Hybrids will revolutionalize the auto industry within the next 5 years ! You know that already, right ? Just read an article where someone mentioned that the days of cheap gasoline are long over. Why ? Because of the HUGE demand from China and other fast growing markets due to their phenomenal growths. And Toyota has always been on the forefront of clairvoyance in the auto industry. They started the hybrids almost a decade ago, while the likes of Ford, GM, MB laughed and scoffed at hybrids. We'll see who'll be laughing in 5 years from now !!!

Diesels in the US as an alternative ? Get real !

designman · February 2005

Yes, Toyota is methodical, deliberate, pragmatic and patient. By comparison all of the others seem to live for today instant profits. Toyota is also into researching and developing the other alternate-energy vehicles and will be ready to pounce on hydrogen when its ready years down the road. But this will require a monolithic effort among government and many industries. That said, they still gave us Quasimoto. I am going to try to get a test drive tomorrow.

carnaught · February 2005

How 'bout the GMC Denali or Cadillac Escalade ....aka....Chevy Tahoe?

More wannabes?

oac · February 2005

That said, they still gave us Quasimoto. I am going to try to get a test drive tomorrow.

Quasimoto ? Would that not be the "Hunchback of Notre Dame" ? Are you refering to the GS ? (hehehehe...

)

I will LOVE to hear/read of your test drive of the GS, if you can get one. So what am I doing wrong that my dealer hasn't called me yet ? I gotta find out and do my own test drive soon.

denaliinpa · February 2005

ok...i did some research on sales volume.
these are figures for year to date 04 vs 03.

04 03
Lexus
IS 9972 13559
ES 79916 67762
RX 106531 92366
GX 35420 31376
LX 9846 9193
GS 1348 2078
SC 9708 10298
LS 32272 23895

Mercedes 04 03
C/sedan 60107 52382
C/coupe 5584 9779
C/wagon 3560 3821
CLK 10120 9802
CLK/conv. 12346 9428
E 53886 53240
E/wagon 5068 2443
SLK 7360 6023
SL 12885 13318
CL 2683 3377
S 20460 22940
M 25681 30018
G 1491 1980
CLS -- ---

just think....10 different models. 15 total variations...not one re badged Chrysler among the bunch. convertibles, high performance coupes and sedans, all wheel drive versions, short and long wheel base availability,
and even wagons. this is a complete portfolio for the luxury car buyer. like i said earlier...re badging Toyota's to create a so called luxury brand just doesn't cut in my opinion.

sv7887 · February 2005

Hi All,
That Criteria would make Ford as much as a Marque as MB...They sell Lincolns at all sorts of prices..Include Jaguar and Volvo and they are a bonafide luxury car maker..

Using your logic Jaguar would not be considered a high end luxury car maker, given both the lack of variety and the fact two of its models (S-Type, X-Type) share platforms with Ford products..(Lincoln LS and Ford Mondeo) How about the XJ6 having a Ford derived V-6 in it? Does that diminish Jaguar in anyway?..

Supermarket like variety isn't the basis for calling an automaker upscale..

pat · February 2005

Folks, I really think it is time to move on. We have beaten this particular thread of conversation into the ground.

We're all entitled to define a luxury brand in the way that we believe it should be defined. None of us are going to convince anyone else to change his viewpoint by saying the same things over and over again.

Everyone here has made his opinion very clear - it's time to agree to disagree where that applies.

Let's find something else to talk about now.

Thanks.

sv7887 · February 2005

Hi All,
I've been reading an older issue of Jaguar World in which it talks about the furor of Jaguar owners after the release of downmarket cars such as the X-Type and X-Type Wagon..Buyer loyalty has fallen and Jaguar isn't expected to make a profit until 2009..

I've always maintained that Ford is making a huge mistake by taking Jaguar downmarket. It's better to focus on the high end. Why risk infuriating a potential buyer of a 80K car for a X Type sale? When I went to have a look at the new XJ I was bothered by the strong resemblance the X-Type had to it..Better yet, the XJ simply lacked the "look" of a Jaguar..It seemed like something that had come out of a Ford design committee..

So the question begs..Is going downmarket the answer to the Euro luxury car woes? What I've said above applies to Mercedes as well...With all the downmarket models what was the point of buying Chrysler? It doesn't make any business sense to me..

Your comments Please,
SV

michael_mattox · February 2005

Actually my attitude is Lexus, S Class and Bmw 7 All very good in different ways...

Audi A8 a tiny bit behind the top 3.

denaliinpa · February 2005

michael i agree.
even though i just purchased an Audi A8...Audi's brand awareness in the USA is not equal to the other German automakers. hopefully this version of the A8 will bridge the gap that now exists.

as for going down market with cheaper models.... i believe it to be a necessity of the auto manufacturing business in todays market. every automaker needs to take advantage of cost savings to be competitive. i believe that all of the brands we see today will eventually be cut by a third within 20 years. Honda and Bmw ...i believe are the only independents left. most brands have merged or been purchased by their competitors. debates like the one that has been raging this past week will even be harder in the future. brand loyalty will be harder to come by.

denaliinpa · February 2005

absolutely....but at least GM has the decency to give you a larger engine and a different drive train.

oac · February 2005

michael i agree

Oh my !!! We finally get an agreement !!!!! Who said we can't get along ???

princeabubu · February 2005

http://money.cnn.com/2005/02/16/pf/autos/lexus.reut/index.htm

Is it just me, or is this little story perhaps getting a little bit more coverage because it involves Lexus?

brightness04 · February 2005

Michael,

You recapped what I was saying very succinctly. Thank you for stepping in here. I was getting a bit frustrated with Merc's insistence on accusing me of making a statement that I never made.

brightness04 · February 2005

What does soft drink have to do with discussion here? Just a way to snipe at another poster, if you ask me.

I have more than a passing knowledge of industrial metals. In case you did not know anything beyond your soft drink can (hey, your own choice of reference, it's only fair, right? ;-) I supplied a link in one of my earlier posts:

http://ussautomotive.com/auto/steelvsal/mechproperties.htm

It's quite an informative site.

Obviously, the industrial insiders find it quite purposeful discussing the intrinsic metallurgical properties without referencing specific crash A/B tests; kinda makes sense, you don't need to build a full size cardboard A8 to prove cardboard is a bad choice.

Now what's the relevence to Audi, you ask, well, one of the Audi fans brought up that Aluminum (space frame) was what differentiiats Audi from VW. I was merely pointing out that the actual benefit from Aluminum construction in a vehicle as heavy as A8 is very questionable. Apparently the industrial insiders at the site referenced above concur; if you follow the link for a few pages you will actually see an in-depth analysis of the 2002 Audi A8 Space Frame Aluminum Intensive structure and its disadvantages.

I should also point out that aluminum construction only accounts for something like 3% of all Audis sold in 2004! That's hardly a marquee identity.

Just because you are not knowledgeable on a specific subject, don't assume others are equally ignorant.

brightness04 · February 2005

just think....10 different models. 15 total variations...not one re badged Chrysler among the bunch.

No rebadged Chrysler necessary; Mercedes vehicles themselves are shoddy enough. I'd take a Toyota over any Mercedes, even at the same price point, much less Lexus. Look through your own list again. LS exceeds S by more than 50% in fleet representation. MB's volume leader is a sub-$30k compact (that's before the even more cheaply put together A/B class gets here; A/B class is the MB volume leader in practically every market that it has entered, at or below $20k base price), whereas Lexus' volume leader is a mid-sized vehicle close to $40k in base price. All the halo models only serve to spread the engineering resources extra thin. At about 35-40k units a year, Chevy sells more Corvettes than all the high performance models MB's combined, yet Chevy is not a high performance marquee due to its roster of low-end products. MB's claim to luxury marquee is likewise questionable when it has moved down market as fast as it has in the last decade.

brightness04 · February 2005

IMHO, platform sharing has become a necessity in today's market. The last Civic platform revision cost $4 billion dollars to design and engineer. That's several boat loads of money ;-) Even at $400k per vehicle, it takes 10k vehicles to break even (assuming the car manufacturing itself cost negligible amount of money ;-). Either that or trim the engineering budget and let cars leave the factory with myriads of bugs due to a shoe-string engineering budget.

One way to increase unit sales for a niche vehicle is prolonging the product cycle, but then the mfr ends up having an obsolete product line. MB seems to be trying some marketting trick with the Chrysler purchase: using the latter as some sort of life cycle extension program for obsolete MB platforms, so more unit sales can be generated. Exterior design is cheap, getting everything working together well inside takes real engineering budget, so it is a cheap trick to extend a platform's shelf life; every brand does that sort of thing with mid-cycle refreshes, but MB is trying to double the shelf life by giving Chrysler hand-me-downs. I wonder how quickly people are going to realize those hand-me-down "MB technology" on re-skinned Chryslers are little more than twice warmed left-overs. I will give it perhaps one year, before 300C piling up in the supply channel to multi-month proportions just like Crossfire has.

xkss · February 2005

has substance that the Crossfire lacks. The 300C is the 300 to get while the 300C SRT-8 is awesome.

Information and pictures of the 300C SRT-8:

http://seriouswheels.com/top-2005-Chrysler-300C-SRT-8.htm

Information on the Chrysler/Dodge LX cars (the big rwd cars):

http://www.allpar.com/cars/lx/index.html

The Magnum is perhaps the first cool American station wagon that has sold very well (55-57 Chevy Nomad didn't sell well).

xkss · February 2005

Here is the 1998 Chrysler Chronos concept car:

http://conceptcars.free.fr/images/Chronos_image1.jpg

http://www.allpar.com/cars/concepts/chronos.html

2005 Chrysler 300C SRT-8:

http://fast-autos.net/chrysler/srt8.jpg

http://www.allpar.com/cars/lx/srt8-chrysler.html

Now the 1957 Chrysler 300C:

http://www.allpar.com/cars/chrysler-300c.html

The grilles of both Chryslers (57 and 05) look similar.

Notice the lines in the middle of the 57 and 05 Chrysler's hoods.

Also notice the rectangular taillights of both cars.

The front end styling of the new Chrysler 300 is almost IDENTICAL to the front end styling of the 1998 Chrysler Chronos concept except for the slant of the new one.

The Bentley Arnage...

"Named for one of the most challenging corners on the Le Mans racing circuit, the Arnage was fittingly introduced at the French circuit in April of 1998." from autos.msn.com

xkss · February 2005

I'd like a new aluminum Jaguar XJ8. The new XJR's aluminum chassis is 60 % stiffer than its predecessor and 40 per cent lighter than that of an equivalent steel body.

http://www.canadiandriver.com/articles/jk/images/04jagxjbody.jpg

http://www.jagweb.com/aj6eng/v8_performance.html

(the new aluminum XJR has a 4.2 V-8)

p.s. The 2005 Jaguar Super V8 is the flagship XJ and it weighs over 800 pounds less than the BMW 760Li.

denaliinpa · February 2005

complete nonsense and spin.

brightness04 · February 2005

Almost any daring retro design can be popular for a few months (or even longer, witness the New Beetle craze a few years ago). Ultimately however, it's the internals that matters. Crossfire was very sought after (Chrysler's first sold-at-MSRP car for nearly a decade), but now has months of supply queued up in the supply chain.

"Cool" is in the eyes of behold. Magnum sales can not compare to Taurus wagon in its hey days, nor Focus wagon today.

brightness04 · February 2005

complete nonsense and spin.

That's certainly a very intelligent rebuttal. I will take it as you are unable to make any counter-argument to the points I made. Namely:

(1) Lexus has higher significantly higher price of admission than MB does, even in the US (the difference is far greater in Europe)
(2) Lexus average selling price is higher than that of MB, in the US and worldwide.

What does that say about which is the higher end luxury marquee??

(3) Halo cars sold in relatively small numbers compared to the rest of the lineup do not make a high end maruqee.

syswei · February 2005

"industrial insiders at the site referenced above concur; if you follow the link for a few pages you will actually see an in-depth analysis of the 2002 Audi A8 Space Frame Aluminum Intensive structure and its disadvantages"

Errrr...American engineers don't know what they're talking about. Only German engineers do. Don't you know that? hehehe.

denaliinpa · February 2005

more nonsense and spin....

you post a link to US Steel!!!
now there is an unbiased promotion!!!!
is this the best you could do?

i read all of it. and guess what....they
complain that the last version A8 is
heavier than the "steel" LS430!!duh...it
has AWD? did it ever occur to you that any weight savings made by using aluminum afford an automaker the ability to ad more equipment that other wise might make the automobile too heavy?

even after reading all of the article which is
clearly biased....the
A8 is obviously one of the most advanced
automobile designs in the world. what a joke!!
tell you what...i will go to ALCOA.... find an article about "how aluminum is better than steel"
and post a link. don't you think it might be a bit biased? duh!!!

both steel and aluminum manufacturers are fighting neck and neck to supply the auto
industry. i read an article in USA today
about a year ago that was quite interesting.
i will try to find it. hopefully it will
have less spin and sales pitch.

brightness04 · February 2005

did it ever occur to you that any weight savings made by using aluminum afford an automaker the ability to ad more equipment that other wise might make the automobile too heavy?

Or trying to make up for inadequate engineering.

the
A8 is obviously one of the most advanced
automobile designs in the world. what a joke!!

The joke is on you. Obviously, each one of LS, 7, S and A8 is "one of the most advanced automobile designs in th world." Dah! You'd think after spending that much money it ought to be.

Biased or not, the steel side certainly has the material expertise and have a long list of disadvantages for aluminum. As far as I can tell, the only counter-argument the aluminum side expert witness can provide is weight savings, which in the case of A8 is quite removed from the spirit of the vehicle.

More to the point, A8 only makes up 3% of Audi sales. How can you argue that differentiates Audi from VW? "Nonsens and spin"?

denaliinpa · February 2005

http://www.autoaluminum.org/sp1.htm

here is a link to an article from Reuters about aluminum in automobiles. it is on a biased site that promotes aluminum but the article is interesting. there is also a sub article that discusses the previous generation A8....how it received 5 stars in crash tests.

for any person to believe that an ALL ALUMINUM A8 is not different than a an ALL STEEL Phaeton...."talking to you is like a martian trying to have a discussion with a fungo"{Bull Durham).

many auto manufacturers are using aluminum today to save weight in their vehicles. the current E class has an aluminum hood, trunk and i believe front fenders. only the Audi has taken it to the advanced technical level of a completely all aluminum vehicle. whether you like Audi or not what they accomplished is very advanced.

sv7887 · February 2005

Hi All,
I don't see the benefits of aluminum unless the car weighs significantly less..The point about the Audi is that even with AWD, it shouldn't weigh more..Even Jaguar's offering weighs less than it's counterpart...It's comparable to Boeing's composite 787 jetliner weighing more than the aluminum 767 it is replacing. Another problem with aluminum is the hassle in getting the thing repaired..It might make a great marketing tool, but I wouldn't want the hassle..I'll stick to steel until Mercedes or Lexus goes that way.

What I find interesting is that the world leader, Mercedes, in safety hasn't adopted this technology. I don't feel unsafe in my LS430 (Especially after taking quite a hit in my LS400), but I feel MB is first to the market with alot of safety innovations..One of the things I was most impressed with in the S Class was it's obvious sturdiness. I wouldn't be too worried about surviving a crash in that car. The Mercedes salesman mentioned something about the frame being made from one metal block rather than being welded like other cars...Is there any real significance to that?

As for Jaguar..The latest XJ is a nice car, but the Jaguar purists are not happy due to it's design..Ford attempts at preserving the look haven't worked thus far..The concepts for the new XK look good..Only time will tell...

SV

kc56 · February 2005

I keep reading all these stories about How bad Mercedes-Benz is doing and yet they only changed one guy at the top. This Cordes guy. He seems pretty sharp and apparently has done a good job before. Yet in the US, it seems they have weak management who have devasted the product and taken away the scheduled maintenance and are losing money and it seems really don't understand the US market. Why not make a change here also?
When Chrysler neeeded help they brought in Zietche and Eberhardt who both knew the US Market, at Mercedes in the US, they took a company doing very well going in the right direction and brought in what has turned out to be sub-par manangement, who had never been in the US before and they have now managed to run in it into the ground and our stock will take the hit.
Maybe Kirkorian should run it.

rl81 · February 2005

"Audi A-8 336 HP...O-60 6.3 sec..No bad for a big car."
"Lexus LS430 290 HP...0-60... 5.9 SEC...and it gets much better gas milage."

Why don't you tell the whole truth?
Where does the A8 reach its peak HP? at 6500rpm!
Where does the LS reach its peak HP? at 5600rpm!
Torque? about the same: 317 A8 vs. 320 LS
Is (18/25 LS vs. 18/24 A8) that so much better???

The Audi weighs about 300 lb. more (8%)

Now, the discussion between alu space frame and conventional steel is very interesting. I have seen the difference between the two in the production. I can tell you that much: the alloy spaceframe is considerably harder to manufacture. It takes a lot more people to put together a spaceframe than a convantional frame, which is manufactured mostly by robots. Audi has a considerable experience in alu frames, since they are the first who did that in large scale production, as far as I know. The new Rolls-Royce is an aluminum space frame, for example.

michael_mattox · February 2005

RL81:

I am not a real knowledge Auto guy...Don't know how to fix them...or build them..Only know how to buy them...Question..

If the Lexus has Almost 16% Less HP...and slightly more toque..AND IS MUCH FASTER 0-60

What is the relavance of the LS reaching Peak HP at a lower RPM...ISN'T THAT A GOOD THING.

sv7887 · February 2005

Hi All,
Does a welded body have any disadvantage over the uniframe design a la Mercedes? If you were going to get into an accident, is there anything conclusive on the merits of either design?

SV

denaliinpa · February 2005

hey guys,

when it comes to which automobile is quicker the A8 or the LS430....the LS is quicker. i have yet to see a 0-60 time for the short wheel base
version of the A8. the 6.3 is usually what i see quoted for the long wheelbase. keep in mind that the A8 in either long or short wheelbase is AWD and I'm sure that will affect the quickness of the vehicle. as for which automobile is safer i am sure they are both equally safe in accidents regardless of the steel vs aluminum nonsense that has been filling this thread.

having said that Audi should be commended for manufacturing a unique vehicle.

rl81 · February 2005

michael_mattox:

the two cars/ engines have totally different characters.
LS: comfortable and refined
A8: sporty and dynamic

Compare it to the M5/M6 engine: V10, 5liters, 507 HP@7750rpm, 383 ft-lbs@6100rpm

The A8 short and long wheelbase are supposed to be the same from 0-60 (6.3s), based on the audiusa website. Either that is a little too optimistic for the long wheelbase or too slow for the short wheelbase. Alright, after reviewing the German Audi website, I found out that the A8 SWB goes from 1-100kph in 6.3s and the LWB takes 6.4s. Because 0-100kph equals 0-62mph, in order to be fair, you have to take off 0.1 or 0.2 seconds off to get the 'real' 0-60 time. Also, don't forget that the A8 is AWD which will slow it down in pure acceleration compared to the LS. However AWD gives you better traction at the limit.

What does that mean? If you ask me? NOTHING. How many luxury car owners in here take their car regularly on the track? How many have driven their LS or whatever on a track? There is nothing to prove it, my opinion is that the A8 will be faster driven at the limit. And I don't mean pure acceleration. Speed in curves is more important on a track.

Really people, the way most people drive these cars, they only get the cars to 60-70% of their potential. It's more about knowing that you could if you wanted.

rl81 · February 2005

The welded construction gets its strength through multiple sheets of metal. You have to imagine it's like an onion, where you have multiple layers that give the final strength. In the beginning that whole construction flaps like it's made out of paper. When it's finished it's very very solid.
The uniframe design on the other hand is more like a skeleton. Conceptually it should be stiffer.

What does this mean in an accident?
Well it depends, the key here is that in an accident you have to bend as much metal as possible to take out the energy of the crash without hurting the people that are inside. Weight is also another consideration because the heavier car will be less damaged in an accident. Safety is a very hard thing to do right because it's not JUST that they try to make to frame as hard as they can. You want to absorb most of the energy in the front where the engine is (in a frontal crash).
Conclusion: safety depends more on how good of a job the engineers have done rather than how stiff the frame is. I personally don't believe that there are cosiderable differences between any serious lux car.
Don't forget, the stiffer the frame the sportier, therefore I assume that Lexus would be more on the soft side since they are more on comfort than sport.

michael_mattox · February 2005

rl81

when you look at the numbers...The LS is both comfortable and refined and Sporty and Dynamic...

How else do you explain both the faster 0-60 time and the slightly stronger gear ratio?? in the LS..As far as faster on the Road...Well you made a GUESS...But we don't have to guess about which is actually faster....

PS. Because of the Audi's greater Turning Radius and great weight I would GUESS it is not faster on the Road either. BUT, that is just MY guess.

Do Dynamic Sporty Cars generally have 4wd, how about Race cars? just curious...I do believe the Hot little Subury does have AWD ...Maybe Audi is in that catagory..Just isn't as fast.

rl81 · February 2005

I tried to find some racetrack times for both of them but, like I said it's not like people race those things. We're just left with guesses.

All new Subarus are AWD...
You probably refered to the WRX, which is the street legal version of the worldcup rallye car. The WRX has about 300 hp and is very light. Sure it's fast. Same with the Mitsubishi Lancer Evo, a Euro version of the Ford Focus...

Other race/sport cars with AWD:
1. Porsche 911 Turbo
2. Lamborgini Murcielago
3. Lamborgini Gallardo (built by Audi)
4. Audi Le Mans (the new super sport check it out at the Future Vehicles seciton)
5. Nissan Skyline (but this is not a 'real' super sport)
6. we might also add the one and only Audi Coupe Quattro
...I can't think of any more, right now...

Back in the early 80's Audi racecars dominated in rallye and touring cars...they were the first ones to do that. My point is that Audi has extensive race experience. I don't want to say that Toyota doesn't have any race, but not as much as Audi...

rl81 · February 2005

Lexus? NO
Acura? NO
Infinity? NO

See the answer here:
http://www.carpages.co.uk/audi/audi-a6-18-02-05.asp?switched=on&e- cho=154506977

sv7887 · February 2005

Hi rl81,
You make a good point about Audi. But is AWD really needed on a Luxo-Cruiser that is likely going back and forth to the office? I'd definitely see the benefit on the S8 though. Like you said, it's not like anyone is racing these cars. I looked at your link and found something interesting:

"They rated the 36 candidates based both on objective criteria, such as product characteristics, and on their emotional charisma: the "wow" factor is clearly just as important an evaluation criteria as safety & environment or value for money."

I think this perfectly illustrates the difference between Lexus and German marque owners and maybe even US and European buyers..We discount the "wow" factor in favor of the objectives. This is not meant to diminish the Audi in anyway. I feel each brand has its' own personality cult. If you were to take an unscientific survey on this board you'd come to the same conclusion. Perhaps this is why Europe has always been hesitant towards Japanese cars. I think it's really the cultural difference.

SV

High End Luxury Cars

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles