Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!

High End Luxury Cars

1161162164166167463

Comments

  • stroudmanstroudman Member Posts: 192
    That's great about the rx400, but if it weren't for the M-class, there would be no RX, MDX, XC90, X5, etc. I think this new ML will fare better, seeing as how this time around there isn't a new factory, new staff, and new product all at once. No one can deny the 1st gen M-class was a very buggy vehicle, but some credit is due for starting an entire genre of cars, IMHO.

    -also don't forget, these are the people who brought you crumple zones, airbags(patent), auto-dimming mirrors, moisture-sensing wipers, keyless-remote, safety-cells, speed-adjusted volume, anti-lock brakes, keyless-go, traction control systems, emergency-tensioning devices(seatbelt), head curtains, watershed management design, fuel injection, diesel engines... I could go on, and I'm sure I'm missing a few.(MERC1?) MOST of the features sold on most cars today, and sometimes presented by those others as their own. The first patent on a motorcar, although a bit dated, is still noteworthy, as well.

    -and with regards to salesmen, some of us aren't hucksters, but enthusiasts who care rather deeply about our product and the happiness and satisfaction of our clients.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    "That's great about the rx400, but if it weren't for the M-class, there would be no RX, MDX, XC90, X5, etc."

    If you are a betting man hold your bet to less than a dollar on that comment. Don't want to see you lose your money.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    if it weren't for the M-class, there would be no RX, MDX, XC90, X5, etc.

    Your comment is symptomatic of the "world revolves around Germany / Germany innovated everything" sort of attitude that is sometimes exhibited here.

    Just what are you saying the M was first at? Not the first luxury SUV, certainly...think Range Rover or maybe TLC. Not the first luxury crossover either, since the original M was a body-on-frame design.

    The RX is pretty clearly more innovative than the M. The RX was the first luxury crossover. And the RX400h the first luxury hybrid drivetrain.

    There has been a whole lot more industry copying/emulation of the RX than of the M, imho.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    5 year plan and $88mln. in spending. Long way off to the real thing.

    http://money.cnn.com/2005/03/30/news/fortune500/gm_fuelcell.reut/index.htm?cnn=yes
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    Agreed, I think it is going to be FIFTY years before we see mass usage of hydrogen-powered vehicles. I might be dead of old age by then.
  • stroudmanstroudman Member Posts: 192
    Fine. So there are no absolutes. If you look at the C-pillar on the M-class and it's coupe-like line, and at the overall profile of the M-class, it's not the least bit derivative of the rover vehicle. No three-box truck lines. It was also the first midsized luxury SUV that was noted as much for its low center of gravity and car-like handling as it was for offroad capability. Comparable vehicles such as the rover were many things, but carlike they were not. The design of the RX and MDX in particular are much more of a "me-too!" reaction to the m-class, than the m-class was to anything before it. They are also-rans that were rushed to market by raiding the parts bins and platforms of the camry and oddessey, and performed accordingly. I'm also not sure the term "crossover" was even being thrown around back in '98-'99 when the RX first hit the pavement. I think most people would tend to refer to the RX as an SUV, the pacifica is a cross-over.
    -As far as hybrid is concerned, it is a very meaningful chapter in the evolution of the car, and toyota is certainly writing it. I just don't think it's quite enough on its own to overshadow what others, be they German or otherwise, have accomplished prior.
    Other than being a sales leader for toyota, I don't know what the RX stands out for in innovations, but I'd be glad to know.
    I don't care to wager, but I do believe the M-class started a trend, and would have argued that long before I began selling them.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    If I recall correctly the RX first shipped about 6 months after the M. So I guess in your view Lexus copied styling elements and the whole idea of a carlike-riding SUV and trailed MB to market by only 6 months? Somehow I thought development cycles in this industry were just a tad longer than that.

    Since you're asking how the RX represents innovation, I'll repeat that it was the first luxury unibody SUV (which is what I meant by crossover and is what most people, pre the Pacifica, meant by crossover). Isn't MB now "copying" the unibody idea with the new generation M?
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    The RX was introduced as a concept vehicle as early as Feb 1997...well before the M first shipped.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "That's great about the rx400, but if it weren't for the M-class, there would be no RX, MDX, XC90, X5, etc."

    Huh. the M-class came out about 2-3 months before the RX. Not really much of a trend-setter.

    "I think this new ML will fare better, seeing as how this time around there isn't a new factory, new staff, and new product all at once. No one can deny the 1st gen M-class was a very buggy vehicle, but some credit is due for starting an entire genre of cars, IMHO. "

    Yeah, the new ML will definately fare better. It's taken a hint from the competition that crushed it(RX300) and gone to a unibody frame. Not to mention it's getting a real Mercedes interior this time.

    One of the biggest flaws with the first ML had nothing to do with a new factory, new staff, new country. It had to do with interior and that goes straight back to the drawing boards in Germany! The plastics rivaled those that GM uses for it's cars. The glove box lid felt like a flimsy piece of plastic, the wood was nonexistant. Let's not forget some exterior miscues-how about those bumpers they forgot to paint? I think it reminded customers of those base Corolla's you used to be able to get with matte black bumpers when you bought the base of the base model.
  • denaliinpadenaliinpa Member Posts: 169
    what Toyota is doing in hybrids is very interesting. hats off to them. it's about
    time some inovation instead of duplication
    is delivered by a Japanese manufacturer.
    when it comes to the RX....every time i see
    one it looks like a girls car. kind of like
    how the Honda Prelude only appealed to women.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    So, the RX is a "girlie" car and therefore we should ignore it. Cars have to be macho to be worth anything, I guess.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "The design of the RX and MDX in particular are much more of a "me-too!" reaction to the m-class, than the m-class was to anything before it. They are also-rans that were rushed to market by raiding the parts bins and platforms of the camry and oddessey, and performed accordingly. "

    Again, the ML was out a few months before the RX if that. I don't know how that qualifies for me-too!

    How the MDX was rushed to market I have no clue. When did the MDX come out? I believe it came out for MY2001. That's hardly a rush job. In fact they read the market well and came out with a great vehicle.

    And if the RX was a rush job. Wow! they sure did one hell of a job! Looked better than the ML, looked more upmarket, had a much nicer interior and it was designed for the way people actually use luxury vehicles. Amazing for a rush job!

    Also, I don't know how basing a car on another vehicle is a rush job. If so, that makes the Sienna, ES330, Solara, Highlander all rush jobs.

    "I'm also not sure the term "crossover" was even being thrown around back in '98-'99 when the RX first hit the pavement."

    Actually they were calling the RX a crossover from day 1 due to it's unibody structure and limited off-road ability.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    Denali,

    I see a lot of women driving Hummer H2s. Must be a girlie car!

    Oh wait a minute, I see alot of any brand of SUV driven my probably more females than males. They must all be girlie SUVs.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    SUVs just don't count for anything in these discussions, and you know why? Its not because they're girlie cars. Its because MB hasn't had much success with SUVs. Anything that MB doesn't do well just CAN'T be important to the self-styled "enthusiasts".
  • footiefootie Member Posts: 636
    Mercedes is as good about hyping other folks innovations as any company I know, and some sites like carfans and wolfgangs just perpetuate the baloney. So here's an update:

    crumple zones, yep MB. It's true!

    airbags(patent), Invented by American Allen Breed, first installed in production vehicles by GM, sold to the US Government in 1973.
    See:

    http://inventors.about.com/library/inventors/blair_bags.htm

    auto-dimming mirrors,

    You might want to take a look at Fred Bauer the entrepreneur behind Gentex Corp at:

    http://www.gentex.com/corp_ent_story.html

    In 1982, his Company introduced the world's first electromechanical (motorized) auto-dimming mirror. It was quickly adopted by Ford and General Motors, who in just three short years were purchasing over 200,000 units annually.

    But Fred wasn't satisfied. He teamed up with research chemists and electrical engineers to achieve what many in the scientific community thought was impossible. In 1987, they brought a 50-year-old scientific phenomena out of the laboratory and into the automobile with the introduction of the world's first electrochromic mirror. An entire industry was born.

    Today, Fred and Gentex's world-class R&D team continue to advance electro-optics and the science of electrochromics.

    moisture-sensing wipers,

    Can't find anything to substantiate a MB claim. TRW had the first one's here in the U.S. in 1997, Valeo in Europe is major supplier to everyone over there.

    keyless-remote,

    Per www.mrtraffic.com/millennium.htm

    TRW introduced the first OEM Keyless remote in 1988.

    safety-cells, ??? I couldn't figure this out. Is this a rehash of crush zones?

    speed-adjusted volume, ??? Only citation I could find was how bad it was in an Audi SR4. Nothing like having the stereo and tire noise competing for max decibels.

    anti-lock brakes,

    Robert Bosch got first patent, not MB as best I can tell. First U.S. vehicles was an early 1970's Chrysler Imperial with 4 wheel electronic ABS. 1st MB was 1978.

    FYI - Antilock brakes in general were developed for the laying of the transAtlantic telegraph cable in 1837 to keep the cable from snapping. The one's autos use were copied from airplane designs.

    keyless-go,

    I think Ford and Keyless invented the original version of this about 25 years ago. MB added a dash start button.

    traction control systems, no info yet, could be MB, though I remember that Continental Teves claims to have done this too...

    emergency-tensioning devices(seatbelt),

    Definitely invented by TRW not MB

    head curtains, watershed management design, ???

    fuel injection,

    Nope. 1910 by some guy in Iowa. I think Fiat invented common rail injection now popular for diesels.

    diesel engines...

    were invented by Rudolph Diesel.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    Nice job. There's an old germancarfan saying: "Don't let the facts get in the way of our unshakable belief that Germans invented everything."
  • stroudmanstroudman Member Posts: 192
    The M-class first appeared much earlier in concept form, as well as in a "jurasic park" sequel to a huge audience, so if the public was already getting glimpses of it one to two years before it actually hit the market, other car companies were surely keen to it as well, and sooner still. Of the vehicles in question, it hit the market first, by months or years isn't relevant to me.
    -Whether or not it was wise or efficient, Mercedes used a ladder body because they thought that was what the American market wanted. They were wrong. Yes the interior was chinsy. The lower body wasn't "forgotten to be painted," it was the same as the sedans they used to paint bumpers and lower body with, and after two years they stopped. They truly believed these vehicles would be taken off-road regularly. They were wrong.
    For every person who says they love the MDX, or any other of these vehicles, there's one that doesn't. The looks of these cars is very subjective, and there aren't enough hours in the day to settle that.
    If the Germans were really aware of the things the American market cared most about, they would have come with cup holders(good ones), in-dash cd players and dvd entertainment for the kids a long time ago. They have always built their car for their market(except for the M) and driving style, and some folks here in the states like them, and some don't. It's always been that way. I'm a lifelong "self-styled" enthusiast, whatever that means, as soon as I could drive, I parked cars as a valet, and Mercedes suited my my idea of the ideal. You guys can knock yourselves out with the Japanese stuff, but you won't sell it to me.

    -platform sharing, and using shared platforms to expedite the launch of a vehicle as quickly and cheaply as possible, aren't the same thing.

    -If all the flaws, be they ergonomics, aesthetics, quality, that the 1st gen M-class had are now getting corrected in the 2nd car, they've done nothing more than take a big step in the right direction.

    I don't have to be right. Mercedes-benz has made many mistakes as of late, but DESPITE those things, overall they still get it right for what I look for in a car.

    If Mercedes now copies something to get it right in the U.S. market, good for them. In the past they haven't copied much, and that was their undoing here in the U.S.
  • dhanleydhanley Member Posts: 1,531
    There's no need to be so defensive guys. Stroudman's not threatening you personally. He said MB brought many of these things to the public. That doesn't mean that they invented all of them, just provided them to consumers.

    For example, everyone knows rudoplh diesel invented "the diesel." It's also true that mercedes produced the first diesel motorcar.

    http://www.ybiofuels.org/bio_fuels/history_diesel.html

    And here's some "milestones"

    http://www.whnet.com/4x4/milestones.html

    Now, not all of these are "firsts" or "inventions" and i imagine some of them are debatable.
  • stroudmanstroudman Member Posts: 192
    Thank you, that's really all I am trying to say. Thanks for the info, though. I don't know everything there is to know, I'm just here to learn as well as discuss.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    "If Mercedes now copies something to get it right in the U.S. market, good for them. In the past they haven't copied much, and that was their undoing here in the U.S."

    Interesting - that's as close to a falling down admission as I've ever seen on this board.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    That's more Porsche than the Cayenne by a real wide margin - that's for sure. I can't imagine the Porsche faithful getting upset with this car if it looks anything like this - though you never know with those people.
  • lovemyclklovemyclk Member Posts: 351
    How right you are... excessive warranty costs are crippling the German firms. The idea behind the Japanese lean strategies is "zero defects". Get it right before it's on the boat/trailer to the retailer.

    Japan, Inc. has figured out how to achieve operational equilibrium that leads to record profits and more capital used for innovation and product development.

    Imagine coupling German engineering with TPS! Heck, imagine American engineering AND innovation with TPS! No reason that we can't develop the complete product package at any price point to match the best in the world. Someone with guts and vision is needed to do this... we're starting to see some of this with the 300C, Corvette, Ford GT, (maybe) the STS and, of course, our trucks.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    Does anyone know if the following story is true:

    I heard years ago that some genius at GM calculated that cost to the company would be lower if they skimped on QC and let the customer discover any problems and then bring the car in for customer service. Very stupid short-term thinking, if true, rather penny-wise and pound-foolish.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    Sounds like a water cooler or coffee machine story. Too much legal risk is involved - I can't imagine a corporate mgr thinking like that.
  • oacoac Member Posts: 1,594
    syswei:

    Here is the more pertinent story. That GM is in so much trouble they'll probably be closing two of their model lines (Pontiac and Buick). If anyone is looking, this is a SERIOUS situation for American jobs. The domino effect is going to be huge.... Much as I love Japanese vehicles, I do not want American jobs disappearing at the expense of overseas auto manufacturers. Something must be done to see that GM does not fall on its face, regardless of what we may feel about the quality of their offerings. Yeah I know their production issues, financing issues, health care issues, benefits issues, etc... BUT...

    Off-topic I know, but worrisome all the same.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    OAC - the unions have to wake up. They are part of GM's problems and paralysis. I'd say GM is partly negotiating via the media. But I'd also say that GM has some real serious issues right now. The P&L warning was huge but you also have to separate out the non-cash charges in it. Nonetheless GM needs some major concessions here. Better to have a good paying job with less benefits than none at all. Hopefully it doesn't ever get that far. But remember there is also plenty of foreigners that are increasing US plant production.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    If a recession hits, I wonder if we'll see big union givebacks like what we've seen from the big airlines of late.
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "If a recession hits, I wonder if we'll see big union givebacks like what we've seen from the big airlines of late."

    I doubt the UAW will give in even slightly. It's not their style. They are too bone-headed to think about the future of the US auto industry.

    I think the airline unions actually see well enough into the future and are willing to compromise to try and help the US airline industry.
  • wbreaux1wbreaux1 Member Posts: 55
    A couple of thoughts on the recent posts. As to "skimping" on QC, I assume that skimping is relative. I assume that car companies chose a level of spending on QC that they think will maximize profits. If GM tripled spending on QC, their cars would be much better but they'd go broke (much sooner than they might otherwise).

    As to the potential loss of jobs at GM being such a serious problem for the US economy, I disagree. The unemployoment rate in the US is about 5.5% compared to around 10% in Germany, which is doing great with autos (I'm not sure what the rate in Japan is but I wouldn't trade our economy for their's). Our economy is enormous and is impacted by many factors. Of course the US has been losing manufacturing jobs, but has been replacing them at an astounding pace. Those who think this is really such a big issue can send campaign contributions to Ross "Giant Sucking Sound" Perot, Dallas, Tx. . .
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    So what are we disagreeing about with regard to the W140, the W220 and the W221?

    After reading all of that I'm not sure at this point. I guess my original point was that how can anyone that finds the current LS even remotely attractive have a problem with the new S-Class' styling. I mean wheel arches are one thing, but the LS430's overall look is awful imo, it being a poor copy of the W140. By poor I mean it has the sides of the W140 down pat, but the front and rear are typical Toyota style-less, plus its too short to be that boxy.

    I agree that Lexus won't emulate the S again, but only because they have or at least think they have a "design direction" now. Otherwise when the 2007 LS came out you'd be looking at a 2000 S-Class all over again.

    M
  • maxhonda99maxhonda99 Member Posts: 1,289
    "Its because MB hasn't had much success with SUVs. Anything that MB doesn't do well just CAN'T be important to the self-styled "enthusiasts". "

    You are correct. If MBs SUV isn't selling well, "let's not count SUVs at all" when comparing luxury brand sales attitude is what it always falls back to.

    Yet, if the new MB M-class sells well, I bet those sales won't be excluded.
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Hmm. The corollary must be - "Don't let the facts get in the way of our unshakable belief the Japanese invented everything"
  • kdshapirokdshapiro Member Posts: 5,751
    Some people say that about Microsoft and their software. Although their are some that made a pretty penny (or old nickel) off of their stuff.
  • stroudmanstroudman Member Posts: 192
    do you mean of the manufacturer, the dealers, or the fans of the vehicle? Whoever generates sales stats, or excludes certain vehicles from those stats, is going to tilt them towards their agenda, whoever they are. Which is obvious if one reads these posts...
  • michael_mattoxmichael_mattox Member Posts: 813
    I believe the story is true...I recall reading stories about Senior Management of GM and Ford using their actuaries to determine how many people would die and the avg. cost of each settlement and comparing that to the cost of making a fix on every car....

    Sometimes it was finincially better to not do the fix....Now a days the lawsuits can be too severe to make that kind of decision.
  • michael_mattoxmichael_mattox Member Posts: 813
    I don't think quality is always a matter of spending more money..It is a culture that needs to be developed in your work force.

    As Toyota has proven...Quality results in more sales, More competitive pricing is possible and warrenty costs are lower leading to much greater profit.
  • michael_mattoxmichael_mattox Member Posts: 813
    What is more critical to a company...The innovations of the past that set them apart from their competition...OR...The current innovations that capature the market..Like hybrids.

    The old quality buggy wip or the model A?

    A sound profit 50 years ago...Or ...a big profit this year and next?

    Innovation that is sometimes unreliable but is first on the market or Absolute Quality and Reliability in the innovations that are put to use.
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    "SUVs just don't count for anything in these discussions, and you know why? Its not because they're girlie cars. Its because MB hasn't had much success with SUVs. Anything that MB doesn't do well just CAN'T be important to the self-styled "enthusiasts".

    Likewise anything Lexus doesn't accel in isn't important either, worse yet in most cases it isn't even understood. Innovation, styling, safety, 0-60 times, handling or anything else that Lexus doesn't come out on top of is dismissed instantly as being irrelevant on this board.

    A salesman comes here to say one thing and it is turned around for another. Rudolf Diesel invented diesel and Mercedes was his first client and they introduced the diesel first to the market. Period. This is the case with many of the other innovations that one here loves to google crap to death about to find the name of the person, but then leaves off how and who brought these things to market.

    SUV sales - the only reason anyone here including me pointed out that SUV sales are holding up Lexus is because after reading all the Lexus rhetoric on this board you'd think every vehicle they sell are bestsellers, yet they aren't hence the pointing out that over half of their sales are SUVs. Didn't say they shouldn't be counted only that it should be noted that not every Lexus car has set the market afire in sales.

    M
  • merc1merc1 Member Posts: 6,081
    "Interesting - that's as close to a falling down admission as I've ever seen on this board.

    What are you talking about? Every car company does, or at least tries to do what is best for the market in which they are competiting. Mercedes is no different, and nobody ever said they were. Copying and making changes to be competitive are two different things. Where Mercedes does differ from your brand is that they don't have to resort to copying styling and having the wannbe image that makes Lexus so lame. This falling down theory is just plain ridiculous and is nothing more than wishful thinking.

    M
  • denaliinpadenaliinpa Member Posts: 169
    Mercedes Benz has sold over 620,000 ML's world wide since production began. it has been a resounding sales success. also, it was not re- badged and inserted in the MB line of vehicles to make the brand appear more broad and substantial.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    I see you haven't let go of the "rebadging" theme. Let me ask you, is the Bentley Continental Flying Spur a "rebadged" Phaeton? Should we judge it as being a lesser vehicle because of its ancestry?

    And by the way the RX came before the Highlander, not the other way around.
  • ljflxljflx Member Posts: 4,690
    Merc1 - let me clarify that earlier post.

    Here was the entire quote from stroudman:

    "If Mercedes now copies something to get it right in the U.S. market, good for them. In the past they haven't copied much,and that was their undoing here in the U.S."

    Now a shortened part of it.

    "and that was their undoing here in the U.S."

    I wasn't referring to the copying - I was referring to the last part of the sentence.
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    A WSJ article today (about a Chinese company about to enter the German market) mentions that average auto sector wages in China are $0.95/hr compared to $36/hr in western Germany and $26/hr in the U.S.
  • ctsangctsang Member Posts: 237
    FRANKFURT (Reuters) - U.S.-German carmaker DaimlerChrysler is recalling 1.3 million Mercedes cars as it tries to fix quality woes that are riddling its German luxury car division, it said Thursday.

    Mercedes will recall the cars in several model ranges worldwide to fix problems with alternators and batteries, which do not affect the cars' safety, according to the supplier, car-parts maker Robert Bosch.

    Mercedes chief Eckhard Cordes, who said earlier this year that his drive to resolve the quality problems would hit this year's earnings, said the cars Mercedes makes now are of high quality and that the recall addressed legacy problems.

    "We are now producing the best product quality ever and our aim is to ensure that those vehicles in the hands of customers which are the cause of complaints achieve a standard of quality that reflects our highest expectations," Cordes said in a statement.

    DaimlerChrysler declined to say how much the recall would cost.

    Shares in DaimlerChrysler dipped after news of the recall, paring earlier gains, to trade up 0.3 percent at 34.56 in afternoon activity, in line with the blue-chip DAX index.

    Mercedes said it would check, and if necessary, replace the voltage regulator in the alternator on vehicles with six- and eight-cylinder engines built between June 2001 and Nov. 2004 in the recall.

    The carmaker will install new battery-control software on E-class and CLS-class models made from Jan. 2002 to Jan. 2005. In addition, it will update the braking system on current E-class, SL-class and CLS-class models, made since June 2001.
  • michael_mattoxmichael_mattox Member Posts: 813
    Hmmmmmm they are producing their best car ever..but recalling over a million of them.
  • oacoac Member Posts: 1,594
    Len, I understand. Its kinda a catch-22: The unions need the jobs to take care of their families, and GM need to cut costs otherwise the jobs won't be there. Doesn't this scenario play out daily ? Thankfully, my line of work don't unionize otherwise I'd be real nervous about our prospects as well. Hopefully every side realize the high stakes and make the best decision for everyone. GM is an icon of the American economy, nay worldwide economy. Maybe they'd wise up quick and take care of their business....
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    Innovation, styling, safety, 0-60 times, handling or anything else that Lexus doesn't come out on top of is dismissed instantly as being irrelevant on this board.

    I won't speak for others, but I don't "instantly dismiss" any of these. My personal take on the points you raise:

    1. Innovation. MB has certainly innovated in 120 years far more than Lexus has in 15. The more relevant question imho is how innovation compares over the past 5, 10, or 15 years, and given the importance of hybrid to the industry the answer is less clear.

    2. Styling. MB wins on styling, you won't get any argument from me there. And I'll admit that the current LS copies the previous generation S's exterior styling in a major way and that it is despicable that Lexus chose to do that.

    3. Safety. MB has more safety features but I have yet to see anyone convincingly demonstrate that this outweighs the safety impact of MB's reliability issues. For instance, how many people have died due to the SC's lack of rollbars, vs how many have died due to MB's brake reliability issues?

    4. 0-60 times. Everytime I post the following…

    LS430 290hp, 320 lb-ft, 0-60 5.9sec
    S430 275hp, 295 lb-ft, 0-60 6.9sec

    …the response is either:
    a. "Who cares about straight line acceleration? It’s handling that counts." To which I ask: why do you prefer MB over BMW?
    -or-
    b. "You ought to be comparing the 4.3 liter LS against a 5.0 liter S." To which I ask: how is this a more fair comparison?

    So it seems to me that it is the MB crowd that is dismissive of 0-60 times, not the Lexus crowd.

    5. Handling. Again I’ll admit that MB has an edge over Lexus. And again I’ll ask: if handling is paramount, why not BMW rather than MB?
  • sysweisyswei Member Posts: 1,804
    I always find it curious that some elevate exterior styling to such high importance, and then turn around and denigrate anyone who dares mention the superiority of Lexus' stereo systems.

    Neither exterior styling nor stereos have any direct impact on the driving experience per se (i.e., "handling" or "fun") that I would have thought "enthusiasts" place paramount. We're basically talking about "eye candy" (styling) vs "ear candy" (stereos).

    Unless one sits in his garage staring at his car for hours on end, how much time does one actually spend viewing the outside of one's car? 2-3 minutes a day? 10-20 hours a year? Versus how much time listening to the car stereo? 200-500 hours a year?

    I'm not saying that stereos either are or should be more important than exterior styling. But I find it curious that the germancarfans seem so dismissive of them. Could it be that they are dismissed because Lexus does them better than the Germans?
  • ctsangctsang Member Posts: 237
    Why not let the market speaks for itself? MB is losing customers while other Japanese carmakers are gaining customers. It is a fact. German carmakers had their days when there was no Japanese competitors, now they are SO scare. Why, they have to worry about the Japanese now and the Korean and Chinese in the future. MB fans, wake up to reality.
Sign In or Register to comment.