Not trying to beat the dead horse but just trying to tell Rocky that the only thing he'll see in his rear view mirror from the CTS-V in Nurburing is...NOTHING.
CTS-V: 8 mins 30 secs (According to Hot Rod Nov issue in 2004 or 2003. Page 31 I believe)
Well I thought our race was with the fictional 400 hp 2008' BMW M3 vs the fictional 600 hp. 2008' Cadillac CTS-V.
So now we are back to the present since you realized I would be leading you in the near future. It's a good move by you. If I was a BMW fan I'd rather brag about today instead of tommorow also. :P You have me by a neck today, tommorow I dominate you...
6783 of 6791 Nurburing Times... by louiswei Nov 28, 2006 (11:32 am) Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg Not trying to beat the dead horse but just trying to tell Rocky that the only thing he'll see in his rear view mirror from the CTS-V in Nurburing is...NOTHING.
CTS-V: 8 mins 30 secs (According to Hot Rod Nov issue in 2004 or 2003. Page 31 I believe)
IIRc, I recommended the S60R. With manual. See, stickshift and under $30K is the reason it fits in this group. HP isn't. Anything over 200HP with a manual transmission and a semi-luxury interior - with traction control and decent enough suspension to beat a Camry - that's what we're talking about. Something that you can pay a little more than a Camry V6 and get a much better overall package.
Entry-level luxury - check. Sporty feel to it - the manual gearbox(which is a very good gearbox as well - not typical entry-level junk) and the sport package make it work as well as any Mercedes C class or Audi 6 series. No, it's not a BMW 3 series, but it's also, oh - about $10K less.
And, yes, I know the Camry is fast in a straight line - but that's about it. It feels mushy and vague in turns and is a whale in traffic due to developing that HP at RPMs that are incompatable with the the transmission(except for a full-throttle magazine test/drag race)
Well the big 3 might be going through some difficult times right now. Some of which they can control and many others they can't. I won't kick a dead horse on it since it's been discussed several times in the past. I know some of you are huge european car fans and I respect that. I grew up in a GM family thus I am a little partial to GM/Ford. If you guys want to see me leave I will do so...I however did like the debates we had. It's hard defending yourself when you are getting bombarted from a bunch of loyal BMW fans. I was thinking Baghdad sounds better right about now.
plekto, are they really giving away S60R's that cheap. When I looked at buying one a couple years ago I had to beg for a discount. Wow, how the times have changed. :surprise:
I, for one, am not a BMW fan. I believe many others here are not as well. However, it doesn't take a BMW fan to realize that the MKZ and 335i don't belong in the same category.
Hi, I'm in a bit of a dilema and hope you can help. I have 3 options and I'm not sure which is best:
1. '06 Audi A4 w/ Sunroof, Premium package, tech package, and Navigation package. MSRP=37,135. Negotiated down to 33,500 and with my trade-in a little over $31,000. Monthly payments= $600 2. '07 Audi A4 standard. Lease. Monthly payments= $359 3. '06 Saab 9-3 (loaner car with approx. 400 miles). MSRP= $23,700. Negotiated down to $21,000 and with my trade in= $19,000. Monthly payments=$385.
I, for one, am not a BMW fan. I believe many others here are not as well.
Who are you trying to fool ? :P
However, it doesn't take a BMW fan to realize that the MKZ and 335i don't belong in the same category.
Well from a true drivers stand point I will agree with you.
However some will cross shop them both since they both are close enough in size and both are on the performance end of the segment. I agree the bimmer 335i is alot faster than the MKZ, but to your average female buyer that won't matter that much. To the gear head it makes a big difference.
The base model is 24,500, but you need to add su much stuff to it that you might as well pay $500 more for the bigger engine. Pass.
The AWD 300HP model, though - that's an IS350 competitor most definately - just with more interior space(rear seat especially). $32K seems like a lot of car for the money.
Other plusses of the Volvos are storage and ergomics are top-notch, part of why it feels "luxury" is that a person sat and obesessed over it like the Swedes are famous for. You reach for something - it's right where it should be. I'm convinced Ford bought Volvo mostly for its interior and ergomics designers. The layout is understated Scandinavian design at its best - it's there, but it's as intruseive as the Avalon is(very good interior, btw - someone's been copying Volvo and Mercedes there - heh)
The sound system is astounding - forget aftermarket. And of course, the gearing is typical Volvo - all about performance and quickness and not about economy(thogh it does get 20/28). You hit maximum power exactly when you think you should and it's a joy in daily driving. Manual, of course. Automatic is a whole other thing, verging on a disaster. Given that 80-90% of cars in Europe are manuals, and the automatic is an afterthought design-wise for rental fleets of tourists from America, it's understandable why there's such a drastic difference between the two. BMW's simmilar in this respect - they really don't design the cars to work well with automatics either.
5.7 seconds isn't "slow". A decade ago, Porsches were doing barely any better, and last I checked, it's alot better than the domestics.
Really - it used to be "It's crap if it's not 6 seconds" now it's 5 seconds? Last I checked humans haven't evolved in the last 10-20 years. 5.7 seconds... Most people would consider it as "really fast".
Oh - and it's not a test-track only result. I've driven it and it'll go just as fast at about any speed thanks to its agressive gearbox. It's fast off the line and in the twisties as well. Your Camry isn't even in the rear view mirror anymore after a couple of miles. And AWD is a nice plus in bad weather. Oh - it's REAL AWD, btw - simmilar to Subaru and Audi. Full-time and not part-time. Makes a huge impact in how it handles, which is why it's an A6 competitor. For handling, it's "sporty" and then some. The 4-piston disc brakes back this up. GM - still using 1 or 2 piston calipers for comparison.
P.S. Who cares about the discount? Get one before they redesign/kill it in 2008.
because shoppers always overlook volvo. Especially shoppers looking for 300 hp AWD 6-speed sedans. you say "S60R" to the regular shmoe on the street and he answers, "what? who?"
Also, for 300 hp, the car is pretty darn slow.
300 hp, AWD, and a mid-size luxo sedan. Let's say it gives up 3/4 of a second to the 335. That's not bad for being bigger and having AWD.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Can you give your opinion vs. the 335I? I haven't driven either of these yet but interested in the comparo real world by shoppers who care about performance.
That must be after the $5,000 factory to dealer incentive.
$32,000 is a really good deal on what is undeniably a solid, AWD entry-level luxury performance sedan.
One of the nice things about Volvo's (like BMW's) is the aftermarket support. There are plenty of speed parts (springs, shocks, sway bars, chips, etc.) to make these cars into real wolves in sheep clothing.
I'd usually avoid a lease as well, but in this case, I'd consider it, especially if you can stay within the mileage limits.
Why? Because it's an Audi, a nameplate that's been near the bottom of quality surveys for a few years now. They've been almost legendary in their terrible reliability, so much that I personally wouldn't risk buying one outright. Who knows? You may have better luck...
The Saab? Not much better reliability-wise, but a friend of the family is driving his third Saab, and has had NO problems with any of them (he still has two of them and the third went to his son in college). The 9-3 isn't bad, especially for the price.
Are they all on equal footing with you? Does one stand out in YOUR eyes? Remember, you'll be the one driving it...
Sorry we get caught up in sometimes gloss over valid questions. I'll give my opinion, remember, just my opinion, it's your money. Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi.
The Saab.. you'll probably be able to negotiate the best deal on this guy as far as over all price. Wait, are you leasing, or buying outright?
I think for everyday driving, it's really hard to beat Audi. BMW does some things better, especially if you want to occasionally track the car. Have you driven them all? Most of us are going to chose the one that feels the best behind the wheel.
Ok. I see that you have some buying and leasing options. You then have to ask yourself, do I want to be in a car until it's paid off. There is something to be said for turning the car in at the end of 3 years or so and getting something else. Most "financial minded" people will tell you to buy slightly used, and drive till dead.
My guess is that you'll find the Saab a little "loose" compared to the Audi. Check out the "10 steps to leasing a car" here on Edmunds. Unless you are already familiar about the financial aspects of both that is.
Good luck, and don't be a stranger after you get the car. Dan
"And there is just one other cloud on this twin-turbo’s horizon, too, BMW’s next release – the 335d. This fuel-sipping diesel will be even faster, so the perfect reviews are almost writing themselves already.
The diesel’s only downfall is the automatic box, as the near perfect six-speed manual in the 335 simply can’t take the torque, and this is by far most enticing option for serious drivers. It’s a good semi-automatic, but if you’re going that way then wait for the oil-burner that could single-handedly rewrite the rules on diesel motoring.
The BMW 3 Series might be the icon of corporate avarice, but the reassuringly expensive 335i Coupe also happens to be one of the best everyday cars in the world."
Comfort access is just like the keyless start option on Lexus and Infiniti. Walk up to the car, grab the handle (car unlocks itself), hop in and fire it up. I will do my best to always own a car with this option from now on. That it's not standard equipment on the 3 series is disgraceful as BMW then forces people without it to put the key in, then press the start button. Lame. Bump the price $100 and make it standard, BMW.
The "keyless start" is a great option, actually. I don't agree that it should be a standard item, but I REALLY don't understand why the keyed-start cars need to press a button as well as insert/turn the key. AFAIC, you either need one or the other, that's it.
What happens if the transponder is dead? How do you access/run the car then?
"5.7 seconds isn't "slow". A decade ago, Porsches were doing barely any better, and last I checked, it's alot better than the domestics."
For what it's worth, in my raggety old June, 1994 issue of Car and Driver, the 1995 270 horsepower 911 Carrera was tested at 4.7 seconds and the 1995 190 horsepower Nissan Maxima SE was tested at 6.7 seconds.
Not sure I would ever clain the Audi A6 as a handling target, though. I was given one as a loaner when I took my 911 in for an oil change and it seemed excessively heavy compared to a 530i or even a 4,000 lb 550i. I'm just not a fan of AWD on sports cars or sports sedans. Great for all weather touring, but give me the lighter RWD setup for nimble handling on dry pavement. That's my opinion from comparing the M3 to the S4, 911C2S to the C4S, 530i to 530ix.
You're not getting the point. Going to 60 and being able to work these cars around curves are two different things. The Volvo would be in a tailspin. It's interesting with the exception of one car or so these cars are old and the testing methodology for each car was completely different. So I call phooey on your whole post, because it doesn't mean anything.
Compared to the 335 the S60 is a pig. I wouldn't want to the QNX around curves either, you would end up in the morgue.
We're talking about, well, entry level performance sedans (we can tell that by looking at the top of the page :P -- where we can also see the list of vehicles that make up our main focus). Let's please keep that in mind.
If I'm not mistaken, none of the vehicles in the last two posts are in this class.
KD, I think you're exaggerating a little. The S60R may not possess the steering feel or dynamics of a BMW, but then again, what car does?
The S60R is a fast, well-mannered, capable, and sporty near-lux sedan. It's blend of comfort, performance, and unique style deserves a look from any enthusiast shopping this segment - especially at $32,000.
Gotta admit at 32k it's a screaming deal. Of course, given that my experience with volvo is even worse than VW/BMW, there's no way in hades I'd consider one.
Having driven a 2007 G35 - I won't go near one until they redesign the car again. The interior is way too tight for a little guy like me to be comfortable. I can't fathom how that car is getting positive press when the driving position is so squished.
My sister said she'd give me an answer on taking my 330i in December. If she'll take the 330i off my hands, I'll drive the Mazdaspeed3, MX-5 hardtop and GTI again. The GTI is the front runner given its fun, utility, luxury touches, gas mileage, etc.
I lean towards the 'ugly' camp about the G sedan's style (or lack of it). Although I loved the performance of the car, the cockpit is cramped. But more than that, I thought the styling was, well, .......kinda feminine?
Blue: My 2004 V70 has been trouble free and a joy to own for the past 45,000 miles. I love it for the uncompromising safety engineering that protects my wife and kids, it's comfy heated seats, quiet interior, plush yet controlled ride, and seating for 7 in a sleek European package.
Volvo is a lot like BMW in that, they do what they do best better than anyone else (I think that makes sense).
KD: In this segment, I agree with you 100%. The S60 is a solid entry in this class, but sport sedans are not what Volvo does best. It may not be a 3-series or G35, but it's hardly a "pig."
Comments
Rocky
CTS-V: 8 mins 30 secs (According to Hot Rod Nov issue in 2004 or 2003. Page 31 I believe)
BMW E46 M3: 8 mins 22 secs (2000)
BTW, the 350Z did it in 8:26 back in 2003.
Thats great just plan on following my lead around the track for the first few miles before I make you slowly disappear.
I in the CTS-V talking hands free to louiswei, "are you still back there" "I don't see you anymore louiswei, I lost you about 3 miles back"
Car and Driver Magazine, March 2004:
"The M3...posted the best lap time of the day at 1:24.471 (75.4 mph)...the Cadillac's best lap—1:25.355 (74.7 mph)."
http://www.caranddriver.com/roadtests/7780/cadillac-cts-v.html
So now we are back to the present since you realized I would be leading you in the near future. It's a good move by you. If I was a BMW fan I'd rather brag about today instead of tommorow also. :P You have me by a neck today, tommorow I dominate you...
Rocky
Rocky
1. Because he can make it whatever he wants
2. Because the big 3 sucks big time right now
3. Because he thinks the big 3 is going to be better
"I pity the fool" - Mr. T
Rocky
Bookmark | Reply | E-mail Msg
Not trying to beat the dead horse but just trying to tell Rocky that the only thing he'll see in his rear view mirror from the CTS-V in Nurburing is...NOTHING.
CTS-V: 8 mins 30 secs (According to Hot Rod Nov issue in 2004 or 2003. Page 31 I believe)
BMW E46 M3: 8 mins 22 secs (2000)
BTW, the 350Z did it in 8:26 back in 2003.
Entry-level luxury - check. Sporty feel to it - the manual gearbox(which is a very good gearbox as well - not typical entry-level junk) and the sport package make it work as well as any Mercedes C class or Audi 6 series. No, it's not a BMW 3 series, but it's also, oh - about $10K less.
And, yes, I know the Camry is fast in a straight line - but that's about it. It feels mushy and vague in turns and is a whale in traffic due to developing that HP at RPMs that are incompatable with the the transmission(except for a full-throttle magazine test/drag race)
Rocky
Rocky
Talking about an UNDERSTATEMENT...
bunch of loyal BMW fans
I, for one, am not a BMW fan. I believe many others here are not as well. However, it doesn't take a BMW fan to realize that the MKZ and 335i don't belong in the same category.
1. '06 Audi A4 w/ Sunroof, Premium package, tech package, and Navigation package. MSRP=37,135. Negotiated down to 33,500 and with my trade-in a little over $31,000. Monthly payments= $600
2. '07 Audi A4 standard. Lease. Monthly payments= $359
3. '06 Saab 9-3 (loaner car with approx. 400 miles). MSRP= $23,700. Negotiated down to $21,000 and with my trade in= $19,000. Monthly payments=$385.
LOL...
I, for one, am not a BMW fan. I believe many others here are not as well.
Who are you trying to fool ? :P
However, it doesn't take a BMW fan to realize that the MKZ and 335i don't belong in the same category.
Well from a true drivers stand point I will agree with you.
However some will cross shop them both since they both are close enough in size and both are on the performance end of the segment. I agree the bimmer 335i is alot faster than the MKZ, but to your average female buyer that won't matter that much. To the gear head it makes a big difference.
Rocky
Rocky
$32K for the AWD S60R(300HP)(~5.7 seconds 0-60)
http://www.carsdirect.com/build/options?zipcode=91020&acode=USB60VOC171B0&restor- e=false
$26,400 for the T5 FWD model. (257HP Turbo-5)
If the Turbo-5 sounds familiar, it's virtually the same engine they used in the 850 T5-R. It's no slouch 0-60. (about 6.5 seconds)
The base model is 24,500, but you need to add su much stuff to it that you might as well pay $500 more for the bigger engine. Pass.
The AWD 300HP model, though - that's an IS350 competitor most definately - just with more interior space(rear seat especially). $32K seems like a lot of car for the money.
Other plusses of the Volvos are storage and ergomics are top-notch, part of why it feels "luxury" is that a person sat and obesessed over it like the Swedes are famous for. You reach for something - it's right where it should be. I'm convinced Ford bought Volvo mostly for its interior and ergomics designers. The layout is understated Scandinavian design at its best - it's there, but it's as intruseive as the Avalon is(very good interior, btw - someone's been copying Volvo and Mercedes there - heh)
The sound system is astounding - forget aftermarket. And of course, the gearing is typical Volvo - all about performance and quickness and not about economy(thogh it does get 20/28). You hit maximum power exactly when you think you should and it's a joy in daily driving. Manual, of course. Automatic is a whole other thing, verging on a disaster. Given that 80-90% of cars in Europe are manuals, and the automatic is an afterthought design-wise for rental fleets of tourists from America, it's understandable why there's such a drastic difference between the two. BMW's simmilar in this respect - they really don't design the cars to work well with automatics either.
But the massive discount off MSRP is scary. Why are they giving the car away?
Also, for 300 hp, the car is pretty darn slow.
Really - it used to be "It's crap if it's not 6 seconds" now it's 5 seconds? Last I checked humans haven't evolved in the last 10-20 years. 5.7 seconds... Most people would consider it as "really fast".
Oh - and it's not a test-track only result. I've driven it and it'll go just as fast at about any speed thanks to its agressive gearbox. It's fast off the line and in the twisties as well. Your Camry isn't even in the rear view mirror anymore after a couple of miles. And AWD is a nice plus in bad weather. Oh - it's REAL AWD, btw - simmilar to Subaru and Audi. Full-time and not part-time. Makes a huge impact in how it handles, which is why it's an A6 competitor. For handling, it's "sporty" and then some. The 4-piston disc brakes back this up. GM - still using 1 or 2 piston calipers for comparison.
P.S. Who cares about the discount? Get one before they redesign/kill it in 2008.
A couple of reviews(wanted a review with manual, so it's U.K. site):
http://www.carpages.co.uk/volvo/volvo-s60r-review-part-1-20-01-05.asp
http://www.carpages.co.uk/volvo/volvo_s60_t5_se_review_part_1_04_01_04.asp
because shoppers always overlook volvo. Especially shoppers looking for 300 hp AWD 6-speed sedans. you say "S60R" to the regular shmoe on the street and he answers, "what? who?"
Also, for 300 hp, the car is pretty darn slow.
300 hp, AWD, and a mid-size luxo sedan. Let's say it gives up 3/4 of a second to the 335. That's not bad for being bigger and having AWD.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
Regards,
OW
$32,000 is a really good deal on what is undeniably a solid, AWD entry-level luxury performance sedan.
One of the nice things about Volvo's (like BMW's) is the aftermarket support. There are plenty of speed parts (springs, shocks, sway bars, chips, etc.) to make these cars into real wolves in sheep clothing.
Good find Plekto!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rApj9u_kRPo&mode=related&search=
Regards,
OW
1. I wouldn't touch the Saab because you are pretty much buying a GM car. However, if you like GM then that's another story.
2. If you are going with the A4, my suggestion is that get the 3.0 instead of 2.0T. The 4 cylinder turbo is way underpower in my point of view.
3. If there are no major changes between the 07' and 06' I don't see why not to take the advantage of the year end deal.
4. I personally would purchase instead of lease. Don't ask me why but that's just me.
Why? Because it's an Audi, a nameplate that's been near the bottom of quality surveys for a few years now. They've been almost legendary in their terrible reliability, so much that I personally wouldn't risk buying one outright. Who knows? You may have better luck...
The Saab? Not much better reliability-wise, but a friend of the family is driving his third Saab, and has had NO problems with any of them (he still has two of them and the third went to his son in college). The 9-3 isn't bad, especially for the price.
Are they all on equal footing with you? Does one stand out in YOUR eyes? Remember, you'll be the one driving it...
Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi,Audi.
The Saab.. you'll probably be able to negotiate the best deal on this guy as far as over all price. Wait, are you leasing, or buying outright?
I think for everyday driving, it's really hard to beat Audi. BMW does some things better, especially if you want to occasionally track the car. Have you driven them all? Most of us are going to chose the one that feels the best behind the wheel.
Ok. I see that you have some buying and leasing options. You then have to ask yourself, do I want to be in a car until it's paid off. There is something to be said for turning the car in at the end of 3 years or so and getting something else. Most "financial minded" people will tell you to buy slightly used, and drive till dead.
My guess is that you'll find the Saab a little "loose" compared to the Audi. Check out the "10 steps to leasing a car" here on Edmunds. Unless you are already familiar about the financial aspects of both that is.
Good luck, and don't be a stranger after you get the car.
Dan
Okay blueguy, I'll bite!
"And there is just one other cloud on this twin-turbo’s horizon, too, BMW’s next release – the 335d. This fuel-sipping diesel will be even faster, so the perfect reviews are almost writing themselves already.
The diesel’s only downfall is the automatic box, as the near perfect six-speed manual in the 335 simply can’t take the torque, and this is by far most enticing option for serious drivers. It’s a good semi-automatic, but if you’re going that way then wait for the oil-burner that could single-handedly rewrite the rules on diesel motoring.
The BMW 3 Series might be the icon of corporate avarice, but the reassuringly expensive 335i Coupe also happens to be one of the best everyday cars in the world."
Does anyone have further details?
Regards,
OW
unfortunately, I can't do that. I have yet to drive the 335i. And it might be a while before I do since I'm not currently in the market.
'11 GMC Sierra 1500; '98 Alfa 156 2.0TS; '08 Maser QP; '67 Coronet R/T; '13 Fiat 500c; '20 S90 T6; '22 MB Sprinter 2500 4x4 diesel; '97 Suzuki R Wagon; '96 Opel Astra; '11 Mini Cooper S
The "keyless start" is a great option, actually. I don't agree that it should be a standard item, but I REALLY don't understand why the keyed-start cars need to press a button as well as insert/turn the key. AFAIC, you either need one or the other, that's it.
What happens if the transponder is dead? How do you access/run the car then?
For what it's worth, in my raggety old June, 1994 issue of Car and Driver, the 1995 270 horsepower 911 Carrera was tested at 4.7 seconds and the 1995 190 horsepower Nissan Maxima SE was tested at 6.7 seconds.
Not sure I would ever clain the Audi A6 as a handling target, though. I was given one as a loaner when I took my 911 in for an oil change and it seemed excessively heavy compared to a 530i or even a 4,000 lb 550i. I'm just not a fan of AWD on sports cars or sports sedans. Great for all weather touring, but give me the lighter RWD setup for nimble handling on dry pavement. That's my opinion from comparing the M3 to the S4, 911C2S to the C4S, 530i to 530ix.
1992 Porsche 968 5.9
2001 Porsche Boxster S 5.6
1994 Toyota Supra Turbo 5.3
2004 Mazda RX-8 5.8
1982 Lamborghini Countach S 5.7
2000 Jaguar XKR 5.6
2006 Honda S2000 5.5
1986 Ferrari Testarossa 5.3
1970 Ferrari 330 GTS 6.9
1990 Chevrolet Corvette 5.7
1990 Chevrolet Camaro IROC-Z 5.8
1987 Buick Regal GNX 4.7(just to prove old doesn't mean slow)
1995 BMW M3 6.2
1998 BMW M3 Sedan 5.5
1999 Aston Martin DB7 5.7
1993 Acura NSX 5.6
2006 Volvo S60R 5.7
As fast as a Countach S, a DB7, and a 1990 Corvette?
But it's not a "sports sedan". Lol.
Compared to the 335 the S60 is a pig. I wouldn't want to the QNX around curves either, you would end up in the morgue.
If I'm not mistaken, none of the vehicles in the last two posts are in this class.
KD, I think you're exaggerating a little. The S60R may not possess the steering feel or dynamics of a BMW, but then again, what car does?
The S60R is a fast, well-mannered, capable, and sporty near-lux sedan. It's blend of comfort, performance, and unique style deserves a look from any enthusiast shopping this segment - especially at $32,000.
If only Mazda made a fast RWD sedan. Sigh...
Now the coupe is downright syrupy sweet.
Volvo is a lot like BMW in that, they do what they do best better than anyone else (I think that makes sense).
KD: In this segment, I agree with you 100%. The S60 is a solid entry in this class, but sport sedans are not what Volvo does best. It may not be a 3-series or G35, but it's hardly a "pig."