Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

flightnurse

rayainsw said:

I mentioned the RPM at cruising speeds in the S3.
The Edmunds test specs show RPM at 70 = 2500.
As one other data point, my Charger would be traveling
at approx. 120 MPH at 2500 RPM in 8th gear.
- Ray
Just sayin' .....

Ray, I would love to see a photo of this, even the BMW 550i isn't doing 120 at 2500...

roadburner

graphicguy said:

In Cadillac's case, perception IS NOT reality. It's going to take some time to shake the grat Uncle image. That said, the one enticement that got me to wtite a check was my car's low $40s selling price.

I'll put my CTS up against a $60K+ E series or 5 series any day....and be glad I bought the Caddy.

That said....it doesn't ride or drive ANYTHING resembling the Caddy of yesteryear. Their long time customers are long gone. Those folks were chased out of the Cadillac showroom and told not to leave their forwarding address.

Hmmm...

flightnurse

graphicguy said:

In Cadillac's case, perception IS NOT reality. It's going to take some time to shake the grat Uncle image. That said, the one enticement that got me to wtite a check was my car's low $40s selling price.

I'll put my CTS up against a $60K+ E series or 5 series any day....and be glad I bought the Caddy.

That said....it doesn't ride or drive ANYTHING resembling the Caddy of yesteryear. Their long time customers are long gone. Those folks were chased out of the Cadillac showroom and told not to leave their forwarding adress.

Graphic, I wish the Auto Mag's would do a comparison of 4 cyl Luxury cars, but then again the E class wouldn't be part of that since the only 4 cyl they have is E250 BluTech. But Audi, BMW and Caddy could go head to head for the battle of who has the best 4 cyl luxury car..

roadburner

I think we need to discuss some of the factors that current buyers look for in an ELLPS, such as:

Which car does the best job of attracting envious glances and telegraphing your disposable income to other drivers and pedestrians?
Are there any modern waxes or polishes that can enhance the above qualities?
How can I make my car understeer even more?

Inquiring wearers want to know!!!

flightnurse

roadburner said:

graphicguy said:

In Cadillac's case, perception IS NOT reality. It's going to take some time to shake the grat Uncle image. That said, the one enticement that got me to wtite a check was my car's low $40s selling price.

I'll put my CTS up against a $60K+ E series or 5 series any day....and be glad I bought the Caddy.

That said....it doesn't ride or drive ANYTHING resembling the Caddy of yesteryear. Their long time customers are long gone. Those folks were chased out of the Cadillac showroom and told not to leave their forwarding address.

Hmmm...

Problem Graphic has a 4 cyl CTS, not a V6.. Also I read that for 2017 the new 5 series will be roughly 250lbs lighter.

kyfdx

rayainsw said:

I have verified:
TOP-GEAR REVS @ 60 MPH 1,250 rpm
= roughly @ 65 1,350
@ 70 1,450
@ 75 1,550
@ 80 1,650
And calculated:
@ 120 2,500

Wow...

Now, I'll guess ( ) that once the wind-drag load picks up, the transmission will choose a lower gear, at some point/speed... Seems doubtful that it would actually be in 8th gear at 120 MPH (maybe at the bottom of Pikes Peak?).

roadburner

roadburner said:

Just recently talked to a long time BMW enthusiast; he has always owned the latest and greatest M3 or M5- and even crewed on a BMW LSR attempt. He told me that he now drives a CTS Vsport. I asked him why and his answer was:
"The Ultimate Driving Machine has left the building."

BWTM:
Just yesterday I talked to another friend; he used to have an E39 M5 that he used as his HPDE instructor car. It was getting long in the tooth and-after checking out the E60 and F10 M5-he decided to buy a CTS-V.

And one more thing; my friend used to be on the staff of Bimmer magazine.

carnaught

The way I see it is that the biggest disadvantage of owning the CTS short term is the price. Of course that is mitigated by a good deal . The jury is still out on ownership in the long term.

rayainsw

kyfdx -
In full automatic, you may well be correct.
[ I have no intention of attempting verification. ]
Locked manually into top \ 8th gear, I am
confident of these numbers - and I have seen the
60 - 80 MPH readings.
- Ray
Probably going to be chastised for being off ELLPS topic here........

kyfdx

Probably going to be chastised to well off ELLPS topic here........

Well... not by me..

I wish I could remember the formula..

(Final drive ratio) X (top gear ratio) X 1000 = RPMs at 60 MPH?

Someone help me out... lol

roadburner

kyfdx said:

Probably going to be chastised to well off ELLPS topic here........

Well... not by me..

I wish I could remember the formula..

(Final drive ratio) X (top gear ratio) X 1000 = RPMs at 60 MPH?

Someone help me out... lol

To find engine RPM:

(337 x GR x S)/D = RPM
Where:
337 is a conversion factor
GR is the gear ratio
S is the speed in miles per hour
D is the tire diameter

kyfdx

roadburner said:

kyfdx said:

Probably going to be chastised to well off ELLPS topic here........

Well... not by me..

I wish I could remember the formula..

(Final drive ratio) X (top gear ratio) X 1000 = RPMs at 60 MPH?

Someone help me out... lol

To find engine RPM:

(337 x GR x S)/D = RPM
Where:
337 is a conversion factor
GR is the gear ratio
S is the speed in miles per hour
D is the tire diameter

Thanks.. I think "final drive ratio" already incorporates the 337 and the tire diameter in there, but I might be wrong..

rayainsw

337 * 1.75 * 120 = 70,770
/
28.68
=
2467

kyfdx

rayainsw said:

337 * 1.75 * 120 = 70,770
/
28.68
=
2467

Okay.. the GR is final drive X gear ratio.. right? 2.65 X 0.67?

Makes sense..

rayainsw

2.62 x .667.
Correct.
Tires = 245/45x20.

cdnpinhead

BMW has clearly decided that the enthusiasts who built the brand 40 years ago are no longer of any significant value, relative to those who appreciate numb electric steering and soft suspensions -- never mind RFTs and electric oil level sensors that don't always work.

I haven't let the door hit me on the way out, and I'm sure the 0.2% of the market who feels the same way hasn't either.

The real question is, where do we go from here? I want a diesel-powered station wagon with a manual transmission. BMW makes several which would perfectly meet my desires, but none are sold in North America. Almost no one else cares, so I guess they're doing it correctly.

stickguy

A stick diesel? Better hope VW offers it in the new golf sport wagon.

qbrozen

billyperks4 said:

I disagree with the CTS been in the same league as a F10- maybe the non sport version.

I guess I drank the kool aid now that I own a F10 but with all partiality aside the N55 engine is a blast to drive.

So, before I comment, I need to know why you feel the sport pack makes a difference in such a comparison. I mean, the adjustable magnetic ride control on my CTS is generally regarded as superior in any comparison, so you can't be talking about suspension. I'd give the nod to the BMW sport seats, so maybe that is all you are referring to, although I can't imagine calling 2 cars in different leagues based on just that.

BTW, my CTS's TT 3.6 has far more power over a far wider band than the TT 3.0 in my 135i did.

billyperks4

Brozen-I am not knocking the Caddy, all I am trying to say (and this is just me) the 5 is just a nicer car to own all around. My tv/audio installer has the CTS and quiet frankly it is a nice car but its just not "me".
Can I have at least have an opinion?-it does not hurt to have one-right?.

roadburner

qbrozen said:

BTW, my CTS's TT 3.6 has far more power over a far wider band than the TT 3.0 in my 135i did.

I fitted the 2.3 DI turbo in my MS3 with a low restriction MS intake as well as an extremely conservative ECU remap; while the N55 does produce appreciably more torque below 2800 rpm, from 2800 rpm to 6000 rpm the 2.3 cranks out 20 lb-ft to 44 lb-ft more torque. Which motor is "best" depends on one's personal preference. In my case, the 2.3 power curve fits both the car and my driving style- and with a 0-100 time in the mid twelves I can refer to the MS3 as "quick" with a reasonably straight face.

qbrozen

billyperks4 said:

Brozen-I am not knocking the Caddy, all I am trying to say (and this is just me) the 5 is just a nicer car to own all around. My tv/audio installer has the CTS and quiet frankly it is a nice car but its just not "me".
Can I have at least have an opinion?-it does not hurt to have one-right?.

Well, certainly. But I can at least admit they are in the "same league," sport pack or no.

qbrozen

roadburner said:

qbrozen said:

BTW, my CTS's TT 3.6 has far more power over a far wider band than the TT 3.0 in my 135i did.

I fitted the 2.3 DI turbo in my MS3 with a low restriction MS intake as well as an extremely conservative ECU remap; while the N55 does produce appreciably more torque below 2800 rpm, from 2800 rpm to 6000 rpm the 2.3 cranks out 20 lb-ft to 44 lb-ft more torque. Which motor is "best" depends on one's personal preference. In my case, the 2.3 power curve fits both the car and my driving style- and with a 0-100 time in the mid twelves I can refer to the MS3 as "quick" with a reasonably straight face.

My 135 was definitely fast, especially after I added the tune, downpipes, and intake. But the curve still wasn't as fat and flat as the Caddy's feels. For example, if I was in the wrong gear in the bimmer, it would just fall flat, while that doesn't seem to be the case in the CTS. Of course, an extra 20% of displacement probably has alot to do with that.

roadburner

qbrozen said:

roadburner said:

qbrozen said:

BTW, my CTS's TT 3.6 has far more power over a far wider band than the TT 3.0 in my 135i did.

I fitted the 2.3 DI turbo in my MS3 with a low restriction MS intake as well as an extremely conservative ECU remap; while the N55 does produce appreciably more torque below 2800 rpm, from 2800 rpm to 6000 rpm the 2.3 cranks out 20 lb-ft to 44 lb-ft more torque. Which motor is "best" depends on one's personal preference. In my case, the 2.3 power curve fits both the car and my driving style- and with a 0-100 time in the mid twelves I can refer to the MS3 as "quick" with a reasonably straight face.

My 135 was definitely fast, especially after I added the tune, downpipes, and intake. But the curve still wasn't as fat and flat as the Caddy's feels. For example, if I was in the wrong gear in the bimmer, it would just fall flat, while that doesn't seem to be the case in the CTS. Of course, an extra 20% of displacement probably has alot to do with that.

Displacement is definitely a factor- and a flat torque curve plays to the strengths of the excellent automatic transmissions we have today. In my case, once you are above 40 mph or so any gear from 3rd through 6th will get the job done- the only difference is how fast. 3rd and 4th or the go-to gears if you want to make really rapid progress on a winding two lane road, but really you can just leave it in 6th from 50 mph-up and still have enough acceleration in reserve to humiliate most challengers.

I've been looking around for a manual CTS-V and they are certainly thin on the ground- good ones are, at any rate. I also wouldn't mind a G8 GXP with a stick, but most of those were bought and stored away by collectors

rayainsw

The BMW 335iS I had [ 370 TQ from the factory ]
was probably the best turbocharged vehicle I have
ever driven. It seemed always to be in the right gear
[ DCT ] or willing to pull with authority and immediacy,
even if [ manual mode ] in a less than ideal gear for the chore.
Part of this was certainly the gearing here.
130 MPH [ legal = on the German Autobahn ]
in top gear = 7th was 4400 RPM!
[ And yes, I have a picture - taken by my daughter. ]
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/rayainsw/media/BMW Euro Deliv/BMW Euro Deliv Jens Pics/IMG_0968130MPH.jpg.html?sort=3&o=3

- Ray
TQ junkie....

roadburner

rayainsw said:

The BMW 335iS I had [ 370 TQ from the factory ]
was probably the best turbocharged vehicle I have
ever driven. It seemed always to be in the right gear
[ DCT ] or willing to pull with authority and immediacy,
even if [ manual mode ] in a less than ideal gear for the chore.
Part of this was certainly the gearing here.
130 MPH [ legal = on the German Autobahn ]
in top gear = 7th was 4400 RPM!
[ And yes, I have a picture - taken by my daughter. ]
http://smg.photobucket.com/user/rayainsw/media/BMW Euro Deliv/BMW Euro Deliv Jens Pics/IMG_0968130MPH.jpg.html?sort=3&o=3

- Ray
TQ junkie....

My MS3 now peaks at 324 lb-ft at 4050 rpm. In 6th(top) gear that is only 104 mph.

billyperks4

Burner- If you are happy with your Mazda and all the modifications-all hats off to you.
I had a Mazda too (a Millennia not the "S")- first new car after graduation back in 2000.
I loved it and did not want to part with it, but Mazda USA did not want to budge on their buy out price (Residual) after my lease was up.

I have got to say, they make very good cars but I am always looking for that upgrade- Can you M6 Grand Coupe M Sport in one breath.

graphicguy

billy...no harm, no foul. I was not enamored with the 5 Series....especially for the price (low $60s). As far as one being nicer than the other? Can't really make that connection. I think the build and materials might actually be a little better in the CTS vs the 5. You don't see it that way. No problem for me. That's why they make all sorts of different cars, models at all kinds of price points. Plenty of choice for everyone.

I do like the 2.0 turbo motors that Cadillac, Audi and BMW use. I like the one in the Caddy a bit better than the other ones, though. INHU, it pulls stronger than the other two. My opinion is the CTS handles better, too. Cadillac really dialed in the suspension on the CTS.

Haven't driven the diesel in the E Class. So, I can't comment on it.

Now, if you ask me about the straight six twin scroll turbo with the performance package I had in my E92, then I'd be hard pressed to pick any of the other turbo 4s over that motor. But, you put that in a 5 Series and you're closing in on $70K.

I'd probably opt for a CTS-V (or even a less expensive CTS-VSport) for that kind of cash.

FN....would love to see a pro comparison with 4 cyl luxury sports sedans.

roadburner

billyperks4 said:

I have got to say, they make very good cars but I am always looking for that upgrade- Can you M6 Grand Coupe M Sport in one breath.

An M6 Grand Coupe M Sport? That's news to me.

I assume you mean the M6 Gran Coupe; it is a decent enough cruiser, but I can't saythat I like it all that much better than the B7 press loaner that I took to Motorsport Ranch in 2007. The Competition package might make it more acceptable, but I haven't tried a car so equipped. Still, at the end of the day the M235i and M3/4 remain the only new BMWs I'd seriously consider owning.

rayainsw

An M235i sedan, with a version of the 370 TQ 3.0 six cylinder
from the 2011 335iS coupe I had [ and the ZF 8 speed automatic ]
would interest me.
A lot - if priced reasonably .....
- Ray
VERY unlikely, I know...

laurasdada

You payz your money, you buyz your car. Personally, while in the same league as the wife's F10 535xi, I much prefer driving my XF. While not lighter in weight, it feels so behind the wheel. XF seats better bolstered than the 5s standard chairs, both interiors nice, but the XF a bit more stylized. Both have their quirks, of course, e.g. hockey puck vs. beer tap shifter. Much better feel behind the wheel of the XF, 5 too boosted. Of course, iDrive is a bit better than the Windows Vista infotainment in the Jag!

But, Zaino, now there's a winner!

graphicguy

roadburner said:

graphicguy said:

In Cadillac's case, perception IS NOT reality. It's going to take some time to shake the grat Uncle image. That said, the one enticement that got me to wtite a check was my car's low $40s selling price.

I'll put my CTS up against a $60K+ E series or 5 series any day....and be glad I bought the Caddy.

That said....it doesn't ride or drive ANYTHING resembling the Caddy of yesteryear. Their long time customers are long gone. Those folks were chased out of the Cadillac showroom and told not to leave their forwarding address.

Hmmm...

RB....I drove both the 3.6 and the 2.0T in the CTS. 3.6L is a nice motor. I preferred the 2.0T. It pulled better in the very lower reaches of the RPM band. If it had been a 3.6L TT, then different story.

But, as the review points out, it seems BMW is swapping places with the old Cadillac....getting softer, while the CTS is becoming more of an athlete in the group.

In truth, I think performance numbers for the 3.6L and the 2.0L for the CTS are just about equal. Some rags have the 3.6L a few ticks faster, some have the 2.0L a few ticks faster. Pick the one you like best, which is what I did.

roadburner

Calling cdnpinhead: 2015 Focus ST Diesel Wagon

Not for North America- of course... :@

roadburner

graphicguy said:

But, as the review points out, it seems BMW is swapping places with the old Cadillac....getting softer, while the CTS is becoming more of an athlete in the group.

I've been reading the May issue of Road & Track and, in addition to a great article by my friend Sam Smith on driving an Alpina 2002ti racer at the Monterey Motorsports Reunion, there is an article on the introduction of the new Miata. Guess what Mazda did? They brought along a pristine 1st generation Miata so that journalists could appreciate how the new Miata remains true to the original concept.
Can you imagine BMW even attempting something similar?

billyperks4

But, Zaino, now there's a winner!

A man after my own heart.

billyperks4

"I assume you mean the M6 Gran Coupe; it is a decent enough cruiser, but I can't saythat I like it all that much better than the B7 press loaner that I took to Motorsport Ranch in 2007"

I stand corrected- its indeed M6 Grand Coupe- there is a white one on my dealer's floor with the brown leather- take about DROOLING.

cdnpinhead

roadburner said:

Calling cdnpinhead: 2015 Focus ST Diesel Wagon

Not for North America- of course... :@

Damn!

I actually like Ford products, in principle.

cdnpinhead

It's interesting (I spent my luch break reading my most recent Roundel) that BMW is continuing to direct anyone who wants an "old school" BMW toward the M cars.

I don't want to spend that kind of money. "In the beginning," BMW made such cars at an entry level. They had solid steering, suspensions that made cornering fun, a manual transmission (& dipstick) and not much else.

Those days are so gone.

I don't want to spend $45K+. I can now, but I won't.

kyfdx

"Old school" cars are gone.... no one makes what they made 25 years ago... (or even 10 years ago).

I love my 2006 E46... That's why I keep driving it.... nothing else out there like it.

Also.. we had an '87 BMW 325iS.. (just a few years ago). That car was $28K in 1987.. even entry level was pretty unaffordable for BMW, then...

flightnurse

cdnpinhead said:

BMW has clearly decided that the enthusiasts who built the brand 40 years ago are no longer of any significant value, relative to those who appreciate numb electric steering and soft suspensions -- never mind RFTs and electric oil level sensors that don't always work.

I haven't let the door hit me on the way out, and I'm sure the 0.2% of the market who feels the same way hasn't either.

The real question is, where do we go from here? I want a diesel-powered station wagon with a manual transmission. BMW makes several which would perfectly meet my desires, but none are sold in North America. Almost no one else cares, so I guess they're doing it correctly.

Oh please stop the drama... These "enthusiasts" don't buy enough cars to keep the company afloat... I guess the M235 isn't good enough...

flightnurse

roadburner said:

I assume you mean the M6 Gran Coupe; it is a decent enough cruiser, but I can't saythat I like it all that much better than the B7 press loaner that I took to Motorsport Ranch in 2007. The Competition package might make it more acceptable, but I haven't tried a car so equipped. Still, at the end of the day the M235i and M3/4 remain the only new BMWs I'd seriously consider owning.

A Physician at work just took delivery of a B6, talk about the right amount of luxury and sport in one car, it also has one of the best mid range torque curve I have driven. But the 150K price tag is big time fat.

dino001

flightnurse said:

cdnpinhead said:

BMW has clearly decided that the enthusiasts who built the brand 40 years ago are no longer of any significant value, relative to those who appreciate numb electric steering and soft suspensions -- never mind RFTs and electric oil level sensors that don't always work.

I haven't let the door hit me on the way out, and I'm sure the 0.2% of the market who feels the same way hasn't either.

The real question is, where do we go from here? I want a diesel-powered station wagon with a manual transmission. BMW makes several which would perfectly meet my desires, but none are sold in North America. Almost no one else cares, so I guess they're doing it correctly.

Oh please stop the drama... These "enthusiasts" don't buy enough cars to keep the company afloat... I guess the M235 isn't good enough...

It's true, but they were ones who shouted from rooftops how great their product was, worth paying the money. So the crowd came, but BMW decided the services of shouting are no longer required. They may be right, for now. It's more important if in say ten-twenty years, when nobody shouts and people buy because they got a good deal, BMW goes Acura's way. It's easy to imagine that. Acura was also on the rise, until it was not. They basically have two models of consequence - MDX and TLX, and the latter one is still not close in popularity to old TL. I don't know, we will see.

robr2

flightnurse said:

cdnpinhead said:

BMW has clearly decided that the enthusiasts who built the brand 40 years ago are no longer of any significant value, relative to those who appreciate numb electric steering and soft suspensions -- never mind RFTs and electric oil level sensors that don't always work.

I haven't let the door hit me on the way out, and I'm sure the 0.2% of the market who feels the same way hasn't either.

The real question is, where do we go from here? I want a diesel-powered station wagon with a manual transmission. BMW makes several which would perfectly meet my desires, but none are sold in North America. Almost no one else cares, so I guess they're doing it correctly.

Oh please stop the drama... These "enthusiasts" don't buy enough cars to keep the company afloat... I guess the M235 isn't good enough...

True - even in the 80's, BMW was becoming a status car for poseurs. They may have been "driver's cars" but the vast marketplace wanted the symbol.

ivan_99

kyfdx said:

"Old school" cars are gone.... no one makes what they made 25 years ago... (or even 10 years ago).

I love my 2006 E46... That's why I keep driving it.... nothing else out there like it.

Also.. we had an '87 BMW 325iS.. (just a few years ago). That car was $28K in 1987.. even entry level was pretty unaffordable for BMW, then...

Unfortunately...$28K in 1987 is almost $58K in today's dollars.

stever

Did you buy your most recent car at least in part because you were drawn to the car's automated safety features (such as adaptive cruise control, parking assist, automatic braking, lane departure warnings, etc.)? If so, a reporter would like to hear your story. Please contact PR@edmunds.com by no later than Monday, April 20, 2015.

markcincinnati

Old School -- not even sure, anymore, what that means exactly. I wouldn't give up ABS, ESP, Blind Spot Warnings, Parktronic, Rear, Front, Top-view cameras, torque vectoring differentials, brake assist, turbo or super charged "cleaner" engines, adjustable suspensions, dual clutch "automatic manual" transmissions, fuel stratified injection, voice commands, hand and eyes free phoning capabilities, sat navigation and all the apparently "New School" tech noted and most of what I didn't note, too.

My all time favorite car -- until now -- was a 1995 Audi S6, fully loaded, manual transmission version. I loved that car. As my newer cars came along, I appreciated their improved technology, safety, performance and luxury, but that certain something the 1995 S6 had was always something I looked and hoped for.

Finally, my '14 S4 has both that "certain something" (old school) coupled with the tech and features available on a modern car (new school).

I bet if someone brought me a pristine 1995 S6 to drive, I'd find it, today, underwhelming.

Of course, that was then, this is now . . . I've let go of the past, even though I still remember it with great affection.

I really doubt there would be much of a market for old school vehicles anyway. . . .

I can't wait for "the next" new school treat from the planet's best automakers.

Signed,

Often wrong, never uncertain.

roadburner

I think that the reason you like your S4 is because the things you liked about your 1995 car are part and parcel of the modern car's driving experience. VW learned the that lesson the hard way; after receiving all sorts of accolades for the Mk I and Mk II GTI, the Mk III and Mk IV were hammered for being soft and uninvolving. VW found the plot again(as the Brits put it) with the Mk V and have not deviated off course with the Mk VI or Mk VII.

I know it is an overused concept, but when a successful automaker deviates from their core DNA, bad things will probably happen. In the case of BMW, the prevalent attitude is: "Want a BMW that drives like a BMW? It's gonna cost you!" It's akin to Hsu Research or Velodyne announcing, "From now on, all of our subwoofers priced under $1,500 will sound no better than a Bose Acoustimass- but they will look just like our high quality subs. Fork over another $1,000 if you want the sound to match the nameplate."

cdnpinhead

Is this where I get to say "please stop the drama?"

I don't think I want to.

roadburner

Light at the end of the tunnel? 2016 7 Series
Granted, the 7er is most certainly NOT an ELLPS, but a key quote from the story provides a bit of hope:

There’s less steering feedback than we prefer, but in every other sense this light and lively 7 appears as if it may vault BMW back to its glory days as the world leader in driving dynamics.

Unfortunately, it seems that when one refers to the steering of a current BMW as being "dumbed-down," the characterization is-sadly-literally quite accurate:

...tuning the electric assist to provide more[feedback] is not that much of a challenge. Unfortunately, luxury buyers whine when too much sense of the road tickles their fingers, so BMW engineers are forced into numb steering by customer demand.

circlew

I broke down and leased a '15 Q50S but it has AWD! Skipped the steer-by-wire which costs more for weird steering gremlins since it's new tech. I'm sure this will improve and they'll figure out the "simulated steering feel" settings going forward to satisfy everyone. (Saw one video that shows you can set the car to drive itself for a short period of time when cruising and lane assist engaged.)

Love the seats in the sport with the thigh support and they did a great job on NVH reduction from the G. Fast but the Q isn't a weekend track mule, that's for sure. Only picked it up last week so not many miles since I'm traveling at the moment....

graphicguy

Circle....congrats. Are we to assume the S model has hydralic steering?