Entry Level Luxury Performance Sedans

flightnurse

roadburner said:

I agree 100%. And the suits at VW should know better- especially after the drubbing they received in the early '80s when US built Rabbits were softened and "Americanized."

The sales of the current Passt is higher then the last Gen, the previous Gen passt was too expensive, just like the Jetta. I too liked the previous Gen Passt, felt more like an Audi then a VW. I think this is why VW has a hard time selling the CC, it's expensive..

dino001

Michaell said:

Try make an order at a Honda dealer - you get rolling eyes, laugh, dismissal, or even anger. Not to mention that Honda itself simply doesn't build ordered cars - it builds whatever it thinks will sell and then MAYBE you get lucky when one of those cars will be what you ordered. There is some chance, as they generally limit possible combinations.

Look at the option list for a 3-series, then for an Accord. Big difference. Really, the only "options" are for dealer added accessories. You want leather for your LX? Sure, here's the Katzkin catalog. Can't get it from the factory. At all.

But you can option up a 320i to $45K if you tick all the boxes.

It's not comparing apples to oranges. More like apples to coffee tables.

I was aware of that. Current situation is a result of years of "streamlining". I probably should have chosen Toyota as my example, as those guys have much more elaborate option structure, yet the ordering mindset is just like Honda's, not BMW's.

dino001

kyfdx said:

Taking delivery the same day is more of a dealer-driven phenomemon than a consumer need for instant gratification. It's the whole "bird in hand" thing..

They are afraid to let the consumer go home and think about it... either getting cold feet or shopping the deal.

It's probably both, self-feeding feedback loop. Because dealers have large inventory and expensive infrastructure to support they will always prefer "bird at hand" (aka instant gratification), they push more for it. The consumers know it, so they adjust behavior accordingly. Of course then dealers claim "it's what customers want". The gratification of actually driving the car the same day and having the interest payment stopped helps, of course.

dino001

flightnurse said:

Acura is the same, the have a limited selection of color combo's, if you want a MDX with a blue exterior, then you will have to settle for black or grey interior.

Didn't we just talk about not having to settle when buying a car?

Honda and Acura are at least honest about it: some things simply don't even exist in their catalogs. I can deal with that - if it's not there, it's not there. The problem is, others (Toyota, Ford, Mazda) have myriad of combinations "available", but units on dealers' lots are "what sells" (understandable) and salespeople are not very receptive to order talk (not understandable). BMW and Benz will usually gladly take an order. It seems VW dealers stay more on the "popular brand" side, i.e. it's as Roadburner said, "cold fusion" difficult.

My other problem is, if not a single lot unit has certain type of option (like suspension) that is essential to the way the vehicle feels, how in the world can know whether or not I want it?

tlong

flightnurse said:

roadburner said:

I agree 100%. And the suits at VW should know better- especially after the drubbing they received in the early '80s when US built Rabbits were softened and "Americanized."

The sales of the current Passt is higher then the last Gen, the previous Gen passt was too expensive, just like the Jetta. I too liked the previous Gen Passt, felt more like an Audi then a VW. I think this is why VW has a hard time selling the CC, it's expensive..

Well they seem to be having a hard time selling what they have out now. Their sales are down and way below targets.

dino001

tlong said:

flightnurse said:

roadburner said:

I agree 100%. And the suits at VW should know better- especially after the drubbing they received in the early '80s when US built Rabbits were softened and "Americanized."

The sales of the current Passt is higher then the last Gen, the previous Gen passt was too expensive, just like the Jetta. I too liked the previous Gen Passt, felt more like an Audi then a VW. I think this is why VW has a hard time selling the CC, it's expensive..

Well they seem to be having a hard time selling what they have out now. Their sales are down and way below targets.

VW's problem was they alienated their old customers, but initially gained some ground on their cheaper and dumbed down models, but ran out of steam. My guess is people figured out that if you want a Corolla clone, better get the original. To me VW is a cautionary tale to BMW. You may have an early success, such as a new Jetta and Passat had, but this doesn't guarantee long run.

BTW, I read somewhere that new then Jetta and Passat were responses on dealers screaming for a car "for Americans". I guess beware what you wish for...

roadburner

VW has never really understood the US market since the days of the original Rabbit. The one constant has been their "Throw it at the wall and see if it sticks." marketing strategy

robr2

As a VW owner and an active member of a VW forum, I feel that I can speak to some of their issues.

Traditional VW buyers want a German made car with a Teutonic feel but they want it at Toyota, Hyundai, Honda prices. They complain about Mexican or US made models and cars targeting at the American market. But they don't get the fact that a German car made in Germany is going to cost more.

The enthusiasts are worse. They complain about the lack of MK II Golf type car. They want the Polo to come to the US with a diesel, 5 sp, crank windows and no airbags. And they want it for $10K. They want the Bulli. They want the Amorak. They want the Caddy. Oh, and they will only buy them used.

The current US Passat is a fine car. The problem is that VW didn't bother to upgrade it every couple of years like the big Asian companies do. A manufacturer can't sell the same car for 8 years anymore with a minor facelift at year 5.

VW also has missed the boat on crossovers. They need a Tiguan replacement and a 7 seat crossover right now. They have talked about the Crossblue (Passat based 7 seat crossover) for 3 years now and they are targeting the 2017 time frame now.

dino001

In ither words, they are too slow. BTW, great description, LOL.

Michaell

Excellent summation, @robr2

I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc.

Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

henryn

Michaell said:

Try make an order at a Honda dealer - you get rolling eyes, laugh, dismissal, or even anger. Not to mention that Honda itself simply doesn't build ordered cars - it builds whatever it thinks will sell and then MAYBE you get lucky when one of those cars will be what you ordered. There is some chance, as they generally limit possible combinations.

Look at the option list for a 3-series, then for an Accord. Big difference. Really, the only "options" are for dealer added accessories. You want leather for your LX? Sure, here's the Katzkin catalog. Can't get it from the factory. At all.

But you can option up a 320i to $45K if you tick all the boxes.

It's not comparing apples to oranges. More like apples to coffee tables.

Honda is well known for this. 3 years ago, I would have bought an Accord if they would have sold me a V6 without a sunroof. No sale.

Last year, I would have bought a CR-V if they would have sold me an EX-L without a sunroof. No sale.

henryn

kyfdx said:

Taking delivery the same day is more of a dealer-driven phenomemon than a consumer need for instant gratification. It's the whole "bird in hand" thing..

They are afraid to let the consumer go home and think about it... either getting cold feet or shopping the deal.

I remember, clearly, the first time a dealer sent me home in a new car the very day I signed the papers. It was in the evening, I was financing through my credit union, which of course wasn't open. I was like, "How can you give me the keys and let me drive it home when you haven't been paid yet?"

And then there was the first time a dealer told me to take it home for the weekend, see if I liked it, bring it back on Monday (or sign the papers if I wanted to keep it).


"The world has moved on", as Steven King kept repeating in the Dark Tower series. The older I get, the more I like / appreciate / resemble those words.

robr2

Michaell said:

Excellent summation, @robr2

I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc.

Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

The strong dollar does make exporting the Polo cheaper but would it be cheap enough? What happens when the dollar weakens and then VW is losing money on every Polo imported from Spain? Perhaps if the next Polo (MK VII) moves onto the MQB platform, then it can be made in the US or Mexico and be profitable.

henryn

robr2 said:

As a VW owner and an active member of a VW forum, I feel that I can speak to some of their issues.

Traditional VW buyers want a German made car with a Teutonic feel but they want it at Toyota, Hyundai, Honda prices. They complain about Mexican or US made models and cars targeting at the American market. But they don't get the fact that a German car made in Germany is going to cost more.

The enthusiasts are worse. They complain about the lack of MK II Golf type car. They want the Polo to come to the US with a diesel, 5 sp, crank windows and no airbags. And they want it for $10K. They want the Bulli. They want the Amorak. They want the Caddy. Oh, and they will only buy them used.

The current US Passat is a fine car. The problem is that VW didn't bother to upgrade it every couple of years like the big Asian companies do. A manufacturer can't sell the same car for 8 years anymore with a minor facelift at year 5.

VW also has missed the boat on crossovers. They need a Tiguan replacement and a 7 seat crossover right now. They have talked about the Crossblue (Passat based 7 seat crossover) for 3 years now and they are targeting the 2017 time frame now.

"The current US Passat is a fine car." Yeah, maybe. But the 2008 Passat that I bought new back in 2008 was a much finer car. Much.

robr2

henryn said:

Michaell said:

Try make an order at a Honda dealer - you get rolling eyes, laugh, dismissal, or even anger. Not to mention that Honda itself simply doesn't build ordered cars - it builds whatever it thinks will sell and then MAYBE you get lucky when one of those cars will be what you ordered. There is some chance, as they generally limit possible combinations.

Look at the option list for a 3-series, then for an Accord. Big difference. Really, the only "options" are for dealer added accessories. You want leather for your LX? Sure, here's the Katzkin catalog. Can't get it from the factory. At all.

But you can option up a 320i to $45K if you tick all the boxes.

It's not comparing apples to oranges. More like apples to coffee tables.

Honda is well known for this. 3 years ago, I would have bought an Accord if they would have sold me a V6 without a sunroof. No sale.

Last year, I would have bought a CR-V if they would have sold me an EX-L without a sunroof. No sale.

Honda has been well known for that since the 1980's. Honda is well committed to the minimal trim lines within a model and then options are dealer installed model. It seems to work for them just fine and in reality, I find that most people would rather have that than a dizzying array of options to choose from. Further, it makes driving it home today much easier.

dino001

Michaell said:

Excellent summation, @robr2

I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc.

Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

You can't make multiyear decisions based on six months of data. It has to work also when dollar is at levels from year ago.

Michaell

dino001 said:

Excellent summation, @robr2 I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc. Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

You can't make multiyear decisions based on six months of data. It has to work also when dollar is at levels from year ago.

So why not consider building the polo in Mexico?

dino001

That could be an option, but considering all costs, generally low volume and pricing centraints of US market, small cars are tough. It's not an easy decision to bring such a vehicle to here.

flightnurse

robr2 said:

Honda has been well known for that since the 1980's. Honda is well committed to the minimal trim lines within a model and then options are dealer installed model. It seems to work for them just fine and in reality, I find that most people would rather have that than a dizzying array of options to choose from. Further, it makes driving it home today much easier.

IT works for them because the buying public allows it to happen. What would happen if Honda's sales would drop say, 13% a year and market research shows that people want to be able to order their cars? Would Honda change?

We can order American cars too, but as it was pointed out the dealers don't like that, but it can be done, and use to be done quite often..

stickguy

you still can't get anything you want with a domestic. Maybe some more packages or stand alone options. But Honda has been this way for a long time, so not likely to change. Very efficient. And frankly, now that sticks are pretty much out of the mix, about the only issue is regarding the moonroof (mostly wanting leather, etc. without one). Other than that, you can get pretty much what you want.

robr2

Michaell said:

dino001 said:

Michaell said:

Excellent summation, @robr2

I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc.

Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

You can't make multiyear decisions based on six months of data. It has to work also when dollar is at levels from year ago.

So why not consider building the polo in Mexico?

Because it would require a dedicated line to build the Polo. It's on an older platform. In fact, VW sells the Vento in Mexico - a Polo based sedan. They import that from India.

robr2

flightnurse said:

robr2 said:

Honda has been well known for that since the 1980's. Honda is well committed to the minimal trim lines within a model and then options are dealer installed model. It seems to work for them just fine and in reality, I find that most people would rather have that than a dizzying array of options to choose from. Further, it makes driving it home today much easier.

IT works for them because the buying public allows it to happen. What would happen if Honda's sales would drop say, 13% a year and market research shows that people want to be able to order their cars? Would Honda change?

We can order American cars too, but as it was pointed out the dealers don't like that, but it can be done, and use to be done quite often..

If that were to actually happen, which we all now is highly doubtful, Honda might change - or they might not.

Buying cars of the lot goes back to the beginning of the auto industry.

flightnurse

stickguy said:

you still can't get anything you want with a domestic. Maybe some more packages or stand alone options. But Honda has been this way for a long time, so not likely to change. Very efficient. And frankly, now that sticks are pretty much out of the mix, about the only issue is regarding the moonroof (mostly wanting leather, etc. without one). Other than that, you can get pretty much what you want.

How about color choice? As I posted if you want a top level Accord, hope black is your favorite color as that is the only color. Anything from EX-L up is limited in color too.. Not too sure what you mean by, " you can get pretty much what you want." In the domestic market you can order separate items, but the trick is finding a dealer that is willing to do it. Ricks father only buys buicks, he just bought a Enclave which he ordered and was able to get stand-a-lone items that where part of a package... So it can happen..

tlong

robr2 said:

Michaell said:

Excellent summation, @robr2

I, for one, would like to see the Polo offered here as an alternative to the Fit, Yaris, Accent, etc.

Shouldn't the strong dollar make imports cheaper?

The strong dollar does make exporting the Polo cheaper but would it be cheap enough? What happens when the dollar weakens and then VW is losing money on every Polo imported from Spain? Perhaps if the next Polo (MK VII) moves onto the MQB platform, then it can be made in the US or Mexico and be profitable.

I would have no problem paying a somewhat premium for a Teutonic (and it doesn't even have to be made in Germany) driving vehicle with a really nice interior - you know, like the early 2000's Jetta and Passat. What I'm tired of (and I owned a Jetta in the late '80) is the ultra high cost of parts and even more so the poor dealer service network and poor reliability. High parts cost is ok if the experience of the car is good and they are reliable. So I really liked the late '90's/early 2000's VWs and nearly bought a Passat as it was much like my '90 Audi A4 - just a bit bigger but still almost as nice in size - practially an ELLPS. Fast forward to the later 200x's and the Passat is bigger, relatively cheaper, and softer. It's more like an American car but still poor reliability, expensive parts, and VW service network. That IMHO is why VW has missed the boat. And also agree that they are slow to respond.

andres3

markcincinnati said:

henryn said:

I, for one, would still do it. Delete the sunroof, that is, even if the price did not decline.

Sunroofs steal headroom, usually about 2 inches. The only car I have been in with a sunroof that did clear my head was a Genesis.

According to my dealer rep, you can delete the sunroof on ordered vehicles. The thing is, however, the thought is you must pay to play when you order a car either in an unpopular color or with options deleted that will make the car, er, "unmarketable."

Increasingly, even the German cars are only purchased "off the lot" -- as we Americans seem to want immediate gratification -- so cars are ordered that the dealer feels confident will sell within some reasonable time frame, thus not incurring interest charges that are above the planned amount.

The off the lot mentality, too, is why so many cars in stock are black, gray, silver with black interiors, etc. We've apparently decided that we want our cars with black paint and black leather -- it is very difficult to find cars with more imaginative color combinations, or without certain packages.

I don't fault the dealers, though, car buying is: test drive and buy on Saturday and, if possible, drive it home on Saturday.

My wife's friend bought a very nice new car, about $70K before discount. A long Saturday test drive, followed by an offer, followed by a pick up on Monday. Wham bam, thank you m'am.

Now, the car in question looked like the Batmobile (well, sort of) and it is a very very nice ride. But, this method of picking out a $70K car seems like settling. I guess it is possible the car was configured EXACTLY as wanted, so ordering it was unnecessary.

But, why not take the time to "build" the car just like many of us build the houses we live in, the suits we wear, etc; and, then wait for the thing to be fabricated to your specifications?

Clearly, there is something wrong with me.

I am thinking that I purchased ONE new Audi off the lot and purchased one "previously owned" Audi (essentially off the lot, too) out of 32 of them. I kept the new one I bought off the lot for less than 12 months because it wasn't equipped to my liking. See, something's just not right with me.

The last time I was in Germany was 2005 -- at that time, the Audi dealer in Munich I spoke with said they keep no inventory other than cars for test drives because "everyone" orders their cars. Well, sure, I thought, you're in Munich -- but the same thing is true in Zurich. Folks decide to buy a car, work with a dealer rep to order the car, wait 4-6 weeks and pick it up -- getting EXACTLY the car they wanted. Is this still European practice?

Anyway, if you don't want a sunroof, order the damn car without it -- it's your money after all.

The 2014 S4 Order form I used to customize my order for the 2014 S4 didn't have a "delete Moon-roof" option written on it. I suppose I should have thought of "writing in" my specifications, but with no credit, I'd of probably hesitated to delete it. If they'd even give me $50 back I'd do it.

andres3

dino001 said:

markcincinnati said:

Here's another issue with the current American Way of buying: there is virtually no opportunity to experience certain options, since the dealer rarely stocks cars with (for example only) Blind Spot Monitoring or Top View Camera, etc.

That is exactly my experience, too. I had to go multiple times just to see how some of those trim colors look like in real life. Another example is dynamic handling package or 3/4-series. Sounds good, especially on X-drive cars that don't get sport suspension with their sport and M-sport lines. NOT A SINGLE unit available with that, across the board - 3-series, 4-series, sedan, coupe, whatever. ZERO. How do I spend, or not spend $1000, if I don't even know what it actually brings? The significance of this one is suspension can completely change ride experience, just like engine, or say type of drive, so it's quite important to know how it will act.

Agreed 100%. How can I choose a color if I haven't seen it in person; paper and monitors often don't come close to replicating actual colors. How can I decide if that 1,100 dollar adaptive S4 suspension is worth the money if there are none to test drive anywhere you go? Also was impossible to find the specs on how much weight, if any, the adaptive suspension adds (I assume it adds some).

andres3

robr2 said:

flightnurse said:

stickguy said:

I also do not think the dealers are willing to explain that the buyer can order a car of their choosing. Which I don't understand since the dealer wouldn't be paying interest on these cars and would be off the lot the following day it arrives...

But they are paying interest on those cars sitting on the lot. Cars cost the dealer money each day they sit in inventory.

But it is argued they order the options and colors that "sell fastest," so that argument holds no water. Why are they paying money for inventory sitting if it "sells fast."

I think this is the chicken and the egg scenario. Dumb car sale managers are controlling what Americans buy because most don't want to wait 6 to 12 weeks for their car. I know with Audi's, if you want what you want, you have to custom order; I'd estimate 90% of the time as dealer's don't like to trade Audi's.

dino001

andres3 said:

I think this is the chicken and the egg scenario. Dumb car sale managers are controlling what Americans buy because most don't want to wait 6 to 12 weeks for their car. I know with Audi's, if you want what you want, you have to custom order; I'd estimate 90% of the time as dealer's don't like to trade Audi's.

I don't think those SM's are dumb. They just have an "average" mind for their average customer. At least Audi or BMW lets you order easily, which is a workaround. I can live with that and I'm even willing to pay, as long as the premium is reasonable. Other brands often take act of Congress.

benjaminh

some entry level lux sales numbers for April:

3/4series 10,374

Cclass 6,665

ES 4,701

TLX 4,093

IS 4,008

LaCrosse 3,585

Q50 2,991

MKZ 2,915

A4 2,327

ATS 2,119

kyfdx

benjaminh said:

some entry level lux sales numbers for April:

3/4series 10,374

Cclass 6,665

ES 4,701

TLX 4,093

IS 4,008

LaCrosse 3,585

Q50 2,991

MKZ 2,915

A4 2,327

ATS 2,119

Lincoln sells more MKZs than Audi does A4s?

Would have never guessed that...

dino001

Neither would I, but I'd like to see percentage of those sold into fleets vs. retail. Also, the fact that ATS is even less, if baffling. Must be a real dog at the moment - and the car isn't so bad. I think the right people haven't found them yet. Looks people likely to like ATS don't even bother to come and look at it.

Michaell

Any numbers for the Q40? I think they should be added to the Q50 numbers.....

roadburner

dino001 said:

Neither would I, but I'd like to see percentage of those sold into fleets vs. retail. Also, the fact that ATS is even less, if baffling. Must be a real dog at the moment - and the car isn't so bad. I think the right people haven't found them yet. Looks people likely to like ATS don't even bother to come and look at it.

Yes the ATS is a great car that is being ignored. It doesn't broadcast the proper image for the wearers and the enthusiasts unjustly write the car off- associating it with the AARP Specials the marque used to crank out.

nyccarguy

Looks like a new addition is coming to the ELLPS family: https://www.yahoo.com/autos/first-drive-2017-jaguar-xe-a-cat-that-purrs-and-118121064842.html

markcincinnati

Someone here wrote that the German practice of a new model designation (with Audi it is B, C, D, etc) is to release a new model every 8 years with a "refresh" at year 5 or 6. This is a practice that, I assume, comes from the desire to amortize development costs (and, in theory, lower the MSRPs) over a long time horizon.

The issue is, car magazines (and the market itself) can latch onto the descriptor: "Long in the tooth." I have a 2014 A4 (B8) sub designated S4. I had a 2009 A4 2.0T Prestige that I took delivery of in 2008. A NEW 2015 A4/S4 is essentially the same as a 2008 available A4. There is, far as I know, no new ordering guide for 2016 A4's available yet.

But, this is the time of year, typically, that you can order a NEW A4 and what will arrive is the NEXT MY. Far as I know -- the operative phrase -- if you go into an Audi dealer and order up a new S4 Prestige with a bunch of options on it, what will arrive is a 2015 B8 version, not the eagerly anticipated B9 morphed model.

At the rate of change that is POSSIBLE, it would seem to me that an 8 year model to model cycle may now be too long. No wonder the A4 is selling poorly -- at this price point, folks want THE NEXT, not THE CURRENT, especially if the CURRENT is, literally, 8 years old, no matter how effective the mid-cycle refresh has been.

Now, I have had my 2014 about a year and a half. I have 25K miles on it. I love this car. I am thinking about replacing the tires thus enjoying the car for the next 35K miles with improved shoes.

I am hoping on a major evolution in the A4 model line as it goes from B8 to B9, and I guess the thing to do is to get the NEW version within the first 2 or 3 MY's into the -- apparent -- 8 year cycle.

I assume my current S4's durability is not in question -- thus far it has been bullet proof. I will be having the car "rejuvinated" at a local detail shop next week. I an assuming this process will do what the name suggests. And, I am looking forward to keeping the car beyond the end of its lease term.

Subsequently, I plan -- plans are nothing, planning is everything -- to buy the next time out, but who knows, things may change. Yet, I still assume I will have to order the car to my specs, but there's the fun, it's like getting a new car TWICE within 90 days.

And, BTW, someone wrote that cars on the lot are less expensive than ordered cars -- I guess there are exceptions to every "rule" -- but in my experience an ordered car is typically hundreds less than a car on the lot; and I've never had a dealer or dealer sales rep indicate anything other than a great willingness to take an order. My rep says he would be fine -- financially, I assume -- if everyone ordered and used the dealership for test drives; this way, he says, he could have more variety available for prospects to test drive.

I don't know anything about "ordering" Hondas, I would no more do that than I would order a new electric can opener, however. I'm partial to Oster's, if you care.

robr2

I'm the one that wrote about VW's long product cycle. I have a B5 Passat. It was available for 1998 to 2005 - 8 model years with only a minor facelift in the 2001 model year. In today's competitive auto market, a car can't stay the same for that long.

Honda used to follow the 2 year minor facelift, 4 year major overhaul, 8 year new car. They have now stretched that to 3 and 6.

My understanding is that the 2016 Audi A4 B9 will be introduced in Frankfurt this September and will probably hit the US in early 2016.

I don't recall anyone saying it's cheaper to buy off the lot versus ordering. For the dealer principal/management, they would prefer you buy off the lot as they have an asset that is costing them money everyday. Just like any inventory intensive business, turning that inventory is key.

As for Hondas, your comment makes you seem a bit elitist. True, they aren't soul filled Teutonic machines with such tight tolerances that failure is inevitable . But they are fine automobiles that must be doing something right as they sell hundreds of thousands every year.

thebean

robr2 said:

.... As for Hondas, your comment makes you seem a bit elitist. True, they aren't soul filled Teutonic machines with such tight tolerances that failure is inevitable . But they are fine automobiles that must be doing something right as they sell hundreds of thousands every year.

+1. Not everyone worships at the altar of German cars.  Some of us would rather drive Honda's and retire early than drive fancy-schmancy cars.  To each their own.

dino001

robr2 said:

I don't recall anyone saying it's cheaper to buy off the lot versus ordering. For the dealer principal/management, they would prefer you buy off the lot as they have an asset that is costing them money everyday. Just like any inventory intensive business, turning that inventory is key.

It's a "wisdom" often repeated in self-help books and websites, based on math of an individual unit cost (no financing cost), not considering overall inventory management economics and psychology of here and certain vs. future and maybe. It also ignores dealer cash incentives that are tied to inventory and taking a delivery in a specific time frame, usually within a month or less. No dealer would commit to a price reduced by a dealer's cash that expires in fifteen days for a car with 8-10 week lead, not eligible for that cash. The incentive may or may not be extended. This alone can put order in a thousand plus dollar disadvantage.

markcincinnati

I have nothing against Hondas -- I did have an Acura TL SH-AWD for a time and thought it the Japanese S4 alternative.

Honda sells an incredible number of units per year -- they offer, apparently, a large number of customers and prospective customers what they want or what they are willing to settle for. That last declaration can be applied to Hondas and Acuras, VW's and Audis and Nissans and Infinitis and Toyotas and Lexus cars.

To some extent, we all settle.

My opinion, and it is a "data point" opinion, is that folks who go for Hondas instead of Acuras, etc, etc, settle more, probably, because they just aren't into cars that much. I work with folks who lease new Corollas every 24 months -- they proclaim in word and deed that their 8 mile per day round trip drive isn't worth getting a Lexus IS350 F-Sport AWD. They see no merit in cars, hoping instead for public transportation that would eliminate their "need" for a car altogether/ Across the hall is another "cars are a necessary evil" individual who is happy to buy a well worn but reliable mini-van opting instead for a new fridge, dishwasher, range and washer and dryer. We also have an empty nester two high income couple who love Acuras. The last player in our small group loves Minis and is as passionate about the brand as I am about Audis.

It takes all kinds.

I would not, on purpose, go to Honda for a new car -- I did dip my toe into Honda in 2012. The Accord line is nice -- but personally, I found it bland, uninvolving but well built with a smooth power train.

I am 63, at this point in my life I find myself repeating "life's too short" whenever I consider any purchase over some at the time appropriate sum.

Every appliance we have purchased -- if we settled too much -- fails quickly, either literally or in its utilitarian aspect. We bought three Whirlpool dishwashers (top of the line) and the damn things kept breaking (thankfully in their warranty period), then when they broke again out of warranty, the repair costs were often about 2/3rds the cost of a new dishwasher. Dishwasher number four was a Bosch -- the thing is a tank and is so quiet its damn near impossible to know if it is running or not.

The point is settle on the things that are not important to you, settle less and less on things that are important to you. If you are "into" (whatever that means to you) cars, you'll probably be compelled toward the ELLPS and LPS models many of us go on about here. If you'd rather have a new Viking range and a new Sub-zero fridge and so on, and aren't made of money, well your choice is much more clear -- go for the great stuff in the kitchen and the good stuff in the garage. I have no quarrel with that.

If you want a larger portfolio and are willing to drive something less than an LPS car, go for that.

Settle on the things you don't care about and don't settle on the things you do.

This is not the entire extent of what I have learned in 63 years, but it did, at the time (way back when) come to feel like an epiphany.

That is why I say: Drive it like you live..

So far, I do not have to settle on a Honda or a Toyota -- but it doesn't mean if you do that I don't respect your decision (unless you are "over-settling" -- you'll easily recognize this if you constantly complain about your new car or whatever).

m6user

Millions buy a Honda or Toyota because it is all they can afford, they are not "settling". It's hard for some to understand that it seems.  Some even aspire to same.

graphicguy

I live near a Mercedes dealer in the county just north of the Greater Cincinnati area. As such, I receive mailings all the time from the dealer, given they captured my contact info when I was helping my sister buy a C class several months ago.

Knowing that the "NEW" C Class was on its way, I told her to hold on for 6-8 months to look at the "all new" 2015 C. But, everyone knew the new C was just around the corner, so the dealers and Mercedes were really aggressive pricewise in selling the '14s.

Anyway, got an email from one of the new sales people at the local Mercedes dealer that was obviously culled from my company's database showing what I'm sure is the only person who works for my company within a 250 mile area (probably bigger). They were having some private showing of a GTS. I ended up on the list to attend a "look see".

Clearly, they didn't have access to my salary info if they thought I was a target customer for the AMG GT-S. But, I had heard about it, read about it, thought it was "cool" so yeah....I'll eat free canapes if they let me sit in it. IF they let me drive it....even better.

I'll cut to the chase. They didn't let me drive it. Got to sit in it, though. I hate the new "flat" paint jobs these cars have. But, I guess the very high end cars are all getting them, Mercedes AMG is no exception.

Can't really see paying as much for a car as a starter home costs, but if you have the disposable income to do so, you'd probably be hard pressed to find a nicer car.

As I wandered from the hoard who was engulfing shrimp cocktail and pate, I spied a humble C-Class outside. Steel Grey with Red Leather (the real stuff....not the fake stuff Mercedes tries to tell you is "better than leather" (it's not). This wasn't the 400, but the lowly 300 with a turbo 4 cyl. Sales guy spots me, asks me what I thought. Told him I liked the color combo better than any I'd seen so far.

At the Autu Show this past winter, they were showing one that was black on black without the sport package....pretty dour. This one, was quite different. Very pretty. Sales guy has keys and a dealer tag before I knew he had left. "Go for a spin?".

"I'm not in the market".

Sales-"I'd rather take you for a test drive and hope you remember me when you are in the market."

"Fair enough".

It's taken me awhile, but I've finally wrapped my head around sports sedans with 4 cyl. Actually, these turbo motors really do amaze me. They're torquey. More fuel efficient. Lighter. And generally, they may not be faster, but just more fun to drive than the recent 6 cyl cars I've had recently. Truth told, they're pretty damned quick in their own right.

This one is no different. I don't know the specs, but it's typical. No turbo lag that I could ascertain. Quick off the line. Pulled hard over a broad RPM range. It was quieter than the growl my CTS gives off (which I like). 7 speed trans that you have to goad a bit to downshift, but steering wheel paddles help with this. It's smoother than my CTS trans, but I've got one less gear and my trans is already pretty smooth already (GM KNOWS how to make a good automatic trans).

C Seats I really liked...even better than my "go to" sport seats in the TL SH AWD. The Benz felt tailored to me. I think most of that is due to the very soft leather (again, no hard "pleather") and the crazy amount of adjustments you can make to them....including power thigh extenders.

My CTS seems faster, but again, the C is no slouch. CTS suspension is geared more towards handling. C is geared more towards ride, but certainly could hold its own. At least that's the first impression over what was a 20 minute test drive.

Now, my CTS interior is no slouch in the build and materials category. Real wood, leather, suede, aluminum, is well put together, inside and out...probably the best GM has ever done with any car they've built........EVER!

C Class is over the top, especially at the price point. Again, real leather, aluminum and the switches were the same as I just had seen in the AMG just 30 minutes earlier. They felt the same, too. Mercedes leather is better than Cadillac leather, which is really good in and of itself. Porous wood, is better than CTS polished wood (which again, is really, really good).

I didn't like the new trend of the "screen as an afterthought". Cadillac does a much better job. I don't like the trans "stalk", but understand that's a Mercedes trade mark (really?). My CTS is bigger, but hte C felt more comfortable.

Final thoughts. The C stickered for right around $50K. Their discount, my corporate discount, probably put it somewhere in the $44K-$45K range. At that price? A very compelling car. The interior is what would sell it. It's competitive everywhere else...drive, handling, performance...with the 3, A, etc. ATS is edgier (as is my CTS).

Maintenance? Included with Cadillac for 4 years. Way cheaper than Mercedes after warranty period, too.

I'd consider one on my next pruchase...probably put it near the top.

roadburner

thebean said:

+1. Not everyone worships at the altar of German cars.  Some of us would rather drive Honda's and retire early than drive fancy-schmancy cars.  To each their own.

I'm not slamming Hondas-I'm going to give the upcoming 300 hp Civic Type R a good hard look-but if you pick the right car and service facility you can run a "fancy-schmancy" German car for little more than it costs to run a Honda- witness my 318ti and my son's X3. That said, a Japanese car is my current favorite for strafing back roads-but then it's a bit of a hooligan sled.

laurasdada

nyccarguy said:

Looks like a new addition is coming to the ELLPS family: https://www.yahoo.com/autos/first-drive-2017-jaguar-xe-a-cat-that-purrs-and-118121064842.html

Jag, huh? Whoda thunk it?

nyccarguy

laurasdada said:

nyccarguy said:

Looks like a new addition is coming to the ELLPS family: https://www.yahoo.com/autos/first-drive-2017-jaguar-xe-a-cat-that-purrs-and-118121064842.html

Jag, huh? Whoda thunk it?

Interesting choice of engines too. a 2.0L Turbo Diesel 4 cyl & a 3.0 Super Charged Gasser V6. Talk about spicing up the segment:)

laurasdada

nyccarguy said:

laurasdada said:

nyccarguy said:

Looks like a new addition is coming to the ELLPS family: https://www.yahoo.com/autos/first-drive-2017-jaguar-xe-a-cat-that-purrs-and-118121064842.html

Jag, huh? Whoda thunk it?

Interesting choice of engines too. a 2.0L Turbo Diesel 4 cyl & a 3.0 Super Charged Gasser V6. Talk about spicing up the segment:)

Pace without diesel clatter grace!

The XF update looks pretty good, too. Car and Driver has an online article regarding 10 great vehicles that no one is buying; the XJ is on the list. Fools!

billyperks4

Laurasdada
Which 535 XI do you have - the M Sport, Sport or just the Base?

flightnurse

nyccarguy said:

Interesting choice of engines too. a 2.0L Turbo Diesel 4 cyl & a 3.0 Super Charged Gasser V6. Talk about spicing up the segment:)

A 2L turbo gas will come 6 months later, btw its the Ford Ecoboost 2L.

markcincinnati

m6user said:

Millions buy a Honda or Toyota because it is all they can afford, they are not "settling". It's hard for some to understand that it seems.  Some even aspire to same.

We all settle -- it doesn't mean it is a bad thing. And, most of us make choices -- the person who goes for the Honda is likely to be able to extend themselves to go for an Acura. They settle for the Honda because of priorities more important to them than having a ELLPS or LPS. Things like kids, houses, pets, home appliances compete for limited funds.

The family that has $50,000 to live on is little different from the family that has $100K to live on -- if you ask them, they will somehow tell you how they choose to live within their means (or they mortgage everything to the hilt, cars included).

I have lived with a relatively small income up to a "middle class" to "upper middle class" income -- at every way station, I have always felt I had to "settle" on something, either the cars or the home appliances or the monthly mortgage.

I am not suggesting that settling is somehow a bad thing. If one had a cushion of $10 million in the check book, I would assume it would be possible for that person to see virtually no barriers to a car purchase,

Personally, I couldn't see spending even $100K on a car, even with the financial impunity to do so.

I'll settle at this point for cars costing no more than a number beginning with a 6. In ten years, I assume the number will be smaller as my needs, like my hairline, continue to recede.

m6user

You just don't get it.  I know we all "settle" or make compromises, but many people actually buy used cars until they can afford that shiny new Honda which they have wanted for years. And no, they can't afford an Acura.   Saying they can afford an Acura or maybe an Audi but have settled for a Honda makes assumptions that reflect a real disconnect.  Isn't it possible that some have "settled" in other areas just so they could buy their new Honda?

graphicguy

markcincinnati said:

m6user said:

Millions buy a Honda or Toyota because it is all they can afford, they are not "settling". It's hard for some to understand that it seems.  Some even aspire to same.

We all settle -- it doesn't mean it is a bad thing. And, most of us make choices -- the person who goes for the Honda is likely to be able to extend themselves to go for an Acura. They settle for the Honda because of priorities more important to them than having a ELLPS or LPS. Things like kids, houses, pets, home appliances compete for limited funds.

The family that has $50,000 to live on is little different from the family that has $100K to live on -- if you ask them, they will somehow tell you how they choose to live within their means (or they mortgage everything to the hilt, cars included).

I have lived with a relatively small income up to a "middle class" to "upper middle class" income -- at every way station, I have always felt I had to "settle" on something, either the cars or the home appliances or the monthly mortgage.

I am not suggesting that settling is somehow a bad thing. If one had a cushion of $10 million in the check book, I would assume it would be possible for that person to see virtually no barriers to a car purchase,

Personally, I couldn't see spending even $100K on a car, even with the financial impunity to do so.

I'll settle at this point for cars costing no more than a number beginning with a 6. In ten years, I assume the number will be smaller as my needs, like my hairline, continue to recede.

Mark.....all good points.

I was just having this conversation with my best friend. He has a $70K '15 Corvette, that for the most part, sits in his garage gathering dust. He drives a new Suburban every 2 years....I'll assume those are at least in the $50K range with discounts...probably closer to $65K with the new version. His wife drives an Infiniti M something....assume mid $50s on that. So, in short, he has roughly $185K tied up in vehicles,,,,,,,RIGHT THIS MOMENT.

He's in my tax bracket. Not Soros money, nor even failed Silicon Valley start up money. But, enough that we're not too worried about going into a dealership and buying something like a brand new Corvette as an impulse buy.

His philosophy? Spend it all while alive and healthy. He has no kids. He was an only child. So, outside of his wife, he really has no other outlet to spend his money (or even save for college tuition, teen insurance rates, etc). In short, the only thing he has to worry about is staying relatively healthy.

Some worry and sweat every purchase, whether it's that new leather recliner, or whether to buy a Honda or an Acura. They have kids. They have huge tuition bills staring at them. I get that. I've been there.

I'm 10 years before I think about retirement. So, that's something I think about, but certainly doesn't occupy a lot of my time. I think I'm good, but who knows what will happen over the next decade.

Would it make a major financial lifestyle change if I bought a Z06 Corvette? Nope. The only question I'd ask myself is "what else could you do with that money?"

I see my son, who has a good job in IT. He works for a major University, so his job is secure, probably as long as he wants to stay there. He's wanting a new WRX. He's fretting over how it will affect his lifestyle currently. As I told him, budget it up. If it would get in the way of your savings plan as it stands right now (I actually showed him how to budget for just about everything and anything), then don't do it. If you can do all the things you're doing now, put all the eggs in the baskets you've set up. then go for it.

Who I feel for are the folks who are busting their tails to make ends meet. Their budget is sliced so thin, that tomorrow is only a hope that they've got enough to feed their family healthily. If their 10 year old Caravan has a major issue, it will mean a large change in a lifestyle that can ill afford any negative changes and is begging for anything positive. They can't afford a new car (although dealers would love to get them in and finance them at their high rates). They're the ones who need a new car the most.

On the other end of that spectrum, there's my other colleague, who has a 12 year old TL....250K miles. We both get a healthy car allowance....BUT...only if the car is 3 years old or less and is on their "list" of approved vehicles. He bought the TL used a decade ago and is having fits about how much "cars cost" today. If he could drive a used Tercel and pocket the car allowance, he'd be happy. And yes, he can afford any car he wanted....including those $100K cars you speak about.

I fall in the middle. I like the nicer cars. but have my own definitions on what I'll spend money on. I like nice cars, but not ones that cost $60K (unless that $60K car was an overwhelming value at that price). I'll put a limit set at $55K. I've long given up the notion of any car as something that's anything more than an expense to me. It's a depreciating asset. Truthfully, it's not even an asset in my mind. Plain and simple, it's an expense.