Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Stories from the Sales Frontlines
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
When we were buying our RX 300 for my wife, the salesperson even showed us a special place where ladies could put their purses.
I could be wrong.
Volvo did have that concept car that was designed only by women and they are the safety kings. I would agree that the RX series are driven almost all by women but the ES series has a far amount of male drivers.
I've got a pretty vivid imagination, but I can't see how this could happen unless someone FORCED their hair into the slot
Err.. I was thinking the same thing. :surprise:
L O N G hair, very fine, get it wrapped around the CD as you feed it into the slot.
Might be possible once by accident.........never twice.
Most people don't understand that.
That's an excuse and a copout.
Certain luxury cars have this problem, but when you pay that kind of money, you expect troublefree operation.
If you want the buyer to be the guinea pig for field-testing the product you should give it to him for free.
As a Rover salesman, I bet you see the most complaints among luxury car makes.
In North America, I'd rate Rover/Audi/Mercedes/BMW in order for most troublesome makes.
Take a look at the Lexus line. That's a fine example of applying high-tech and making it perform reliably in the real world for several years.
Yeah its an excuse, yeah its a copout, but its also the truth. The more complicated you make something the easier it is to break.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Radar/Laser cruise, Night vision, adustable suspensions all of that has been around for a little while now.
I don't know where rovers fall in terms of customer complaints versus other european marks but according to this we are above them.
Vehicle Satisfaction Awards
To be completly subjective though Lexus vehicles are just boring. The original IS300 and GS300/400 had a little bit of soul but those are the only two. If I wanted to drive an appliance I would put wheels on my dishwasher.
What good is cutting edge if it doesn't work.
To be completly subjective though Lexus vehicles are just boring. The original IS300 and GS300/400 had a little bit of soul but those are the only two. If I wanted to drive an appliance I would put wheels on my dishwasher.
Talking about "soul" is all fine and dandy, but it CANNOT come at the cost of reliable operation, especially in an expensive luxury vehicle.
If your wheeled dishwasher was made by Rover, that'd probably break down very often as well, just like your other Rovers.
Hybrids are a pretty enormous technology to exclude. And the rest are several years behind.
For Land Rover, it would be like excluding all 4WD/traction technologies. What else have they pioneered? Not fair? Exactly.
Didn't they have headlights that turn into curves first as well?
I'm not a Lexus historian, but I'm sure if I was I could list off 10-12 things easily.
-juice
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
IMHO, cutting edge automatically comes with technical issues.
Talking about "soul" is all fine and dandy, but it CANNOT come at the cost of reliable operation, especially in an expensive luxury vehicle.
People put their money where their mouth is everyday by purchasing less reliable products because of "soul". That's what they value - others value faultless operation whicle others value cosmetics. Buy and drive what you like.
So yes he could have bought it from the Land Rover dealer and had them put it on. For US spec Rovers the Snorkel is kind of point less since the Range Rover/LR3 and Range Rover Sport can already wade through over two feet of water. The air intake is mounted on the side to keep dust, debris and water from entering it easily anyway. All US rovers are gas engined and if you go into water much deeper then 27 inches for more then a few seconds you are going to fry some part of the engines ignition system. The gas engines they use are dust proofed and water proofed as much as possibly but their electrical components will still fall victim to water damage.
The diesel engined Rovers with a snorkel can wade through water that is pretty much as deep as the snorkel as long as the truck can get traction.
Actually movable headlights were first invented by Preston Tucker designer of the Tucker automobile. This was back in 1948 and although the technology was crude they were brought to market on 51 production vehicles.
http://www.si.edu/RESOURCE/FAQ/nmah/tucker.htm
http://www.150.si.edu/150trav/imagine/m611.htm
I think Volvo might have actually had the current version of adaptive headlights first on a concept car. I am not sure who brought it to market first but it very well could have been lexus.
Not sure about GPS NAV, Bluetooth, and that type of stuff, but I'm sure they pushed the envelope in those areas. Maybe backlit instrument panels as well.
Lexus does it, and does it right. Maybe that's why they thrive and Tucker isn't around any more.
-juice
Everything on the tucker was many years ahead of anything being currently offered.
In 1948 all of the cars that the Big three were putting out were just slightly revamped pre-war designs. Nothing was nearly as cutting edge as Tucker's car.
I really don't know why people have this perception of the HSD. We're talking about an engine, two electric motors, a power sharing device that resembles a differential, a battery pack and a computer to control the whole thing. It's a novel application for sure, but the components are not exactly cutting edge.
We shouldn't forget the Citroen DS either. The picture shows the inner headlight turned to follow the front wheels on full left lock.
Now there's a car with character and soul, and it was certainly cutting edge. Wasn't too good in terms of reliability though! :sick:
The car buying and brand awareness is quite different in the U.S than in Europe. Audi out sells Benz and BMW in many places in Europe. C-class benz's are taxis out there!
Audi is a more prestigous brand in Europe than here. For some reason since we were on the subject of platform sharing can we say R-Class= Chrysler Pacifica!?
Audi builds a tremendously safe car, a great value, and Pioneers of AWD!
For those who have questioned reliability. Audi's quality rating has risen steadily from 2003 on. There are lemons in every brand,but people who drive german cars buy them for the fun to drive factor, and are not looking to play it safe. If you want to play it safe, buy a camry!
Hmmm.......you might want to check out the 'Buy Here, Pay Here' board.
Thats a good theory but it doesn't address one small thing, that is circumstances forcing ones hand. Circumstances (be they your own making or beyond your control) can force you into a position where you have to take a less than good deal.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Probably the car that interests ME the most in Audi's lineup is the A3....the one that has the most VW cross sharing.
RE: The R-Class.
We took one of those in trade for a Range Rover. All I can say is Mercedes has seriously disapointed me. Everything about that vehicle was bad. Throttle response was horrible, visibility was nonexistant. You cannot tell where your nose is at all. The stupid steering colum has four different stalks on it since it has that silly colum shift feature Mercedes says is better but is actually stupid and is also a power tilt/telescope wheel.
The wiper select switch took so much force to move I thought I was going to break it.
That same day one of our company directors came in with his demo a Pacifica. At first glance they might seem to share a platform but I do not think they do. The pacifica uses an East to West engine mount for its 3.5 liter V6 while the R-class uses a North to South mount for its 5.0 or 3.5 liter V6. They do share a lot of components but I don't think they share a platform. I would need to get one up on the lift to tell for sure.
The Pacifica drove better then the mercedes did all around in everyway. The interior of the merc wasn't too much nicer either.
If you're going to believe that, then you should argue the converse, namely that every deal is good for the seller.
A dealer should be just as excited about a below-invoice mini obtained from a grinder as you would be about a full price deal sold at a high interest rate and plenty of mop-and-glo...but I'll bet that most of the dealers here wouldn't agree with you if you did believe that...
Audi's reliability may have improved since 2003, but at that point they had nowhere to go but up.
There you go with the "fun to drive factor" again. Tell me, why does it have to come at the cost of reliability.
And since we are talking about North American cars, we essentially don't care about Audi's perceived prestige in Europe, though I find your statement about it being more prestigious than Mercedes quite hard to believe.
As for "playing it safe", let me assure you - more people have regretted buying Audis than Camry's due to repair nightmares - despite Camry outselling all Audis combined by a significant number.
concept
engineers
the 5 link rear suspension.
Other than that, they share nothing else.
The R is based on the ML while the Pacifica is based on a unique platform that seems based on the Caravan.
I thought Passat=B platform, Rabbit, Jetta, GTI, =A platform? Did that change recently? :confuse:
Generally speaking, buyers who don't care for Lexus don't much care for what they feel is a sterile driving experience and/or too much of a Toyota feel behind the wheel. Again, some buyers prioritize reliability, others don't.
FWIW, the 2005 A4's have an above-average reliability rating from Consumer Reports, and the mechanicals tend to be pretty solid. (If there are issues, they are niggling electrical problems, not major component failures.) Audi's North America operations has seperate QC from VW, which has helped its recent reliability results, and the service package takes the edge off of the problems. The 3-series has seen similar gains and provides similar service. I would also hope that they would improve reliability over the long run, but again, this does not seem to be a priority with enough buyers so as to leave both BMW and Audi with reasonably sized pieces of the US luxury car market, even if some prefer other makes.
I had them parked right next to each other with all the doors open so that made it real obvious.
I knew the R was based on a stretched version of the ML just like the GL is so figured the main platform was different.
Why does one have to trade off reliability to get this? Why can't Audi, BMW, et al talk to the Lexus guys and figure out how to make a RELIABLE car with je ne sais quoi? How hard could it be? Or why can't the Lexus guys talk to the BMW guys on how to add some je ne sais quoi to the Lexus cars?
Let me ask you a question from the other side of the coin. Why should reliability come at the expense of performance, and driving dynamics?
I do my research ahead of time when buying a car. I know that I can live with some problems in exchange for excellent driving dynamics. Hence, I would suggest that people that buy a German car to drive "till the wheels fall off" and then cry about repairs are Naive with capitol N.
As far as Audi being the bigger selling in Europe and not caring about that. I don't know who we is, but they don't buy German so I don't care if whoever we is, don't care. Go to the Camry board and throw a party for yourself. Might I suggest a door prize of pocket protectors, and rubber thumbs to suck.
In India,
- the Hyundai Sonata goes neck& neck with a Mecredes Benz.
- Bajaj Scooters outsell Vespa Scooters, even though Bajaj scooters started manufacturing based upon a Vespa Scooter.
Perception is the key my friends.
I am fairly positive that the current 2003-present Mark III Range Rover is just about the only vehicle in the world that does not have some platform sharing.
From 2003-2005 there were some shared drivetrain components with the X5 but now that we are using the AJV8 motor from Jag all of those are gone. With the demise of the old TDV6 and the new TDV8 motor jointly developed by Ford/Land Rover coming on line as well I am pretty sure the Range Rover is the most unique platform, excluding true exotics like the Veryon, Enzo, SLR etc., currently on the market.
Even Bentely uses platform sharing among its models and Audi the parent company.
We're going to have to agree to disagree. Yes, the Toyota system has an extra electric motor, but it does mean that Toyota have been able to do away with either a conventional transmission, torque converter etc., or a 'conventional' CVT, both of which are complex hydraulic/electronic systems.
First, it would be collusion.
Second, it's culture. The Japanese manufacturers typically focus more on long term reliability and new technology at the expense of driving dynamics. The Europeans focus more on initial impressions, driving dynamics, and elegant (if unneccesary) design with long term reliability as a distant thought.
I'm reminded of a conversation we had with a German manufacturer of plumbing fixtures. They offered a great product but we insisted on offering a life-time warranty on it here in North America. They said they couldn't afford to support a product warranty for 20-30-40 + years - "It's not designed to last forever". In Europe, someone buys a home and typically dies there. We had to explain that in the US, the typical homeowner moves every 7 years and that's how long the warranty really would last.
The latter causes more defects to fall through the cracks, makes QC oversight more critical, and raises costs. It also puts limitations on how quickly production volumes can be increased, which has created problems for the Germans because they have tried to ramp up volumes more quickly than the QC could manage.
The thing is, the Germans have driving qualities that Lexus just haven't been able to emulate, and some buyers will opt for those qualities, even if the car is less reliable. Again, the German car problems tend to be niggling errors caused by QC screw ups, but the engineering tends to be solid, meaning that the driving experience is interesting and the basic mechanicals do tend to hold up. If you keep the car under warranty or do it with a lessee/ short termer's mentality, you can have a satisfying ownership experience, but it won't be as dull or predictable as a Camry.
Plus, the Euro vehicles end up having fatal flaws designed into them, like, if you short out your dome light, the car will no longer start, because that's on the same fuse the interior lights are on. Then, to add insult to injury, the fuse controlling that isn't on the main fuse panel or with the fuseable links next to the battery, it's hidden on a relay panel that you have to disassemble the dash to get to. (Just using a real-world example from the Volkswagen Jetta/Golf/New Beetle platform.)
I resent that comment.
It's not nice to talk about Audi like that.
-Mathias
I'll never understand this but maybe I just like boring cars that don't cause trouble constantly.
I would say mazda does the very best but they have so much ford/volvo influence that I am not going to count them.
Many people are misinformed.
In the year I have worked for Audi, I have not had ONE severe service issue on any 05.5-06 model car. I just had coffee with our Master Lead tech, and he said there are "no sweeping problems on any of the new product" Yes, sometimes the MMI gets a little quirky, the credit card holder sticks ect... Audis are reliable cars. Are they as reliable as a Toyota Camry? Who knows.
People who rant and rave about Audi reliability either (excuse my bluntness but I hear this crap all the time)
A. stuck in 1982 and talk about the unintentional acceleration piece on 60 min. Did you know that after several years of research, it was never proven that it was the cars fault?
B.They are stuck in 2002. The Massive recall, the recall to end all recalls. Coil Packs, oil sludge, CVTs. All problems have been taken care of. Audi slaps on an extended warranty on all 1.8ts. CVT transmissions are replaced not repaired.
C. Cant afford an Audi. Sad but true. I have my wonderful Saturday clients who drive up in a 2001 Chevy Malibu and ask about pricing on the A4 and tell them $500 off and no cash back rebates or 0% then they say "Don't these cars have a lot of problems" or "Mercedes will give me 2000 off" fine pay 450 for a split seat and 650 for a 6-disc changer.
D. When it comes to German cars whether it be BMW or AUDI OR BENZ, people either get it or they don't. If someone says "this car is a little bumpy" or "why do all the cars have sunroofs" or "there is a lot of road noise, the lexus is much quieter" THEY DONT GET IT!
We do know. They are NOT. Not even close.
People who rant and rave about Audi reliability either (excuse my bluntness but I hear this crap all the time)
A. stuck in 1982 and talk about the unintentional acceleration piece on 60 min. Did you know that after several years of research, it was never proven that it was the cars fault?
B.They are stuck in 2002. The Massive recall, the recall to end all recalls. Coil Packs, oil sludge, CVTs. All problems have been taken care of. Audi slaps on an extended warranty on all 1.8ts. CVT transmissions are replaced not repaired.
One big recall wouldn't necessarily damage Audi's reputation. It's the countless non-recall repair issues that occured from 96 to early/mid 2000's model years.
You seem to be stuck on 05.5/06. Please understand we're talking about long-term reliability, not inital quality.
If Audi produced unreliable cars until 05.5, it'll take a few years of producing reliable cars to regain their reputation.
C. Cant afford an Audi. Sad but true. I have my wonderful Saturday clients who drive up in a 2001 Chevy Malibu and ask about pricing on the A4 and tell them $500 off and no cash back rebates or 0% then they say "Don't these cars have a lot of problems" or "Mercedes will give me 2000 off" fine pay 450 for a split seat and 650 for a 6-disc changer.
I can't afford an Audi either. Not in terms of purchase price, but in terms of time not in posession of the car due to repair nightmares. And I don't buy new cars, so don't tell me again about the 06's.
It just feels different. I can't put my finger on it but it just feels more solid. The door closes with a satisfying thunk and not a single rattle. My dealer experience has been excellent.
Even if that is true, it doesn't matter.
People base their opinions on what happened in he past. If Audi produced cars of poor quality in the past, they are going to have a bad reputation for a long, long time.
Remember, you only have one chance to make a first impression.
If Audi keeps making high quality cars, maybe their reputation will have improved by the time your granddaughter is selling cars.
People don't forget. But I am sure the average Ford Buyer does not question the fact that Crown Vics have a habit of blowing up when rear ended, they still are buying them up.
Its wierd, people TO THIS DAY still bring up that issue in 1982.
I might be stuck on 05.5-06 because that is when I started with Audi, and to get unstuck, Consumer reports rated the A4 in 2004 with perfect reliability rating, near perfect in 2003.
Consumer reports also gave Audi a high quality rating for 2004 also. Right along with LExus and INfiniti.
We offer one of the best warrantys in the industry, and stand by it. Most comprehensive Pre-Owned warranty also.
I have owned a Toyota that was the biggest turd.
I have had a Honda Accord that vapor locked on me in a flood and almost killed me.
I have owned a 95 Jetta that had the worst rating by consumer reports, yet saved me in a crash and was only in the shop for maitnence.
I Also own a death Trap F-150 that wont die no matter how much I try.
What I am trying to say is, No matter brand there is no absolutes.
-juice
I'll grant you - the Audis of North America are probably as reliable as Fords. But Ford has a much longer history. (Edit) And they are much cheaper to repair when something breaks.
I might be stuck on 05.5-06 because that is when I started with Audi, and to get unstuck, Consumer reports rated the A4 in 2004 with perfect reliability rating, near perfect in 2003.
Last time I checked, Consumer reports doesn't buy, maintain and repair cars. Talk to existing owners / automotive experts (there are a few in Edmunds) to get some real-world info.
BTW do you have the reliability ratings of the 03/04 A4's today - when they are 3 to 4 years old. Those ratings would be more meaningful.
We offer one of the best warrantys in the industry, and stand by it. Most comprehensive Pre-Owned warranty also
There is a reason for offering the best warranty. It's not out of the goodness of VW/Audi's heart. And here's a sobering thought. Hyundai/Kia have a great warranty as well.
Consumer reports also gave Audi a high quality rating for 2004 also. Right along with LExus and INfiniti.
Infiniti, despite re-inventing themselves with better products - are not Lexus's equal in the real world.
Just for kicks, compare used car prices for a 04 A4 and an 04 ES. They both listed for about the same when new. I'll bet you the ES holds a better percentage of its value. And I'm not talking asking prices in your fancy dealership. Compare auction numbers.
You can trash reliability all you want. But without it, no car manufacturer can succeed long-term. And Audi isn't there yet.
Are you sure you mean vapor locked and not hydraulic locked. The latter sounds more likely if it occurred in a flood, and there is a good chance that it would have happened if you had been driving an Audi (or anything else) too.
End of discussion no more talk of projected relablity or whatever on this therad. Go down to one of the repair threads are the audi board or wherever you want but not here.