Luxury Lounge

jlbl

"French cars are apparently quite literally lemons, at least according to the most recent Top Gear survey."

Fully agreed. In spite of my romantic (or may be masochist?) love for some Citroen cars, I must say I have put too much money in the maintenance and repair of those I have owned. Nonetheless, Renault is now in much more deeper trouble than PSAs.

Regards,
Jose

dewey

Nonetheless, Renault is now in much more deeper trouble than PSAs.

What hurts Renault hurts Nissan and vice versa. If your Siamese twin sibling gets sick then you yourself are prone to get sick too. That's a lesson Daimler learned from Chryler and Chrysler learned from Daimler.

jlbl

What hurts Renault hurts Nissan and vice versa.

Right.

tayl0rd

Again, I have to tell you. That very same 3.5L V-6 that was used to introduced the very excellent LH cars in '93 is the very same 3.5L SOHC engine that is used today in the Magnum, 300, and Charger. Same old iron block and all. ...

You're mistaken, blkhemi. I own an '02 300M Special, and I promise you the 3.5L V6 engine is all aluminum and has been since the introducion of the last generation LH cars. Reading the specs of it, it would seem that it was overbuilt for it's purposes. Here's a link for you to read. Scroll down to the "3.5 Liter High Output Engine" section, followed by the "Shared Features" section. Maybe the 2.7L is iron, but according to that link, even it has an aluminum block.

dewey

Now that's what BMW should be concentrating on instead of that awful F3!

The BMW F3 seems redundant.

Why have a F3 when there is a 3 series touring wagon and an X3. What kind of person would buy this atrocious looking vehicle?

dewey

So now MB has its CLS 4 door coupe and almost every single luxury competitor wants to imitate MB with such a car.

But my question is who are they imitating MB or Infiniti?
Remember the Infiniti J30. IMO that was one very good looking 4 door coupe although I know there are some who will debate whether a J30 really was a 4 door coupe.

hpowders

"What kind of person would buy this atrocious looking vehicle?"

The same kind of person who buys the PT Cruiser, but with a bit more money in the bank.

I was in an MD's office yesterday when his new Car & Driver issue was just being delivered and I noticed that the X3 won a small upscale SUV comparo with words to the effect "good to have you back!"

I will check out the 2008 version when it arrives.

As far as redundancy goes, with the X5 selling so much better than the X3, the debut of the F3 may signal the beginning of an eventual X3 phase-out.

2001gs430

Now that I am considering the ML, and GL since they can be had for huge discounts in Buffalo compare to similar Canadian models. I will have to pay cash for the vehicle, so I would assume most of the risks compare to leasing.
Similar discounts exist for Lexus SUVs as well which I think are lower risk to purchase, but I am hooked by MB's 7-speeds autobox...

What do you think, is it wise to pay cash for either an ML or GL?

bristol2

Not sure 'wisdom' is the correct attribute to look for in dropping $60-$100k on a depreciating asset.

Try fun/ satisfaction/ utility.

In a choice between the ML or GL, the GL seems a pretty clear winner. More space primarily and the ML has won no friends with either reliability or interior.

If you can see beyond the MB transmission, the Lexus LX is built on great Land Cruiser pedigree. In terms of reliability and actual off-road strength, this is a 'wiser' choice.

dewey

the debut of the F3 may signal the beginning of an eventual X3 phase-out.

Highly unlikely. Worldwide the X3 is a big seller for BMW. Also MB, Audi, and Lexus and I believe even Infiniti and Porsche are planning models that will compete with the X3.

lexusguy

Remember the Infiniti J30. IMO that was one very good looking 4 door coupe although I know there are some who will debate whether a J30 really was a 4 door coupe.

The J30 wasn't a 4-door coupe, nor was it particularly good looking. It was a basic "3 box" sedan with a sort of frumpy rear end. It made its debut in the early '90s, and went away after '97 or so. I don't think anyone mourned its passing...or ever noticed it to begin with. Car makers are rushing CLS competitors because the CLS was a hit. The J30 was never a hit.

dewey

The J30 wasn't a 4-door coupe, nor was it particularly good looking.

Well it has a spherical shape of a coupe and yes I did consider it very good looking. And I loved driving a manual one during the early 90s (I didn't own one but my friend had one).

That picture you had provided is not exactly a complimentary picture of a J30.

lexusguy

Well it has a spherical shape of a coupe and yes I did consider it very good looking. And I loved driving a manual one during the early 90s (I didn't own one but my friend had one).

That picture you had provided is not exactly a complimentary picture of a J30.

I don't think it was anymore coupe-like than the late '90s "bubble" Taurus. Is this more flattering?

tayl0rd

... Is this more flattering?

No. The J30 just wasn't very attractive. Sorry, dewey.

2001gs430

bristol2, I was not asking about the decision to spend the money on SUV. I was looking at the 30K Murano a week ago, but now I realized that I can import a lux SUV a huge discount due to weakening USD.
Btw, thanks for your input that seems to confirm my belief, since I need to consider reselling the car in about four to five years down the road I.E. a used LX would be an easier sale than a used GL.

designman

Dewey, when I first saw that photo I thought for a moment some of you guys got together and tried to settle the hybrid-diesel argument for once and for all.

;-)

2001gs430

tagman

Dewey, when I first saw that photo I thought for a moment some of you guys got together and tried to settle the hybrid-diesel argument for once and for all.

D-man... you often come through with your good sense of humor.

The hybrid-diesel argument is naturally just going to intensify. Why? Because the diesels have just started to trickle out, and the news that is associated with them has also just started to trickle out.

By the time the diesels are really going strong and proving their merit, I can't even imagine how many posts I will have to make to defend them along their road to success.

But, I'm sticking with them all the way. I'll be watching to see who else around here will support the diesels over the next year or two. So far, I know of one poster who most definately isn't a supporter of diesels.

It will get very interesting indeed.

TagMan

hpowders

If what you say is true, Dewey, then the existence of the F3 will create too small a niche, IMO, to justify the expense and time BMW will waste on it. With the 328i wagon and X3 firmly in place, who the heck needs an F3?

anthonyp

Hi TagMan

I for one have had diesel and worked with my big diesel tractor(many year ago) so I do not like the fueling operation..Other than that I am sure there is a bright future for diesel...One important thing, I watched Al Gore and an `Inconvenient Truth` the other day....It is alarming what is happening, and just one look around, and the roads are just full of large trucks, cars etc....I can not see any other solution to this approaching problem other than increasing the cost of fuel--and I mean a big increase....If that were to happen you could rest assured I would be in the market for a nice car with a modest quiet diesel engine...probably in the two hundred hp range...No dreams of four hundred plus hp, but a nice body on a well planned out interior would have to suffice....I did change the lightbulbs----very poor----They don`t put out enough light for the wattage therefore you need more of them...Tony

brightness04

Welcome to our humble abode. You obviously follow the car races much closer than I do. I had no idea that the diesel Audi V10 won because it had larger displacement and larger restrictor diameter until I read that article. From the boastings of diesel propagandis . . . hmm . . . "diesel supporters," we'd think the audi diesel won fair and square and really beat the gasoline cars on equal footing. Nope. It was heavily handicapped race designed to give diesels a leg up so that they could be in the races at all. It was simply a sort of lousy affirmative action deal.

brightness04

Thank you for pointing out that detail. Glad someone else is also reading the details besides myself.

brightness04

A robust technological solution does not need our "support" per se. Such a solution should prove a success in the market place when we vote with our wallets. For what it's worth, I actually had a diesel car before, a 300TD from the early 1980's. It was the biggest mistake that I've ever made in terms of buying cars. It seems to me that people who have had diesel cars before, and not current owning either diesel or hybrid hence can make a relatively even-handed judgement, often come out with a dim view of diesel.

lexusguy

For what it's worth, I actually had a diesel car before, a 300TD from the early 1980's. It was the biggest mistake that I've ever made in terms of buying cars. It seems to me that people who have had diesel cars before, and not current owning either diesel or hybrid hence can make a relatively even-handed judgement, often come out with a dim view of diesel.

A 300TD from the early '80s is hardly representative of where diesel is now. That would be akin to me saying all hybrids are junk because I had a Honda Insight, and it was tiny and slow as molasses.

To appreciate what a modern diesel can do, you have to drive one. I spent a week with an Audi A4 2.0TDi. The engine from outside the car was a bit rougher sounding than a gas engine. That was it. You couldn't hear it coming a mile away, it didn't smell bad or anything like that. Turbo lag wasn't really a problem, and the car had enough power for driving around town or 80+ on the Autostrada.

Comparing Audi to Lexus, the A6 3.0TDi costs 1000 pounds LESS than the 3.2 FSI gas engine. 0-60 times for both cars are identical. Lexus tacks on $10,000 to put a hybrid motor on the GS350, and for that you get a car which handles worse, and the increases in acceleration and fuel economy are marginal at best. Trunk space also shrinks to 7.5cu.ft, less than a Porsche Boxster.

With the A6 you don't have to worry about making up the price premium with fuel economy because you're already ahead 1000 pounds! A GS450h owner on the other hand will never make up the difference compared to a GS350.

blkhemi

That may be a draw LG. My previous 760, the XKR, and the very recent ZF-equipped Maser QP Automatica that I drove last week indeed had the same quality of the 7G.

BUT, it does not change gears as buttery-smooth as the Mercedes unit, especially in Sport mode, where the ZF definetely spells Sport, where as the MB speeds gear changes without much undo harshness(even tho the ZF can never be described as harsh.

BUT, again, the 7G does not blip or match revs like the ZF, and that is a huge thing for me in the XK.

lexusguy

and the very recent ZF-equipped Maser QP Automatica that I drove last week indeed had the same quality of the 7G.

What did you think of the big Maser? I've really enjoyed that car every time I've driven it, but I just can't bring myself to actually buy one.

tagman

Terrific post (2175).
TM

tagman

Tony - Always nice to read your pleasant posts. I purchased "An Inconvenient Truth" past winter and I had already changed the bulbs in select areas that didn't require a dimmer switch. Now that they can be dimmed, I'm planning to buy a whole lot more.

It's funny to hear people's reaction to diesels. They think of the old clackity gutless smoke-belching engines. And it makes perfect sense for them to think that. The new modern generation of diesels hasn't really made its dent yet, and won't do so for a couple of more years in any significant way. But eventually, the truth will filter through.

I agree with you that a moderate-sized diesel could be the ticket. I am truly on standy... just waiting for the right car and/or SUV to come along with a nice modern diesel engine. I think there a quite a few on this forum that are also waiting. I don't think we are the only ones.

TagMan

hpowders

Tony. I agree with you.

We need a HUGE surtax on gasoline in this country, say bringing it up to about $8 a gallon for regular.

People are too complacent. Every year it's the same old story. As gas prices rise, people cut back on SUV purchases and then go back to buying them when prices fall. They have short memories. It's got to stop.

In Europe where gas prices are always high, people use scooters, bikes, small cars and diesels predominate for the rest.

I hope the next US President shows some genuine courage and attempts to push through a big gasoline surcharge. It's the only way people will seriously conserve and automakers will eventually convert all vehicles to diesel and/or hybrids.

We must change the "immediate gratification with no sacrifice" mind-set and the gasoline surcharge is IMO, the way to go.

I would be quite happy to drive diesel vehicles from my next car forward and say hasta luego to gasoline permanently!

houdini1

Just the opposite for me. I also owned a 240D in the early 80's and I loved it. It was one of the best highway cruisers I have ever had. Sure, it was a little slow getting up to speed but by contrast, it was so superior to the crap that Detroit was building back then that I thought it was great. No squeaks, no rattles and no problems.

I can't wait to get my hands on one of the new diesels. Right now my fav is the Q7 but I am keeping my options open.

anthonyp

Hi H, and T

Can you think of any other way the country can achieve a serious cutback??other than a big surcharge....I know in our family we would only take one car and maybe even have only one if it were to help in some way...and others were to be encouraged to do the same...I do feel our domestic manufacturers have let us down, and in turn themselves...i am not an alarmist, but this is a serious problem, and worlwide so the U S isn`t the only culpret Tony

hpowders

You are correct Tony, but I just don't see a big surcharge happening. Not that much courage out there. But I do believe it would be the correct longterm solution. No pain...no gain.

By this time, one would think all vehicles in the USA would be getting 35mpg at the absolute minimum.

lexusguy

Terrific post (2175).

It gets even worse for Lexus at the high end. The 345hp A8 4.2FSI LWB hits 0-60 in 6.3 seconds, and costs £63,285. The 321hp A8 4.2TDi is two tenths faster to 60, and costs £63,965, an increase of £680. Loss of trunk space is 0 cu.ft.

The LS600hL is a bit more than the ~$1300 difference between the A8 gas and diesel compared to the 460L. Quite a bit more.

dewey

I also owned a 240D in the early 80's and I loved it. it was so superior to the crap that Detroit was building.

I currently own a 83 300D which can be described by the following words:.

Extremly low maintenance
Incredibly reliable

Fuel efficient

Durable longetivity unlike any new car

Approaching 300K mileage and capable of going beyond one million.

After a quarter a century we still drive our 300D for long trips.

The 300D does not have performance or bling but it has one thing that current luxury vehicles dont have: Understated elegance. THis car does not need bling or gizmos to stand out.

esf

I drove the Quattroporte Automatic, myself. My friend actually recently traded her DuoSelect Q-Porte for an Automatic version; oddly enough, she got it with the exact same color combo. But more relevant is that I drove a dealership model. It really is a fabulous sedan and I too enjoy driving it, but I just can't get a sedan. Not when my wife might have one.

Another reasons is that while it's extremely beautiful, it's ridiculously impractical. Bad mileage, undriveable in the winter, reliability headaches and oh, that sticker! As long as it has good resale, I guess...

To be honest, if I really wanted a sedan, I'd either go for the S550 4Matic or S8. Probably the S8.

'06 Audi A3 2.0T DSG • '05 Audi S4 Cabriolet • '04 Lexus RX330

lexusguy

Another reasons is that while it's extremely beautiful, it's ridiculously impractical. Bad mileage, undriveable in the winter, reliability headaches and oh, that sticker! As long as it has good resale, I guess...

That's what has kept me from actually pulling the trigger on one. If I had to have only one car, it would probably be a QP. Fortunately, I have the luxury of having ol' reliable to get me to work, and the XK for fun.

brightness04

No one is suggesting today's diesel is exactly the same as that found in the 300TD. Technology progresses, for both diesel and gasoline engines. Yet, the marketing hype of "this time it's different and it is just as good as gasoline" is eerily similar to how the 300TD was presented 20 years ago.

So what is a modern diesel? A measely 140hp pushing around 3150lbs as in the A4? 3.0TDi develops 23 less horsepowers than 3.2FSI, and 23 more horsepowers than 2.8FSI, so it's half way in between, yet its pricing is much loser to the higher performance gasoline car than to the lower one. 0-60 is hardly the most important measure of performance; diesels fall behind rapidly beyond 60 because their lack of power compared to the supposed gasoline counterparts that diesel advocates keep bringing up.

What's more? None of the diesels mentioned are clean enough to even be legal in 50 states. By the time additional emission control devices are tacked on, and the sulfer removal process also lowering energy content in the new blend that is called ULSD, the performance figures cited from overseas models may not apply at all to US models that will be legal.

brightness04

I guess 67hp was adequate for someone, just not me; the 93hp found in the 300TD was totally lacking for a 3200lb car. The maintenance hassle of keeping a diesel running in winter was a nightmare.

brightness04

Not sure why those numbers make it worse for Lexus. #63k UK is equivalent to $120k US. Measely 321hp at that high a price? Why bother, when one can get 100+ more hp from Lexus for $15k less . . . and it's a car that has numerous options loaded that are not even included in the #63k/$120k A8.

tagman

So what is a modern diesel? A measely........

And there you go again with more of your negative biased view of diesel.

The way you can't see the merit or benefits here shows that you totally don't get it.

Dewey presented significant real-life benefits of his prior-generation diesel, and you slapped them down as meaningless to you.

BTW, if I recall, you chose to purchase a Highlander and a Saab. What makes them such terrific choices that you can put down other posters vehicles?

TagMan

lexusguy

Not sure why those numbers make it worse for Lexus. #63k UK is equivalent to $120k US. Measely 321hp at that high a price? Why bother, when one can get 100+ more hp from Lexus for $15k less . . . and it's a car that has numerous options loaded that are not even included in the #63k/$120k A8.

Since when does an A8L cost $120K? According to Audi USA, the car starts at $72K. Based on the difference between models in UK pricing, I would guess that if we had the A8L 4.2TDi in this country, it would cost <$74K. You completely ignored my point, that the difference between the gas and diesel is just $1300.

The 600hL costs what, <i>thirty thousand dollars more than the 460L? Twenty-five thousand more than the A8L diesel?

tagman

Here's a good review of the Lexus IS 220d. BTW, the top speed is misprinted as 135 mpg, instead of mph. (who ever said I don't notice the details? ) BTW, the actual combined mpg is 44.8 mpg. (keep in mind that this is most likely a European measurement, so no need to get into yet another argument over THAT.)

The Fifth Gear video review is really very interesting, and is at this link:.

link title

TagMan

tagman

Toyota Delays on Use of Lithium-ion Batteries in the Next Prius Citing Safety Concerns

Here's the blurb on this interesting set-back.

link title

TagMan

tagman

More encouraging news about the future of diesels...

link title

It's all just the beginning of something great.

TagMan

tayl0rd

Not directed at any individual person, but I'm so tired of short-sighted people saying we need to have even higher gas prices to curtail people's fuel consumption. The only thing they have to support their stance is the ridiculous prices of fuel across Europe. There are so many reasons why that can't work for the U.S. For one, this is the United States of America! We can fit whole nations of Europe within our borders. Our country is SUBSTANTIALLY larger than any nation in Europe. Our cities/towns are substantially bigger than those of European nations. Hence, we have to travel substantially farther than Europeans to get from place to place. In some western states, driving from county to county is like driving from country to country in Europe.

Also, keep in mind that salaries and pay rates are substantially higher in those European nations that some of you love to idolize. Also keep in mind that most, if not all, Europeans don't have to pay for their medical coverage. A college education is practically free or heavily subsidized by their governments, etc. We, as U.S. citizens, have to pay for those things with little to no assistance from the government. The last thing we need is the government rabbit-earing our pockets at the gas pumps. If you're making a 6+ figure salary, it's easy to be cavalier about paying $7+ for a gallon of gas. For the other 98% of us, we don't see it that way.

Wouldn't a better idea be to lobby the auto industry to do better. Chew on this. How come the cars with the best fuel economy have the smallest tanks? A Corolla gets 40 MPG but barely has a 13 gallon gas tank. Why? Why can't it have a 15+ gallon tank? That would mean far fewer trips to the pump. It's not like the gas would be sitting in the car's tank long enough to go stale.

How about better transmission technology and more gear ratios? A 400HP, 6.2L V8 powered Corvette can get nearly 30 MPG on the highway. My 255HP 3.5L V6 can barely muster the mid-20s on the highway, and that's only if I drive 65MPH or less. (Where's the fun in that?) Why can't we get the auto industry to stop abandoning the manual transmission? If they choose to do so, then we, as consumers, should be forcing them to give us the same number of gears in the automatics. The inadequately geared automatics can be tailored to rival the fuel economy of the manuals, but the gear ratios are so poorly spaced that performance suffers significantly. Don't give me the cost argument. "If you build it, they will come."

I think all SUVs (regardless of size) and full-size pickups should come with diesels ONLY. And a manual transmission should be available on all of them at all trim levels. The auto industry has left WAY too much meat on the table for people to be proclaiming that the American consumer should pay the price for their travel necessaties. Notice I said "travel" and not "transportation." Is it "necessary" for anyone to have a Luxury car, a sports car, an RV, etc. as a mode of transport? No, but everybody has to travel one way or another. Their chosen mode is irrelevant.

But anyway... I'm rambling now.

tayl0rd

I blame the men of this nation for the lack of manual transmissions in the U.S. They don't even try to teach their kids how to drive one. The lamest excuse I always hear is about "stop and go traffic." How many places across the country really have that much stop and go traffic? If you suffer from a leg injury that prevents you from driving a manual, I understand 100%. But "stop and go" traffic?? Please! The few cars that are equipped with manuals these days have clutches so light that it's like stepping on a hot marshmallow. Have the men of this nation become that big of pansies that it's too much effort to move their left foot 3 inches to the left and, literally, let it fall back to rest on the clutch?? Sheesh!

I can't WAIT to teach my kids how to drive a stick! I can tell they want to learn. When I take them out in my Mustang GT, I can see them watching my feet as I row through the gears. My daughter watches intently and sometimes even moves her arms as though she's going through the gears with me. Just a couple more years... My son wants to "inherit" my Mustang when he goes off to college, but that's still a few years out.

cyclone4

Thanks Tag! However, interestingly enough, there was also this amazing article yesterday talking about the Prius getting 125 mpg with the new battery technology.

http://www.businessweek.com/autos/content/may2007/bw20070529_034748.htm

dewey

Interesting.

I was convinced that my next car will be a lithium ion battery powered hybrid but based on this news I may have to wait a bit longer or settle for a diesel. Not a bad situation IMO.

dewey

Lithium Technology Corporation (LTC) yesterday unveiled a retrofitted Toyota Prius, with plug-in capabilities allowing for 125+ miles per gallon fuel efficiency, which is powered by the Company's unique battery technology.

The big problem with this news is that retrofitting Priuses with lithium batteries costs tens of thousands of dollars.
The most important news is when a mainstream automaker introduces high volume low cost lithium ion batteries in their hybrids or electrical vehicles. And that car may very well be the GM Volt.

Since GM makes such lousy fuel inefficient four cylinders a Volt may be the answered prayers GM is looking for.

hpowders

I like driving as much as the next guy, but lobbying the auto industry to do better? Come on. If the energy crisis of the 1970's has brought us in 2007 to the sorry state where we are now, STILL being held hostage by the mid-east sheiks, then more drastic measures must be employed.

I would like to see initially a $5 constant price for regular fuel, consisting of the refiners' cut, state and local taxes and a fluctuating federal surcharge which will enable the price to remain at a fixed $5, federally mandated, no discount stations. This will force rapid action by auto manufacturers to convert all gas guzzlers to fuel efficient diesels and provide a goal of converting all vehicles to 35 mpg minimum EPA combined within 5 years. It can only be done with a cattle prod and I'm afraid the surcharge is the only way to go.

Better some pain and sacrifice now than much worse circumstances down the road and as I implied, I wouldn't like it either, but this country is moving much too slowly given the potential for catastrophe.