By accessing this website, you acknowledge that Edmunds and its third party business partners may use cookies, pixels, and similar technologies to collect information about you and your interactions with the website as described in our
Privacy Statement, and you agree that your use of the website is subject to our
Visitor Agreement.
Comments
My previous C5 Z51 automatic was even better at turning 2000 at about 80mph.
Even though they only have 4 gears, they still can be spaced accordingly. Toyota's old 4-speeders had exceptionally short gearing.
Isn't that something? A few years ago, most quipped Lexus at stealing MB styling cues, now.....
European monarchs were actiing as private entities as private investors in those venturs. Remember, the concept of "nation state" and "public" came later. The rulers at that time had to borrow on their own credit rating, not on the "full faith and credit" of an entity that can not think or speak. European settlements in North America were conducted as shareholding companies where shareholders literally shared risk and profit. The religious wackjobs simply took a loan from a group of for-profit investors to fund the Plymouth colony. The Massbay and Salem settlements were both straight-forward for-profit investments, so was the less successful Jamestown venture earlier.
3/4 of the worlds oil resources are in the middle east. We do not have enough under our own ground to last past 2008.
That's complete nonsense. Canadian oil sands and the "stans" of former soviet union each have more oil under ground than the middleast. We have plenty oil under our own ground. It's just more costly to extract.
I'm not against conservation per se. However, it should be the at the intiative of each individuals, making changes that make sense (and can be corrected quickly when it stops making sense; that is the key). Government meddling and attempts to rig the market place would only lead to inefficiency. There are more important goals than saving a few gallons of oil . . . like avoiding lung cancer! The tragi-commedy of government meddling in the market place is already showing up in alarming ways: for example, the CO2 trading system (a completely rigged "market" that should not have existed except as a "market" to placate the gullible chicken littles whipped up by manipulative for-profit politicians) has produced very profitable companies that literally dump iron powder into the sea to promote plankton and algae growth! So, humanity is now endeavoring to dig iron ore out of the ground, refine it, then grind it up, and ship out to be dumped into the ocean!!! What a total waste of energy, time and resources!
I do have to take exception to the statement that at the time of the settling of the US the concept of the nation state was not yet in place. The nation state existed since the end of the feudal era (War of the Roses 1485) and the emancipation of the serfs in the west. Columbus set sail as an envoy of the King and Queen of Spain (which had been unified) and they certainly did not act as private entities, they were the government and the government was them. As far as credit, they levied tax and made conquest, lending was not considered Christian and so the practice was not widespread.
Anyway, conservation does make sense, I just don't understand how a free market encourages conservation. Prices will rise as resources become scarce but that is not conservation.
Looks pretty good! It could be a Lexus. Almost.
DrFill
In 1980, a gallon of gas cost $1.35 -- about 4 times what it had cost in 1973. Moreover, almost everyone of driving age believed that by 1990, gas would cost $3/gallon -- in 1980 dollars. And don't forget that memories of gas lines in 1979 were still vivid. We knew that shortages could pop up without warning, at any time.
In that climate, CAFE was really beside the point. We cared about fuel efficiency more than anything else. Performance, handling - even safety - didn't matter nearly as much. The era of fuel-guzzling SUVs didn't come until much later - after the oil price collapse of the late 1980s.
The conclusion that I've drawn from what I've seen since the 1973 OPEC oil embargo is that price fluctuations change human behavior much more rapidly than regulations.
Well, it's a prototype, so who knows.
TagMan
Here's the info:
Three years of faithful service,this is the time the engine managed to keep up with the rivals. The 400-hp LS2 V8 has been replaced with a almost new LS3 engine that produces 430 bhp in standard trim and 436 hp with optional muffler-bypass valves.
The list of redesigned is long: block, crankshaft, pistons, heads, camshaft, valves, and intake rocker arms have been modified to take the best of the engine. Boring out eight big holes an additional 2.15 mm (0.085 inch) adds 0.2 liter of displacement and more bang from every power stroke. The valves, intake and exhaust ports, intake lift, and fuel injector capacity are all larger to raise peak torque from 400 lb-ft to 424 lb-ft at 4600 rpm. The optional exhaust kicks in another 4 lb-ft of torque.
Here's something very interesting:
LS3 also benefits of the new V8 in the pipeline: the supercharged and intercooled 650 bhp blunderbuss due next year for the Corvette SS. The much higher combustion pressures that are created by supercharging necessitate the use of the LS3, with its more substantial cylinder walls, rather than the Z06’s 7.0-liter LS7 as the basis of that engine. The blower on top will more than make up for the smaller displacement. Although not yet confirmed, count on the Corvette SS V-8 to take yet another new LS designation: LS9.
TagMan
People reacted to high oil prices and went for more efficient vehicles but when oil prices went down, they went back to thirstier vehicles which were mostly designed to get around the CAFE regulations.
The new CAFE regulations eliminate (currently) the weight exemption regarding CAFE. That could have a profound long-term effect, regardless of the cost of oil.
Yeah, I had been following this earlier in the year. This engine is basically the same that is in the Escalade. GM was coy about sticking with the pushrod design. There was talk of going super high-tech with a new from scratch 5.0L DOHC V-8 for about the same power, but that was quickly shelved because it would strip away the Vette's concieved "value" moniker because of the higher cost of the engine.
The LS3 is a better engine than the one it replaces as it has markedly better cooling and fuel economy. I'm certain that it will keep the heritage alive.
The Blue Devil, Corvette SS, Z07, Stingray- what ever the heck they're going to call it- OTOH, will be an all together different animal. This is in an attempt to once again topple the rude and crude Dodge Viper and bring performance in line with cars like the Porsche 911 Turbo, upcoming Audi R8 V-10, Ferrari F430 Challenge Stradale, and Lambo Gallardo Superleggra.
Somewhere between 650-700hp, this car will indeed be a force to be reckoned with, making the current Z06 look like a mere Honda Civic.
It would seem that this LS3 is a more durable engine that should withstand most punishment thrown at it. Next... Viper's turn.
TagMan
Good point. I hope you're right.
If I sound skeptical about the effectiveness of the regulatory approach, it's because I suspect that a prolonged drop in fuel prices would generate enormous political pressure to water down the regs.
I can't prove it, but I think that an energy tax that, in effect, sets a floor under the price of fuel would get us where we want to go sooner. I don't particularly like this approach - for one thing, it hurts poor people - but it will get results much sooner. We won't have to wait until new, more efficient, vehicles are in showrooms to see significant savings. We'll be forced to use what we now own more intelligently.
I just don't understand how a free market encourages conservation.
The mechanism is quite simple: if something becomes in short supply, its price goes up . . . higher price encourages people to use it less and encourages the production of substitutes.
The energy bill that passed the Senate last night makes little sense on all three of its main components:
(1) 35mpg by 2020. Let the game begin: just watch how the manufacturers game the system. Instead of improving those 12mpg guzzlers to 15mpg or 18mpg, which would really save substantial amount of fuel, the manufacturers would probably import and practically give away a few 60mpg $5k tin cans that would would have no business on the road otherwise. Notice, using the current mpg system that we have, every parked 60mpg tincan would be able to pull a 10mpg guzzler on the road to the 35mpg fleet average . . . whereas improving a 12mpg guzzler to 18mpg while actually saving enormous amount of fuel would miss the 35mpg CAFE standard by a mile. A complete waste of energy in reality. The resources would be much better utilized on improving 12mpg guzzlers to 18mpg, but the mandate would result in the silly behavior of giving away tincans that nobody really wants, and endangering the poor schmucks who buy those tincans at the same time. The good news is that the time horizon (2020) is so far off that it may as well be an empty promise.
(2) Anti-price gouging. Welcome back to the 70's lines at the gas stations. Rising price is what makes people economize in times of shortage (and encourage production at the same time). Price fixing would simply remove the incentive to conserve. The result is the absurd of spectacle of gas shortage while people wait in long lines idling their cars and wasting energy at the same time, on top of killing productivity. It's soviet union all over again: the reality of empty shelves and long lines never seem to intrude upon the "fair price" fantasy of limosine statists.
(3) Ethanol. It's like mandating man-made water (from say, burning natural gas) instead of collecting rain water or getting it from the river. Sure, man-made water will make it draught-proof, but at what cost?? We have had a decade of good planting weather and good harvest, partly due to the warming climate. I shudder to think what will happen when the climate turns to the cooling cycle in a few years, and crop yield drops. Corn prices and meats are already going up dramaticly due to this new fuel demand. We shall see how it all plays out when there is a food shortage because the law says that a big chunk of food production has to be burned!
Sometimes I wonder, what if the EPA mpg tests included full-throttle acclearation some day :-) The current high 20's highway reading for Corvette is the result of a testing method that entails preset accelaration cycles that's like 30-second 30-60. That translates to perhaps 35 horses of those 400+ actually pulling the weight ;-) Who drives a Corvette, or any other sportscar, like that? I can't imagine any car getting better than 10mpg while acclearating full throttle with the engine delivering 600+hp.
Some allusions having being posted (none related with cars, however), there is some information that may bee consulted in
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_of_Aragon
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crown_of_Castile
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Monarchs
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Habsburg_Spain
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spanish_Empire
:shades:
Regards,
Jose
There is plenty of potential energy, innovation, and technology to see us through this entire historical transition from the over-consumption of imported fossil fuels to alternative domestically produced energy.
Are there bumps in the road ahead? Of course.
Do politics and big money play into this? Of course... They always have.
But, our future has never been brighter, as our society will ultimately become energy independent.
When I was just a kid, chemical companies were pouring poisonous waste into the drinking water and smokestacks were belching poisonous substances into the air. There was no common practice of recycling. The use of persticides was rampant, and no one heard of the word "organic". Cigarettes had just become dangerous, and still no one even considered the idea of "second-hand smoke". There was no such thing as a "smog-check" to register an automobile, and there was no such thing as a catalytic converter.
There was no MRI, no medical lasers, no cell phones, no computers, and therfore no internet.
Doomsdayers are blind to the incredible possibilities of the future.
TagMan
I just disagree with how to fix it
If the EPA measured all cars like this, then it would be worthless to even mention fuel economy on the window sticker as it would be such an amusement.
Cars that are boasted about around here in their respected class(Toyota Prius, BMW 3-Series, and Lexus LS460) as having the best fuel economy will have a hard time selling them on this subject.
How much corn can be produced, really?
Where do we get enough to power our unending appetite for fuel?
Ethanol hasn't proven anything to me. And the amount that we'd need is a pipe dream.
I could be wrong, but I doubt it. :P
DrFill
1. It actually gives your car less mileage.
2. It actually gives your car less performance.
3. And where the heck do we get enough farmland to produce the proposed billions and billions of gallons yearly and sustain enough to make it to to the marketplace for human consumption?
It's great that our country is making great strides in helping with the energy crunch, but ethanol ain't it and this ain't Brazil. Getting into super clean diesels and possible electric-hybrid-diesel is probably the most feasible and economic way to go.
2. It actually gives your car less performance.
Less mileage yes, but performance goes up, not down, as E85 is much higher octane than premium unleaded. C&D did some testing awhile back with flexfuel vehicles, and they were always faster with ethanol in the tank. I agree though that ethanol isn't the solution. The best we can do until hydrogen becomes a real possibility are biodiesel and plug-in hybrids.
I saw that C/D article some months back, and yes the GM products like the flex-fuel Tahoe did get a couple of ticks better in performance times.
But I also saw a article in Businessweek last week where Brown University tested some of the GM vehicles and some of Chryslers Durangos and Rams and they actually lost a couple of ticks compared to running on 93 octane.
Were splitting hairs here though.Ethanol is only a band-aid to our growing problem concerning renewable energy in this country.
But finally, the Senate, pending Bush's veto notwithstanding, will give loans, grants, and incentives to corporations and non-profits to develop real, long-lasting solutions on technology like plug-in hybrid, electro-diesel, and hydrogen. We need these technologies like never before.
It's still not the most intuitive interface, but it's leaps and bounds better than the first gen and there hasn't been many reports that have said this system is faulty.
Most of the electronic problems surronding the 7-Series were almost always with this system, not necessarily the electrical system(ie: altenator, cpu, ecm, etc.)
There are some pretty sweet lease deals and buying options out there. And no standard model outhandles it this side of a Maserati QP.
How are they similar? If you are just looking to try something different, that's one thing. But the LS460 is not evolutionary. :confuse:
DrFill
2013 LX 570 2016 LS 460
I have to agree with you that the 7-series hasn't gotten the respect that it deserves.
TagMan
Totally disagree on that, Doc. To say that the LS has not been evolving... is missing the mark.
The LS is definately an evolving theme and consistent approach that is true to its LS badge, as opposed to a radical departure.
The evolutionary and generational dots are well-connected... making the LS460 the very latest expression of that evolution.
TagMan
Beautiful car indeed.
TagMan
I've been digging, but the BMW models getting the diesel treatment remain a secret at this time. But I'm guessing the X5 will be one of the first.
The diesel engine construction is unique in that instead of using cast iron engine blocks, BMW has found a way to make them out of much lighter aluminum! (Not a cast iron inlay with an aluminum coating around the core). According to BMW, 55lbs. are saved on the 3-liter inline six-cylinder diesel and 66 lbs. from the 4.4 liter V-8 diesel. No weight distribution problem here!
The new BMW diesels will produce incredible torque at low engine speeds (something sadly missing from my otherwise incredible 1993 and 2002 325i's). By 1600 rpm, maximum torque is delivered in the 335d!
According to BMW, the 335d will be propelled to 62 mph in 5 seconds flat! Compare this to the 5.6 seconds achieved by the "slow" 335i!
The practicality of the X3 gets thrown out the window by this writer in favor of the more exciting award-winning 535d or 335d if they arrive by the summer of 2008 and conditions for fueling are more favorable than at present. :shades:
If you are seriously considering a 6, try a Jaguar XK. It's better than the 6 in just about every way, and so much better looking.
The X5 does seem to be the most likely candidate for a diesel option, unless for some reason BMW introduces a 2009 X6 with a diesel.
So, given that the X5 is the likely "chosen one", the X3 is still a big question as to whether or not it will have a diesel.
But when we consider that Mercedes Benz will likely offer a diesel option in every single SUV, including the new GLK I posted about recently, it begs the question as to whether or not BMW would stand by and just watch.
TagMan
According to BMW, my 2004 BMW 530d weights 3,682 pounds (it encompassing a 90%-full-tank plus a 165-pound-driver). The engine is indeed made of aluminium, and the weight distribution is 50%/50%.
Jose
Toyota definitely has "evolutionary" redesigns and "revolutionary" redesigns. This is not an evolution of the LS430. I'm sure they kept what was working, not to alienate the sizable customer base. Lexus has a way of doing things that seems to work.
Having driven the three cars in question, I can't recommend the 7's interior (or exterior). You can get much better from Audi, much less Lexus and Mercedes. I haven't heard many share your view, but you are more than entitled to it.
I'm sure the 750 has excellent driving dynamics.
If you like the S better, that's fine. I don't see $10-25k more car there, but others might. Mercedes seems to be doing well.
They were doing better before the LS came out, doh.
DrFill
Having tested the new S Class two separate times, I would say that it has the LS beat in all of the driving dynamics again, but that's only to say that one is a 98 out of 100 and the other 90 out of 100. No doubt as you climb upwards price-wise you get less and less incremental benefits for your buck. Hey, an Infiniti M30 may be 90 percent as good as a Lexus LS.
They are very different cars. The M is all about performance, and will crush the LS in terms of driving dynamics, but its not a great highway cruiser. The softer, more luxury oriented mid-lux cars like the GS or S80 can be more directly compared with the LS.
What advocates for government subsidy usually miss is that, all government can do is transferring resources from other endeavors, even endeavors that are intrinsicly efficient, to institutions and individuals who are adept at taking advantage of government silliness. Individuals are very good at maximizing his or her own utility functions. Just like the War on Poverty that produced zillions of broken families because single-parenthood makes qualification for government aid easier, War on Energy Dependence will produce likewise uneconomic behavior.
BTW, it's not really energy indepedence; we will still use energy. The lofty goal should really be termed "energy self-sufficiency." "Self-sufficiency" should be viewed quite dimly by anyone with a modicum of economic knowledge. Division of labor is what makes the wealth of nations. The pursuit of self-sufficency in the face of much lower cost import is quite fool-hardy. One only need to look to North Korea to see what a national policy based on "self-sufficiency" would lead.
I would try the 535i in a non-sport package demo, if you can find one. Should be plenty of passion with a touch of civility.
A well-equipped 535i, sans sport, has an MSRP of around $65,000 and can be leased for about $850 a month plus tax for 36 months with no money down.
TOTALLY disagree. The arrival of the information age gives this latest generation opportunities like never before. Powerful computers, the internet, cell phones, and satellites spread information and knowledge at exponential growth.
Sure, nothing wrong with the industrial revolution, the end of WW2, the space age, and the end of the cold war. All good historical bookmarks.
But, IMHO, nothing comes close to this latest wave of information and technology.
You talk about cars... my goodness, would you even compare a car of the 60's to any of today's top auto achievements?... and it's going to get even better... much better.
Politics and big money have surrounded the world's use of oil in the 60's and beyond. Now we can begin to see that there are alternatives... alternatives that can work. Changing a society in such a large scale way without totally ripping the fabric of lifestyle and political and business status quo is no instant coffee. But any way you want to slice it, change is upon us, and it is profound.
Sure, if you like, you can use the words self-sufficient when you refer to energy. I think your choice of words is fine. In fact, I see a future that gives not just our nation greater self-sufficiency, but even communities, neighborhoods, homes, and individuals greater energy self-sufficiency.
Sure, there are problems, but problems are challenges. If we don't "face our challenges", they will be "in our face". So... either way, we will confront them.
We could post forever about our theories and views of life, but I think that overall I am an optimist. I still see the problems out there. But, I believe that there are solutions.
On a seperate note, speaking of problems, let me ask you a question... how will this world of ours find a way to "cure" diseases, when there is so much more big money to be made by "treating" those diseases instead of curing them? After all, if the disease is gone, where's the profit in it's treatment? What do you think, brightness?
TagMan
On another note, I had a chance to drive an 03 MB S Class (only 28K miles). I was amazed at how well it rode. I was every bit as impressed as I was when I first test drove it as a new car back in 03. It's still got the best ride of any car I've driven (of course, I should qualify as "luxury ride")
As it turned out, I've had my way on too many cars to mention, so she got the nod, and I essentially went to my local dealer and got an incredible deal on a brand new '05 XJ Vanden Plas loaded with the rear-seat entertainment, Bluetooth, upsized chrome 5-star factory wheels, an '06 chrome wire mesh front grill, and essentially every option. That model came with 4 years of all-included maintenance and warranty, and they even added an extended 7 year service contract.
For a car I wouldn't have necessarily chosen, I have to say the deal was terrific, and the car has not had a single problem. Not one.
How does it drive and compare? Well, it is extremely light in weight, about the weight of a BMW 3-Series. And it also shares the same 300 ponies as the 3-series 335i with its twin turbo. So, for a very big car, with a V-8, it is strange to compare its weight and hp to a small 3-series, but that's what an all-aluminum car can do. It is EPA rated at a whopping 17/28, which means it gets better mileage than even the LS hybrid on average, and far better than its typical counterparts.
Styling is very subjective, as this new generation of XJ never changed its classic styling enough to suit many folks, although there are others that like it. The interior styling is also subjective. You either like it or you do not, and no one else's opinions in these areas matters except for yours.
If you buy one new, you need to get a fantastic deal like I did, or you should buy one used... otherwise the resale is pitiful. A good used one can be had for a song.
The performance is quite spirited and surprising, but that is due to the light weight, of course. In routine driving, the handling is great, but not at the limits, where the BMW or S-Class will show their merit. Generally, a car like this isn't driven at the limits anyway, so Im not sure it matters all that much, but for me personally, I always like a car that handles great, and this one would not be my top pick for outstanding driving dynamics. But again, at normal driving it is wonderful, smooth and quiet, and comfortable.
In routine driving or even in traffic, it has a graceful drive to it that is appealing and seductive. The driver's seat can be a challenge to find the sweet spot, but don't worry, it is there, and once you find it, you will lock it into memory, otherwise you will hunt for it again. The seats themselves are not too soft or hard, and offer that reasonable support that should be good on a long drive, with plenty of both upper and lower back power adjustments, as well as all the usual power adjustments.
The sound system is very good, but not nearly the ultimate, and satellite is only an add-on to avoid. The rear seat entertainment, if you opt for it, is excellent, as each passenger gets their own color monitor built into the front headrest, and the quality is excellent. The DVD unit, however, is in the trunk, so a movie change requires a stop, if your drive is longer than the 90 minute - 2-hour movie, and your passengers want a second movie, although there are numerous direct inputs from the console from other video sources.
The brakes are smooth and the steering is responsive without too much boost. Turning radius is good, and the trunk is huge. Rear passengers are also very cozy. Climate control is excellent with split zone.
Because of my unexpected purchase of this car, I know the car very well, but I would say that if it were totally up to me, I would most likely buy the S-Class. The Audi A8 I checked out, but have yet to drive, was extremely comfortable and had a wonderful interior. I have tested the Lexus LS numerous times, and it is incredibly comfortable, although I question how those softer seats would do on a long trip, and the car's driving dynamic is definately disconnected from the driver too much, for my taste. But I could see the LS being a good choice for a comfy, somewhat isolated, quiet ride with superior sound system. (and, of course, it is statistically reliable) I actually like the XJ's ride better than the LS, but overall, it is hard to beat the Mercedes S-Class, IMHO.
If reliability ratings are a big concern for you, the LS of course rules, but the latest generation Jag XJ is right up there. The Mercedes S-Class would not be as statistically reliable, however, so you would take some chances. Personally, I never buy a car based upon those statistics anyway, but some do, and therefore I mention it.
If you have other questions about the XJ, let me know. I'll be glad to answer.
BTW, FYI, we don't plan on keeping this car or any HELC sedan too much longer, as neither my wife nor I drive it often enough to merit it's existence in our garage. As a mom, she is in an SUV so much that we believe a vehicle like the Mercedes GL will give her the best of both worlds. Me? I drive a Porsche.
Hope that all helps.
TagMan
I have to admit that I have been thrilled at some of the info that I read. When I first heard that the diesels were all-aluminum, it did not sit well at first. But knowing that the 530d has had an aluminum diesel all along relaxed me a bit. And knowing that BMW is an engine guru puts most fears to bed anyway.
I believe that the X5 and bigger X6 will get the diesels first. But I also believe that every BMW(save for the M cars, Z, and 6-Series) will have a diesel option soon.
That classic shape combined with the new found reliablility is all the more reason why more people should find interest in these cars.
I think an XJ with most options represents a great value if bought like you mentioned: slightly used or get an awesome deal off of the sticker.
I also read in an 08 brochure that the seats will be updated (improved). MB's are the best IMHO.
What kind of deal did you get? Since I lease, I wonder if the "deals" will extend to leases given the poor re-sale/residuals.
That sums up the XJ pretty well. The standard XJ8 is actually faster than it feels, the autobox is programmed to mostly avoid first gear or change out of it quickly unless you really boot the throttle to the floor with the car in "S" mode and the stability control turned off.
Even the XJR doesn't feel incredibly fast off the line, the power tends to come on in a big rush after about 3000rpm, so 0-30mph seems a bit slow, but 30-90mph comes very quickly after that. My feelings on the XJ are that its a fantastic used car buy. A low miles '05 XJ Super V8 is cheaper than a 5 series. New though, it just can't measure up to the performance of the Germans, or the technology of the LS. The interior is nice (though very plasticky in certain areas) but compared to the rest of the class, it seems late '90s, which it basically is.
As has already been mentioned, the depreciation is absolutely brutal, so if you are interested, my advice would be to buy one at 2-3 years old, keep it for 2 years or until the warranty runs out at the longest, and then get rid of it.
One day, not too long from now, all cars will be diesel, hybrid or other innovative technology. Hydrogen, anyone?
The vehicle innovations from BMW are coming so fast and furious that in order to incorporate them, BMW must resort to employing premature model years. Pretty soon we will be seeing "2009" used for the diesels. The 2008's were out in May which enabled BMW to quickly bring the incomparable 535i to market.
The all aluminum diesel engines produced by BMW will ensure the 50/50 weight distribution that BMW customers are used to, or should I say spoiled by.
How anybody would rather be in the 1960's rather than the 2000's, regarding potential revolutionary innovations I find rather puzzling.
This is the greatest time to be alive and alert. I cannot even begin to conceive of how different things will be just 10 years down the road.
I just bought an espresso maker that brews a perfect cup in about a minute of input. This alone is unbelievable!