Luxury Performance Sedans

bjbird2 · July 2005

Would I call it Performance Luxury Sedans? We already have the topic, why shouldn't it be open to discussion? I thought that's what makes a forum interesting.

hpowders · July 2005

Because even though the topic is a broad one, we are limited to talk about just the 6 cars listed at the top of the thread.
Perhaps the topic should more accurately be called "6 Luxury Performance Sedans."
I feel your pain. I have been involved in quite a few interesting exchanges only to be cut off by one of the hosts because I strayed off the topic.

cdnpinhead · July 2005

Read -- maybe.

Understood -- not so much.

However, all told, I agree.

cdnpinhead · July 2005

Eightly percent of the interest is in 20% of the vehicles in the category. Faced with the requirement to winnow the herd to six, we've got what we've got. When I first found this forum, I wondered at the selection of "worthy" vehicles. I eventually came to understand, more or less.

I think that why the Lincoln LS was never included had more to do with the fact that no one understood it, or cared about it, as opposed to its ability to compete on performance or features.

Even the LS enthusiasts have lost hope, given how it's been marketed, and the lack of upgrades since '03 (Ford can no longer afford it & the dealers are beyond clueless).

So, we all have our favourites, but the board still provides entertainment and the odd bit of useful information.

lexusguy · July 2005

"The Avalon is far superior to the Buick LaCrosse, Chrysler 300, Ford 500, Kia Amanti and Hyundai XG350, and Nissan Maxima, and you know it, and so does everyone else here."

So that would make it best in class. C&D and Edmunds seem to agree. This forum, however, is not about that class of car. If you invite in the Toyota, all of the others have to come in too. Perhaps the title of this forum should be changed to "no fake wood" and that would elimate any problems

syswei · July 2005

Perhaps the title of this forum should be changed to "no fake wood" and that would elimate any problems

The words "luxury" and "fake wood" (or fake aluminum, in the case of the 300C) indeed don't belong together, imho.

pat · July 2005

When someone creates a discussion, he/she pretty much gets to define the topic. So let's revisit the opening post: jrock65, "Luxury Performance Sedans" #1, 6 Apr 2004 12:19 am. "With the upcoming new Acura RL, Audi A6, Infiniti M, Lexus GS, as well as mainstays MB E and BMW 5, this segment seems poised to heat up."

The vehicles under discussion here are the ones listed in the header. I wish I could use "Infiniti M" and "Lexus GS", but I can't, so those two by themselves could take up 4 of the 6 spaces if I used all four. Based on how the conversation has flowed, I've been using 3 spaces for them and swapping in and out as it seemed appropriate. (We dropped the E-Class fairly quickly, as I recall, because no one was talking about it.)

Once again, anyone who wants a different comparo should go here and fire it up. If there is enough interest, it will fly, if not, well at least you tried.

Sorry to be hard-nosed about this, but this discussion is associated with articles and detail pages all over edmunds.com based on the categories. I need to see that the conversation sticks reasonably to those vehicles.

I would appreciate your cooperation - further comments on this may be directed to me via email, but we've got to get back on topic here.

Thanks!

armen6 · July 2005

Someone pointed out to me that Audi has the only true (Quattro) AWD system in the group. Lexus, Infiniti and others have electronic AWD, which may be inferior. What does this mean in real-world conditions? I have a extreme need for AWD with a long, steep driveway and steep, hilly roads in the frozen northeast. Hard to think of that in 89 degree July, but it the main clincher for me. I have been leaning M35x, but may switch back to A6 if it is true.

kyfdx · July 2005

In 99% of "real world" conditions, it means nothing.. All of the AWD systems are electronic and mechanical... There are differences, but not to the degree that you would think..

Even Audi uses two different systems.. but, calls them both Quattro..

regards,
kyfdx

markcincinnati · July 2005

I would like to underscore this statement and make a slight emphasis change:

"In 99% of "real world" conditions, it means nothing." Original.
"In 99.9% of "real world" conditions, it means very little." Modified.

The rear-biased AWD supporters may not like this, but -- even Acura's and Volvo's AWD cars (that are up to 95% FWD normally) -- can pretty much shift power as needed to where its needed virtually instantly.

Audi's quattro system is called TORque SENsing (TORSEN) and is therefore almost a completely mechanical system. Quattro HAS BEEN and mostly remains 50-50 F/R split (but will shift power to where it is needed, just like the other systems.) But even Audi has caved in to the RWD bias "encouragement" and is (or soon will) be offering the RS 4 with a 40-60 F/R AWD bias. One can only assume that the other Audis will shortly ( a year or three ) fall in line and be the same.

These systems -- sometimes called "X" or sometimes designated with an "X" (as in 530xi, M35x, etc.) -- in passenger cars driven the way most mere mortals drive all provide superior traction. Some (basically all) provide extra benefits on any surface -- performance CAN be enhanced with AWD.

Weight increases attributable to AWD are usually at least 150 pounds, often more. The argument can be made that the weight penalty offsets the performance gains. While perhaps technically true, for most of us, most of the time, the advantages of AWD (not part time four wheel drive) outweigh any issues that may come with the territory.

Of greater importance, IMHO, is the F/R WEIGHT balance, the suspension geometry, the tire wheel choices made by the mfg and other engineering "areas of opportunity." Audis, the thing I think I know the best, are almost all (every one of them) "nose heavy." Yet, using ONLY that criteria, Audis handle way better than they "have a right to." The reasons for this apparent discrepancy include suspension design, the choice of tires and wheels, damping (think shocks) and AWD.

The new BMW 330, is a great car, and without the "x" designation is RWD. BMW's are generally thought of to be very well balanced and often nearly 50-50 weight distribution. Yet, in the newest of the new 330's, the editors of Automobile magazine indicated they felt the car was very willing to understeer and not as easy to "tail drive" or drive by throttle as a Cadillac CTS for instance. The Cadillac, as I recall is not as well balanced as the BMW, but there you have the editors claiming this new BMW tends to understeer.

Understeer (in a vacuum) is often caused by a car's weight balance being biased so that it is mostly on the front wheels. Clearly the BMW is not what one would call nose heavy.

Typical answer -- you asked what time it is and I somehow go down the path that includes watch building.

AWD in this class of cars is 99.9% of the time superior to other ways to put power to the pavement. More and more, the AWD systems are drifting toward being rear biased. Frankly, I think this is to just shut the journalists up in large measure.

Audi has 25 years experience with AWD -- they squandered that advantage as far as I am concerned by having quattro be an unintentionally kept secret. Now all the LPS crowd offers competent AWD. Audi probably does know more about building AWD cars than Infiniti or BMW or Lexus -- but since we live and drive in the "real world" you should get the car you want (with AWD) and not be much concerned with "how" they did their version of it.

It's all good! :shades:

cdnpinhead · July 2005

Excellent!

Keep it simple. "No fake wood" absolutely fills the bill. Back in the day, I thought my LS (being a "luxury" Lincoln) would come with real wood. I learned differently.

I think you've hit upon the best way to winnow the herd.

Well done.

lexusguy · July 2005

"Typical answer" Hehe. Indeed sir.

armen6, to shorten it up just a tad, I'd like to just say that any AWD car should be fine. What tires you choose to use in the snow are more important than the differences between Infiniti's ATTESA-ETS and Audi's Quattro. If you get a sport package and that comes with UHP summer tires, you're going to want to swap with snow tires or A\S tires at the very least. Nobody's AWD system, not Quattro, ATTESA, xDrive, SH-AWD, whatever, will work if the tires cant get any traction in snow.

mark, perhaps BMW designed the new 3 to have a natural understeer rather than oversteer when pushed over the limit to make it a little easier to handle for would-be Schumachers. I know from personal experience that in a G35x, even with the stability control on, all it takes to bring the tail out is to hit the throttle in a corner.

markcincinnati · July 2005

The Automobile comparo was CTS G35 and 330i -- despite the "understeer" of the Bimmer, it "won" the comparo (even though by reading the entire article, it would be pretty hard to pick a bad one from the three.)

The BMW cost the most and it showed it, was the conclusion.

The Infiniti was the most perky, yet even that did not overcome the goodness of the new Bimmer.

I know they wanted 3 RWD cars, so I'll just have to wait for the 330xi vs the A4 3.2 (both with sticks, please) comparo -- or throw in the G35X and make all three of them automatics (for proper comparison)!

lexusguy · July 2005

I thought Audi only offers the stick on the 2.0T? Thats what Edmunds said in their recent comparo of the 2.0T with a stick vs. the 330i with a stick.

frisconick · July 2005

Pat, I had trouble getting to your link "here" maybe it's trouble on my end. I want to start a topic "How do define a luxury perfomance sedan"

frisconick · July 2005

Once again, anyone who wants a different comparo should go here and fire it up. If there is enough interest, it will fly, if not, well at least you tried.

Hey Pat, I would love to start a new comparo called: "How do you define a Luxury Performance Sadan. However, your "here" link does not work. Maybe the prob is on my end.

docnukem · July 2005

Good idea. Did you get to the sedan vs sedan comparison topic list? There is a small link at the top of the list that says "Add a discussion". I might have tried it, but it was your idea.

Personally, as the title of this board is "Luxury Performance Sedans", it should be more inclusive. I don't know if that means it should not be under the "Comparison" grouping. Maybe it should be more of a general topic or general sedan thread. Would that get around the six car limit?

pat · July 2005

No, the six car limit has something to do with the software. We are going to have that in any discussion and there is no way around it. The creator of the discussion adds 3 categories and I have to add the other 3.

Yes, the link is at the top (and bottom) of the page and yeah, I screwed mine up in my second post, sorry about that (missed the / before the file ID).

http://townhall-talk.edmunds.com/direct/view/.eec8b4e

We can try that discussion. I think you have to define "luxury" first and then choose the "performance" sedans after that. If we're not going to limit it to 6 cars, we're not going to put any individual vehicles in the categories.

markcincinnati · July 2005

The A4 2.0T and 3.2 can be had with manual transmission -- but ONLY if they are called MY 2006.

The A4 3.2 w/6spd manual and S-Line would be every bit the S4 (B5 vintage) -- and it would be less money than the S4.

Of course, the main plus of the S-Line offering is the wheels -- for less, you could probably just order a new A4 3.2 6spd manual with the sport suspension, lots of options and fully loaded it would be less than $45K. "AS4" indeed.

I just wish they would offer the A6 with the DSG or the 6spd. The tip is the weakest link (in any of these fine German cars, not just Audi). Are clutches really that difficult to press? My wife's new BMW clutch is, as they say, buttery smooth.

Even my 2003 allroad manual was "not bad."

To each his/her own (if only the choice was presented -- oh wait, it IS in the A4 line.) Party on Wayne.

lexusguy · July 2005

Party on Garth. I'm guessing the DSG may show up first in the next RS6, and then work its way into the regular A6 line.

markcincinnati · July 2005

Yesterday, I along with 399 other souls, was a Car and Driver, Road and Track, "editor for a day." Woo woo!

Did anyone else in this erudite forum, have the same experience (I understand it is nationwide)?

It WAS quite fun, but it is (my story that is) a cautionary tale. . . .

begbie · July 2005

For me it was always between the Audi A6 and BMW 530. I test drove the Bimmer, great drive of course, cool exterior BUT the interior simply is awful. Plus EVERYTHING is optional. Took out the Audi, elegant exterior, nice techno-looking interior, smooth ride..but not as "sporty" or "youthful" as I would like (I'm 30). On a whim, I drove the Infiniti M35 and it truly kicked both the German cars butts. Kick-butt engine, acceleration. Awesome exterior (looks better in person than in pics) and the interior is unbelievably cool. The Only reason I could think to buy one of ther others is the "status" of their badges, a stupid reason to buy a car. Seriously, the Infinitit M35 (and big brother M45) is the car to beat in this segment (and at a bargain!). I bought mine yesterday and LOVE it!

frisconick · July 2005

Congratz, enjoy your new ride!!! :P

Many people think it's strange that test drive so many different cars, but you never know what car will crab you. You test drove the M on a whim, and bam, it's the car of your dreams.

lexusguy · July 2005

Enjoy your new M. While Lexus hyped the GS as the 5 killer (something that turned out to be pretty much completely false), the M is the real deal.

markcincinnati · July 2005

Saturday my wife and I were the "invited guests" of C&D and R&T magazine to a two and a half hour closed course comparison test drive.

First head to head comparo: 2005 Cadillac STS V6 vs. BMW 530i (both automatics.)

Second comparo: 2005 Cadillac CTS 255 HP V6 vs. Lexus ES330 (ditto autos only.)

Acceleration, braking, handing tests in a parking lot, closed course. Each driver was allowed 2 full runs in each car. A "race car driver" was in the front passenger seat and you were given a "demo ride" in each car by the pro.

A clip board and a form to evaluate the cars also went along with the deal. Everything was "staged" -- arrival, sign in, sign waiver, introductory lecture, one car of each kind to inspect for fit and finish, etc (the inspection cars were not driven so that the hood and trunk and all four doors could remain open for all of us "editors" to poke around without having the cars taken away from us while we were looking at the back seat, trunk room or playing with the switchgear.)

Three drivers per car, plus the instructor. Same routine for all four cars.

Comparisons were based on price points: the STS and the 530i were approximately $50,000. The CTS and the ES330 were in the high $30,000's.

My wife and I (and our newfound friend co-driver, Gene) all took this very seriously and wrote all our notes down -- Gene and I ranked the cars 1,2,3,4. Even though the rankings were supposed to be within price class, we listed the cars in that fashion. We were allowed to ask any questions we wanted of the pro drivers (who seemed to be contract drivers to C&D and R&T.)

The BMW was so bad, I could not figure it out. Hanging from the back of the tent was a sign that listed the car's attributes: engine stats, tire/wheel stats, price, weight, dimensions, etc. The BMW and the Cadillacs all claimed to be 255HP machines. The BMW was a dog, a bone and frankly anemic. The brake pedal travel was excessive before you hit the sponge that passed for brakes. With four people in the BMW it felt, I was certain, like a 525, rather than a 530.

I looked at each tire/wheel and wrote each size of the tires down on my clipboard test notes. The tires did not match the sign. I asked if the 530 (which had a 5 speed auto) was a 225 or 255 HP version. I was told it was a 225. I asked if the Cadillac STS had the sport package on it -- the answer was yes, but the BMW was standard in every way "that's because this was a price comparo, not a feature to feature comparo." The Cadillac was about $2K more than the BMW, for the record.

The BMW's rear suspension bottomed in the handling test.

Much the same thing over on the CTS vs ES330 test. The ES330 was very nice, when it was not moving. And, it did ride well, it was plush that is -- it took the bump section better (smoother and quieter, only in the definition of better) than the other cars. But the poor FWD sofa like ES330 was not a car I could imagine owning.

So, all is done -- it is a good 2.5 hours later and my test report scores (subjective and objective) are all noted. The CTS was number one, and overall, I would have to say it was tied with the STS (since the CTS engine had to lug around a lot less weight in the CTS than in the STS.) Both Cadillacs had sport suspensions (but NOT magna ride); the BMW did not have Servotronic steering and it felt sluggish and stiff at low speed and overboosted as the engine revs climbed.

The Lexus was a "5" on a scale of 1 to 4, it was that bad. The BMW did have a nicer interior than the STS but if you like the CTS interior (I run hot and cold on it, I described the CTS interior as an STS interior with a goiter), it was pretty close to the BMW. Fit and finish was probably best on the ES330 followed by the BMW and the Cadillacs brought up the rear.

Overall, all things considered, the Cadillacs were tied for first place, the BMW was, despite all my negatives, second place and the Lexus was a distant third place, so distant I always rated it fourth place even though with the Cadillacs tying for first place there only were 3 places.

Opened my eyes.

All is over, "please go to the exit interview tent for some parting gifts."

We entered the tent -- it was a Cadillac showroom in the middle of the parking lot. Our gifts, a very nice fabric brief case with the Cadillac crest embroidered on it, a Cadillac ball cap and a fabric Car and Driver portfolio and an Identification Card, "Honorary GM Employee ID."

Now, this does not change the facts -- as they could be presented under the circumstances: the Cadillacs WERE superior. But I suspect they were ringers -- sport set up vs standard. Tire sizes that belied the the posted size. Perhaps a "dumbed down" BMW. The Cadillac STS had sat nav and was ever so nice. The seats in the BMW were better, but of course the BMW had a black interior which is THE MOST DREADFUL interior look for this car -- can you say cheeeeeeep? But, despite the BMW apparently deliberately being put in its worst possible light (interior wise), the BMW interior was STILL nicer than the STS's. In many ways, so was the Lexus Interior.

Now, I drove my new A6 3.2 (also 255HP) to this event. When I got into my car and drove off, I couldn't help but try the same test loop in my car as I had just done in the other cars. The CTS still struck me as having the most power of the 5 cars (now including my 1,500 mile on the clock A6 3.2), but just by the hair on my chinny chin chin. Otherwise, the A6 3.2, up against either the 530 or the STS would have been a no contest. I may understand why the Audi was not included, or perhaps it just was that the BMW could be a 225HP version (and a 2005) and could be snuck in (perhaps?) along side a 255HP Cadillac.

I had fun, the parting gifts were pretty nice -- but I feel so USED! It would have been OK if there had been a BMW, Cadillac AND Lexus showroom after the "test drives." But this, after the fact, was clearly a Cadillac sponsored event.

Funny, I thought it was a coincidence when my new co driver, Gene, came to the same conclusions regarding the cars -- and the three of us, Gene, my wife and I, all EXPECTED the BMW to be the hands down fave -- na baby na.

I have nothing against such events. Heck I have been to two Porsche test drive events and one Chrysler-Jeep event. And, in these events there were (sometimes) camparo cars for "evaluation." Generally though, I expect a Jeep event to prove Jeeps are "better" off road than, X5's or whatever.

I had no idea, until after the fact, that this was apparently a Cadillac deal.

Should you get such an invitation, please take it -- it is fun, entertaining and even a little educational. It is, however, not even close to being "unbiased."

:shades:

qbrozen · July 2005

thanks for the writeup. I'm definitely glad I ignored my invite. My wife was surprised I wasn't interested, but my point was that I didn't feel like driving 2 hours to where it was being held in Philly to drive a few cars that I could just go to the local dealership and try out if I so desired. Now after hearing how its set up, I'm even more sure I made the right decision.

Glad you had fun, though.

rich545 · July 2005

Mainly because the performance stats for teh 2005 530i would not seem to indicate sluggishness. It's no rocket, but not slow either. I've never driven it though so I really don't know. I would imagine the new engine would make a difference, but that's odd about the suspension. I realize it wasn't a sport suspension, but I've never heard complaints about how the 530 handles before. Hell, maybe they crippled the poor car just to make the Caddie do better! I do know that the 545 is anything but sluggish and with the sort suspension it handles like it's on rails. It really does sound more like you drove the 525. You don't think they'd actually rebadge the car do you?

bdkinnh · July 2005

I asked if the 530 (which had a 5 speed auto) was a 225 or 255 HP version. I was told it was a 225.

FYI: The 2006 BMW 530i is 255 HP and is a six speed. I've driven the 2006 525i, and it is a tad slow off the line (kind of felt like an Audi) but it has plenty of power otherwise and handles great. I didn't feel the braking was too soft.

I'll be driving a 530i in a week or so... hopefully the take off will be a bit better.

Sounds like it was just a Cadillac demo day and they castrated/mis represented the other cars to make Cadillac look better. I'm a little surprised that C&D would host something so biased.

hpowders · July 2005

I'm not surprised. Car and Driver accepts Cadillac advertising, don't they?

markcincinnati · July 2005

. . .the pro drivers were programmed to answer but not volunteer.

I knew that the 255 HP 530i when equipped with an auto was both a dumb thing to do when it is about the last hold out with a stick AND it would be 6 forward speeds.

The fact that they answered truthfully was good -- but this thing would have been better compared with the ES330 if power was wanted.

The CTS with the sport set up but with auto was clearly in its sweet spot - 255 hp and about 500 pounds lighter than the STS.

The fact that the HEAVIER STS bettered the 530 (but the 530 CLAIMED to have less torque than the STS) of course it had WAY less torque since it was NOT the new 3.0 255HP motor.

I asked "does this BMW have Servotronic steering" the pro driver said, "it must have." But when he asked the other pro drivers they all said "nope, not on this one." The steering wheel feel at a dead stop was overly heavy. The Cadillac by comparison was just right.

This was set up, MAYBE, (probably) so that the Cadillac would impress you even if you were a BMW bigot.

I don't mind being in such a situation -- but to claim, initially, that this was a test report and later have it turn out to be obviously sponsored by Cadillac, was disappointing.

Maybe if the event would have said sponsored by Cadillac we wouldn't have taken up the challenge -- we didn't have anything else going on, and it was fun. I certainly would never do to a car I was test driving what I did to these vehicles, so in that respect it did allow you to wring out the cars.

So Cadillac is building some near world class cars --? Yes, but I already knew that. I also thought, already, that they weren't QUITE there yet. Close, but no cigar. The real test, I'd wager would have been comparably priced M35 Infiniti and the STS V6. I'd wager, no contest -- but heck, I felt that way about the A6 3.2 "informal" comparo I did whilst still on the parking lot test track.

My A6 3.2 bettered the STS -- !

frisconick · July 2005

Of course it was a Caddy set up!!! :P Sounds like you had a great time.

Nevertheless, Consumer Reports gave very high marks for the CTS. They were very impressed with the car, so even if was a set up, apparently it's a great car. However, I want to see the CTS reliability record in a couple years.

rich545 · July 2005

Actually, the 530 is 6 speed with both manual and auto. The 0-60 time difference between the two is only .2 seconds (6.4 and 6.6 respectively). The manual, of course, is more fun, but performance-wise it obviously doesn't make a huge difference. I opted for auto in my 545 (gasp!) after having owned only one other auto car in my life. I traded a 330xi with stick for it. Can't say I miss it much given the traffic around Chicago and its suburbs. I know it's somewhat of a poor substitute, but the steptronic auto isn't bad. It lets you decide when to shift at least. Obviously there's no clutch though. It actually took me a while to get used to automatic, and I still rest my right hand on the shifter. It's just that having driven my 330 around here for a while, it was a real pain to push the clutch in and out about a million times in first gear in traffic!

rich545 · July 2005

Here's an interesting read from Motor Trend about the advantages and disadvantages of the three drive systems:

http://motortrend.com/roadtests/sedan/112_0506_grip/index.html

freddybb · July 2005

Funnily enough, I went through the same decision-making process that Begbie went through, and I chose the 530xi hands-down over the M35x. I posted this earlier, and my decision was based on the following factors:

- I want to get back to the joy of a manual shifter.
- The BMW exterior looks much cooler to me than the bulky looking M35x (although I definitely found the car to be way better looking in person than in the awful photos in the brochure and on the website). The 5 looks like it is moving even when it is standing still -- and I know lots of people who love the way my car looks (and yes, I know it is not the most popular of designs :-)
- I felt cramped and claustrophobic in the M35 (surrounded by too much stuff), and the light interior wood looks very cheap.
- I HATED the control panel in the M that is canted towards the top of the car (the part below the navigation screen).
- Finally, walking up to the 5 gets my blood pumping and I am excited to get in the car and drive. Walking up to the M makes me feel blah and reminds me that I would be making a compromise. This is all emotion, so go figure!

Don't get me wrong -- the M is a great car too, but the 5 got my money! And I am a first time BMW buyer with no prior prejudices. If anything, I have a bias towards the quality and reliability of Japanese makers (owned a very reliable Toyota and a very problematic Volvo before this).

To each his own, as the adage goes.

frisconick · July 2005

Congratz on your new 5 :shades:

I didn't like the M either, I knew immediatly I was not going to buy.

markcincinnati · July 2005

The auto WAS a 5spd -- it is NOW a 6spd -- the manual was and is a 6spd.

When I noticed what seemed to be a 225HP car, despite the board comparing the two, I asked -- they said, uh, yea, it isn't 255HP thats the 06's this is an '05.

It WAS a fun day. But hardly an objective day. Not that I am under the impression that cars are objective.

Just a bit of a let down knowing that the deck seemed stacked.

The Caddy's WERE very nice. But somebody should have shot that BMW and put it out of its misery.

I have NOT driven a 255 auto 530xi or a manual one for that matter -- I am just saying that SUBJECTIVELY the quickest car of the four we tested plus the fact that my A6 3.2 was my ride home in this order: CTS A6 STS 530i ES330.

I wish they had allowed us to drive the 530 with the 255HP like the comparo chart claimed. I am certain the outcome would have been less dramatic against the BMW.

Finally, the 530xi of the three that seem to be written about from time to time here (A6 M35X and 530xi) wins at least insofar as it can be had with a stick shift.

My timing, perhaps, was a bit off -- I haven't seen or driven one of these 530xi's yet -- knowing Cincinnati, tho, 6spds will be sold order only.

What a drag it is getting old. . . :shades:
Hmmmm.

frisconick · July 2005

What a drag it is getting old. . .

Rolling Stones, 1965, you are getting old :P

markcincinnati · July 2005

But even without citing my source you came to my rescue by recognizing the quote, I may be old, but I'm in good company.

I think the purpose of the "editor for a day" was served. The Cadillacs are certainly "worthy" of consideration. And, although I haven't looked at what the employee discount would really mean, I suspect a $62,000 STS AWD might be down around the price of my new Audi. And, with the V8, perhaps the Cadillac would have been worthy of consideration against my two winners: the Audi and the Infiniti.

I keep reading everyone's "justification" for why they did that this or the other thing -- I too have my justifications for switching first to Infiniti then back to Audi. Once the playing field (for me) was more or less leveled, the Audi won me back. Overall, however, I cannot say anything negative about the M35X -- it is a great car in every way.

The Audi with, what, 25 more HP and a 2% improvement in F/R balance would be the one to beat, IMHO. But for the time being for the money most of us would have to pay (my deal was a fluke, I'll wager) the Infiniti is "the one to beat."

Full disclosure, I would still want to test the 530xi w/manual transmission.

The BMW, for the moment, is back to being less competitive if you can believe the configurator on the WWW. But the Audi, still comes off expensive when examined and compared to the M35X.

What a great time to be in the market.

lexusguy · July 2005

Interesting report. I understand the "ringer" STS vs. the worst BMW they could possibly get their hands on, that makes sense and sounds like something Cadillac would do to try to make their cars look better.

CTS vs. ES330 though? What? Who thought this was remotely fair? (Or...perhaps that was the point in the first place. Some Cadillac exec said "get me a Lexus we can beat up, I dont care which one"). A fair comparison would be the ES330 vs. say, the Buick LaCrosse. Who would the winner be then?

I definitely know why the 330i, A4 3.2, and G35 were not invited, even though they actually compete with the CTS.

frisconick · July 2005

It's not so bad getting older, I have more money, can say no to sex sometimes, and can afford these cars :P

jjacura · July 2005

"It's not so bad getting older, I have more money, can say no to sex sometimes, and can afford these cars."

Ah yes, an age of embellishment modified by some discretionary but diminished returns, silver threads among the gold. A time to bring on the reward of that luxury performance sedan.

frisconick · July 2005

Well put!!!

msu79gt82 · July 2005

Thanks for the link - I'm trying to decide if AWD is worthwhile in the deep South.

bondguy1 · July 2005

I think it is. I am in Fort Lauderdale and this summer has been real wet. The car drives like a dream...I especially like when it doesn' t pull to the side of the road when you hit a puddle sticking out from the side of the road like a non four wheel drive car would do.
I now really enjoy my car since I discovered the "S" mode. It drives like a sports car with four doors. Unbelieveable how much difference this makes. Probably getting 10 MPG while in this mode. It's like a friend of mine said who just got the Chrysler 300 Hemi...I asked him how the engine works with cruising at highway speeds and using less power for fuel economy...he said I don't know...when you drive this car, you race around to each stoplight that you don't get any mileage worth speaking of.

jjacura · July 2005

What car are you driving Bondguy?

lexusguy · July 2005

If you get a lot of rain, yes. If not, the RWD versions of cars offered with AWD, such as the 5, E, M, or GS will weigh less, which means faster acceleration and most likely a few more miles to the gallon. Even still, AWD does offer a nice insurance against unexpected conditions. If Lexus offered the LS in AWD, I'd buy.

bondguy1 · July 2005

2005 A6 3.2 pretty much loaded
in black exterior w/ amaretto inside

frisconick · July 2005

Enjoy your new ride! :shades:

jjacura · July 2005

wouldn't a 2006 be new :confuse: ...but I guess its quite possible to have recently bought a new 2005 Audi A6.

why_not · July 2005

In reply to numerous concerns i believe that if the
title is going to be called LPS than make guidelines that would allow
it to be an LPS. not a unilateral role.

A good suggestion of a Luxury Performance Sedan would be
It must come in a V8 or a V6
It must cost at least 40,000 in the top trim
It must be Available with real wood (not fake)
It must have a rwd or a awd wheelbase
It must have at least 6 lux features. (Xenon, side and front Airbags,
trac control, dual climate, heated seats, navigation, engine
disabler, 17" to 20" wheel factory, at least 6 speaker 5 disk changer
factory etc.)
It must have sold at least 30,000 copies a year
It has to be able to be purchased overseas.
The car company must have a high performance model (gs430 Ltuned, S6,M5)
and a high performance division.

Now i understand peoples view on only the cars on whoever started this thread feel's should be in but as people have stated, the market and the structure, changes so to be on par, make up a guideline and than if a new car comes out and it fits the guideline let it be recognized. If not change the title to
"The so called luxury performance sedans because, society sets luxury standards and society is the people, but in this thread only one person is allow to have a opinion of luxury.
There should be some measurable view, of the peoples thoughts.

P.s i seen this stated on this board before but the poster had sarcastic comments i believe thats why it was removed. So I cleaned it up but he had a real good viewpoint minus the sarcasm.

Luxury Performance Sedans

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles