Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see May lease deals!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
M
Well, it's hard to say anyway what caused what. It's not as if BMW or MB came out and said, "Yeah, we need to put a V8 in our cars because of the Q45 (or LS400)." It was probably a combination of both, but I think the Q had a greater impact in the "engine" department, from what I remember in the press.
The LS, of course, was a much bigger success, but the Q45 was pretty successful as well in its first iteration, and received a lot of acclaim from the press. Too bad Infiniti messed it up with stupid advertising and trying to emulate Lexus (later for a bit) instead of sticking to their original "performance" image.
Won't jacking up the HP on the M35 negatively affect NVH?
I don't necessarily think that Nissan would make the M35 300+ hp, just that I won't be surprised if they do. The Altima redefined the midsize V6 family sedan class in 2002 in terms of power with the 240 hp Altima. After Honda matched with the 240 hp Accord in 2003, Nissan promptly raised the Altima to 245 hp in 2004.
Same thing with the G35 and TL. The 2003 G35 had 260 hp, then Acura came out with the 2004 270hp TL, now Nissan is coming out with the 277hp 2005 G35 sedan.
So it looks like Nissan is determined to stay at the top in the hp race, with Honda egging them on. The RL/M35 battle could be the same thing. So I wouldn't be surprised if the M35 was 304hp or something, just so that Nissan could have bragging rights.
Another reason may be that the 2005 G35 Coupe Sport will have about 295 hp. Hence, it probably isn't that hard to squeeze out a few more horses, from basically the same engine. Also, Infiniti may not want a "lower-class" vehicle to have higher hp than a "higher-class" vehicle, even though one is a coupe and the other a sedan.
In all likelihood I'm wrong, but it's just a thought.
I'm sure Nissan could get over 300HP out of the VQ. It has the same displacement as the RL's 3.5L SOHC but the VQ is a DOHC so Nissan should be able to get more than 300HP, and they're not that far away with some of their other VQ offerings.
pg4877 is repeating my basic point. The VQ is on the loud and gruff side regarding NVH, so to up the HP will make it probably even louder and gruffer, and cars in this price range typically have very low NVH.
M
There can't be too many people in this world, of any race or culture, that can go into another country without speaking the language and do what Ghosn did.
It's too bad Ghosn's not in charge of GM.
Japan, Inc. has a long history of working with outside car companies. Mazda has close ties to Ford and has for a long time. Isuzu, Subaru and Suzuki have close ties to GM. Heck, GM buys Honda V6s for the Saturn Vue! Mitsubishi has long-term close ties to Chrysler (which are coming apart). (And don't forget Ford started in Japan before WW II and was a key player until their assets were appropriated by the Japanese government during the war.)
M
M
'21 Dark Blue/Black Audi A7 PHEV (mine); '22 White/Beige BMW X3 (hers); '20 Estoril Blue/Oyster BMW M240xi 'Vert (Ours, read: hers in 'vert weather; mine during Nor'easters...)
My problem with the STS (without having actually "seen" it) is the price. There is no way I'd pay that much for a Cadillac sedan.
M
"Even though I would never buy the Cadillac myself... the companies I WOULD consider buying from...."
So if Cadillac built the best car for the lowest price, you'd still pass? And if some other company built a worse car you'd buy it? Just because of what? Brand loyalty? Snob appeal?
Never understood slavish devotion to a car marque. Do you think the car marque is so slavishly devoted to you?
I say buy the best car that meets your needs and fits your budget, regardless of who makes it or where it is made!
Thats a hypothetical question that your saying I'm saying yes to. Cadillac doesnt build the best car, nor is it the lowest price, so it doesnt really apply does it? I'm not blindly devoted to one brand. Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura happen to be my favorite three auto makers, so their cars are the ones I would consider actually buying. Cadillac needs to work on their styling, interiors, and pricing before they would get my serious consideration.
"Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura happen to be my favorite three auto makers, so their cars are the ones I would consider actually buying."
Actually, to be accurate, you should have written Toyota (Lexus), Nissan-Renault (Infiniti), and Honda (Acura). They are the manufacturers. Lexus, Infiniti, and Acura are just the marques, subsidiaries of the parent corporations. For example, an ES330 is essentially a Toyota Camry. An Infiniti I35 is essentially a Nissan Maxima. An Acura TSX is essentially a European Honda Accord.
What does the auto maker have to do with the specific automobiles for sale? Do you like their corporate politics? Profit margins? Environment and social policies? Unionization stances? Logos? Letterhead? Web sites?
If you love the auto maker but not the cars, would you still buy the cars?
And we in America/NA have to buy specific cars from franchise dealers. The dealers aren't even owned or controlled by the manufacturers. What if you love the auto maker but hate the auto maker's dealers?
When Volvo was telling the world how great seatbelts are, GM fought tooth and nail to not have to put them in their cars. Safer to be thrown (through the windshield) from the car, said GM. Several more Mercedes and Volvo innovations GM was either slow to adopt, or literally fought in the courts to have them NOT adopted. Lately, when the feds propose an increase for CAFE economy, Toyota and Honda are happy to comply. Who's there to fight it? Why good ole GM, wanting to keep CAFE as low as humanly possible so they can keep from having to modernize. Toyota and Honda I feel are responsible companies, trying to HELP a bad situation, not hurt it. These are part of the reasons why I would NOT buy Cadillac. I generally dont like GM. On top of that, I dont like any of Cadillacs products, so that makes the decision pretty easy.
"20 years of embarrasing quality levels, uncompetitive engines and cheap Cadillac interiors are GM's decisions, not the dealers. When Volvo was telling the world how great seatbelts are, GM fought tooth and nail to not have to put them in their cars. Safer to be thrown (through the windshield) from the car, said GM. Several more Mercedes and Volvo innovations GM was either slow to adopt, or literally fought in the courts to have them NOT adopted."
What does any of that have to do with the cars we are comparing today and buying today? GM owns Opel, Holden, and Saab, and has financial ownership interests in Isuzu, Daewoo, etc. Ford owns Volvo, Jaguar, Aston Martin, etc. and has ownership interests in Mazda.
BMW (who now own Rolls Royce cars) used to be part of the [non-permissible content removed] war machine (the Allies hated BMW so much for their great jet engines that the Allies gave England's Bristol BMW's car designs and engineering) and built Isetta bubblecars in the 1950s. That was then. The past is long over and done. We are talking about buying today's cars. Not cars from the 1950s or 1970s.
Once again, buy the best car that meets your needs and fits your budget. Don't worry about who builds them or where they are built or what that company used to do 25 or 50 years ago.
The best car that meets my needs, fits my budget, and is built by a company I actually respect is the LS430, which is why I own one.
The LS430 is a very nice LUXURY sedan. But the LS430 is NOT a nice luxury PERFORMANCE sedan. Is unfortunate that Toyota/Lexus won't create a decent Sport Pkg for the LS to give it some performance capability. LS400/430 is a magnificent sedate highway cruiser. Eats up miles of smooth, flat roads and coddles the driver and passengers. Almost narcotic-like. A car designed to separate driver and passenger from the road.
LS400/430 is for those who love to ride, but not for those who love to drive.
But I'm glad Lexus is around. Although I have no interest in anything they make, I think Lexus has scared the snot out of MB, BMW and other luxury brands and the competition will force all of them to make better cars at more affordable prices.
It's far more meaningful to compare models by models instead of brand vs. brand.
Yes I like Mercedes in general, but would I pick up a ML, probably not unless it is heavily discounted.
While I appreciate BMWs' handling, would I get one? Not necessarily due to the latest models' poor ergonomics and design I cannot get used to. The X5 is nice, but not the 745i in my opinion.
Lexus? Sure, not a bad choice if I were mainly only looking for a quiet ride and a super stereo. However, some Lexus models are pretty lame, look at the over priced LX and GX.
Acura? They have a Civic dressed up model here which I think is the biggest scam.
Cadillac? While I'm not a big fan or their SUVs, the convertible seems quite interesting. In fact, I may get it over the SC430.
To judge a car objectively, one must see beyond the brand.
Of course, some prefer to purchase based on blind loyalty, snob appeal or even nationalism!
However, I'm not particularly impressed with certain Lexus interiors either.
Somehow Lexus likes to put lots of wood everywhere (which I don't have a problem with); however, the wood is too 'red' and when clashed with the dark grey plastic buttons and the modern silver metallic radio trim pieces, the end result is a rather gaudy look.
I would be far happier if they pick a different shade of wood. Yes, the Lexus may seem more expensive when compared to the new 5, but both are rather unattractive if you ask me.
BMW is most successful combining performance and luxury, with MB & Audi a distant 2nd (tied). Other than the IS300 manual and SportCross, Lexus really doesn't have much in way of performance. The GS has mostly been a poseur. Infiniti at least has the G35 sedan and coupe with 6-speed manuals, but the M45 and Q45 have (rightly) been flops.
Acura isn't even a player, since they are FWD and RWD is the minimum to play competitively in this league.
Sad thing is that by the time you cross the $40,000 threshold, the emphasis is on luxury. You can't get a manual transmission in the 7 Series any more. You can't get a manual transmission in any performance-oriented MB over $50K, not even the AMGs sold in USA.
The last successful combination of luxury and performance may be the 545i 6-speed manual. (The old M5 and 540i6 are classics). Followed by the Cadillac CTS-V with 6-speed manual.
I will readily admit my biases. A true performance car needs manual transmission with clutch pedal (no ATs or SMGs), IRS, RWD, and near 50/50 balance. Farther you get from these criteria, less likely you have a performance car. For example, AWD adds weight, complexity, eats up space, reduces economy, adds price, etc.
For some of us, (I own a 2003 5 series) automatics or I have manu-matic serve me just fine, thank you very much. I drove manuals for more than 25 years. It's fine if you live in Nebraska, where one has small towns and many open roads and highways. But try dealing with stop and go bumper to bumper traffic on a daily basis day-in and out in Southern California. I guarantee anyone, that your knees will NOT appreciate it.
IMO, performance levels are in the eye of the beholder. The bottom line is that all of the cars we're discussing here are terrific and are a matter of personal taste. So, go out their and drive, cruise or corner. It's all good.
If you like to be driven, buy an AT or SMG.
A Ferrari without the lovely gated shifter and clutch pedal is like the Statue of Liberty without arms or Mona Lisa without a head. Yes, something beautiful, special, and interesting, but not quite up to its true potential.
The market agrees with me. Just compare used car prices for automatic and manual transmission-equipped Ferrari built in the past 20 years. You'll take a pounding because no one wants to pay top dollar for an AT Ferrari.
At least BMW's M held on for a long time. Too bad they, too, are going route of SMG. Will be interesting to see what collectors will pay for both in 20 years.
Like I said, I admit my biases. RWD, IRS, manual transmission, near 50/50 weight balance, and naturally-aspirated engines (I6 or V8)
She's now considering a 2003 GS300 which has a better color trim....and in our opinion...a more attractive body style.
The other option is a 2005 Mercedes c230 Kompressor. Two totally different types of car....but both have things she likes about them.