IFCAR Comparo: Entry-Lux Sedans

[ifcar]

His webhost and domain would stay the same. Ifcar, if you took me up on my offer I would rather you not use frontpage simply because it has a tendency of screwing up designs not originally written with it, I find nvu to be a better alternative.

Is it free?

Yep, it is actually managed by the mozilla foundation, just like firefox and thunderbird.

That's a good sign, anyway. Do you have a link for a download?

[TBR]

http://cvs.nvu.com/download/nvu-1.0-win32-installer-full.exe

[ifcar]

Thanks.  

[Raghavan]

Ifcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.

A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.

Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.

[mazda6er]

Good job, iffy. That must've taken a lot of work, but at least this was a fun group to test drive. Even though there are a lot of good cars there, I'm suprised the A4 ended up in 10th.  

[ifcar]

Ifcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.

A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.

Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.

Too many variables, too much of a chance that true competitors could be separated by rigid criteria.  

[ifcar]

Good job, iffy. That must've taken a lot of work, but at least this was a fun group to test drive. Even though there are a lot of good cars there, I'm suprised the A4 ended up in 10th.

Thanks, and if it weren't fun I wouldn't be doing it.  B)

And the A4 simply didn't stand out enough to make it up higher, though 10th place is still very good considering what it did have to beat to get there.  

[BMWDave]

I just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er

Why do you feel the 3er was down on power?  While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all.  The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.

[ifcar]

I just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er

Why do you feel the 3er was down on power?  While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all.  The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.

Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?  

[BMWDave]

I just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er

Why do you feel the 3er was down on power?  While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all.  The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.

Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?

The old one.

[Raghavan]

Ifcar, that's a good review, but 29 pages is a bit too long, both for you and the reader. You should test either comparable high levels of models or low levels of models, not everything mixed in. 9 cars max in the review would be fine, but 29 because a bit tiresome to read, and probably a bit tiresome for you to write a whole friggen page about every single car. Make it shorter, and it'll probably be a lot easier and more enjoyable to read.

A car like the TSX isn't in a lower class than a car like the 325i just because it's a better value, and shouldn't be penalized for being less expensive. I would rather set it up that way, but some models are just too overpriced for that to work.

Yeah, i know, but maybe test more powerful models, and then test some less powerful models in a separate test, so you won't have to include an S60 2.4 and an S60 t5, etc, all in the same review. You should base your test off of maybe price or engine output or luxury or something so you'll have fewer test cars and a shorter review instead of just having a huge test with all of the entry-lux sedans available.
Just a suggestion.

Too many variables, too much of a chance that true competitors could be separated by rigid criteria.

if you have a standard, liek 250hp and up or something, you can get the A4 3.2, the 330i, G35, Avalon, etc. you may miss one or two, but it's better than a whole jumble of cars mashed together.

[ifcar]

Keeping competitors together is more important to me than risking including extra vehicles.

[R33 GT-R]

Isn't cross pollination great?

[BMWDave]

Isn't cross pollination great?

No ones arguing now  

[Colonel Cadillac]

I might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?  

[BMWDave]

I might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?

He said the 3er provided the best sports car attributes and had best in class handling and all.

[ifcar]

I might have missed this, I was skimming a bit, but which car did you over-all find the most fun to drive?

He said the 3er provided the best sports car attributes and had best in class handling and all.

If you consider handling the mark of a true fun-to-drive car, the 3er. If you prefer power, the 300C. If you like a mix, the G35 and 3er are very close.

[ifcar]

I just checked the 4th place slot, not bad for the 3er

Why do you feel the 3er was down on power?  While it may lack power on paper, those who have driven it usually felt it was an extremely competitive car in terms of acceleration and all.  The car feels like it makes a lot more hp than it does on paper.

Are you talking about the old 325i or the new one?

The old one.

Must have missed this.

It never felt underpowered, but when you consider how fast many of its competitors are, it just falls short. Yes, it felt like it had more power than its hp figures implied, but that's still beating only 184 in a class were 250+ isn't rare.

The only 0-60 time I've seen for an auto 05 325i was 8.1 seconds. It feels faster than that, but that's still not enough for that class.

[Yoshi]

I'd never suggest expanding this review, my suggestion was about future reviews. The size and complexity of this piece is impressive in its own right, but if you're looking for a way to stand above the crowd try something no one else is doing. I fully admit it's a difficult proposition, but the value would e tremendous.

Without providing detail on where you drove them, for me it is hard to judge whether or not you really had the opportunity to push the cars to discover how well they balanced handling/comfort.  

[ifcar]

I take most of the cars on an approximately 10-mile loop around Waldorf, Maryland. I don't destroy the cars while testing them Car and Driver style, as they are driven on test drives, occasionally with a salesman in tow.

I also get a chance to evaluate a good number of vehicles at the annual GM-sponsered Auto Show In Motion, where they have their cars and some competing products on a short track course, where I can even better-evaluate the cars' handling capabilities.

And while it would be interesting to evaluate sedans versus wagons and the like, it would be impossible to set standards that could keep it from being too inclusive. I have considered smaller comparisons of vehicles from radically different classes (a company's minivan against its own comparably-priced SUV, for example), but those would probably end up more as editorials about which general vehicle type is almost always better rather than useful reviews.  

[Tom]

Ifcar:  don't dealerships catch on after a while that you don't plan to buy?  And on an unrelated note, how has your parents' xB been so far?

[ifcar]

Ifcar:  don't dealerships catch on after a while that you don't plan to buy?  And on an unrelated note, how has your parents' xB been so far?

I often go with someone else, often someone who is considering a new car and drives something better than I do. It helps get test drives and gives a second opinion.

And my parents seem very happy with their xB. They mentioned getting a second one as a strong possibility as a replacement for the 96 Caravan.

[Raza]

I think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type.  I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof.  And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero).  The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even.  Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.

[Tom]

I think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type.  I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof.  And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero).  The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even.  Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.

That's strange, did you try adjusting seat height?  My uncle owns one and fits in it fine, and he's 6'1" and 220ish

[Raza]

And the TL in first again?  You really like all rounders, don't you?  And the Avalon?

Oh my, if.  Have I taught you nothing?

It's pretty well written, though.  I'd like to see some more figures in them.  Power, speed, things like that, that you can lift from reviews of the manufacturer websites.  They are essential to what a car is.  Considering that the TL place much higher than the TSX, I'm sure that the power was a factor.

As tested transmission would also be nice.  Or were they all automatics?

[ifcar]

I think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type.  I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof.  And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero).  The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even.  Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.

The 9-5 is surprisingly expensive, and the X-Type's price has been slashed every year. Couldn't tell you about lease prices though.  

[ifcar]

And the TL in first again?  You really like all rounders, don't you?  And the Avalon?

Oh my, if.  Have I taught you nothing?

It's pretty well written, though.  I'd like to see some more figures in them.  Power, speed, things like that, that you can lift from reviews of the manufacturer websites.  They are essential to what a car is.  Considering that the TL place much higher than the TSX, I'm sure that the power was a factor.

As tested transmission would also be nice.  Or were they all automatics?

All-arounders are comparison test winners.

As to the specs you wanted included, power (I assume you mean horsepower) can easily be, but I assumed the forumites here and at C/D already knew them (or had a rough idea), and I don't know if by speed you mean acceleration (which not many automakers include on their sites, and with varying degrees of accuracy) or top speed, which I don't consider especially important.

And yes, the specific cars reviewed were automatics to keep it fair to auto-onlys like the 300C.

[Raza]

I think the Saab 9-5 is a better car than the X Type.  I don't know how tall you are, but I'm not exceptionally tall, and I had trouble getting my head not to rub the roof.  And as for entertaining to drive, the 9-5 is moreso, and more powerful as well (Aero).  The interior is not as aesthetically pleasing as the X Type's, but the quality is almost even.  Plus, it's larger and can be had for less money, at a more attractive lease price as well.

The 9-5 is surprisingly expensive, and the X-Type's price has been slashed every year. Couldn't tell you about lease prices though.

The leases on Jaguars are tremendously expensive, thanks to poor residuals.  Also, the Jag's one of the coldest, numbest cars I've driven.  The Saab 9-5 (which, honestly, I was just a passenger of) seemed far more responsive (and the 9-3 was as well, and that placed higher, as I recall, so good show on that) and the Jag can still touch 40 grand easy and be left in the dust by a 9-5.  Plus, all that extra room, and the Swedishness of the car put it far higher in my book--but I understand if some people don't appreciate the Swedishness.

And all rounders shouldn't win comparison tests, not at this level.  You're rewarding the car for being excellently mediocre, or rather, excelling at mediocrity.  The TL is a great car, yes.  Is it a better value than the 3 series?  Maybe.  The G35?  No.  Is it more luxurious than the G35?  Yes.  The 3er, C class, and A4?  No.  Is it more fun to drive than the Avalon?  Yes.  Is it more fun to drive than a 3er or G35?  I don't think so.  Would I buy it over a 330i, C350, A4 2.0T?  No*.  Is it a good car?  Yes.  Is it the best?  No.  

And why be fair if the market is not?  If one car is faster than another, should you give it extra weight because it was a power advantage or slash the tires if it has a handling advantage?  If it's available as a manual, it would have been nice to see them tested.

*Provided all automobiles are manual transmission.

[ifcar]

A comparison tries to keep as many factors equal as possible, and it's very easy to do so with the transmission option. Also, aside from enthusiasts, most people buy automatics anyway.

And all-arounders win comparison tests because they do everything that virtually every buyer could want, covering all the bases. Otherwise, you have to pick a trait that you think is the most important, and make the car that does that best the winner.  

[Raza]

A comparison tries to keep as many factors equal as possible, and it's very easy to do so with the transmission option. Also, aside from enthusiasts, most people buy automatics anyway.

And all-arounders win comparison tests because they do everything that virtually every buyer could want, covering all the bases. Otherwise, you have to pick a trait that you think is the most important, and make the car that does that best the winner.

Right.  There are factors that are more important.  In a sports car, handling is more important than comfort.  In an mpv, handling isn't so important.  On a midsize luxury car, handling, acceleration, and comfort should all be important.  Unlike Consumer Reports, the way the car drives should be more important than how big the trunk is.