The G-spot

[12,000 RPM]

Same reason anyone gets rid of any perfectly running car. Not a swipe at all, sometimes it's just time.

[Rich]

IMO his G is better than a new Q

[12,000 RPM]

He only drives automatic so from that POV that new 400HP Q50 looks pretty good. I myself would much rather a stickshift G37, and even more than that an E90 335i

[MrH]

Camaro SS + a 4Runner is perfect for Cougs if the carport can fit both.

[Raza]

Camaro SS + a 4Runner is perfect for Cougs if the carport can fit both.

Cougs doesn't believe in owning two cars, remember?

[MrH]

We're slowly going to convince him.  2 cars for life.

[Raza]

We're slowly going to convince him.  2 cars for life.

Actually, I think he's working on a windowless train. 

[AutobahnSHO]

I was eagerly awaiting the MY2016 Q50 because it uses the new turbo motors..

says the "if it's not NA it's junk" guy

[68_427]

says the "if it's not NA it's junk" guy

Isn't that sporty

[12,000 RPM]

I have resigned to turbos as well, on the street. Midrange and good gas mileage are king. N/A is good, when the car is light enough (ideally <3000lbs) and the engine is powerful enough (200HP/ton) and good sounding (>=5 cylinders), and most of your driving is nowhere near altitude. Too many qualifiers. By contrast the 1.8 TSI in the Golf I drove was pretty much perfect on the street. It wasn't a very characterful engine but it had a huge surge of torque that got the job done and returned better gas mileage than my Civic on the same route and with the same lead foot. The shit just works.

[MrH]

Long term reliability > gas mileage. I'm all on the NA train.

[Raza]

NA I6 for life! 


(But I like turbos too)

[12,000 RPM]

Long term reliability > gas mileage. I'm all on the NA train.

Light swipe, funny to hear long term reliability from a guy who keeps cars for <2 yrs

Now that the Japanese have surrendered to boost I don't see reliability being a problem. Plus have you forgotten the 2JZ, RB, VG30DETT, SR20 etc. Turbos just look unreliable now because the Germans have been carrying the torch. But the Koreans and Mrrcns have done a better job from what I've seen. Me no worry

[MX793]

The 90s era and earlier Japanese turbos are generally less reliable and higher maintenance than their NA counterparts.  80s era American turbos (Ford 2.3, Mopar 2.2) were likewise not known for being bulletproof.  After experience with a turbo T-bird back in the 80s, my dad wrote off anything with a turbocharger.  Newer cars I think are gradually swaying his opinion, but when I was looking for my first car as a high schooler in the late 90s, anything with a turbo got a "you don't want the headaches from that turbo junk" response.

[GoCougs]

The G is indeed a better car than the Q50 (at least for me). The Q50 is a bit slower (heavier and taller gearing), the infotainment is a disaster, and there is little character left in the driving experience. Having had a quite a few as service loaners I can confirm It's nice enough for what it is, it's just not a compelling enthusiast vehicle with a great value proposition, as were the two previous Gs.

My G just hit 100,000 miles this week, and though it looks like it has ~30,000 miles, why not, yo?!. Thing is, the poser class is awful - I submit it is the worst class in all of automobiledom (that is, if you want an enthusiast experience - the class has shifted to the luxury side, and it has done it okay, if you stay out of the abominable 4-banger strippers).

And make no mistake, turbo motors are not as reliable or robust as N/A motors, which is going to push the poser class that much further into lease disposables. Sure, turbos are better than they were, but expecting more than ~5 years or ~100,000 miles without a turbo replacement is wishful thinking.

[GoCougs]

Also, the 400 Red Sports have indeed started to hit dealers. They actually look better than in the press shots. I mean, they're trying to butch them up by making the splash guards into some sort of pseudo fender bulges, but all in all, not a bad looking car. For MY2015 the Q50 had an optional exhaust which was supposed to make it sound like a G, and if the 7AT is truly much better (it's supposed to be), I might be able to swing this if I got a screaming deal.

[MrH]

Light swipe, funny to hear long term reliability from a guy who keeps cars for <2 yrs

Now that the Japanese have surrendered to boost I don't see reliability being a problem. Plus have you forgotten the 2JZ, RB, VG30DETT, SR20 etc. Turbos just look unreliable now because the Germans have been carrying the torch. But the Koreans and Mrrcns have done a better job from what I've seen. Me no worry

The 4Runner will live on forever!  When that's paid off, I will drive it until the apocalypse and only sink money into the fun car then.

[12,000 RPM]

Thing is, the poser class is awful - I submit it is the worst class in all of automobiledom (that is, if you want an enthusiast experience - the class has shifted to the luxury side, and it has done it okay, if you stay out of the abominable 4-banger strippers).

Barring full on sports/performance cars I cannot think of a better class for the enthusiast experience. Pickup trucks? Family CUVs? Large mainstream sedans? Hell large luxury sedans? Lol

They definitely made a shift over towards luxury, wihch was for the better IMO... but you're not getting any closer to a Z than a G, or a Z4 than a 3 series. Don't be hatin' cause a chipped GTI DSG will culo blast your G from a roll

[CJ]

The G is indeed a better car than the Q50 (at least for me). The Q50 is a bit slower (heavier and taller gearing), the infotainment is a disaster, and there is little character left in the driving experience. Having had a quite a few as service loaners I can confirm It's nice enough for what it is, it's just not a compelling enthusiast vehicle with a great value proposition, as were the two previous Gs.

My G just hit 100,000 miles this week, and though it looks like it has ~30,000 miles, why not, yo?!. Thing is, the poser class is awful - I submit it is the worst class in all of automobiledom (that is, if you want an enthusiast experience - the class has shifted to the luxury side, and it has done it okay, if you stay out of the abominable 4-banger strippers).

And make no mistake, turbo motors are not as reliable or robust as N/A motors, which is going to push the poser class that much further into lease disposables. Sure, turbos are better than they were, but expecting more than ~5 years or ~100,000 miles without a turbo replacement is wishful thinking.

2001 S60 T5. 220k. Original turbo.

2005 S60R. 140k. Original turbo.

Things are different with the Americans, but the Swedes do turbos quite well.

[12,000 RPM]

Not to mention, diesels.... this is not new or complicated technology.

[GoCougs]

2001 S60 T5. 220k. Original turbo.

2005 S60R. 140k. Original turbo.

Things are different with the Americans, but the Swedes do turbos quite well.

They use others' turbos just like everyone else.

98% bet those turbos, or significant aspects of them, are by definition dead (i.e., just because a turbo spins doesn't mean it's not out of spec). Simply Google the issues with the 335i or B5 S4 for a look into our collective turbo futures. Works great for 5/100, but man, after that, you're gonna have headaches galore (esp. fun with the 335i as like the B5 S4 you gotta drop the motor to get at the turbos).

Remember, Ford was touting the Ecoboost V6 was designed for a service life of 150,000 miles, and that motor is more robust than anything in a Volvo (not a knock at Volvo - the EB V6 was designed for truck service), and even then EB V6 has been a load of headaches for owners.

[12,000 RPM]

Much of turbo life is based on engine design. For example plenty of cars used the K03s that came on the B5 S4s. But only the S4 had those disproportionately high turbo failures. By contrast Hino Trucks, which is owned by Toyota, tops the reliability rankings for turbodiesel trucks Germans can't figure out how to make a cooling system that doesn't require continued maintenance/replacement, I would not use them as a basis for how reliable turbos can be

[GoCougs]

I should say the Japanese stuff (really, only Subaru) has been better with turbos, though it's still not as good as their N/A counterparts, and when things do go bad, it's much more expensive.

[MX793]

I know plenty of Subaru owners who have had to replace turbos at 100,000 miles or so (sometimes less).

[CJ]

I know plenty of Subaru owners who have had to replace turbos at 100,000 miles or so (sometimes less).

I'm a firm believer that Subaru reliability is a total myth.

[GoCougs]

I know plenty of Subaru owners who have had to replace turbos at 100,000 miles or so (sometimes less).

Right, and that is about your high bar for turbo reliability/durability.

[MX793]

I'm a firm believer that Subaru reliability is a total myth.

Older ones may have been bulletproof, but the 2.5L motors used for the past 10 years at least have known major problems.  EJ25s are well known for head gasket issues even on N/A variants.

[12,000 RPM]

The motors are separate from the turbo though

Only turbo problem I heard of.... Apparently Subaru put a pre cat between the engine and turbo? You can imagine where things went from there. I think that was on the first WRX they brought over

[68_427]

Yeah the catless up pipe is a must

[Raza]

The motors are separate from the turbo though

Only turbo problem I heard of.... Apparently Subaru put a pre cat between the engine and turbo? You can imagine where things went from there. I think that was on the first WRX they brought over

Can you explain for those of us who can't imagine?