I love it.
(http://www.cheersandgears.com/uploads/d9fb72828b10bead8977d9b3b5801a52.png)
I have to wait for an official posting, this seems to be the only image out right now.
Damn, that is amazing!
Looks like a pointy Camry.
Quote from: thecarnut on April 03, 2012, 07:55:02 PM
Damn, that is amazing!
I like it more than the new GS, more than the CT, and a WHOLE LOT more than the hideous MKZ.
Looks pretty good
It's pretty ugly, honestly. It's all very blobby.
Quote from: CJ on April 03, 2012, 08:05:31 PM
It's pretty ugly, honestly. It's all very blobby.
Hater.
I like some parts of it and don't like some parts of it. It's like they tried to stretch a CT to be a GS. Big improvement over the current car though, at least from this view. I get the feeling the profile + rear 3/4 won't be as flattering.
Not a fan, but at least no one can claim it looks anything like a Camry.
meh
Looks kind of like a boring Altima
Generic Asian car...
Very, very good.
I don't know why, but it reminds me of the Accord coupe.
It's not bad at all.
Boring, like the way it drives.
Quote from: thecarnut on April 03, 2012, 07:55:02 PM
Damn, that is amazing!
outstanding design, no longer resembling the toyota camry. the lexus brand now has a cohesive line-up.
Quote from: ifcar on April 03, 2012, 10:06:35 PM
*legitimately claim
They didn't even change the door panels. Same exact, big, flat, boring doors.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on April 03, 2012, 10:17:13 PM
They didn't even change the door panels. Same exact, big, flat, boring doors.
They don't really look alike at all. The MKZ and Fusion look more alike than the ES and Camry.
(http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/2012-toyota-camry-hybrid_100360541_m.jpg)
(http://www.cheersandgears.com/uploads/d9fb72828b10bead8977d9b3b5801a52.png)
I just hope they didn't pull a 2012 Camry and fuck up the rear.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 03, 2012, 10:22:11 PM
They don't really look alike at all. The MKZ and Fusion look more alike than the ES and Camry.
(http://images.thecarconnection.com/med/2012-toyota-camry-hybrid_100360541_m.jpg)
(http://www.cheersandgears.com/uploads/d9fb72828b10bead8977d9b3b5801a52.png)
There's definitely a resemblance between those two cars.
Quote from: 850CSi on April 03, 2012, 10:11:24 PM
Boring, like the way it drives.
cannot find a road test as to how it drives. i would imagine this new lexus ES will continue to give near luxury car buyers a great ride vs. "dive" (as in sportier cars). the all new lexus GS and IS cover this shortcoming. yet this trait of the ES and LS appeal to the luxury car minded owner, not sports car enthusiasts.
I'm not seeing any resemblance at all.
Quote from: 850CSi on April 03, 2012, 10:27:48 PM
There's definitely a resemblance between those two cars.
A very, very small amount. The MKZ and Fusion look very similar, especially on the inside (which is the problem). This new ES will likely have a new interior that has no relation to the Camry.
Wow, it looks exactly like everyone knew it would ;)
Quote from: thecarnut on April 03, 2012, 10:28:40 PM
I'm not seeing any resemblance at all.
That's hilarious, because they are the same car.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on April 03, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
That's hilarious, because they are the same car.
They're proportioned slightly differently....the ES is lower, has a longer hood and a more rakish roofline.
Quote from: Vinsanity on April 03, 2012, 10:32:00 PM
Wow, it looks exactly like everyone knew it would ;)
:lol:
Underratedly, the new Camry's quite a good looking car.
Sorry, but the design looks ungodly boring.
Quote from: thecarnut on April 03, 2012, 10:28:40 PM
I'm not seeing any resemblance at all.
Ditto - zero resemblance; grill, hood, distance between the top of the wheel well and top of fender, fender bulges, windshield angle, mirror mounting, B pillar, rear door esp. the window, rear 1/4 panel, and then look how much lower the ES sits.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 03, 2012, 11:10:31 PM
Ditto - zero resemblance; grill, hood, distance between the top of the wheel well and top of fender, fender bulges, windshield angle, mirror mounting, B pillar, rear door esp. the window, rear 1/4 panel, and then look how much lower the ES sits.
If you were to remove the badges on both cars I wouldn't have guessed they were from the same company. The entire shape of the car itself is different, and none of the details are similar either.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 03, 2012, 10:22:11 PM
They don't really look alike at all. The MKZ and Fusion look more alike than the ES and Camry.
Really? Are you sure? Whatever you're smoking must be really good.
(http://www.technogadgets.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/fsn13_highlight_lg_design.jpg)
(http://kitcarsonelementary.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/6712842dent-626x382.jpg)
^Those two aren't very similar either but the greenhouse and overall roof line are a giveaway.
Quote from: 2o6 on April 03, 2012, 10:30:27 PM
The MKZ and Fusion look very similar, especially on the inside (which is the problem).
Again, WTF are you talking about?
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/lincoln-mkz-concept-12.jpg)
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/2013-Ford-Fusion-Interior-2.jpg)
Quote from: CJ on April 03, 2012, 08:05:31 PM
It's pretty ugly, honestly. It's all very blobby.
Hater! Go back to driving your overpriced and unreliable European car! I'll be laughing my ass off when I pass your broken-down Volvo with a steaming hood in the pouring rain while listening to Prince in my Mark Levinson stereo system and enjoying the baby-butt-rubbing effect of the soft better-than-Rolls-Royce leather in my 2013 ES that can drive up to 3289323209092380 miles without ever experiencing a break down or problem!
:lol:
Here are some interior shots.
(http://cdn.thelexusenthusiast.com/images/weblog/12-02-22-2013-lexus-es-interior-thumb.jpg)
(http://cdn.thelexusenthusiast.com/images/weblog/12-02-22-2013-lexus-es-interior-closeup-thumb.jpg)
Link: http://lexusenthusiast.com/2012/02/22/examining-the-2013-lexus-es-interior/
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 04, 2012, 05:54:13 AM
Hater! Go back to driving your overpriced and unreliable European car! I'll be laughing my ass off when I pass your broken-down Volvo with a steaming hood in the pouring rain while listening to Prince in my Mark Levinson stereo system and enjoying the baby-butt-rubbing effect of the soft better-than-Rolls-Royce leather in my 2013 ES that can drive up to 3289323209092380 miles without ever experiencing a break down or problem!
:lol:
These jokes have never been funny.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 04, 2012, 06:09:02 AM
These jokes have never been funny.
Joke?
I was serious! I love Prince and I adore Lexus leather! Oh my god! Like cloth seats? Yuck!!!!
Lexus leather is quite good.
My car has 300,000 KM, Wimms. Of course it's more likely to break down than a car that isn't even on sale yet.
I'm no fan of either the Camry or the ES, but I can appreciate them for what they are - the ES more so. But other than the overall shape, and I assume the hard points, I think they've done a great job of differentiating the two cars, especially this new generation.
And now that I just took a closer look at the Fusion and the MKZ in the photos above, it looks to me like the doors (other than the sheetmetal), are identical - look at the windows and frames.
Quote from: 850CSi on April 03, 2012, 10:27:48 PM
There's definitely a resemblance between those two cars.
I don't really see it and 99% of people who don't know what an ES is won't see it either.
It looks good, but as I do know what it is, I'd never buy one.
As much shit as I give Camrys they're not bad cars. Just not what folks like us want. Ironically I think something like a Camry Hybrid would be a great fit for Wimmer- if Germany had the dealer network to support it.
I absolutely agree, but a Passat TDI would be a better choice. Similar MPG, but a MUCH larger trunk.
The proportions the MKZ are identical to the Fusion, and the overall layout and design of the interior of the MKZ loooks the same (and no more special) as the Fusion.
The Lincoln's steering wheel and instrument cluster looks like Barney the Dinosaur:
(http://i30.photobucket.com/albums/c342/hemi666/lincoln-mkz-concept-12.jpg)
(http://cbsknci.files.wordpress.com/2011/04/barney-the-dinosaur.jpg?w=385&h=240)
Quote from: 2o6 on April 04, 2012, 08:12:45 AM
The proportions the MKZ are identical to the Fusion, and the overall layout and design of the interior of the MKZ loooks the same (and no more special) as the Fusion.
You're blind.
Quote from: CJ on April 04, 2012, 06:40:03 AM
My car has 300,000 KM, Wimms. Of course it's more likely to break down than a car that isn't even on sale yet.
Look, I'm not a hater but how would some punk ass Lexus fanboys respond to your statement ^above^?
Here's how...
"LOL? 300,000 km? That's like barely even broken in for any Lexus! A Lexus with over 300,000 km won't break down! Never!!! Ever!!! Ever!!! Lexus 4 life!!!" :lol:
Quote from: CALL_911 on April 03, 2012, 10:53:36 PM
Underratedly, the new Camry's quite a good looking car.
+1 especially in SE guise.
This blows the MKZ out of the water, unfortunately.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 04, 2012, 11:27:50 AM
Look, I'm not a hater
Yeah, you are. You like the C-Class more than the 3er (which you seem to somewhat dislike solely because it's more acclaimed than your beloved MB) because it's "more comfortable."
This, from a luxury standpoint, shits on the C-Class. It's probably better built too, to boot. Only reason you don't like it is because its a Lexus, which, in turn, you don't like because they've been shitting on MB for a while now.
Quote from: 68_427 on April 04, 2012, 11:45:52 AM
+1 especially in SE guise.
This blows the MKZ out of the water, unfortunately.
I disagree, especially after seeing the interior pics above
Quote from: TurboDan on April 03, 2012, 10:53:46 PM
Sorry, but the design looks ungodly boring.
Must be due to the big L on the front...
Interior looks quite nice as well. I'm really liking the Lexus design language lately.
This car looks more like a mini LS than anything
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2012/04/04-2013-lexus-es.jpg)
Nothing like a Camry.
I seriously hate the front end, but the rest isn't bad. The ES has never been an unattractive car, to be honest. It's always been a touch dull, but never ugly.
It's just so boring and generic, though. There's no personality, nothing unique, just vanilla. It's as appliance-ish as appliances get. Don't get the love for it.
Quote from: TurboDan on April 04, 2012, 12:16:51 PM
It's just so boring and generic, though. There's no personality, nothing unique, just vanilla. It's as appliance-ish as appliances get. Don't get the love for it.
Which market segment is it directed towards?
Quote from: FoMoJo on April 04, 2012, 12:20:47 PM
Which market segment is it directed towards?
Good point...
Wow looks better in that second view. Mini LS is right, looks better than the GS
(http://rpmedia.ask.com/ts?u=/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/3rd_Lexus_ES300.jpg/100px-3rd_Lexus_ES300.jpg)
Actually, I always thought this was a pretty decent looking car (the facelifted one only).
I guess I'm the minority who thinks the new ES actually looks quite good
Quote from: SVT_Power on April 04, 2012, 03:09:21 PM
I guess I'm the minority who thinks the new ES actually looks quite good
No I think it looks awesome.
I don't get where the bland/vanilla comments are coming from, though.
Quote from: SVT_Power on April 04, 2012, 03:09:21 PM
I guess I'm the minority who thinks the new ES actually looks quite good
Def not, dare I say its more bold than all the midsize German offerings, at least from these little pictures
Quote from: CALL_911 on April 04, 2012, 11:52:48 AM
Yeah, you are. You like the C-Class more than the 3er (which you seem to somewhat dislike solely because it's more acclaimed than your beloved MB) because it's "more comfortable."
Funny. Everyone praises the 3er for its driving dynamics which are class leading, yet most people don't even buy a 3er for that feature. They buy them for the badge. That's true for all premium brands.
And to me the C-Class is the
better car for my needs, which are not blasting down backroads because C&D said I should. I require more interior/luggage space and a C-Class offers more of that in both sedan and wagon form, just because the engine isn't pushed back behind the front axle.
So what are my priorities? Driving dynamics or overall practicality? C-Class wins for me because it offers what I need. I have nothing against the 3er. I just don't need or want one.
Quote from: CALL_911 on April 04, 2012, 11:52:48 AMThis, from a luxury standpoint, shits on the C-Class. It's probably better built too, to boot. Only reason you don't like it is because its a Lexus, which, in turn, you don't like because they've been shitting on MB for a while now.
:rolleyes:
Quote from: SVT_Power on April 04, 2012, 03:09:21 PM
I guess I'm the minority who thinks the new ES actually looks quite good
Blinded by the badge and platform. It looks good, but I'd never own one.
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2001-LEXUS-ES-300-3-0L-V6-SUNROOF-HTD-LEATHER-ONLY-50K-/400288473827?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item5d330d62e3#ht_23577wt_1165
:wub:
Quote from: CJ on April 04, 2012, 03:31:51 PM
http://cgi.ebay.com/ebaymotors/2001-LEXUS-ES-300-3-0L-V6-SUNROOF-HTD-LEATHER-ONLY-50K-/400288473827?pt=US_Cars_Trucks&hash=item5d330d62e3#ht_23577wt_1165
:wub:
:confused: :nutty:
Do they only come in the one colour?
Quote from: CALL_911 on April 04, 2012, 03:56:35 PM
You know I'm right.
You're seeing things in black and white. This is probably a better boring pure-lux mobile than a C-Klasse, but it's not either/or.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 04, 2012, 03:14:25 PM
Funny. Everyone praises the 3er for its driving dynamics which are class leading, yet most people don't even buy a 3er for that feature. They buy them for the badge. That's true for all premium brands.
And to me the C-Class is the better car for my needs, which are not blasting down backroads because C&D said I should. I require more interior/luggage space and a C-Class offers more of that in both sedan and wagon form, just because the engine isn't pushed back behind the front axle.
So what are my priorities? Driving dynamics or overall practicality? C-Class wins for me because it offers what I need. I have nothing against the 3er. I just don't need or want one.
:rolleyes:
The new 3er is roomier than the C in every interior dimension (http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/interior.aspx?c=0&i=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&tb=0&dt=0&cp-documentid=0&v=t115220&v=t114534)
and has more trunk space (17.0 vs 12.4 cu ft) (http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2012/3/328iSedan/Compare/Default.aspx?enc=/eiUrYOZAxtXbrazY6tfknvs2p4czl6fdqlc7VGB7GMLQANm3GrUQlVJ8kC/sR1sIUSlmnWyI33ymhNjxYIIY76bpVI49VdfufyyvKmRLhwyvE3TcYTiur9+Lq8LMreUCfdy6O0q7jUhO9YUBqz5LaF9WpCgwlA25dEXXgrSJbQ2VbRSrVYzGQJ0TIYxFWuJ3K4WD3ev+tOkgAHhcbf6cQ==)
So I'm kind of confused as to what you're talking about... if space is your priority the 3er is the better choice
By any objective measure the F30 is a better car than the W204... and its handily outsold it year after year despite being so "aggressive".... if you like the Benz because its a Benz thats fine, but stop trying to discredit anyone who sees how obvious the Bimmer's objective superiority is.
Likewise you can gripe all you want about Lexus being "boring", but I'm not sure how a run of the mill E350 is like $10-20K more exciting. An ES a good luxury car, period, nobody cares about H&H
I like this new ES overall. The snout looks weird from that front side profile angle though, I don't care for the car from that angle.
Quote from: Eye of the Tiger on April 03, 2012, 10:33:29 PM
That's hilarious, because they are the same car.
If it was a simple rebadge, sure. Having the same (or mostly the same, I guess they may have changed some little things) mechanical bits doesn't make it the same car however, and I agree with iffy that this new model shares the least resemblance with its Camry cousin of any ES generation so far. They both have four doors, are the same size, and the new Camry's grille actually almost has a spindle-ish look itself I had never noticed before (if the two parts were connected like in the ES at those angles it would look very similar), but beyond that they look pretty different.
Meh. Generic looking blob. Remove the badge and it could be damn near anything. :zzz:
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 04, 2012, 07:32:09 PM
The new 3er is roomier than the C in every interior dimension (http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/interior.aspx?c=0&i=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&tb=0&dt=0&cp-documentid=0&v=t115220&v=t114534)
and has more trunk space (17.0 vs 12.4 cu ft) (http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2012/3/328iSedan/Compare/Default.aspx?enc=/eiUrYOZAxtXbrazY6tfknvs2p4czl6fdqlc7VGB7GMLQANm3GrUQlVJ8kC/sR1sIUSlmnWyI33ymhNjxYIIY76bpVI49VdfufyyvKmRLhwyvE3TcYTiur9+Lq8LMreUCfdy6O0q7jUhO9YUBqz5LaF9WpCgwlA25dEXXgrSJbQ2VbRSrVYzGQJ0TIYxFWuJ3K4WD3ev+tOkgAHhcbf6cQ==)
So I'm kind of confused as to what you're talking about... if space is your priority the 3er is the better choice
By any objective measure the F30 is a better car than the W204... and its handily outsold it year after year despite being so "aggressive".... if you like the Benz because its a Benz thats fine, but stop trying to discredit anyone who sees how obvious the Bimmer's objective superiority is.
I'm talking about the wagons and I'm not talking about the new 3er vs the "old" W204 C-Class.
When the BMW 118i had its steering system replaced (a common defect on the 1-Series in Europe), I got a ride home in a 3er Touring and all my equipment in the 1er was put into the back of the 3ers trunk: it barely fit. Half my shit had to be stored on the rear seats. The trunk of the 3er Touring was narrow and small. The S204 C-Class wagon on the other hand had a nice wide and roomy trunk. I visited the local Benz dealer on purpose to test if my stuff fit and I managed to fit more of my gear into the back than I did in the 3er Touring. C-Class wins for me based on that.
And I'll say it again. I've driven a few W204 C-Classes. They're comfortable and they drive good. They can be driven in a sporty fashion and they're competent in that regard. That's all I need, so I don't need a 3er or an A4. In fact I don't care much about driving dynamics because I tend to drive in a relaxed and elegant manner. I don't care if a 3er drives better, so what? It's not what I am looking for.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 05, 2012, 05:08:55 AM
I'm talking about the wagons and I'm not talking about the new 3er vs the "old" W204 C-Class.
Then what are you talking about? The W204 is the current model
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 05, 2012, 05:08:55 AMWhen the BMW 118i had its steering system replaced (a common defect on the 1-Series in Europe), I got a ride home in a 3er Touring and all my equipment in the 1er was put into the back of the 3ers trunk: it barely fit. Half my shit had to be stored on the rear seats. The trunk of the 3er Touring was narrow and small. The S204 C-Class wagon on the other hand had a nice wide and roomy trunk. I visited the local Benz dealer on purpose to test if my stuff fit and I managed to fit more of my gear into the back than I did in the 3er Touring. C-Class wins for me based on that.
So you just said you didn't want to compare the new 3 to the "old" (???) C class, but now you are comparing the latest C-class to the old (E91) 3er?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 05, 2012, 05:08:55 AMAnd I'll say it again. I've driven a few W204 C-Classes. They're comfortable and they drive good. They can be driven in a sporty fashion and they're competent in that regard. That's all I need, so I don't need a 3er or an A4. In fact I don't care much about driving dynamics because I tend to drive in a relaxed and elegant manner. I don't care if a 3er drives better, so what? It's not what I am looking for.
Driving dynamics is not just at the limit performance and feel, it's also ride comfort and general confidence. Just like your 1 series, there are "non enthusiast" spec 3s, and by any metric the F30 is better in those regards too. Just as comfortable, roomier, more economical to run, not much more (if at all) expensive. So stop acting like one is sacrificing anything in getting a 3er over a C-Class. The C is inferior in more than performance, it's just inferior period, and if it wasn't a Mercedes you wouldn't care about it. If the BMW was badged a Benz you would be celebrating its dominance and applauding the magazines that deemed it #1. You have this irrational need to defend Benz and discredit anyone/anything that doesn't see things the way you do. Its goofy as hell.
The W204 is not a bad car but its in no way the best car in class, except for folks who prefer Mercedes' as a brand emotionally.
And for someone who values space, fuel economy, and comfort, the ES will definitely be a better buy than an equivalent C class
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 04, 2012, 07:32:09 PM
The new 3er is roomier than the C in every interior dimension (http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/interior.aspx?c=0&i=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&tb=0&dt=0&cp-documentid=0&v=t115220&v=t114534)
and has more trunk space (17.0 vs 12.4 cu ft) (http://www.bmwusa.com/Standard/Content/Vehicles/2012/3/328iSedan/Compare/Default.aspx?enc=/eiUrYOZAxtXbrazY6tfknvs2p4czl6fdqlc7VGB7GMLQANm3GrUQlVJ8kC/sR1sIUSlmnWyI33ymhNjxYIIY76bpVI49VdfufyyvKmRLhwyvE3TcYTiur9+Lq8LMreUCfdy6O0q7jUhO9YUBqz5LaF9WpCgwlA25dEXXgrSJbQ2VbRSrVYzGQJ0TIYxFWuJ3K4WD3ev+tOkgAHhcbf6cQ==)
So I'm kind of confused as to what you're talking about... if space is your priority the 3er is the better choice
17 cubic feet of trunk space!? Holy shit. I always considered my trunk to be cavernous, and it's 15 cubic feet.
Quote from: Raza on April 05, 2012, 08:31:12 AM
17 cubic feet of trunk space!? Holy shit. I always considered my trunk to be cavernous, and it's 15 cubic feet.
Thats what they say. I imagine the F3x wagon will similarly dominate the W204 wagon in trunk space too.
The 3er is longer + wider than the C which prob helps too.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 05, 2012, 10:00:44 AM
Thats what they say. I imagine the F3x wagon will similarly dominate the W204 wagon in trunk space too.
The 3er is longer + wider than the C which prob helps too.
You say F3xW2043erC... I say FX-16 GT-S
(http://dayerses.com/data_images/posts/toyota-corolla-fx/toyota-corolla-fx-06.jpg)
Now Lexus needs to do the IS in a sexy fashion, and we're good!
Quote from: 2o6 on April 05, 2012, 08:59:31 PM
Now Lexus needs to do the IS in a sexy fashion, and we're good!
I like the current IS. It was the first Lexus sedan I considered sporty/good looking overall in ... maybe ever.
Quote from: thewizard16 on April 05, 2012, 11:55:38 PM
I like the current IS. It was the first Lexus sedan I considered sporty/good looking overall in ... maybe ever.
The first gen IS is probably the best driving lexus so far, save for the LFA. But I do suppose it's not much of a sporty looking car
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 04, 2012, 03:14:25 PM
Funny. Everyone praises the 3er for its driving dynamics which are class leading, yet most people don't even buy a 3er for that feature. They buy them for the badge. That's true for all premium brands.
:rolleyes:
Wow, so false. 3er has more space, and it's contained in an interior that doesn't resemble a mid 2000s Acura. ;)
And YES, most people DO choose the Beamer bc of its driving dynamics. As I've said, the average buyer can't always articulate it, but they can tell the BMW is a better driving car than the Benz. And honestly, it has a more Spartan, but desirable, interior. Been that way for years.
Quote from: thewizard16 on April 05, 2012, 11:55:38 PM
I like the current IS. It was the first Lexus sedan I considered sporty/good looking overall in ... maybe ever.
I do like it as well. Shame that their dealer networks never stock manuals and mostly only stock AWD models in this part of the country or I would have considered an IS250 instead of my Jetta. But, when it comes down to it, my Jetta makes the same power from a turbo engine and weighs about the same, if not less, so I think I'm better off. 2 to 1 it handles better than the IS250 too, since they tend to keep the sporty stuff for the auto-only 350.
I don't think you could deal with the low power of the IS250. Its heavier + less torquey than your car. The 350 is a fucking rocket though
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 05, 2012, 06:01:23 AM
So you just said you didn't want to compare the new 3 to the "old" (???) C class, but now you are comparing the latest C-class to the old (E91) 3er?
I'm comparing the "old" E90 WAGON to the current S204 C-Class WAGON.The current F30 WAGON isn't even out yet. Once it is, then we can talk. And it'll most likely be hampered by the fact that BMW places their engines behind the front axle. No matter how intelligent the interior design, this will always take away some precious interior space.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 05, 2012, 06:01:23 AMThe C is inferior in more than performance, it's just inferior period, and if it wasn't a Mercedes you wouldn't care about it. If the BMW was badged a Benz you would be celebrating its dominance and applauding the magazines that deemed it #1.
Oh please. The C-Class has good driving dynamics that'll satisfy most people. If you want something sportier there's always a 3er or Infiniti G. Big deal.
I don't drive like crazy, I don't need a 3er and the current S204 wagon offers more interior and luggage space than the E90 Wagon. I don't need to explain which car I would choose here based on what my needs are.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 05, 2012, 06:01:23 AMYou have this irrational need to defend Benz and discredit anyone/anything that doesn't see things the way you do. Its goofy as hell.
Really?
Guess you missed those posts where I hate on the new M-Class, SLK or SL.
When someone comes along and claims that "every single car in this class needs to try and beat the 3er", then I have a problem with that. Because it's bullshit. The Mercedes C-Class has never tried to be dynamically superior car. It's focus was always on a balance between sport and luxury and it does that quite well.
Quote from: TurboDan on April 06, 2012, 02:46:33 AM
Wow, so false. 3er has more space, and it's contained in an interior that doesn't resemble a mid 2000s Acura. ;)
Nope. E90 Wagon vs S204 Wagon has less space.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:02:43 AM
I don't think you could deal with the low power of the IS250. Its heavier + less torquey than your car. The 350 is a fucking rocket though
I see where you're coming from, but you forget. I was coming from the 1.8T 5AT Passat, a 170bhp, 3400 pound car. It was a hell of a lot of fun, but not at all fast. 0-60 was mid to low 8s. But you're right, I'm better off with the Jetta.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 06, 2012, 09:24:00 AM
I'm comparing the "old" E90 WAGON to the current S204 C-Class WAGON.
The current F30 WAGON isn't even out yet. Once it is, then we can talk. And it'll most likely be hampered by the fact that BMW places their engines behind the front axle. No matter how intelligent the interior design, this will always take away some precious interior space.
The E90 is roomier than the W204 too
http://autos.msn.com/research/compare/interior.aspx?c=0&i=0&ph1=t0&ph2=t0&tb=0&dt=0&cp-documentid=0&v=t111527&v=t111758
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 06, 2012, 09:24:00 AMOh please. The C-Class has good driving dynamics that'll satisfy most people. If you want something sportier there's always a 3er or Infiniti G. Big deal.
Right but so do most cars. But cars in that segment are called
sport sedans. Mercedes even claims the C to be a sport sedan itself:
http://www.mbusa.com/mercedes/vehicles/model?class=C&model=C250WZ
So in that context its not as good. But even practically, its not as good. We already established the W204 is not as roomy as neither the F30 NOR the E90.
But guess what. Its also less economical to run in ALL trims:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/Find.do?action=sbs&id=30053&id=30323&id=30058&id=30322
Has worse depreciation:
http://www.cars.com/go/alg/index.jsp?makename=Mercedes-Benz&modelname=C+CLASS&year=2012
http://www.cars.com/go/alg/index.jsp?makename=BMW&modelname=3+SERIES&year=2012
And is probably less reliable too.
So even outside of the context of sportiness, by many many measures the C-class is just worse than the 3, and its been this way since the W201.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 06, 2012, 09:24:00 AMI don't drive like crazy, I don't need a 3er and the current S204 wagon offers more interior and luggage space than the E90 Wagon. I don't need to explain which car I would choose here based on what my needs are.
You don't need to, but you did, and you were wrong.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 06, 2012, 09:24:00 AMReally?
Guess you missed those posts where I hate on the new M-Class, SLK or SL.
Which cars in those segments would you go with instead, if given the choice?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 06, 2012, 09:24:00 AMWhen someone comes along and claims that "every single car in this class needs to try and beat the 3er", then I have a problem with that. Because it's bullshit. The Mercedes C-Class has never tried to be dynamically superior car. It's focus was always on a balance between sport and luxury and it does that quite well.
The 3 is the benchmark, and if the C wants to take the crown it has to compete with it. You know it can't, which is why you claim it shouldn't have to. But again, by pretty much every metric you've deemed as "important", both the E90 and F30 have the C beat. And on top of that, it doesn't cost more, and is more engaging to drive. BMW & Driverisms aside, it's just a better car, and its perpetual dominance in sales over the C show this.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:54:07 AM
The E90 is roomier than the W204 too
You know, that's what fans of the third generation Lexus GS also claimed - that it has the largest interior space volume. That number means shit if I felt like a sardine can in the back (and front), which I did when I checked it out. At the time my family had the W211 E320 and that thing was roomy inside despite having "less interior space" in terms of numbers.
It's the same with the E90 vs S204. My equipment wouldn't into the back of the 3er Touring. In contrast the luggage space of the S204 was better laid out - flatter, wider and longer (and higher). So if the 3er Touring has more interior space in terms of pure volume, it's not working to its advantage.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:54:07 AMRight but so do most cars. But cars in that segment are called sport sedans. Mercedes even claims the C to be a sport sedan itself:
And the current C-Class is sporty car in its own way. It's not as sporty as a 3-Series. Big deal.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:54:07 AMSo even outside of the context of sportiness, by many many measures the C-class is just worse than the 3, and its been this way since the W201.
Nothing in the standard W201 lineup was even remotely biased towards sport.
You had to go to the 190E 2.3-16V and 190E 2.5-16V as well as the EVO I and EVO II models for that. And back in their day those were an alternative to the 3-Series.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:54:07 AMWhich cars in those segments would you go with instead, if given the choice?
If I had the choice I'd go for a Skoda Superb Combi or Citroen C5 Touring. FWD means more effective interior packaging and better traction in the winters. The 1-Series is terrible in the snow and I shouldn't even bother taking trips to some locations here in the winter because I'll get stuck.
Between the 3er Touring E90 and S204 C-Class Wagon, I'd take the C-Class wagon anytime for the roomy luggage compartment. It's easy to fill and stow and can handle more of my gear than the E90 Touring. The E90 Touring was a disappointment. A nice C220 CDI or C180 Kompressor works for me. AWD would be nice but that means upgrading to a C250 CDI 4Matic and I don't need that when a '220 CDI is sufficient.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 06, 2012, 09:54:07 AMThe 3 is the benchmark, and if the C wants to take the crown it has to compete with it. You know it can't, which is why you claim it shouldn't have to.
What do you mean by
"it can't"? Sounds kind of ignorant. Do you really think Mercedes' couldn't build a dynamically competitive car to the 3er? After all the C-Class is competes in DTM (which BMW is now re-entering) where it has a special 4.0 V8 N/A motor (with 500-hp) and purposefully tuned suspension. This is done by Mercedes' Motorsport division and no outsourcing job.
Let's get real here. What sells the C-Class is a balance between sport and comfort. Most C-Class customers want that, aside from the badge. It's a big plus if you have a car that handles well and is also comfortable. There are other reasons to get a C-Class. The reputation for safety is well-known for Mercedes' products. Some people might like the design of the C-Class better than the 3er. Some people might like the way it drives better. Who knows? Who cares? Both cars are the top sellers in their segments and I ascribe that more to their badge reputation than most people actually caring about driving dynamics.
Unlike the G, 3er, A4, IS, etc., the C-class provides no differentiation vs. its more expensive stablemates other than price and size. It's badge-snob bait and why I've never had any respect for it.
i see the lexus ES as an entry level into the company's luxury fold. for an individual or family man looking to move up from a toyota, loving the GS or LS but either not able or not will to pay the price of either those two higher priced vehicles. the acura TL is that same short of car for the honda enthusiast wanting that "near luxury" experience. once they get a taste of one and the leaps-and bounds superior customer services, they may very well move up into something even more luxury oriented.
Quote from: GoCougs on April 07, 2012, 11:32:17 AM
Unlike the G, 3er, A4, IS, etc., the C-class provides no differentiation vs. its more expensive stablemates other than price and size. It's badge-snob bait and why I've never had any respect for it.
Huh?
Uh oh :mask:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on April 07, 2012, 02:15:39 PM
Huh?
Cougs hit it on the nose. The non-sport package 3 series is a more fun to drive, more economical, more spacious, slower depreciating car than the C-Class. Aside from purely subjective attributes (styling, badge) there is no reason to get one over a 3. You speak as though the base 3er is some stripped out race car... its no less comfortable or luxurious than a C-Class, and its objectively better on many fronts....
I put it like this... say a friend of yours was looking at cars and he wanted to choose between the E90 and the W204. What could you say to convince him to go for the Benz?
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 07, 2012, 02:38:56 PM
Cougs hit it on the nose. The non-sport package 3 series is a more fun to drive, more economical, more spacious, slower depreciating car than the C-Class. Aside from purely subjective attributes (styling, badge) there is no reason to get one over a 3. You speak as though the base 3er is some stripped out race car... its no less comfortable or luxurious than a C-Class, and its objectively better on many fronts....
I put it like this... say a friend of yours was looking at cars and he wanted to choose between the E90 and the W204. What could you say to convince him to go for the Benz?
And because I buy my cars used, the part in bold would be my main reason for considering a C-class over a 3-series sedan.
You get what you pay for...
Quote from: GoCougs on April 07, 2012, 11:32:17 AM
Unlike the G, 3er, A4, IS, etc., the C-class provides no differentiation vs. its more expensive stablemates other than price and size. It's badge-snob bait and why I've never had any respect for it.
It actually is a pretty fun car and it's not a 3 series, which is can be enough. But now that they dropped the stick, the only reason to get it over an IS is space.
But, in the end, I really doubt any of those cars are as fun to drive or as practical as a four door GTI.
Quote from: Raza on April 09, 2012, 08:52:03 AM
It actually is a pretty fun car and it's not a 3 series, which is can be enough. But now that they dropped the stick, the only reason to get it over an IS is space.
But, in the end, I really doubt any of those cars are as fun to drive or as practical as a four door GTI.
They are better looking!
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on April 09, 2012, 02:10:33 PM
They are better looking!
The A4 and C class, yeah. But the others? Eh.....
Quote from: Raza on April 09, 2012, 08:52:03 AM
It actually is a pretty fun car and it's not a 3 series, which is can be enough. But now that they dropped the stick, the only reason to get it over an IS is space.
But, in the end, I really doubt any of those cars are as fun to drive or as practical as a four door GTI.
Even the G? I haven't driven a new one but the old one felt surprisingly light on its feet, for what it was.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on April 09, 2012, 02:30:20 PM
Even the G? I haven't driven a new one but the old one felt surprisingly light on its feet, for what it was.
I also haven't driven the new one, but I was not a fan of it. It suffered all the bad parts to the experience as the 350Z, but with more weight that put you even further from the driving experience. It's a great car, on paper, but I didn't like it in the real world (same as the 350Z, which is a shame because it has such good looks and great specs that I still want one; it's kind of like a Japanese TT, but in an opposite way).