CarSPIN Forums

Auto Talk => Luxury Talk => Topic started by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 11:09:18 AM

Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 11:09:18 AM
1. M35X (now CR's currently top-rated sedan)
2. A6
3. STS
4. RL
5. GS300


M35:
Acceleration: 5/5 (0-60: 7.0)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 5/5
Emergency Handling: 5/5
Braking: 5/5 (60-0: 128 feet)
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 4/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 5/5
Trunk: 3/5
Front seat: 5/5
Rear seat: 4/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)

A6:
Acceleration: 4/5 (0-60: 7.7)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 4/5
Emergency Handling: 4/5
Braking: 4/5 (60-0: 129 feet)
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 5/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 2/5
Fit and Finish: 5/5
Trunk: 3/5
Front seat: 5/5
Rear seat: 4/5
Fuel Economy: 3/5 (21 mpg)

STS:
Acceleration: 5/5 (0-60: 7.1)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 5/5
Emergency Handling: 4/5
Braking: 5/5 (60-0: 131 feet)
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 4/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 4/5
Trunk: 2/5
Front seat: 5/5
Rear seat: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)

RL:
Acceleration: 5/5 (0-60: 6.9)
Transmission: 4/5
Routine Handling: 4/5
Emergency Handling: 4/5
Braking: 4/5 (60-0: 131 feet)
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 4/5
Driving Position: 4/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 3/5
Fit and Finish: 5/5
Trunk: 2/5
Front seat: 5/5
Rear seat: 4/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (18 mpg)

GS300 AWD:
Acceleration: 4/5 (0-60: 7.4)
Transmission: 5/5
Routine Handling: 4/5
Emergency Handling: 3/5
Braking: 4/5 (60-0: 133 feet)
Ride: 4/5
Noise: 5/5
Driving Position: 3/5
Access: 4/5
Controls and Displays: 4/5
Fit and Finish: 5/5
Trunk: 3/5
Front seat: 4/5
Rear seat: 3/5
Fuel Economy: 2/5 (20 mpg)


CR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.  <_<  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: BMWDave on July 31, 2005, 11:10:29 AM
What about the 5er?  Why wasnt it included?
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 11:34:50 AM
Were these all AWD cars?  It doesn't make sense to compare the A6, M35x, RL, and GS300 AWD with a RWD STS.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 11:51:37 AM
QuoteWhat about the 5er?  Why wasnt it included?
CR didn't include the 530i or E-Class because they had just tested them last year. Re-testing them would cost them an additional $100,000 or more.

Here are the rankings of the other comparable luxury sedans that they have tested:

1. M35X
2. E320
3. 530i
4. A6
5. STS
6. RL
7. X-Type
8. GS300
9. S80 T6

Raza, the STS can only be had in AWD with the V8. It makes more sense to compare comparable engines and prices than comparable drivetrains IMO.  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Run Away on July 31, 2005, 11:56:51 AM
What the hell, 3/5 have a 5 star rating for acceleration, the other two have 4 star?
5 competitors, rank them in order.
Fastest gets 5 stars
Second fastest gets 4
etc

This isn't kindergarten, where "everyone is a winner! Yay!".  <_<  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: TBR on July 31, 2005, 12:03:02 PM
I completely agree with those rankings, something I never thought I would say regarding Consumer Reports.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 12:07:10 PM
QuoteWhat the hell, 3/5 have a 5 star rating for acceleration, the other two have 4 star?
5 competitors, rank them in order.
Fastest gets 5 stars
Second fastest gets 4
etc

This isn't kindergarten, where "everyone is a winner! Yay!".  <_<
CR always uses the same rating system for all vehicles in everything but cargo space (in which wagon-style vehicles are held to a higher standard). Always have.  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 05:26:51 PM
Quote
QuoteWhat about the 5er?  Why wasnt it included?
CR didn't include the 530i or E-Class because they had just tested them last year. Re-testing them would cost them an additional $100,000 or more.

Here are the rankings of the other comparable luxury sedans that they have tested:

1. M35X
2. E320
3. 530i
4. A6
5. STS
6. RL
7. X-Type
8. GS300
9. S80 T6

Raza, the STS can only be had in AWD with the V8. It makes more sense to compare comparable engines and prices than comparable drivetrains IMO.
They should have left out the STS completely.  You've got four AWD entrants and one RWD?  Deciding which one doesn't belong should be an elementary exercise.  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 05:27:21 PM
QuoteWhat the hell, 3/5 have a 5 star rating for acceleration, the other two have 4 star?
5 competitors, rank them in order.
Fastest gets 5 stars
Second fastest gets 4
etc

This isn't kindergarten, where "everyone is a winner! Yay!".  <_<
Everyone's not a winner, clearly.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 05:31:49 PM
Quote
Quote
QuoteWhat about the 5er?  Why wasnt it included?
CR didn't include the 530i or E-Class because they had just tested them last year. Re-testing them would cost them an additional $100,000 or more.

Here are the rankings of the other comparable luxury sedans that they have tested:

1. M35X
2. E320
3. 530i
4. A6
5. STS
6. RL
7. X-Type
8. GS300
9. S80 T6

Raza, the STS can only be had in AWD with the V8. It makes more sense to compare comparable engines and prices than comparable drivetrains IMO.
They should have left out the STS completely.  You've got four AWD entrants and one RWD?  Deciding which one doesn't belong should be an elementary exercise.
It's not exactly a comparison test in the same vein as a C/D comparo. CR refers to these as Road Tests, so their comparison is simply a group of road tests done at the same time to keep their ratings and statements relative to a group. If they left out the STS, they wouldn't have a review available probably for another two years, maybe more.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: mazda6er on July 31, 2005, 06:08:49 PM
QuoteThey should have left out the STS completely.  You've got four AWD entrants and one RWD?  Deciding which one doesn't belong should be an elementary exercise.
Which other group would you test the STS with? This is the only place it fits.  <_<  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: mazda6er on July 31, 2005, 06:12:52 PM
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.  <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: BMWDave on July 31, 2005, 06:15:17 PM
Quote
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.  <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.
I think Iffy was joking :lol:  (since those 3 finished in top order).
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: mazda6er on July 31, 2005, 06:17:46 PM
Quote
Quote
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.? <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.
I think Iffy was joking :lol:  (since those 3 finished in top order).
I thought he might be joking, but I figured he would have used a different smiley if he was. Grrrrr....I hate looking at text instead actually seeing people talk.  rokon.gif  :lol:  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: BMWDave on July 31, 2005, 06:18:43 PM
Quote
Quote
Quote
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.? <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.
I think Iffy was joking :lol:  (since those 3 finished in top order).
I thought he might be joking, but I figured he would have used a different smiley if he was. Grrrrr....I hate looking at text instead actually seeing people talk.  rokon.gif  :lol:
Yea, it can be confusing some times :lol:  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 06:19:55 PM
Quote
QuoteThey should have left out the STS completely.  You've got four AWD entrants and one RWD?  Deciding which one doesn't belong should be an elementary exercise.
Which other group would you test the STS with? This is the only place it fits.  <_<
With rear drivers like the 530i, E350, GS300, and M35.  You know, the rear drive models.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 06:33:48 PM
Then you don't think they should test the RL at all? As I said, they were simply conducting their tests of luxury sedans, and running them at the same time.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 06:35:44 PM
Quote
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.  <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.
I was kidding. I thought it was clear enough.  :(

And the GS lost because it had the least interior space and the most-relaxed handling in the group.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 06:43:40 PM
QuoteThen you don't think they should test the RL at all? As I said, they were simply conducting their tests of luxury sedans, and running them at the same time.
The RL was AWD, just like 3 other cars in this test.  The STS was the only rear driver.  It wasn't relevant in a review that has such a seemingly narrow focus.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 06:46:13 PM
Right, going by your standards they had to choose not to review the STS (doing the other 4 with AWD) or choose not to review the RL and A6 and review the other 3 as RWD. Even C/D didn't do that.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on July 31, 2005, 06:57:45 PM
I see, that considering this is CR, they don't get very technical, but if you've a review that has several RWD cars and a few AWD cars, then the focus is broad enough to encompass both sets of vehicles.  But you don't compare 5 SUVs and a Ferrari.
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: mazda6er on July 31, 2005, 07:02:05 PM
Quote
Quote
QuoteCR is clearly biased towards Nissan, VW, and GM.? <_<
They most certainly are NOT biased toward any of those brands. GM routinely gets crushed in their ratings, VW cars are not reviewed without noting at least once their horrendous reliability, and the previous gen Frontier and Xterra were rated by far the worst in their respective classes. If anything, they are biased towards the same companies as everyone else: Honda, Toyota and BMW. The low ranking of the Lexus, I would imagine, is due in large part to the electronic "nannies" everyone has been bitching about.
I was kidding. I thought it was clear enough.  :(

And the GS lost because it had the least interior space and the most-relaxed handling in the group.
Not your fault, I always have trouble telling who's serious and who isn't on the internet.  :)  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: ifcar on July 31, 2005, 07:17:25 PM
QuoteI see, that considering this is CR, they don't get very technical, but if you've a review that has several RWD cars and a few AWD cars, then the focus is broad enough to encompass both sets of vehicles.  But you don't compare 5 SUVs and a Ferrari.
The difference isn't that great between RWD and AWD.  <_<  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: JYODER240 on July 31, 2005, 10:54:29 PM
Quote
QuoteI see, that considering this is CR, they don't get very technical, but if you've a review that has several RWD cars and a few AWD cars, then the focus is broad enough to encompass both sets of vehicles.  But you don't compare 5 SUVs and a Ferrari.
The difference isn't that great between RWD and AWD.  <_<
Depending on the torque split, some are very FWD biased, others more RWD.  
Title: Consumer Reports compares luxury sedans
Post by: Raza on August 01, 2005, 06:36:59 AM
Quote
QuoteI see, that considering this is CR, they don't get very technical, but if you've a review that has several RWD cars and a few AWD cars, then the focus is broad enough to encompass both sets of vehicles.  But you don't compare 5 SUVs and a Ferrari.
The difference isn't that great between RWD and AWD.  <_<
Well, all analogies break down somewhere.  But still, you get my point.  I realize now that it was done on scale to the other comparisons it had already done, but had this been a stand alone comparison, it would have been foolish.