Not too sure how I feel about the front facia and how the character line protrudes outward. It looks a bit strange at the front.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/08/4-2011-infiniti-m.jpg)
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/08/2-2011-infiniti-m.jpg)
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/08/1-2011-infiniti-m.jpg)
Interior looks classy.
(http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog.com/media/2009/08/3-2011-infiniti-m.jpg)
http://www.autoblog.com/2009/08/14/monterey-2009-2011-infiniti-m-makes-virtual-reveal-in-pebble/
Nice! I'm not a fan of the grill 'tho.
The first photo, the profile, gives me an immediate "ugh" reaction. It looks good in the other views, but the interior styling is too carryover.
I like it! IMO, it definitely looks better than the W212.
OOoooooooo! :wub: Love it. M56s :ohyeah:
It's looks great -- a rare comment for this class.
Quote from: the Teuton on August 14, 2009, 09:03:37 PM
It's looks great -- a rare comment for this class.
At first I was going to say something, but you're right. The 5-series and E-class are ugly. The GS and this are actually good looking.
Holy shit M56. I expected the M50, but this is a surprise.
It only says over 400hp.
I get the feeling it's quite alot over 400hp. Nissan mentioned something about uniting it's endurance V8's from the truck line and the VK series V8's from it's luxury cars.
If we assume the same HP/L as the 5.0 V8 in the FX, we are looking at 437hp.
Maybe the high performance version of this car will be that GT-R sedan everyone's been talking about.
It's too swoopy.
Whether it grows on me or not is a different story.
Very dramatic.
I rike it.
I do not like this at all. W212, please. Actually, W211 please.
Quote from: 565 on August 14, 2009, 09:36:02 PM
Holy shit M56. I expected the M50, but this is a surprise.
hehe, same here.
I'm giggling like a little school girl looking at that decklid badge. It's like seeing the first digit on your paycheck +1 higher than usual
Quote from: 565 on August 14, 2009, 09:36:02 PM
Holy shit M56. I expected the M50, but this is a surprise.
It only says over 400hp.
I get the feeling it's quite alot over 400hp. Nissan mentioned something about uniting it's endurance V8's from the truck line and the VK series V8's from it's luxury cars.
If we assume the same HP/L as the 5.0 V8 in the FX, we are looking at 437hp.
I think you're right, 420-440 is probably what they're going for. It'll be enough to swoop the E550, and the next 400hp 5 series (on paper at least; that V8tt makes more like 450hp.)
The rear doors look small relative to the front doors.
Also, supposedly it'll be larger than most other mid-sizers. Is Infiniti making the M it's flagship, and renouncing a Q forever?
The first picture has some Panamera resemblance.
The 3/4 rear profile looks like the Jaguar XF. I'm surprised nobody has said this yet since everyone was so quick to claim the W212 E-Class looks like a Lexus GS in the front and a Hyundai from the rear. :rolleyes:
(http://www.krauthahn-berlin.de/auto/img/jaguar_xf.jpg)
Is this the new Infiniti Essence design language? It looks very "European" somehow. I mean the side profile reminds me of classic Jaguar lines from the '50s and '60s. The front is pretty aggressive and has that Infiniti-look, but the rest of the car doesn't look like an 'Infiniti" to me. Maybe that will change when more models receive the Essence design language.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 08:47:48 AM
The 3/4 rear profile looks like the Jaguar XF. I'm surprised nobody has said this yet since everyone was so quick to claim the W212 E-Class looks like a Lexus GS in the front and a Hyundai from the rear. :rolleyes:
(http://www.krauthahn-berlin.de/auto/img/jaguar_xf.jpg)
Is this the new Infiniti Essence design language? It looks very "European" somehow. I mean the side profile reminds me of classic Jaguar lines from the '50s and '60s. The front is pretty aggressive and has that Infiniti-look, but the rest of the car doesn't look like an 'Infiniti" to me. Maybe that will change when more models receive the Essence design language.
I don't see it. I see way more Hyundai/GS in the E than I see XF in this.
The M isn't necessarily attractive, but it certainly isn't in any way derivative.
Quote from: CALL_911 on August 15, 2009, 08:49:48 AM
I don't see it. I see way more Hyundai/GS in the E than I see XF in this.
Yay! Argument time!
I get the feeling people here, being so friggin sports biased, love to hate on the cars which don't really focus on this aspect: E-Class, RL and the GS.
To me the rear of this M has something "Jaguar" about it and the side profile too. If I ever see the car in real life I might change my mind because pictures don't really tell the whole story. And until now I really don't see the Lexus GS aspect in the front of the E-Class. I just don't. There are no design cues from the GS in the front of the new W212. And the rear lights? The B-Class had this rear light design ages ago - it was incorporated into the new E-Class, stretched and reformed a bit. That's how I see it.
"I get the feeling people here, being so friggin sports biased, love to hate on the cars which don't really focus on this aspect: E-Class, RL and the GS."
The GS doesn't do either comfort or sport well, the RL is too much like a TL but more expensive, and the E-Class is too expensive.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 08:55:34 AM
"I get the feeling people here, being so friggin sports biased, love to hate on the cars which don't really focus on this aspect: E-Class, RL and the GS."
The GS doesn't do either comfort or sport well, the RL is too much like a TL but more expensive, and the E-Class is too expensive.
I've read the same about the GS.
Why does everyone here hate the RL? I've seen a handful of Honda Legends here in Europe and it looks like a great car. Everything about it screams value. Is the drive that bad?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:00:40 AM
I've read the same about the GS.
Why does everyone here hate the RL? I've seen a handful of Honda Legends here in Europe and it looks like a great car. Everything about it screams value. Is the drive that bad?
It's not that it's bad, it's that it feels like a class below what it is. It's got very little if anything over Acura's own TL in space, power, or quality.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:02:25 AM
It's not that it's bad, it's that it feels like a class below what it is. It's got very little if anything over Acura's own TL in space, power, or quality.
The 3.5 V6 of the RL makes how much horsepower?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:05:04 AM
The 3.5 V6 of the RL makes how much horsepower?
3.7-liter, 300 hp.
The TL has a standard 3.5-liter 280 hp V6, with an available 3.7-liter 305-hp.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:07:12 AM
3.7-liter, 300 hp.
What are they thinking? A schoolbus has more horsepower! :facepalm:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:07:57 AM
What are they thinking? A schoolbus has more horsepower! :facepalm:
Again, it's not that the RL itself is bad, it's that Acura hasn't distinguished it from its own cheaper, newer TL. Sales have reflected that.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:08:48 AM
Again, it's not that the RL itself is bad, it's that Acura hasn't distinguished it from its own cheaper, newer TL. Sales have reflected that.
I have a question. Are Americans that sensitive?
I mean the RL must offer more space than a TL, right? I have a hard time believing someone buying an RL will feel annoyed if a cheaper TL has more horsepower. Everyone here seems to think people go for cars based on horsepower and performance output - there is much more to a car than that and everyone here seems to be ignoring those aspects IMO.
Quote from: mojammer on August 15, 2009, 03:19:50 AM
Also, supposedly it'll be larger than most other mid-sizers. Is Infiniti making the M it's flagship, and renouncing a Q forever?
I believe that's the case with the current M. At least compared to its competitors in 2005.
The Q was always in the shadow of the Lexus LS, and was never successful that way. If Infiniti brought back the Q to compete with, say, the Mercedes CLS, then I bet they would find more success that way. At least it would be more interesting.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:11:58 AM
I have a question. Are Americans that sensitive?
I mean the RL must offer more space than a TL, right? I have a hard time believing someone buying an RL will feel annoyed if a cheaper TL has more horsepower. Everyone here seems to think people go for cars based on horsepower and performance output - there is much more to a car than that and everyone here seems to be ignoring those aspects IMO.
It doesn't offer more space than the TL, or the Accord, for that matter.
Quote from: CALL_911 on August 15, 2009, 09:20:35 AM
It doesn't offer more space than the TL, or the Accord, for that matter.
Wait, wait. The TL competes with the 3er right?
Quote from: CALL_911 on August 15, 2009, 09:23:47 AM
Yeah.
And the RL with the 5er and E-Class, right?
Logic dictates that the RL is bigger and thus offers more interior space. It's basically a class above the TL. Right?
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:23:08 AM
Wait, wait. The TL competes with the 3er right?
Yes, but it's Accord-based; bigger than the 3-Series.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:24:47 AM
And the RL with the 5er and E-Class, right?
Logic dictates that the RL is bigger and thus offers more interior space. It's basically a class above the TL. Right?
Right.
Logic dictates that, but Honda didn't necessarily follow that logic. The RL is loaded with high tech shit, and that's what they're pushing to sell the car. It hasn't ever sold well. Besides, the TL probably has just as much, if not more, high tech shit. And it's bigger and more powerful.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:25:57 AM
Yes, but it's Accord-based; bigger than the 3-Series.
So the TL offers just the same amount of space as an RL?
Quote from: CALL_911 on August 15, 2009, 09:26:30 AM
Right.
Logic dictates that, but Honda didn't necessarily follow that logic. The RL is loaded with high tech shit, and that's what they're pushing to sell the car. It hasn't ever sold well. Besides, the TL probably has just as much, if not more, high tech shit. And it's bigger and more powerful.
In other words: RL = FAIL? :lol:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:26:39 AM
So the TL offers just the same amount of space as an RL?
Yes.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:27:04 AM
In other words: RL = FAIL? :lol:
Again, it's not that it's bad on its own. It's that Acura upstaged it with the TL.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:27:26 AM
Again, it's not that it's bad on its own. It's that Acura upstaged it with the TL.
I see. So the TL is essentially better value. You get more car for your money.
Didn't Acura upgrade the RL recently? Guess they didn't do much...
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:30:03 AM
I see. So the TL is essentially better value. You get more car for your money.
Didn't Acura upgrade the RL recently? Guess they didn't do much...
Bigger engine and modified styling, but they also gave the TL that same bigger engine.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:31:13 AM
Bigger engine and modified styling, but they also gave the TL that same bigger engine.
Now I see why people hate on Acura for the lack of a V8.
I love this car. It looks fantastic.
:wub:
I dig the wavy lookin' seats.
I like it, which isn't hard since i like the G37 sedan and coupe.
Infiniti has a chance to finally achieve what it set out to do almost 20 years ago. With a solid G and a revised M(maybe a M coupe) all that is left is to do the Q right and they will have a solid full 3 car lineup. Something they have never had in the past.
While I hope for a manual(fat chance) I imagine that this motor pumping out 400+ ponies mated to the very well reviewed 7 speed automatic in the G37 sport would make a nice combo for a nice luxury/sport sedan.
Just had another thought.
The G, M and Q would make a full line(with G and M coupes).
If they play their cards right and start seeing the sales that would give them some cash flow. I would like to see the J make a comeback in the form of a 4 door coupe(the new one could be based off the M, in V8 trim only).
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on August 15, 2009, 06:36:46 PM
Just had another thought.
The G, M and Q would make a full line(with G and M coupes).
If they play their cards right and start seeing the sales that would give them some cash flow. I would like to see the J make a comeback in the form of a 4 door coupe(the new one could be based off the M, in V8 trim only).
Unless Nissan already has something in Japan that would make a good Q, that is not where Nissan should be investing its money.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 06:38:18 PM
Unless Nissan already has something in Japan that would make a good Q, that is not where Nissan should be investing its money.
Nissan(infiniti), unlike GM, has a platform that is expandable and adaptable across many segments. The Q would be nothing more than a stretched M with a top spec V8(or possibly a unique motor, the largest cost) and all the fixins'.
Infiniti will be releasing a new Q, they are fully aware of the need for a Flagship sedan. They have been delaying it, but for the(it appears) purpose of solidifying the lower models in their luxury line.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:27:04 AM
In other words: RL = FAIL? :lol:
Since day one.
And, wimmer, you say that everyone is biased against MB, have you ever thought that perhaps, maybe (now this is really stretching it..) you're just such an ardent fan that you think that anyone who is ambivalent to things like badge is biased against them?
I didn't know everyone was biased against mercedes(on this forum).
Maybe i haven't paid enough attention.
Either way, wimmer isn't without a leg to stand on. I'm a BMW person, I prefer the sporty tilt of their luxury cars. With that said I absolutely LOVE mercedes cars. Even though i prefer BMW, I have no problem admitting that Mercedes is the "better" luxury brand.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 15, 2009, 09:11:58 AM
I have a question. Are Americans that sensitive?
I mean the RL must offer more space than a TL, right? I have a hard time believing someone buying an RL will feel annoyed if a cheaper TL has more horsepower. Everyone here seems to think people go for cars based on horsepower and performance output - there is much more to a car than that and everyone here seems to be ignoring those aspects IMO.
It's not even that. Feature wise and space wise the TL SH-AWD is pretty much an uglier RL for $8000-12000 less. The RL is supposed to be a flagship and it doesn't even match up against the TL. It's the same deal that made the original RL such a waste.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on August 15, 2009, 06:36:46 PM
Just had another thought.
The G, M and Q would make a full line(with G and M coupes).
If they play their cards right and start seeing the sales that would give them some cash flow. I would like to see the J make a comeback in the form of a 4 door coupe(the new one could be based off the M, in V8 trim only).
Yea this would be a pretty solid plan. I have always said they need to make the Q with a big ass V12 off the FM platform. They could just melt 2 VQs together.
The J is a good plan too. Maybe you are in the wrong business.
I still think they should also offer a smaller motor in the G. Do a G30, G40, G50. But w/e.
As far as the new M I love it. Very nice, easily the best looking car in class next to the XF.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on August 15, 2009, 06:50:57 PM
Nissan(infiniti), unlike GM, has a platform that is expandable and adaptable across many segments. The Q would be nothing more than a stretched M with a top spec V8(or possibly a unique motor, the largest cost) and all the fixins'.
Infiniti will be releasing a new Q, they are fully aware of the need for a Flagship sedan. They have been delaying it, but for the(it appears) purpose of solidifying the lower models in their luxury line.
One: GM's platforms are VERY adaptable.
Two: I don't think the FM platform can go any larger. I think the M would be as large as it can get.
Quote from: 2o6 on August 15, 2009, 10:06:57 PM
One: GM's platforms are VERY adaptable.
Two: I don't think the FM platform can go any larger. I think the M would be as large as it can get.
Define VERY adaptable.
It seems that the STS cannot be stretched to yield a true fullsize competitor(apparently width is an issue) and the CTS can barely be used to make a replacement STS(which it isn't, since a stretched malibu/lacrosse will be used for that).
Face it, GM used the one good platform they had(is it sigma?) for the STS and could not use it for much else(SRX, but that was replaced with a tarted up vue).
Compared to the nissan FM platform(which spawned the 350/370Z, G sedan/coupe, M, FX, EX and most likely a future Q car) GM doesn't even come clost to having a platform that is as capable as the FM(as far as being able to underpin a wide rance of sport/luxury products).
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on August 15, 2009, 11:01:11 PM
Define VERY adaptable.
It seems that the STS cannot be stretched to yield a true fullsize competitor(apparently width is an issue) and the CTS can barely be used to make a replacement STS(which it isn't, since a stretched malibu/lacrosse will be used for that).
Face it, GM used the one good platform they had(is it sigma?) for the STS and could not use it for much else(SRX, but that was replaced with a tarted up vue).
Compared to the nissan FM platform(which spawned the 350/370Z, G sedan/coupe, M, FX, EX and most likely a future Q car) GM doesn't even come clost to having a platform that is as capable as the FM(as far as being able to underpin a wide rance of sport/luxury products).
Theta has Delta roots. (GM compact cars, GM small SUV's)
The SRX competes with the much more competitive Lexus RX. (Likely, that's what the old SRX was priced against)
Sigma II (new CTS) shares a LOT of parts with Zeta. The new "alpha" platform that will underpin the next ATS/BLS will likely come from a shortened Sigma.
Epsilon and Epsilon II house a smorgasbord of cars.
Lambda comes from Epsilon.
GM SCCS (Gamma) was developed with Fiat.
Kappa used parts from pretty much all GM platforms including the Corvette.
And of course, you have Zeta itself.
Saying that GM is unadaptable is quite ignorant.
-------------
The STS is to Cadillac is what the RL is to Acura. Both are nice vehicles, but their cheaper stablemates match or better it in every way.
Quote from: 2o6 on August 16, 2009, 08:53:07 AM
Theta has Delta roots. (GM compact cars, GM small SUV's)
The SRX competes with the much more competitive Lexus RX. (Likely, that's what the old SRX was priced against)
Sigma II (new CTS) shares a LOT of parts with Zeta. The new "alpha" platform that will underpin the next ATS/BLS will likely come from a shortened Sigma.
Epsilon and Epsilon II house a smorgasbord of cars.
Lambda comes from Epsilon.
GM SCCS (Gamma) was developed with Fiat.
Kappa used parts from pretty much all GM platforms including the Corvette.
And of course, you have Zeta itself.
Saying that GM is unadaptable is quite ignorant.
-------------
The STS is to Cadillac is what the RL is to Acura. Both are nice vehicles, but their cheaper stablemates match or better it in every way.
So the SRX is on theta
The CTS on sigma II
The STS on Zeta?
The future ats/bts will be on Alpha
and the rumored XTS will ride on a modified Ep/Epsilon II
Meanwhile at Infiniti they have the FM that underpins the G Sedan/Coupe, M, EX and FX.
So cadillac will have 5 cars on 5 different platforms and Infiniti has to make due with 1 platform for 4 different segments.
Well fire up the ignorant train cause i'm coming aboard, you can't possibly think GM is even remotely adaptable when they continue to shuffle and add new platforms while droping half used platforms like Zeta.
BTW, Zeta is getting dropped because apparently they can't ADAPT IT TO OTHER MODELS.
Carlos Ghosn, if anything, created a cost consolidation method within Renault/Nissan that has just recently become a model for a profitable, competitive car company. I know that sounds like an excuse to allow GM to perform poorly, but it's really not. Ford wouldn't be coming back if it weren't for the Way Forward and One Ford plans that are somewhat modeled on what Ghosn did.
I think GM is inherently flawed, but I can't see them not working on some of their problems. And yeah, I think everything they have should be a Zeta, Sigma, or Kappa, but that's for them to figure out now. That's not really our problem.
Quote from: Vinsanity on August 16, 2009, 11:33:18 AM
Currently, the STS is on Sigma I
That was the one i was unsure about.
Quote from: FlatBlackCaddy on August 16, 2009, 10:56:14 AM
Meanwhile at Infiniti they have the FM that underpins the G Sedan/Coupe, M, EX and FX.
So cadillac will have 5 cars on 5 different platforms and Infiniti has to make due with 1 platform for 4 different segments.
Well fire up the ignorant train cause i'm coming aboard, you can't possibly think GM is even remotely adaptable when they continue to shuffle and add new platforms while droping half used platforms like Zeta.
Yet again, they're not wasting R&D funds by developing new platforms. They're simply adapting base platforms to fill whatever niche they need.
BTW, Zeta is getting dropped because apparently they can't ADAPT IT TO OTHER MODELS.
Not true. It's just too costly and would wreck their CAFE average to manufacture more cars on Zeta. The Camaro uses Zeta.
But those really aren't different, all-new platforms. The Lambda platform sharing with the Epsilon would be in similar vein of how the Quest and Murano share platforms with the Altima.
Quote from: the Teuton on August 16, 2009, 11:15:55 AM
Carlos Ghosn, if anything, created a cost consolidation method within Renault/Nissan that has just recently become a model for a profitable, competitive car company. I know that sounds like an excuse to allow GM to perform poorly, but it's really not. Ford wouldn't be coming back if it weren't for the Way Forward and One Ford plans that are somewhat modeled on what Ghosn did.
I think GM is inherently flawed, but I can't see them not working on some of their problems. And yeah, I think everything they have should be a Zeta, Sigma, or Kappa, but that's for them to figure out now. That's not really our problem.
I agree.
Is this different from the G?
Quote from: Raza link=topic=19598.msg1139872#msg1139872 date=1250465286
Is this different from the G?
Huh? It replaces the current M.
This car competes more with the 5-series, GS and E-class crowd.
Quote from: 2o6 on August 16, 2009, 06:01:07 PM
Huh? It replaces the current M.
This car competes more with the 5-series, GS and E-class crowd.
I meant the looks.
Quote from: Raza on August 16, 2009, 06:14:25 PM
I meant the looks.
It's pretty similar, but still good looking. I am hoping the G gets a little smaller next go round.
Quote from: the Teuton on August 16, 2009, 11:15:55 AM
Carlos Ghosn, if anything, created a cost consolidation method within Renault/Nissan that has just recently become a model for a profitable, competitive car company. I know that sounds like an excuse to allow GM to perform poorly, but it's really not. Ford wouldn't be coming back if it weren't for the Way Forward and One Ford plans that are somewhat modeled on what Ghosn did.
I think GM is inherently flawed, but I can't see them not working on some of their problems. And yeah, I think everything they have should be a Zeta, Sigma, or Kappa, but that's for them to figure out now. That's not really our problem.
I should hope Ford's efforts are better than those of Le Cost Killer. Mainstream Nissans and Renaults are impossibly underwhelming - the Laguna isn't competitive at all, the Teana/Maxima only sells because of its equipment levels for the price, the mum-and-dad Meganes are nothing special, the Versa/Tiida is a fabulously cynical car, the Koleos is underdeveloped, the Dualis/Qashqai doesn't do anything better than a cheaper 3, Focus or Golf, the X-Trail is an uglier, pricier old model, and so on.
Anyone watch the virtual unveiling?
I thought it was just going to be showing some CGI movies on a big screen, but what Infiniti did was something new and interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2rp8RnVi3k
Sadly the video isn't of great quality.
Apparently they had a foam white model of the new M there and used special projectors to give it color and detail and they could make it look as if it was in motion on the road.
It looks like the technology is still a bit new right now, but given some time this could change how cars are revealed at car shows and such. You could show the car in every color, different lighting conditions, you could put it anywhere you wanted, in the middle of NYC with the skyscrapers reflected in the sunroof, or on the Nurburgring with the trees flashing by the windows.
Quote from: 565 on August 30, 2009, 05:17:07 PM
Anyone watch the virtual unveiling?
I thought it was just going to be showing some CGI movies on a big screen, but what Infiniti did was something new and interesting.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J2rp8RnVi3k
Sadly the video isn't of great quality.
Apparently they had a foam white model of the new M there and used special projectors to give it color and detail and they could make it look as if it was in motion on the road.
It looks like the technology is still a bit new right now, but given some time this could change how cars are revealed at car shows and such. You could show the car in every color, different lighting conditions, you could put it anywhere you wanted, in the middle of NYC with the skyscrapers reflected in the sunroof, or on the Nurburgring with the trees flashing by the windows.
Yeah, but you don't get to go inside the car.
Quote from: ifcar on August 30, 2009, 05:24:40 PM
Yeah, but you don't get to go inside the car.
That's true with some concepts cars as well. Clearly an actual car in the flesh is best, but if you don't have that ready yet, this will certainly dazzle the masses.
Quote from: 565 on August 30, 2009, 05:27:28 PM
That's true with some concepts cars as well. Clearly an actual car in the flesh is best, but if you don't have that ready yet, this will certainly dazzle the masses.
It certainly would make the first-stage concept car lower-investment. But I can't see it catching on for more finished products like the M.
That's pretty cool technology.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on August 17, 2009, 03:54:43 AM
It's pretty similar, but still good looking. I am hoping the G gets a little smaller next go round.
They're all pretty ugly. The G coupe is the least ugly, but the new design language just doesn't feel cohesive to me.
i love every aspect of it!
According to Autobild there will be a V6 diesel for the European market. Has this been confirmed yet? :huh:
I've not even seen an Infiniti on the road here yet except a few imported FX's.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 31, 2009, 02:45:09 PM
According to Autobild there will be a V6 diesel for the European market. Has this been confirmed yet? :huh:
I've not even seen an Infiniti on the road here yet except a few imported FX's.
I don't think Infiniti is prepared to make a 4 cylinder diesel M
From what I gather, the Nissan Fuga (Infiniti M) is pretty ubiquitous in Japan, so I'd think that whatever economical engine options they have there would be sufficient for Europe.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 01, 2009, 08:01:40 AM
I don't think Infiniti is prepared to make a 4 cylinder diesel M
It wouldn't hurt them at all. They have no image to cultivate in Europe in the first place, like Lexus. This mentality of "6-cylinder only because of image reasons" doesn't really work with the new Japanese luxury brands in Europe. They have no image in the sense of their European rivals.
They should just go ahead and offer an efficient and refined 4-cylinder diesel. Nissan can source these from Renault. Renault has some excellent diesels in Europe.
Quote from: ifcar on August 15, 2009, 09:27:26 AM
Again, it's not that it's bad on its own. It's that Acura upstaged it with the TL.
The RL is an expedient attempt to avoid going rear-wheel drive (or balanced chassis w/ AWD) - which is what a car of that size and weight needs to be in order to compete. Barring a few exceptions (Audi comes to mind), it's that simple. In engineering terms, the RL fails basic logic.
That's a major handicap; but logic isn't the overarching factor in this price range. An inherently handicapped car is wearing a badge that is hardly tested at the $50,000 level. So it fails in that regard, too.
The problem is not the TL; the problem is the RL's competition. There's no reason to buy an RL, but plenty of reasons not to buy one; and none of them need have anything to do with the TL.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 05, 2009, 04:45:33 PM
The RL is an expedient attempt to avoid going rear-wheel drive (or balanced chassis w/ AWD) - which is what a car of that size and weight needs to be in order to compete. Barring a few exceptions (Audi comes to mind), it's that simple. In engineering terms, the RL fails basic logic.
That's a major handicap; but logic isn't the overarching factor in this price range. An inherently handicapped car is wearing a badge that is hardly tested at the $50,000 level. So it fails in that regard, too.
The problem is not the TL; the problem is the RL's competition. There's no reason to buy an RL, but plenty of reasons not to buy one; and none of them need have anything to do with the TL.
The RL as it is is fine for the buyer who is just looking for the badge but with more space than an entry-level premium car, who I suspect makes up a larger portion of sales than you probably think. And those buyers have little reason to buy an RL because of the TL.
You don't need to have the best-engineered car to have a successful car. It's Acura's market positioning, not its lack of rear-wheel-drive, that's messed up the RL.
Quote from: ifcar on September 05, 2009, 05:47:30 PM
The RL as it is is fine for the buyer who is just looking for the badge but with more space than an entry-level premium car, who I suspect makes up a larger portion of sales than you probably think.
For $50,000? That's all they want? A badge and more space?
"Just fine" doesn't cut it for $50,000; not when there are
much more compelling choices out there.
QuoteAnd those buyers have little reason to buy an RL because of the TL.
Remove the TL from Acura's range.
Take it out. Completely.
You
really think that RL sales would climb significantly?
QuoteYou don't need to have the best-engineered car to have a successful car.
You need a
well-engineered car.
And, in this class, some cachet.
The RL's engineers were given a
massive handicap. They fought (probably, valiantly) the inherent problems in ride and handling. Their SH-AWD system is actually technologically intriguing - but it has more than met its match in trying to get an overweight, ill-balanced vehicle to dance. In this car, it's no more than a band aid, and it can't fix the issue.
And there's certainly no cachet to a car that cannot dynamically match its competitors, wears an Acura badge, costs $50,000, and looks like an overgrown Honda Accord.
Notice that I haven't mentioned the TL once.
QuoteIt's Acura's market positioning, not its lack of rear-wheel-drive, that's messed up the RL.
The "market positioning" you're talking about - as I understand it, the existence of the new TL - was not present when the RL launched. Yet the car was a slow seller from the outset.
Acura wanted to move 20,000 per year, as I recall... couldn't see it happening then, and I'm not surprised now.
This was a marginal car.
With or without the new TL.
Quote from: cawimmer430 on August 31, 2009, 02:45:09 PM
According to Autobild there will be a V6 diesel for the European market. Has this been confirmed yet? :huh:
Yup, confirmed. Same engine used in the Laguna Coupe.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 05, 2009, 05:57:38 PM
For $50,000? That's all they want? A badge and more space?
More people than you seem to think, yes. What do you think the average consumer is looking for, weight distribution?
Quote
"Just fine" doesn't cut it for $50,000; not when there are much more compelling choices out there.
You'd be surprised. When the standard is so high, anything that even approaches it is still a pretty nice automobile.
Quote
Remove the TL from Acura's range.
Take it out. Completely.
You really think that RL sales would climb significantly?
Yes.
Quote
You need a well-engineered car.
And, in this class, some cachet.
The cachet probably hurts more than the engineering. Yet Lincoln is able to sell the MKS in this price range with no more cachet and even less engineering. Space and a badge.
Quote
The RL's engineers were given a massive handicap. They fought (probably, valiantly) the inherent problems in ride and handling. Their SH-AWD system is actually technologically intriguing - but it has more than met its match in trying to get an overweight, ill-balanced vehicle to dance. In this car, it's no more than a band aid, and it can't fix the issue.
And there's certainly no cachet to a car that cannot dynamically match its competitors, wears an Acura badge, costs $50,000, and looks like an overgrown Honda Accord.
I've seen many reviews praising the RL's driving dynamics and criticizing those of some of its rear-drive competitors. Does the RL really fail to match a Lexus GS or Cadillac STS, cars I frequently see sharply criticized?
The styling hurts, badly. No doubt about that. Acura once had a great-looking flagship, and it was very popular. And everyone can notice styling.
Quote
Notice that I haven't mentioned the TL once.
The "market positioning" you're talking about - as I understand it, the existence of the new TL - was not present when the RL launched. Yet the car was a slow seller from the outset.
Acura wanted to move 20,000 per year, as I recall... couldn't see it happening then, and I'm not surprised now.
This was a marginal car.
With or without the new TL.
The 2004 TL had just come out, and it too had lots of power and similar interior space compared to the 2005 RL. But now for 2009, they went and stripped the RL of the one thing it had left that was unique: the all-wheel-drive.
This was indeed a marginal car with or without the TL. But even with snoozer styling, it would have undeniably sold better had it not faced the internal competition of the TL. Would it have met sales projections? Perhaps. 20k/year isn't a huge volume, and the RL was always priced pretty well relative to the competition. If the TSX were Acura's only entry-level car, it might very well have pulled that off despite its handicaps.
M35x: $47K
RL: $47K
M has more room, smaller footprint, arguably better dynamics
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 06, 2009, 06:58:04 AM
M35x: $47K
RL: $47K
M has more room, smaller footprint, arguably better dynamics
It would be my choice as well, sure. But the difference between the two is not so vast that it would be inconceivable for someone to pick the RL. Also, last I checked, the M doesn't sell so well either.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 06:49:16 AM
More people than you seem to think, yes. What do you think the average consumer is looking for, weight distribution?
:rolleyes:
Leaving aside that the "average consumer" isn't shopping in the $50k class...
The sizzle, ifcar.
Not the steak.They want the characteristics that a well-engineered automobile offers.
And they want it to feel $50k worth of special.
And if they can't figure it out for themselves, plenty of tests and local anoraks will confirm that the RL ain't up to par.
Again - this is the $50k class. You're not trying to sell someone on the merits of a Kia Rondo (more space, reliable, etc.)
If you honestly believe that, minus the TL, the RL would sell significantly better, then explain how it is that the RL has
never sold well, with or without the current generation of TL in showrooms.
You appear to believe that buyers are waiting, baited breath, for an Acura with space; as though someone walks into an Acura showroom with the desire for x cargo capacity with room for y passengers. At $50k, the market simply does not work that way.
This car is at a serious deficit vis a vis its (very) established competition - and yet you're worried about sibling rivalry.
QuoteLincoln is able to sell the MKS in this price range...
Go back and check the MKS' base price. And I wouldn't agree that it has significantly less cachet than an Acura, or significantly "less engineering." It does look considerably more special, though.
QuoteI've seen many reviews praising the RL's driving dynamics and criticizing those of some of its rear-drive competitors. Does the RL really fail to match a Lexus GS or Cadillac STS, cars I frequently see sharply criticized?
Those cars get the basic plot right, sure, but they need work in other areas. At $50k, you want the complete package. The difference is that Honda got this one wrong from square 1.
QuoteThe styling hurts, badly. No doubt about that. Acura once had a great-looking flagship, and it was very popular. And everyone can notice styling.
Yes. Overgrown Accord.
But about this "everyone can notice" business - I'll tell you, from first hand experience, that you underestimate the number of BMW drivers who come back because they like the "feel" of their cars. They may not all understand weight distribution, but your "average consumer" is hardly as plebian as you make him out to be.
QuoteBut now for 2009, they went and stripped the RL of the one thing it had left that was unique: the all-wheel-drive.
... and sales were poor, before and after the event you're trying to present as a turning point.
BTW, they didn't "strip" the RL of anything; it's still the same, marginal product it was.
Quote20k/year isn't a huge volume, and the RL was always priced pretty well relative to the competition.
A half-hearted, expedient effort, in this class, with this sort of competition, wearing a badge whose ability to hit $50k remains untested, doesn't need the TL to flunk its sales targets.
I agree that the platform is not the only thing holding this car back;
but the TL is no more than the icing on the cake - the last explanation I'd use - amid the RL's many deficiencies.
By the way - there's no TL in Europe, and yet Honda couldn't give the Legend away. I think they've actually stopped selling it in the U.K., with more market withdrawals possibly to follow.
But many people buy cars with deficiencies, even luxury cars. The Lexus GS is a giant walking deficiency -- deficient ride, deficient handling, deficient space. It's not top seller, no, but it sells, and at a higher rate than the almost inarguably superior Audi A6.
The real question isn't whether the RL feels like you think a $50,000 car should. It's what makes people care in this case. And I seriously doubt it's the front-drive based underpinnings, which don't necessarily betray any shortcomings when a car is driven like a luxury car rather than a sports sedan. I also doubt it was the reviews of the car that kept people away -- many were very positive despite the lack of RWD.
Styling was the biggest problem. Had this car looked the part of a $50,000 car, it would have done pretty well. Did a lack of rear-wheel-drive ever kill the Legend, back in the days of the 2.5-liter 170-horsepower TL?
Cannibalism from the TL is certainly up there too, from the 2005 RL's first day on the market and increasing with the TL's 2009 redesign. Why would someone go into the Acura dealer and not be encouraged to buy a $35k TL and get virtually the same experience as in a $50k RL?
No TL, and Acura can upsell TSX buyers looking for more power and luxury. (At least before the 2010 TSX.) Can't do that with the TL sharing showroom space.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 08:24:40 AM
By the way - there's no TL in Europe, and yet Honda couldn't give the Legend away. I think they've actually stopped selling it in the U.K., with more market withdrawals possibly to follow.
The European market is an entirely different animal. I don't know how the Legend is priced there and what it's supposed to be competing with, but I doubt it's relevant to the US.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 07:02:39 AM
It would be my choice as well, sure. But the difference between the two is not so vast that it would be inconceivable for someone to pick the RL. Also, last I checked, the M doesn't sell so well either.
I see a heck of a lot more Infiniti Ms than I do RLs.
Quote from: MX793 on September 06, 2009, 10:28:09 AM
I see a heck of a lot more Infiniti Ms than I do RLs.
Yes, but not a huge number of either.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 07:02:39 AM
It would be my choice as well, sure. But the difference between the two is not so vast that it would be inconceivable for someone to pick the RL. Also, last I checked, the M doesn't sell so well either.
The M sells worlds better than the RL. If you consider the M as not selling well, then only two cars in the class could be considered to sell well, as the Infiniti M holds about 3rd place in the market. The M is a sales miracle considering the old M45 sucked, and Infiniti had almost no presence in this market before.
It usually holds about 3rd place, despite being rather long in the tooth by 2008/2009 (the 2008 update was very minor), and being more limited in choices (fewer engine choices than BMW, Merc, no wagon).
http://www.autospies.com/news/January-2009-Luxury-Car-Sales-40605/
http://www.autospies.com/news/March-2008-Luxury-Car-Sales-Winners-Losers-28250/
2008 March
MID-LEVEL
1. BMW 5-Series - 3,667
2. Mercedez-Benz E-Class - 3,039
3. Infiniti M - 1,753
4. Lexus GS - 1,668
5. Volvo S80 - 1,629
6. Cadillac STS - 1,486
7. Jaguar XF - 1,161
8. Audi A6 - 898
9. Acura RL - 548
10. Saab 9-5 - 316
11. Jaguar S-Type - 80
2009 Jan
Mid-Level
1. 5 - 2,596
2. E - 1,768
3. M - 1,176
4. GS - 898
5. A6/S6 - 776
6. S80 - 473
7. STS - 413
8. RL - 208
9. 9-5 - 101
Despite coming from no where, the Infiniti M manages to beat out established cars like the GS and A6.
M sales have fallen sharply. It was just around 600 units last month.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 10:53:24 AM
M sales have fallen sharply. It was just around 600 units last month.
A lot of models have seen sales plummet recently. But overall, the M has sold pretty well. And maybe it's a regional thing, but it seems to me that I almost see as many Ms as I do G35/G37s.
Quote from: MX793 on September 06, 2009, 10:57:15 AM
A lot of models have seen sales plummet recently. But overall, the M has sold pretty well. And maybe it's a regional thing, but it seems to me that I almost see as many Ms as I do G35/G37s.
I strongly doubt it's in any third place anymore. I guess it could be.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 08:40:36 AM
The European market is an entirely different animal. I don't know how the Legend is priced there and what it's supposed to be competing with, but I doubt it's relevant to the US.
The Legend was priced alongside the 5 Series. I don't know what it competes against in the US but I've only seen two Legends in my lifetime. I think they would have to price it around 3 Series money to stand a chance, and even then they'd be struggling. Badge is the main reason, but that aside, the car just isn't good enough.
The M is a pretty nice. They don't offer it here but I used to pass one everyday working for a previous employer. It's not a bad looking car.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 11:12:15 AM
The Legend was priced alongside the 5 Series. I don't know what it competes against in the US but I've only seen two Legends in my lifetime. I think they would have to price it around 3 Series money to stand a chance, and even then they'd be struggling. Badge is the main reason, but that aside, the car just isn't good enough.
5-Series here as well, though with a premium badge.
I thought the TL was a 5er competitor? I remember seeing a few (old shape) TLs when I was last in the States and thinking it looked like a decent 5er alternative.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 11:24:10 AM
I thought the TL was a 5er competitor? I remember seeing a few (old shape) TLs when I was last in the States and thinking it looked like a decent 5er alternative.
The RL and TL are pretty much the same size, but the TL -- like the Infiniti G or Cadillac CTS -- is positioned against the 3-Series.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 10:59:20 AM
I strongly doubt it's in any third place anymore. I guess it could be.
Looking at the closest ones to catching the M in sales, it might have slipped all the way to 4th last month (3rd went to the GS) considering the new M was just announced. Still CTYD for 2009 still puts the M ahead of the GS, A6, and STS.
MX793 is right, short of the 5 series and new E class, the rest of the field took a pretty big hit last month.
Lexus
http://lexusenthusiast.com/2009/09/02/lexus-usa-august-2009-sales-report/
GS-669
CTYD-4,776
Infiniti
http://www.nissannews.com/assets/attachments/August2_SalesReport09___3.pdf
M-618
CYTD-6,294
Audi
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS208180+01-Sep-2009+PRN20090901
A6 -561
CYTD-4,171
Cadilliac
http://media.gm.com/servlet/GatewayServlet?target=http://image.emerald.gm.com/gmnews/viewmonthlyreleasedetail.do?domain=6&docid=56621
STS-337
CYTD-4,609
The RL is way way behind
Acura
http://www.reuters.com/article/pressRelease/idUS203397+01-Sep-2009+PRN20090901
RL-149
CTYD-1,341
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 11:24:10 AM
I thought the TL was a 5er competitor? I remember seeing a few (old shape) TLs when I was last in the States and thinking it looked like a decent 5er alternative.
TL is sort of an in-between car, though it's most often compared with the 3-series due to price (even though it's closer to the 5 series in size, same with the Infiniti G and Cadillac CTS). One could argue that the TL also fights with the lower end 5 series models for buyers as well. Acura also has the TSX (Euro Accord), which is also a 3-series competitor (particularly the bottom of the line 328). The RL competes squarely with the 5 series both in size in price.
Quote from: 565 on September 06, 2009, 11:31:27 AM
Looking at the closest ones to catching the M in sales, it might have slipped all the way to 4th last month (3rd went to the GS) considering the new M was just announced. Still CTYD for 2009 still puts the M ahead of the GS, A6, and STS.
MX793 is right, short of the 5 series and new E class, the rest of the field took a pretty big hit last month.
I'm not finding sales figures, but I wouldn't be surprised if the XF was in 4th.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 08:38:44 AMAnd I seriously doubt it's the front-drive based underpinnings, which don't necessarily betray any shortcomings when a car is driven like a luxury car rather than a sports sedan.
Yes, they do. Ride quality. Steering feel. Responsiveness. You don't need to be driving at nine-tenths to want these things.
That layout is just as bad for luxury as it is for sportiness. It's an expedient compromise that has no place at $50k.
QuoteDid a lack of rear-wheel-drive ever kill the Legend, back in the days of the 2.5-liter 170-horsepower TL?
The Legend was a rather lighter car, with superior dynamics in some respects. It also competed against German cars whose price tags were more exorbitant, and dealers still more callous, than they are today.
QuoteWhy would someone go into the Acura dealer...
And that's the question, isn't it? You keep starting with a buyer walking into an Acura dealer and wondering what he can get for $50k.
Try starting with a buyer looking at what he can get for $50k, period.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 11:21:41 AM
5-Series here as well, though with a premium badge.
And the same Honda looks and underpinnings...
But hey, Acura says it's premium. More space, right?
I find it hard to believe they think a car with Accord underpinnings can seriously compete with the 5 Series and E-Class.
ifcar - if a homely girl with no personality whined to you that she couldn't get a date, would you deduce that the existence of her prettier, more charismatic sister was the problem?
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 12:09:57 PM
I find it hard to believe they think a car with Accord underpinnings can seriously compete with the 5 Series and E-Class.
Let's not get into what price point Lexus is able to successfully take Camry underpinnings.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:12:00 PM
Let's not get into what price point Lexus is able to successfully take Camry underpinnings.
In the case of the ES - considerably cheaper than the RL, and its success is hardly all down to the actual car.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:11:33 PM
ifcar - if a homely girl with no personality whined to you that she couldn't get a date, would you deduce that the existence of her prettier, more charismatic sister was the problem?
Don't you think she'd stand a much better chance if her sister weren't there?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:12:50 PM
Don't you think she'd stand a much better chance if her sister weren't there?
But why, oh why, have you limited yourself to girls from this family?
Not if other girls in the club were better looking
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:12:41 PM
In the case of the ES - considerably cheaper than the RL, and its success is hardly all down to the actual car.
I was actually going the RX route. That thing gets damn pricey and people eat it up. The ES can too, though it is indeed cheaper than the RL. Way fewer people are looking for any form of sportiness than many car people seem to think.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 12:09:57 PM
I find it hard to believe they think a car with Accord underpinnings can seriously compete with the 5 Series and E-Class.
It's not like Honda has any other platforms to play with, and they've demonstrated a determination to not develop a premium RWD platform (or a V8 engine).
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:14:07 PM
But why, oh why, have you limited yourself to girls from this family?
There are a hell of a lot of Honda loyalists you should be asking that question to.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:16:48 PM
There are a hell of a lot of Honda loyalists you should be asking that question to.
Yes. CRX. S2000. Civic Type-R/ VTEC people. NSX worshippers (who evidently had not the money to buy one, given the sales figures).
But Acura worshippers? People willing to pay $50k for an Acura? No, sir, not at present time.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:17:45 PM
Yes. CRX. S2000. Civic Type-R/ VTEC people. NSX worshippers (who evidently had not the money to buy one, given the sales figures).
But Acura worshippers? People willing to pay $50k for an Acura? No, sir, not at present time.
There are people buying RLs. Just not many. The MDX also approaches $50k, and it's had no trouble selling.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:15:41 PM
I was actually going the RX route. That thing gets damn pricey and people eat it up.
Fair enough, although the RX is hardly a dynamic masterpiece. It's a different segment; you're not looking for the ultimate in roadholding or silence. People like the styling, the utility, the dealership treatment - and that hybrid model gives them a few incremental sales.
The ES is junk. Any number of cars do luxury better; but the dealership experience and reputation for quality is another matter. If you don't want to be bothered, period, I can see why you might buy one.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:06:46 PM
Yes, they do. Ride quality. Steering feel. Responsiveness. You don't need to be driving at nine-tenths to want these things.
That layout is just as bad for luxury as it is for sportiness. It's an expedient compromise that has no place at $50k.
The Legend was a rather lighter car, with superior dynamics in some respects. It also competed against German cars whose price tags were more exorbitant, and dealers still more callous, than they are today.
And that's the question, isn't it? You keep starting with a buyer walking into an Acura dealer and wondering what he can get for $50k.
Try starting with a buyer looking at what he can get for $50k, period.
What is the inherent advantage in either ride quality or steering feel to rear-wheel-drive?
And anyone who does put the RL on even the longest shopping list of cars to research will very easily find the TL offering the same characteristics and use that to conclude that the RL isn't worth the money. Perhaps buying a TL, perhaps buying a competitor, but rarely buying the RL.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:19:29 PM
There are people buying RLs. Just not many.
Then these "loyalists" of which you speak have no bearing on this subject. So, once again, the question of why you're limiting yourself to a particular family, for your $50k/ date/ what have you, comes up.
Fair enough on the MDX, haven't looked at the sales, although I wonder how many of those are base models (most, I'd casually wager).
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:20:47 PM
Fair enough, although the RX is hardly a dynamic masterpiece. It's a different segment; you're not looking for the ultimate in roadholding or silence. People like the styling, the utility, the dealership treatment - and that hybrid model gives them a few incremental sales.
The ES is junk. Any number of cars do luxury better; but the dealership experience and reputation for quality is another matter. If you don't want to be bothered, period, I can see why you might buy one.
Junk is too harsh of a word. Like the RX, it was carefully developed for a market segment most automakers have ignored, making everything soft and plush and pleasant. The car exudes "nice." Not necessarily "good" -- the dynamics and so forth -- but "nice." A lot of people just want a really nice car.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:21:21 PM
Perhaps buying a TL, perhaps buying a competitor, but rarely buying the RL.
Precisely. And the second possibility is one hell of a lot more likely, and relevant.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:23:44 PM
The car exudes "nice." ... A lot of people just want a really nice car.
It's not "really nice." It may be "nice," in terms of the overall ownership experience; but as a car, it's junk.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:22:55 PM
Then these "loyalists" of which you speak have no bearing on this subject. So, once again, the question of why you're limiting yourself to a particular family, for your $50k/ date/ what have you, comes up.
Fair enough on the MDX, haven't looked at the sales, although I wonder how many of those are base models (most, I'd casually wager).
My local Acura dealer has an almost equal number of base, midline, and loaded MDXs listed on its online inventory, spanning from $41k to $49k. Nav systems and DVD players are both popular options in that class; the base MDX has neither.
And I never said people were necessarily limiting themselves to Acura. Simply that if anyone even considers the brand, they'd be more likely to get the TL than the RL. No TL, and people who are in the brand for the entry-luxury TSX could be more easily upsold -- and they have a reason for already being in that family, they're at the dealership already.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:21:21 PM
What is the inherent advantage in either ride quality or steering feel to rear-wheel-drive?
Please tell me you're joking.
Start with the concept of powering and steering the same set of wheels (what do you think that does to steering feel?), and work your way back to front-heavy weight distribution, and its impact on steering and ride when a heavy, unbalanced car pendulums back and forth under acceleration and braking. And I still haven't used any performance terms.
It's as "inherent" an advantage as you can find on a car. Indeed, it's Square 1. And Honda deliberately screwed it up.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:28:09 PMAnd I never said people were necessarily limiting themselves to Acura.
The primary reason you gave for the RL's lack of success was the existence of the TL.
Then you started talking about Acura loyalists.
Fact is, they're not a significant bunch.
So the reason you gave simply cannot be the primary cause.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:25:58 PM
It's not "really nice." It may be "nice," in terms of the overall ownership experience; but as a car, it's junk.
Not only is "junk" too harsh, but the ambiance inside is definitely "really nice" -- unmatched at its price point.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:30:31 PM
The primary reason you gave for the RL's lack of success was the existence of the TL.
Then you started talking about Acura loyalists.
Fact is, they're not a significant bunch.
So the reason you gave simply cannot be the primary cause.
I mentioned them in passing. I didn't say they were the primary cause.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:25:58 PM
It's not "really nice." It may be "nice," in terms of the overall ownership experience; but as a car, it's junk.
Define "junk"? It's reliable, it's got a lot of creature comforts, it's quiet, it's got a compliant ride... This is exactly the kind of luxury that many Americans want (the prevalence of SUVs in America is a pretty good indication that most Americans couldn't care less about responsive handling or fun-to-drive). This is exactly the kind of car that old school American luxury and entry luxury cars were. Soft, floaty, disconnected land boats with lots of creature comforts.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:28:34 PM
Please tell me you're joking.
Start with the concept of powering and steering the same set of wheels (what do you think that does to steering feel?), and work your way back to front-heavy weight distribution, and its impact on steering and ride when a heavy, unbalanced car pendulums back and forth under acceleration and braking. And I still haven't used any performance terms.
It's as "inherent" an advantage as you can find on a car. Indeed, it's Square 1. And Honda deliberately screwed it up.
I must say that I've driven plenty of front-drive cars that ride well and/or have good steering feel. And there are also many rear-drive cars marked down for ride and steering feel, and several of those compete with the RL.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:28:34 PM
Please tell me you're joking.
Start with the concept of powering and steering the same set of wheels (what do you think that does to steering feel?), and work your way back to front-heavy weight distribution, and its impact on steering and ride when a heavy, unbalanced car pendulums back and forth under acceleration and braking. And I still haven't used any performance terms.
It's as "inherent" an advantage as you can find on a car. Indeed, it's Square 1. And Honda deliberately screwed it up.
Then so are Audi and Volvo, as both build almost exlusively FWD-based cars. Only recently has Audi started shifting the engines back so that they are more over the front axle rather than hanging completely out in front of it.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:32:49 PM
Not only is "junk" too harsh, but the ambiance inside is definitely "really nice" -- unmatched at its price point.
... ruined by all the measured pliancy and dynamic sharpness of a hippo swimming in jello.
Well-insulated junk, but junk nonetheless.
Not worthy of a brand that earned its name with the (really rather interesting) LS 400,
and not worth anything near what they charge for it.
The ES is simply proof that the upwardly mobile are clueless. I've never suggested otherwise, and I caution against working backwards from a car's sales figures to determine its "niceness." Otherwise, the Ford Cortina would be really nice. So would a Ford Escort.
But when faced with something as expedient as an RL, facing down established competition with an Accord's underpinnings and a $50k price tag, you have to wonder... who are they trying to kid?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:34:04 PM
I mentioned them in passing. I didn't say they were the primary cause.
You cited the existence of the TL as the primary cause of the RL's failure.
Quote from: MX793 on September 06, 2009, 12:38:32 PM
Then so are Audi and Volvo, as both build almost exlusively FWD-based cars. Only recently has Audi started shifting the engines back so that they are more over the front axle rather than hanging completely out in front of it.
Agreed. They do have a few other USPs, though (much as I personally don't find them too compelling).
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:45:52 PM
... ruined by all the measured pliancy and dynamic sharpness of a hippo swimming in jello.
Well-insulated junk, but junk nonetheless.
Not worthy of a brand that earned its name with the (really rather interesting) LS 400,
and not worth anything near what they charge for it.
The ES is simply proof that the upwardly mobile are clueless. I've never suggested otherwise, and I caution against working backwards from a car's sales figures to determine its "niceness." Otherwise, the Ford Cortina would be really nice. So would a Ford Escort.
But when faced with something as expedient as an RL, facing down established competition with an Accord's underpinnings and a $50k price tag, you have to wonder... who are they trying to kid?
I'm not saying the ES is nice because it's popular. I'm saying it's nice because it's nice, and there are worse-handling cars.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:47:12 PM
You cited the existence of the TL as the primary cause of the RL's failure.
But not because of people who will only buy Acuras.
And I cited the styling as the primary cause of its failure. Make a car attractive enough and people will buy it. The TL is another top reason, however.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:35:53 PM
I must say that I've driven plenty of front-drive cars that ride well and/or have good steering feel.
None of those weigh 4,000 lbs.
QuoteAnd there are also many rear-drive cars marked down for ride and steering feel, and several of those compete with the RL.
Expectations. It's often hard to tell whether they were marked down vis a vis something like the RL, or versus, say, a 5 series.
A Cadillac STS (a car you mentioned earlier, and which, as I noted, needs work) is a more linear drive than an RL; but it falls down in other areas.
A simple test to prove this - go drive an STS, enter a bend on a trailing throttle. Enter the bend as you think an "average consumer" might, but keep in mind that this "average consumer" has spent $50k on his car.
Now do the same in an RL. What you'll notice is that the RL rapidly washes out into understeer. You need to get on the throttle to get it around the bend at the steering-wheel angle you picked. That's because, under no-wheel-drive (i.e.: trailing throttle) conditions, it behaves as though a front-heavy, front-wheel-drive car.
Which leads us to infer, then, that you need to drive an RL hard to get the same sort of linearity out of it as you note in, say, a 5 series. And still, the chassis is twitchy, the steering feel just ain't there, and the car is both crashy and wallowy all at once.
The most powerful Acura ever built
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:49:05 PM
But not because of people who will only buy Acuras.
The problem is, you need to assume the existence of a significant number of those people - people who will only buy Acuras - in order to suggest, as you did, that removing the TL from Acura's range would result in significantly better RL sales.
Again - the RL is a failure because the competition is much, much better; not because of sibling rivalry.
QuoteAnd I cited the styling as the primary cause of its failure.
You said that the car was "just fine," but that it had been upstaged by the TL.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:53:35 PM
None of those weigh 4,000 lbs.
Expectations. It's often hard to tell whether they were marked down vis a vis something like the RL, or versus, say, a 5 series.
A Cadillac STS (a car you mentioned earlier, and which, as I noted, needs work) is a more linear drive than an RL; but it falls down in other areas.
A simple test to prove this - go drive an STS, enter a bend on a trailing throttle. Enter the bend as you think an "average consumer" might, but keep in mind that this "average consumer" has spent $50k on his car.
Now do the same in an RL. What you'll notice is that the RL rapidly washes out into understeer. You need to get on the throttle to get it around the bend at the steering-wheel angle you picked. That's because, under no-wheel-drive (i.e.: trailing throttle) conditions, it behaves as though a front-heavy, front-wheel-drive car.
Which leads us to infer, then, that you need to drive an RL hard to get the same sort of linearity out of it as you note in, say, a 5 series. And still, the chassis is twitchy, the steering feel just ain't there, and the car is both crashy and wallowy all at once.
But if someone is used to driving a front-wheel-drive car, wouldn't they just have driven differently and not noticed?
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:55:29 PM
The problem is, you need to assume the existence of a significant number of those people - people who will only buy Acuras - in order to suggest, as you did, that removing the TL from Acura's range would result in significantly better RL sales.
Again - the RL is a failure because the competition is much, much better; not because of sibling rivalry.
You said that the car was "just fine," but that it had been upstaged by the TL.
I said it was fine in the context of how the car drives, not its styling.
Let me quote, rather than paraphrase once more, what I'd said about the model lineup:
"And I never said people were necessarily limiting themselves to Acura. Simply that if anyone even considers the brand, they'd be more likely to get the TL than the RL. No TL, and people who are in the brand for the entry-luxury TSX could be more easily upsold -- and they have a reason for already being in that family, they're at the dealership already."
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:48:07 PM
I'm not saying the ES is nice because it's popular. I'm saying it's nice because it's nice, and there are worse-handling cars.
For that sort of money, you genuinely have to try to find a car that both handles and rides worse, as a complete package. It's the compromise that I don't like, not simply the handling. Neither the handling nor the ride is much good - and, incidentally, I cannot understand why you keep separating the two. They work in tandem; it's not as though a car has two suspensions, one for each.
Accountants, not engineers, made the decision to build this thing. Yes, that happens much of the time with other models; but calling this particular result "nice" lets a thoroughly insipid car off the hook.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 12:59:48 PM
For that sort of money, you genuinely have to try to find a car that both handles and rides worse, as a complete package. It's the compromise that I don't like, not simply the handling. Neither the handling nor the ride is much good - and, incidentally, I cannot understand why you keep separating the two. They work in tandem; it's not as though a car has two suspensions, one for each.
Accountants, not engineers, made the decision to build this thing. Yes, that happens much of the time with other models; but calling this particular result "nice" lets a thoroughly insipid car off the hook.
The ES's ride is a matter of taste. In the way it's designed to be driven, it rides very well. It's not designed for people who will push it hard.
And it is nice. Whether you like the car or not, it is a very pleasant, very nice car.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:56:34 PM
But if someone is used to driving a front-wheel-drive car, wouldn't they just have driven differently and not noticed?
I don't understand what you're asking. My point is that if you drive the RL as you might a front-wheel drive car, you'll get poor results. If you drive it as a rear-wheel-drive car, things improve, but the ride quality and steering feel remain poor, vis a vis the rear-wheel-drive competition; and, as I said, you really need to get on it to get the full effect of that SH-AWD helping you around, like the band-aid that it is.
It really is a poor drive unless you're on it consistently (and several tests, I'm sure, bear me out on this). That doesn't sit well with your idea that the "average consumer," who pootles around everywhere (even assuming that such an animal exists in this class), likes the way that this car drives.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 12:58:57 PM
I said it was fine in the context of how the car drives, not its styling.
Quote from: ifcarAgain, it's not that it's bad on its own. It's that Acura upstaged it with the TL.
My point is that you seem under the impression that a bunch of people are waiting with baited breath for Acura to introduce a luxury sedan based on an Accord; that all these buyers with $50k in their pocket walk into an Acura dealership, wanting an RL - and walk out with a TL.
Sure, it happens; but the lost sales would seem insignificant number in the face of the many cars that the RL competes against.
The current generation (and previous, for the most part) RL has always been a poor seller. Its ineptness in the face of the competition, not the TL, is the reason for that.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:03:21 PM
I don't understand what you're asking. My point is that if you drive the RL as you might a front-wheel drive car, you'll get poor results. If you drive it as a rear-wheel-drive car, things improve, but the ride quality and steering feel remain poor, vis a vis the rear-wheel-drive competition; and, as I said, you really need to get on it to get the full effect of that SH-AWD helping you around, like the band-aid that it is.
It really is a poor drive unless you're on it consistently (and several tests, I'm sure, bear me out on this). That doesn't sit well with your idea that the "average consumer," who pootles around everywhere (even assuming that such an animal exists in this class), likes the way that this car drives.
Here you go... I found a video that would seem to prove my point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaw8p__T62w
Forget the fact that they're testing on a track. Forget your concept of how the "average consumer" won't drive this way. Listen to what he's saying. This car has pig understeer unless you foot it out of every bend; the chassis is twitchy, and the ride, the rest of the time, is nothing to write home about.
This car is in no way "fine" in terms of the way it drives; and even if it were, "fine" and "nice" are hardly enough at $50k.
Quote from: CaMIROIt really is a poor drive unless you're on it consistently (and several tests, I'm sure, bear me out on this). That doesn't sit well with your idea that the "average consumer," who pootles around everywhere (even assuming that such an animal exists in this class), likes the way that this car drives.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:07:39 PM
My point is that you seem under the impression that a bunch of people are waiting with baited breath for Acura to introduce a luxury sedan based on an Accord; that all these buyers with $50k in their pocket walk into an Acura dealership, wanting an RL - and walk out with a TL.
Sure, it happens; but the lost sales would seem insignificant number in the face of the many cars that the RL competes against.
The current generation (and previous, for the most part) RL has always been a poor seller. Its ineptness in the face of the competition, not the TL, is the reason for that.
The confusion there might just be that I don't consider styling a factor in whether a car is good or not. The styling is certainly harmful to the car, but that wasn't what I was referring to.
And let me quote, rather than paraphrase once more, what I'd said about the model lineup:
"And I never said people were necessarily limiting themselves to Acura. Simply that if anyone even considers the brand, they'd be more likely to get the TL than the RL. No TL, and people who are in the brand for the entry-luxury TSX could be more easily upsold -- and they have a reason for already being in that family, they're at the dealership already."
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:12:27 PM
The confusion there might just be that I don't consider styling a factor in whether a car is good or not.
When looking at the $50k range (at least), you might want to start.
And the way it drives is important, too.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:10:41 PM
Here you go... I found a video that would seem to prove my point:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qaw8p__T62w
Forget the fact that they're testing on a track. Forget your concept of how the "average consumer" won't drive this way. Listen to what he's saying. This car has pig understeer unless you foot it out of every bend; the chassis is twitchy, and the ride, the rest of the time, is nothing to write home about.
This car is in no way "fine" in terms of the way it drives; and even if it were, "fine" and "nice" are hardly enough at $50k.
They're enough if you aren't test-driving the competition, or drive them only gently on a short test drive.
I'm curious about one thing -- the RL hasn't been a huge seller, far from it, but they've sold many thousands of them since 2005. Describe who you think is the sort of person buying them.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:14:16 PM
They're enough if you aren't test-driving the competition, or drive them only gently on a short test drive.
I'm really not sure who, for $50k, doesn't test drive the competition. And, as I've pointed out, even a gentle test drive (or browsing through a few reviews) should alert you to some of the problems - and to the presence of considerably better cars.
Even if the RL were "fine" and "nice" (which it largely isn't) - you don't want "fine" and "nice" at $50k. Or you'd spend $20k.
QuoteI'm curious about one thing -- the RL hasn't been a huge seller, far from it, but they've sold many thousands of them since 2005. Describe who you think is the sort of person buying them.
Every model finds a buyer. Ford sold a handful of Scorpios. Lancia sold a handful of Lybra and Thesis models. Renault sold a handful of Safrane Biturbos, Avantimes, and Vel Satis.
I could hazard a few guesses, but exceptions prove nothing.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:17:57 PM
I'm really not sure who, for $50k, doesn't test drive the competition. And, as I've pointed out, even a gentle test drive (or browsing through a few reviews) should alert you to some of the problems - and to the presence of considerably better cars.
Many reviews were positive, not just from the reviewers who are always positive either.
Quote
Even if the RL were "fine" and "nice" (which it largely isn't) - you don't want "fine" and "nice" at $50k. Or you'd spend $20k.
There are a great many people who spend a great deal of money on a car without having a good idea what they want.
Quote
Every model finds a buyer. Ford sold a handful of Scorpios. Lancia sold a handful of Lybra and Thesis models. Renault sold a handful of Safrane Biturbos, Avantimes, and Vel Satis.
I could hazard a few guesses, but exceptions prove nothing.
I'm not asking this as evidence in an argument. I'm curious who you think buys this car, and why.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:12:27 PM
"And I never said people were necessarily limiting themselves to Acura. Simply that if anyone even considers the brand...
And this is precisely where your argument falls over. The number of people, with $50k to spend, considering Acura seriously enough to look chiefly at the RL and its stablemates is, logically, small compared to the number of people seriously considering the competition, in the RL's own price class.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:25:03 PM
And this is precisely where your argument falls over. The number of people, with $50k to spend, considering Acura seriously enough to look chiefly at the RL and its stablemates is, logically, small compared to the number of people seriously considering the competition, in the RL's own price class.
Unless you know the market inside and out already, you have to consider Acura a bit to learn how it compares to its competition.
Or are you saying that no one will consider any $50k Acura, regardless of its engineering and styling?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:23:41 PM
Many reviews were positive, not just from the reviewers who are always positive either.
I don't recall seeing many positive reviews of the RL, but even assuming this, the reviews of the competition have certainly been rather more credibly positive.
QuoteThere are a great many people who spend a great deal of money on a car without having a good idea what they want.
That's hearsay. I'm not interested in consumers; just cars. When the RL launched, back in September 2004, I spent a considerable degree of time explaining why that car wouldn't drive or (by corollary) sell well, and I can't say I was wrong.
Mind you, it doesn't always work. Consumer behavior is much harder to predict than you seem wont to believe.
QuoteI'm not asking this as evidence in an argument. I'm curious who you think buys this car, and why.
I'm not deflecting the question; just pointing out that there is no shortage of deficient models which find a handful of buyers. The ones I listed are just off the top of my head.
Those buyers are, however, exceptions.
Trying to figure them out will not get you, me, or Acura, anywhere significant!
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:28:51 PMOr are you saying that no one will consider any $50k Acura, regardless of its engineering and styling?
Few will seriously consider
this $50k Acura, because of its engineering and styling, taken in and of themselves, or vis a vis the competition.
Quote from: ifcaryou have to consider Acura a bit to learn how it compares to its competition.
One minute your "average consumer" isn't test-driving the competition, and now he's being forced to do his research and consider Acura?
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:29:33 PM
I don't recall seeing many positive reviews of the RL, but even assuming this, the reviews of the competition have certainly been rather more credibly positive.
I don't recall seeing many negative reviews. The only one that comes to mind is Consumer Reports'.
Quote
I'm not interested in consumers; just cars.
Which is why you will never understand the appeal of a Lexus ES350, or even try to.
Quote
When the RL launched, back in September 2004, I spent a considerable degree of time explaining why that car wouldn't drive or (by corollary) sell well, and I can't say I was wrong.
I caution against working backwards from a car's sales figures to determine anything about it.
Quote
I'm not deflecting the question; just pointing out that there is no shortage of deficient models which find a handful of buyers. The ones I listed are just off the top of my head.
Those buyers are, however, exceptions.
Trying to figure them out will not get you, me, or Acura, anywhere significant!
You have no curiosity about this? About these thousands of people who choose this car over competition you feel is very obviously superior?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:33:40 PMI caution against working backwards from a car's sales figures to determine anything about it.
Unlike you, I wasn't working backwards; in September 2004, I was working forwards.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:32:07 PM
Few will seriously consider this $50k Acura, because of its engineering and styling, taken in and of themselves, or vis a vis the competition.
When I say "consider," I don't necessarily any further than doing research on the car. I don't mean putting it on the short list.
Quote
One minute your "average consumer" isn't test-driving the competition, and now he's being forced to do his research and consider Acura?
I was talking about someone who could be upsold while at the Acura dealer looking at the TSX, in that particular case.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:34:36 PM
Unlike you, I wasn't working backwards; in September 2004, I was working forwards.
But you're using sales to try and prove that you were right about more than you wouldn't like how it drives.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:33:40 PM
I don't recall seeing many negative reviews.
That's not the same as "many" positive reviews against established competition.
QuoteWhich is why you will never understand the appeal of a Lexus ES350, or even try to.
That's not fair. I've already said, in this thread, that I understand the appeal. It has little to do with the car, and much to do with the overall ownership experience. If your car is transportation, but you make more money than the "average consumer," then you judge the experience by servicing costs, ease of arranging servicing, etc.
QuoteYou have no curiosity about this? About these thousands of people who choose this car over competition you feel is very obviously superior?
Oh, I'm curious. I'm probably one of the people who would have bought a Lancia Thesis or a Renault Avantime in the face of dynamically superior competition. They're not particularly analogous here, because they stand out as much as the RL does not - but they still support my point about models which find a handful of buyers.
What I'm saying is that Acura would be wise not to base their product planning on that negligible number of people.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:35:56 PM
But you're using sales to try and prove that you were right about more than you wouldn't like how it drives.
No. I suggested in September 2004 that this car would not sell well because it drove poorly vis a vis its established competition, thanks to an expedient compromise that was all too obvious. I explained exactly why (much to the aggravation of Wizard, among others).
This is, by definition, looking
forwards, not backwards. I attempted to predict something, and turned out to be right.
Mind you, my thoughts about sales figures were secondary to the argument. I was, and remain, horrified that Honda though they could get away with the automotive equivalent of refried beans, with a slice of pineapple, sold as haute cuisine.
Had I come here and said, "the RL sells poorly, so it must be an awful car," that would have been rather different. In this thread, I've consistently used arguments about the car's dynamics that are easily demonstrable; arguments I made precisely five years ago (good grief, has it been that long...?)
Like I said, it doesn't always work, and I won't pretend it does -
- but it's a very different process to saying, "the Camry is the best-selling car, so it must be the best car." And I've heard that argument made.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:40:01 PM
That's not the same as "many" positive reviews against established competition.
It placed third in an eight-car C/D comparison, and most other reviews I've seen (I can try and find them if you want) were also positive.
Quote
That's not fair. I've already said, in this thread, that I understand the appeal. It has little to do with the car, and much to do with the overall ownership experience. If your car is transportation, but you make more money than the "average consumer," then you judge the experience by servicing costs, ease of arranging servicing, etc.
There's more to it than that.
Quote
Oh, I'm curious. I'm probably one of the people who would have bought a Lancia Thesis or a Renault Avantime in the face of dynamically superior competition. They're not particularly analogous here, because they stand out as much as the RL does not - but they still prove the point about models which find a handful of buyers.
What I'm saying is that Acura would be wise not to base their product planning on that negligible number of people.
I'm sure that was not their intention.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:45:39 PM
It placed third in an eight-car C/D comparison, and most other reviews I've seen (I can try and find them if you want) were also positive.
I remember that ridiculous comparison, but few others.
QuoteThere's more to it than that.
I disagree, for reasons I've listed several times over. It's a safe car with mediocre driving characteristics and a reputation for solidity and reliability, sold by an excellent dealership network. For some, done deal.
QuoteI'm sure that was not their intention.
Well, feel free to come up with a theory or two; I still can't figure how they thought they could get away with it.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:52:40 PM
I remember that ridiculous comparison, but few others.
I was just seeing an Edmunds review that called it an exceptional luxury car that just wasn't especially fun to drive, which agrees with one but not both of your complaints, plus a Motor Trend review that said they wanted more power but the RL was otherwise excellent.
Quote
I disagree, for reasons I've listed several times over. It's a safe car with mediocre driving characteristics and a reputation for solidity and reliability, sold by an excellent dealership network. For some, done deal.
It's very comfortable and has an excellent ambiance. It's not just the dealers.
Quote
Well, feel free to come up with a theory or two; I still can't figure how they thought they could get away with it.
Coming off a smash hit from the FWD 2004 TL, I don't see why they wouldn't have had great expectations when they tried something similar one class up. Only they lost the styling advantage, and it was otherwise too similar.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 01:29:33 PM
I don't recall seeing many positive reviews of the RL.
:facepalm: What are you talking about.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/05q1/2005_10best_cars-10best_cars
Acura RL, 2005 10 best.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests
Eighth: 2005 Jaguar S-type 4.2 VDP Edition
Seventh: 2005 Cadillac STS V-8
Sixth: 2005 BMW 530i
Fifth: 2005 Audi A6 4.2 Quattro
Fourth: 2006 Mercedes-Benz E350
Third: 2005 Lexus GS430
Second: 2005 Acura RL First: 2006 Infiniti M45 Sport
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0503_luxury_sport_comparison/2005_acura_rl.html
6)Jaguar S-Type 3.0
5)Cadillac STS V6
4)Audi A6 3.2 quattro
3)BMW 530i
2)Acura RL1)Infiniti M35
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106555
5) GS300AWD
4) BMW 530xi
3) M35x
2) A6 3.2
1) RLIf anything the RL has gotten universal praise.
Quote from: 565 on September 06, 2009, 01:59:34 PM
If anything the RL has gotten universal praise.
"The RL doesn't stand out in its class. While quick, its transmission isn't very responsive. In turns, its AWD system delivers extra torque to the outer rear wheel to reduce understeer, but handling is still neither sporty nor more secure than its competitors. The cabin isn't particularly roomy. Its driver-interaction system is confusing, but usefully integrates traffic reports into the navigation system."
-Consumer Reports, ranking it 4th place of 5 cars, ahead of just the Lexus GS.
I definitely agree with you, however, that the RL has gotten mostly good press, or at least did when it came out.
Quote from: 565 on September 06, 2009, 01:59:34 PM
:facepalm: What are you talking about.
Like I said, I don't recall. Very little that I read about that car made any impact on me, positive or negative. Part of it may be that, by dint of having spent several years in Europe, I'm remembering Legend reviews (i.e.: the same car). And those reviews have generally been rather poor.
Either way, I'd still suggest that reviews of the competition have been more credibly positive.
I mean, I remember positive reviews of the Jaguar X-Type, too...
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 01:58:00 PMComing off a smash hit from the FWD 2004 TL, I don't see why they wouldn't have had great expectations when they tried something similar one class up.
It's a different class for a reason. Looking at the competition would have been a good idea.
I think it's fair to say that you have to pay to play in this segment; and, SH-AWD apart (which works, to a degree, but cannot fix this car), Honda simply didn't.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 02:07:05 PM
Like I said, I don't recall. Very little that I read about that car made any impact on me, positive or negative. Part of it may be that, by dint of having spent several years in Europe, I'm remembering Legend reviews (i.e.: the same car). And those reviews have generally been rather poor.
Either way, I'd still suggest that reviews of the competition have been more credibly positive.
I mean, I remember positive reviews of the Jaguar X-Type, too...
You mean the reviews that placed them below the RL in comparisons?
I certainly don't recall many positive reviews of the X-Type myself, certainly at least not in comparisons.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 02:01:46 PM
"The RL doesn't stand out in its class. While quick, its transmission isn't very responsive. In turns, its AWD system delivers extra torque to the outer rear wheel to reduce understeer, but handling is still neither sporty nor more secure than its competitors. The cabin isn't particularly roomy. Its driver-interaction system is confusing, but usefully integrates traffic reports into the navigation system."
-Consumer Reports, ranking it 4th place of 5 cars, ahead of just the Lexus GS.
I definitely agree with you, however, that the RL has gotten mostly good press, or at least did when it came out.
Since when did Consumer Reports count compared to C&D and Motortrend?
The only one missing in comparison praise from the big 3 magazines is Road and Track, not because they panned the RL, but because they never really ran a comparison in that market around that time. They didn't put the often victorious Infiniti M35/45 in a comparo either.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 02:13:37 PM
You mean the reviews that placed them below the RL in comparisons?
Perhaps, depending on what was actually written. Many times, it's, "this car is the best here, but the price is exorbitant... etc. etc."
What I was referring to, though, was a longstanding love affair with a car; e.g.: Accord, 3 series, etc.
Not, "the newest car here is the best," at launch, followed by relative silence thereafter.
I've said it before, and I know you've seemed irritated by the thought before, but these people do have to sell copies.
QuoteI certainly don't recall many positive reviews of the X-Type myself, certainly at least not in comparisons.
I don't put much stock in comparisons, but I do remember being irritated by the amount of positive press surrounding the X-Type; particularly after its mid-life revisions. There were at least two articles asking, "why don't more people buy this car," "if only," etc. etc.
Quote from: 565 on September 06, 2009, 02:14:39 PM
Since when did Consumer Reports count compared to C&D and Motortrend?
Unless you want to know which microwave dethaws your burrito fastest -
they don't.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 02:17:56 PM
Perhaps, depending on what was actually written. Many times, it's, "this car is the best here, but the price is exorbitant... etc. etc."
What I was referring to, though, was a longstanding love affair with a car; e.g.: Accord, 3 series, etc.
Not, "the newest car here is the best," at launch, followed by relative silence thereafter.
I never said it did earn that status. But you said that reading a review would turn off a consumer to the RL; if anything, it would be the opposite.
Quote
I've said it before, and I know you seem irritated by the thought, but these people do have to sell copies.
So you're suggesting they chose the car they didn't prefer because they felt it would boost their readership to put the Acura RL high in their comparisons?
Quote
I don't put much stock in comparisons, but I do remember being irritated by the amount of positive press surrounding the X-Type; particularly after its mid-life revisions. There were at least two articles asking, "why don't more people buy this car," "if only," etc. etc.
I put the most stock in comparisons. It means you have to have a winner and a loser; you can't sort of muck around and call everything great.
Though I don't even recall the X-Type even getting an update besides losing the base engine.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 02:28:20 PM
I never said it did earn that status. But you said that reading a review would turn off a consumer to the RL; if anything, it would be the opposite.
Perhaps my recollection has been colored by the poor Legend reviews I've read (and see the Fifth Gear video, earlier, where this car can barely get within 7 - yes, SEVEN - seconds of a 5 series and an A6).
But there's a difference between reading a review, and tallying the scores. I certainly remember reading reviews that noted the albatross that is the RL's layout, because I quoted several in that infamous Car and Driver thread.
QuoteSo you're suggesting they chose the car they didn't prefer because they felt it would boost their readership to put the Acura RL high in their comparisons?
I'm suggesting that controversy sells magazines.
You can find a reason to place virtually any car at #1, #2, #3 -
but -
you can't continue the charade for long without losing all credibility. See Accord, 3 series, etc.
LJK Setright, certainly among the very best automotive correspondents who ever lived, was convinced that Bristol made the best car ever. To his credit, his argument was solid; but few took him seriously. Thankfully, he had numerous other merits, and his love affair with Bristol (and the 4-wheel-steering Honda Prelude) was viewed as no more than an eccentricity.
QuoteI put the most stock in comparisons.
Don't.
I've told you this story before, but why not tell it again... several years ago, I worked for a major import manufacturer. My colleague, two offices down, ran the press fleet. He was contacted, well in advance, by a major automotive publication (listed in this very thread) to provide a car for a comparison test.
Now, that publication had praised some of our cars - indeed, this particular model - quite a bit. In a sense, their credibility was tied to the model. So they were only too happy to tell us exactly which cars were going up against ours.
My colleague realized that the only way to win the comparison was to provide a version with a larger engine; but that would have surpassed the price barrier for this particular test.
So - with the tacit knowledge of the magazine - we ordered a car that could not be found at any dealership in America: the larger engine, but absolutely no options.
We won the comparison; but I pity the soul who tried to order a similar model.
QuoteThough I don't even recall the X-Type even getting an update besides losing the base engine.
Some Vanden Plas edition, or something like that? A gearbox change? I don't remember, exactly; but something changed, and the reviewer was mourning the fact that people wouldn't notice. Which annoyed me, because Jaguar should never have built the X-Type.
You guys are positively ridiculous. :lol:
Well, let me humbly invite the peanut gallery to participate! :thumbsup:
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 02:47:15 PM
Well, let me humbly invite the peanut gallery to participate! :thumbsup:
Swift!
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 02:40:41 PM
So - with the tacit knowledge of the magazine - we ordered a car that could not be found at any dealership in America: the larger engine, but absolutely no options.
That's how I would prefer to order a new car as well. Unfortunately, I had to discover this availablility issue the hard way :(
I must say I have no recollection of your having worked for an automaker. Whether that's just a result of missing where you posted that or seeing it and forgetting it I have no idea.
I don't think having a ringer is an indictment against the comparison format, though. It could happen in any review. And while you can justify many different ranking orders, it's that justification that keeps a review on target for having a specific conclusion about how a car stands up against its competitors.
I also don't think that putting the RL near the top of the list when most everyone else is doing the same counts as controversy, either.
By the way, you didn't remain close to your press fleet colleague, did you? I've only been able to get press cars from Hyundai and Kia so far; you wouldn't be able to put in a good word?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 02:52:07 PMI must say I have no recollection of your having worked for an automaker.
I vividly remember us going back and forth over that story, way back when. Ah, well. I can only swear that it is entirely true - and that if I referenced the issue directly, you'd probably crack a smile or two (given how closely you seem to follow these things).
QuoteI don't think having a ringer is an indictment against the comparison format, though. It could happen in any review.
Yes, and it probably does. I still have a copy of the magazine, somewhere (and you probably do, too!)
I tried to practice healthy skepticism vis a vis the media before that incident, but it was nonetheless an eye opener.
QuoteAnd while you can justify many different ranking orders, it's that justification that keeps a review on target for having a specific conclusion about how a car stands up against its competitors.
It's like politics, though; I can't remember the name for the "syndrome," but liberals tend to find the media conservative, whereas conservatives feel it is liberal.
Without going too far off course - these justifications of which you speak are important, sure; but how much validity they add is debatable.
I think it was Car and Driver that put the current G35 behind the 3 series, suggesting it was not as complete/ refined a car; in that case, I thoroughly agreed. Yet you have people on the other side whining about how the G35 put up better numbers, and should have won.
We read what we want to into these things; some fight that instinct better than others, but it happens to us all. And that's why credibility - for instance, a long-term love affair with a car (which I doubt any magazine has had with the RL in the same way as, say, the 5er, 3er, Accord, etc.) - matters. Reinforcement. Tell me and tell me again.
QuoteI also don't think that putting the RL near the top of the list when most everyone else is doing the same counts as controversy, either.
Vis a vis other magazines, no; but it disrupts the status quo.
I remember the first Car and Driver RL comparison (so many problems with that one... but let's not dwell), and the forum chanting about how the RL would be listed 10Best for many years to come.
QuoteBy the way, you didn't remain close to your press fleet colleague, did you? I've only been able to get press cars from Hyundai and Kia so far; you wouldn't be able to put in a good word?
I read your note recently, about how you ask for press cars; intriguing. My former colleague is no longer running the press fleet, but I know who I might be able to drop a line to about it.
I'll test the waters, but I'll caution you, they're very cagey about that sort of stuff. Without dropping too many hints, several years ago they caused a minor bust-up when they denied a rather popular website press cars. As far as I know, that site is still banned.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 03:05:02 PM
I vividly remember us going back and forth over that story, way back when. Ah, well. I can only swear that it is entirely true - and that if I referenced the issue directly, you'd probably crack a smile or two (given how closely you seem to follow these things).
Yes, and it probably does. I still have a copy of the magazine, somewhere (and you probably do, too!)
See, now you're almost saying to me: "Abandon everything else that you're doing and study old car magazines looking for the big-engine no-option car."
Quote
I tried to practice healthy skepticism vis a vis the media before that incident, but it was nonetheless an eye opener.
It's like politics, though; I can't remember the name for the "syndrome," but liberals tend to find the media is conservative, whereas conservatives feel it is liberal. Without going too far off course - these justifications are important, sure; but how much validity they add is debatable.
When done right, you can take what's said to determine how you yourself would feel, which is much harder to do in an everyone-wins! single-car review. Comparisons also prevent reviewers from being wowed by a car's x quality in a market segment where every car has x quality -- a crossover SUV's practicality, for example.
Quote
We read what we want to into these things; some fight that instinct better than others, but it happens to us all. And that's why credibility - for instance, a long-term love affair with a car (which I doubt any magazine has had with the RL in the same way as, say, the 5er, 3er, Accord, etc.) - matters. Reinforcement. Tell me and tell me again.
Vis a vis other magazines, no; but it disrupts the status quo.
So are you saying the love affair is good and disrupting the status quo is a ploy for causing reader-inducing controversy? Or am I misreading?
Also, I'm not sure I understand your objection to the "love affair" if you have one. To me, it's consistency -- if one car consistently provides the qualities you seek in an automobile better than others, why shouldn't it consistently win?
Quote
I read your note recently, about how you ask for press cars; intriguing. My former colleague is no longer running the press fleet, but I know who I might be able to drop a line to about it.
I'll test the waters, but I'll caution you, they're very cagey about that sort of stuff. Without dropping too many hints, several years ago they caused a minor bust-up when they denied a rather popular website press cars. As far as I know, that site is still banned.
I assume you have more experience than I do at getting press vehicles, through Automobear? Any advice you can offer me -- as someone who has had a grand total of four -- would be greatly appreciated. (Bear in mind that quite a few automakers have no-exceptions age rules mandated by insurance concerns.)
I wouldn't pull any TTACs.
Big engine, import, no options, many tests, well-liked cars from the past:
BMW 3ers
BMW 5ers
Honda Accord
Mazda6
Porsches in general
...to name a few...
Let's face it, there are very few car companies that make the bigger engine available without a myriad of features. The ones that do, however, all seem to be German for the most part.
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 03:23:54 PM
Big engine, import, no options, many tests, well-liked cars from the past:
BMW 3ers
BMW 5ers
Honda Accord
Mazda6
Porsches in general
...to name a few...
Let's face it, there are very few car companies that make the bigger engine available without a myriad of features. The ones that do, however, all seem to be German for the most part.
Honda has almost no factory options. You could always buy the base model of their bigger engine. It's the others you mention where there's tons of optional equipment that can always be added to a car and usually is.
Now all we have to do is sift through controversy. My bet's on Audi/VW or BMW.
MB doesn't cause brouhahas usually, nor Porsche.
I can't see the Japanese being that vain, either. But then again, a 6-speed Accord sedan with the V6 is a rare one.
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 03:33:17 PM
Now all we have to do is sift through controversy. My bet's on Audi/VW or BMW.
MB doesn't cause brouhahas usually, nor Porsche.
I can't see the Japanese being that vain, either. But then again, a 6-speed Accord sedan with the V6 is a rare one.
I have work to do, dammit! I have to get a review posted (on a self-imposed schedule) and write a newspaper article (by Thursday)! You are interfering with these crucial efforts!
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:17:14 PM
See, now you're almost saying to me: "Abandon everything else that you're doing and study old car magazines looking for the big-engine no-option car."
Ha! No, I wouldn't do that to you. The actual test is less important than what it says about the way the industry works. I told that story simply to make a point. Frankly, it actually hurt me to see something like that happen, because I used to hold auto correspondents in such high regard.
LJK Setright, George Bishop, Gavin Green - personal heroes of mine. Decades on, I trust what they wrote.
Come to think of it, Bishop used to write articles about hypothetical train rides in which some awful car would be launched, on the train, but the press would be too drunk and full of caviar to notice that they hadn't actually driven it. Of course, the blurb would read, "nestled in the deep, plush seats of the (insert car here), all was right with world..."
If you ever see CAR Magazine, issues 1970-1990, for sale, pick them up.
QuoteWhen done right, you can...
When done right, sure.
QuoteSo are you saying the love affair is good and disrupting the status quo is a ploy for causing reader-inducing controversy? Or am I misreading?
Something like that, yes. I have no objection to the "love affair;" it is indeed about "consistency." Disrupting it every so often is probably good for the soul, but the staff's true feelings usually come out at the annual awards.
QuoteI assume you have more experience than I do at getting press vehicles...
These days, I'm not particularly involved in the auto industry, although I write bits and pieces of things from time to time. Frankly, I find the state of the industry a little depressing...
I do consult for one of the local magazines, so I get to drive what they drive. Speaking of which - a colleague who writes for that magazine recently called me up, while at the wheel of a new press car. He was complaining about the ride quality, which he said was abysmal.
When he told me what the car was, I wasn't surprised - until he drove the point home, saying that he could continuously hear the rear wheels slapping against the pavement, and that he couldn't believe that this car had been released, quite so underdeveloped.
When I drove the car later that evening, I found that he was right. Things were so bad that you could significantly even the ride out by accelerating over bumps, to transfer weight to the unladen rear wheels (to stop them slapping).
He set about putting his thoughts together, and sent me his draft. It was excellent.
Then he called me the other night; asked if I'd bought the magazine. I hadn't, yet. He asked me not to be mad.
There was no way, he said, that they would have let his original article go to press.
They'd lose ads.
The same thing happened a few weeks ago when a luxury car they were testing started clunking in first gear. Not a word about this made it into print (yet I have the clunking on camera).
Mind you, this guy is a damn good writer.
But I digress.
Prior work experience, and some of the attention that my old articles got, seemed sufficient to gain press fleet admission. My suggestion would be to mingle at the trade shows (Detroit, Chicago, etc.) Talk to the PR people and engineers on the stands during press days - if they think you can illustrate something about their car in a unique way, they'll generally be only too happy to let you take a spin in it.
I've said it before, I'll say it again - the goal is to understand your subject much, much better than does your readership, but to be able to explain it in a unique way that is easily comprehensible. I can't say I've always held to that goal, or that every correspondent I've admired has done so, either, but it's worth striving for.
And talk to the actual press at those shows, too.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:36:39 PM
I have work to do, dammit! I have to get a review posted (on a self-imposed schedule) and write a newspaper article (by Thursday)! You are interfering with these crucial efforts!
I'm not forcing you to do anything. :lol:
If I had my 600+ magazines here with me, I'd start. But you're the auto journalist -- not me...yet.
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 03:38:00 PM
I'm not forcing you to do anything. :lol:
If I had my 600+ magazines here with me, I'd start. But you're the auto journalist -- not me...yet.
I don't have my magazines here either. I'll be relying on the internet... not that I've committed myself to this endeavor or anything.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:39:33 PM
I don't have my magazines here either. I'll be relying on the internet... not that I've committed myself to this endeavor or anything.
You know you have. Deep down in your psyche, the question festers: Who is CaMIRO, and what can his experience do to help me better understand the field where I want to work?
The answer haunts you because you just don't know. You'll be searching for it late into the evening, and you know it.
Good grief...
I really need to stop telling that story.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 03:44:00 PM
Good grief...
I really need to stop telling that story.
Seriously, I'd love to pick your brain a little in a PM or email if you don't mind sometime. There are only so many reasons I'm an English major, and driving cars and writing about it happens to include most of them.
The other thing that works, ifcar - go to an auto show, on a press day, with at least one open-ended question for every new car launched (and a few existing models). Develop it into a theme of questions, reinforcing the original point.
Find the brand manager, the vehicle line executive, anyone key at the launch - and toward the end of the press conference and ensuing feeding frenzy, corner them with your question. When they ask if you've had lunch yet, you've done it.
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 03:45:25 PM
Seriously, I'd love to pick your brain a little in a PM or email if you don't mind sometime.
Feel free; there might still be something worthwhile in there. I've been trying to stay away from cars for a while, though...
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 03:37:50 PM
Ha! No, I wouldn't do that to you. The actual test is less important than what it says about the way the industry works. I told that story simply to make a point. Frankly, it actually hurt me to see something like that happen, because I used to hold auto correspondents in such high regard.
LJK Setright, George Bishop, Gavin Green - personal heroes of mine. Decades on, I trust what they wrote.
Come to think of it, Bishop used to write articles about hypothetical train rides in which some awful car would be launched, on the train, but the press would be too drunk and full of caviar to notice that they hadn't actually driven it. Of course, the blurb would read, "nestled in the deep, plush seats of the (insert car here), all was right with world..."
If you ever see CAR Magazine, issues 1970-1990, for sale, pick them up.
When done right, sure.
Something like that, yes. I have no objection to the "love affair;" it is indeed about "consistency." Disrupting it every so often is probably good for the soul, but the staff's true feelings usually come out at the annual awards.
These days, I'm not particularly involved in the auto industry, although I write bits and pieces of things from time to time. Frankly, I find the state of the industry a little depressing...
I do consult for one of the local magazines, so I get to drive what they drive. Speaking of which - a colleague who writes for that magazine recently called me up, while at the wheel of a new press car. He was complaining about the ride quality, which he said was abysmal.
When he told me what the car was, I wasn't surprised - until he drove the point home, saying that he could continuously hear the rear wheels slapping against the pavement, and he couldn't believe that this car had been released, quite so underdeveloped.
When I drove the car later that evening, I found that he was right. Things were so bad that you could even the ride out by accelerating over bumps, to transfer weight to the unladen rear wheels (to stop them slapping).
He set about putting his thoughts together, and sent me his draft. It was excellent.
Then he called me the other night; asked if I'd bought the magazine. I hadn't, yet. He asked me not to be mad.
There was no way, he said, that they would have let his original article go to press.
They'd lose ads.
The same thing happened a few weeks ago when a luxury car they were testing started clunking in first gear. Not a word about this made it into print (yet I have the clunking on camera).
But I digress.
Prior work experience, and some of the attention that my old articles got, seemed sufficient to gain press fleet admission. My suggestion would be to mingle at the trade shows (Detroit, Chicago, etc.) Talk to the PR people and engineers on the stands during press days - if they think you can illustrate something about their car in a unique way, they'll generally be only too happy to let you take a spin in it.
I've said it before, I'll say it again - the goal is to understand your subject much, much better than does your readership, but to be able to explain it in a unique way that is easily comprehensible. I can't say I've always held to that goal, or that every correspondent I've admired has done so, either, but it's worth striving for.
And talk to the actual press at those shows, too.
I guess if/when auto writing ever becomes a full-time job I'll be able to go to the shows. As it is, that would be almost impossible to pull off. (I was able to go to the NY show last year, but that was a one-time gig.)
I do make a point of going in-depth with press cars -- not in the sense that you likely would but in their everday practicality and usability. My own niche, I guess.
And the example you give is a disgrace. I'd like to think the automaker is working on a fix already to a problem that severe, and I wouldn't think the automaker would pull ads over a complaint that's obviously legitimate -- even the mainstream media might cover that one and it would be hugely embarrassing.
I imagine you're keeping the make/model of car quiet intentionally?
Okay, I have a potential ride quality candidate: Lexus IS-F?
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 03:43:10 PM
You know you have. Deep down in your psyche, the question festers: Who is CaMIRO, and what can his experience do to help me better understand the field where I want to work?
The answer haunts you because you just don't know. You'll be searching for it late into the evening, and you know it.
I think I found my lifesaving excuse: I only get C/D and Motor Trend and am not at all familiar with what sort of comparisons the others have been running.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:57:41 PM
I think I found my lifesaving excuse: I only get C/D and Motor Trend and am not at all familiar with what sort of comparisons the others have been running.
Good save.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:48:15 PM
I guess if/when auto writing ever becomes a full-time job I'll be able to go to the shows. As it is, that would be almost impossible to pull off. (I was able to go to the NY show last year, but that was a one-time gig.)
You are, unfortunately, on the East coast. If you were in Detroit, that'd be two shows (Chicago is an easy trip).
Then again, if you were in Detroit, you'd want to shoot yourself right about now.
Look, New York is a great opportunity. Get cracking. You have two days out of the year when these guys literally stand there and answer everything you throw at them. Use the opportunity to come up with something they may not have thought of; or, at least, suggest something they've thought of, but haven't made public yet.
Go find Lutz next year. He's remarkably easy to talk to, and a good place to start when approaching these guys. Somewhere, I have a whole list of the most approachable people. Ed Zellner at Buick, for instance.
QuoteI do make a point of going in-depth with press cars -- not in the sense that you likely would but in their everday practicality and usability. My own niche, I guess.
A good opportunity to say that I thought the Forte review was very good; much more on dynamics than I had expected to read. I follow your reviews, I just haven't been around much.
QuoteAnd the example you give is a disgrace. I'd like to think the automaker is working on a fix already to a problem that severe, and I wouldn't think the automaker would pull ads over a complaint that's obviously legitimate -- even the mainstream media might cover that one and it would be hugely embarrassing.
I imagine you're keeping the make/model of car quiet intentionally?
Well, there were two cars involved; the first, with the ride quality problem, and the second, the clunking.
I have no stake in either matter. The first brand is known for performance mainstreamers, but not sold in America; and if I mentioned the second (a luxury brand), at least one person on this forum would want my head (and I rather wonder if anyone would believe me).
The first car - the ride quality issue is a simple case of someone getting the suspension tuning very wrong. It's so noticeable, when you're looking for it, that I was shocked to discover that the car actually had an independent rear (I'd forgotten that they'd upgraded for the new generation).
As far as I can tell, the problem is that they threw a diesel engine into it without compensating for the additional weight up front, which I can only imagine is serious enough to cause this sort of issue (unladen rear skips over bumps). As things stand, the gasoline-engined version is certainly stiff, but with this diesel, on anything but glasslike roads, the rear jounce and rebound is awful.
I think it was Henry Ford who decided that the vertical frequency of a car should be about 1.5 Hz. It could have been Andre Citroen, too. Either way, that's what the human body wants to travel at, up and down. Well, this thing probably registers considerably higher; I'd just had dinner, and wished I hadn't.
As to the second car - it had fewer than 5,000 miles on it, and would CLUNK when first gear was engaged, and the clutch was released. I'm guessing one of the linkages at the rear; whether related to suspension or drivetrain, I couldn't say. The importer took a look at it, mid-test, and pronounced it fine (I still can't believe that), and it was still clunking when they gave it back.
In all fairness, it was a press car, and had no doubt been severely abused; but still, that issue should have made it into print.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 03:56:21 PM
Okay, I have a potential ride quality candidate: Lexus IS-F?
Think hatchback from mainstream, performance-oriented brand, not sold in America.
If there was a performance variant of it, and it switched from beam axle to IRS, I'd have to say Alfa, Fiat, or Renault.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:05:52 PM
You are, unfortunately, on the East coast. If you were in Detroit, that'd be two shows (Chicago is an easy trip).
Then again, if you were in Detroit, you'd want to shoot yourself right about now.
Look, New York is a great opportunity. Get cracking. You have two days out of the year when these guys literally stand there and answer everything you throw at them. Use the opportunity to come up with something they may not have thought of; or, at least, suggest something they've thought of, but haven't made public yet.
Go find Lutz next year. He's remarkably easy to talk to, and a good place to start when approaching these guys. Somewhere, I have a whole list of the most approachable people. Ed Zellner at Buick, for instance.
Thanks for the tip. Again, someday, I'll be able to do that; as it is, I don't think my schedule or finances would allow it. When I was there before, the show happened to have coincided with my spring break and I was there on the dime of Edmunds.com.
Quote
A good opportunity to say that I thought the Forte review was very good; much more on dynamics than I had expected to read. I follow your reviews, I just haven't been around much.
Well, thank you. Any advice on improvements you could offer -- short of becoming an engineer -- I'd give the fullest consideration.
Quote
Well, there were two cars involved; the first, with the ride quality problem, and the second, the clunking.
I have no stake in either matter. The first brand is known for performance mainstreamers, but not sold in America; and if I mentioned the second (a luxury brand), at least one person on this forum would want my head (and I rather wonder if anyone would believe me).
The first car - the ride quality issue is a simple case of someone getting the suspension tuning very wrong. It's so noticeable, when you're looking for it, that I was shocked to discover that the car actually had an independent rear (I'd forgotten that they'd upgraded for the new generation).
As far as I can tell, the problem is that they threw a diesel engine into it without compensating for the additional weight up front, which I can only imagine is serious enough to cause this sort of issue (unladen rear skips over bumps). As things stand, the gasoline-engined version is certainly stiff, but with this diesel, on anything but glasslike roads, the rear jounce and rebound is awful.
I think it was Henry Ford who decided that the harmonic frequency of a car should be about 1.5 Hz. It could have been Andre Citroen, too. Either way, that's what the human body wants to travel at, up and down. Well, this thing probably registers considerably higher; I'd just had dinner, and wished I hadn't.
As to the second car - it had fewer than 5,000 miles on it, and would CLUNK when first gear was engaged, and the clutch was released. I'm guessing one of the linkages at the rear; whether related to suspension or drivetrain, I couldn't say. The importer took a look at it, mid-test, and pronounced it fine (I still can't believe that), and it was still clunking when they gave it back.
In all fairness, it was a press car, and had no doubt been severely abused; but still, that issue should have made it into print.
If the car is clunking and they're denying it, that's certainly something to write about: the whole dialogue. With the other car, what were the circumstances that it's not sold in the US but was being reviewed here? Or are you out of the US at the moment?
Quote from: the Teuton on September 06, 2009, 04:11:26 PM
If there was a performance variant of it, and it switched from beam axle to IRS, I'd have to say Alfa, Fiat, or Renault.
Close.
This was not the performance variant, but such a version does exist. The entire brand is pitched as a performance offering - and many have complained that the ride quality of all their cars is too stiff for the general public. Their sales have been rather low, perhaps as a result.
Thing is, I wanted to like this car; I just couldn't. Not with a tugboat diesel engine and that slapping...
At first I thought you where talking about the A5 Sportback but that is not really mainstream.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 04:13:29 PM... I was there on the dime of Edmunds.com.
Good for you. Next time an opportunity like that comes along, start networking (I hate that word, but it is what it is).
Quote... short of becoming an engineer...
Don't do that. Too boring. Only LJK ever really pulled that off, anyway.
I read with interest your point about the Kia's gearbox. And I can't remember if that was the car that had the 4th-5th issue or not, but either way - if you're going to devote that much space to things like that, you'll need the public behind you. Else you're shooting yourself in the foot by deriding the manufacturer that is giving you press cars.
To clarify - I agree with you writing about the problem; I just wonder what the reaction will be.
QuoteIf the car is clunking and they're denying it, that's certainly something to write about: the whole dialogue. With the other car, what were the circumstances that it's not sold in the US but was being reviewed here? Or are you out of the US at the moment?
Agreed on the clunking. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I still can't believe it. Problem is, the importer who pronounced it "ok" is the same organization who issued it as a press car.
I am indeed in Europe. Needed a break from Detroit... but the auto industry followed me here. Every time I try to get out...
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:14:17 PM
C
This was not the performance variant, but such a version does exist. The entire brand is pitched as a performance offering - and many have complained that the ride quality of all their cars is too stiff for the general public. Their sales have been rather low, perhaps as a result.
A certain VW AG offering ffrom Spain? ;)
Quote from: Galaxy on September 06, 2009, 04:26:26 PMA certain VW AG offering ffrom Spain?
Took you a while, didn't it? ;)
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:22:54 PM
Good for you. Next time an opportunity like that comes along, start networking.
I should have done better then, I agree. I wasn't writing anything automotive at the time to pitch, unfortunately.
Quote
Don't do that. Too boring. Only LJK ever really pulled that off, anyway.
Aren't a lot of car reviewers former engineers? Gives them all that understanding of how things move and all?
Quote
I read with interest your point about the Kia's gearbox. And I can't remember if that was the car that had the 4th-5th issue or not, but either way - if you're going to devote that much space to things like that, you'll need the public behind you. Else you're shooting yourself in the foot by deriding the manufacturer that is giving you press cars.
To clarify - I agree with you writing about the problem; I just wonder what the reaction will be.
What would be the point of getting the car from them if I'd be afraid to talk about it? My own edification on their dime?
Also, in this particular case, the Forte's oversensitive throttle has been discussed in other reviews, though not quiet as extensively. But it's something of a dealbreaker if there's an aspect of a car that prevents it from being driven.
Quote
Agreed on the clunking. I'm not exaggerating when I say that I still can't believe it. Problem is, the importer who pronounced it "ok" is the same organization who issued it as a press car.
I am indeed in Europe. Needed a break from Detroit... but the auto industry followed me here. Every time I try to get out...
Have you totally moved to Europe, or is it more of a sabbatical?
With the clunking issue, it seems fair to report someone official proclaiming the car fine. I might have gone a step further and taken it to a dealer; I almost took my Genesis Coupe test car to the dealer when I couldn't get reverse. It turns out that the trick is to just pull the shifter really really hard.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:28:42 PM
Took you a while, didn't it? ;)
Seat is not the first brand that comes to mind. Which is probably a large part of their problem.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 04:31:52 PMAren't a lot of car reviewers former engineers? Gives them all that understanding of how things move and all?
Teuton will be pleased to hear that most of the ones I tend to like have, I believe, been English majors, or the rough equivalent (I think George Bishop studied some type of literature, not sure). I'm not sure what Gavin Green's background is, nor Mel Nichols', Ian Frasier's, etc.; but they don't write like engineers.
I'm not sure what LJK Setright's background was, but I do know that he was a self-trained engineer (and apparently trained himself so well that automakers used to let him loose in their cars before they launched them).
Among engineers, you've got Dennis Simanaitis (R&T), and the late Jeff Daniels, an aerospace engineer who used to write for evo and who wrote *the* book on Jaguar (titled, appropriately enough, Jaguar: The Engineering Story). For some reason, I'm struggling to think of others.
QuoteWhat would be the point of getting the car from them if I'd be afraid to talk about it? My own edification on their dime?
I agree. I suppose that if you can suggest a fix (throttle linkage) in addition to describing the problem (jerkiness), you're fine.
QuoteHave you totally moved to Europe, or is it more of a sabbatical?
Sabbatical. For the next year or so, at least. I hadn't programmed anything in a while, and when the opportunity arose, I jumped on it. Thing is, you still wind up marketing something or other.
As to the clunking issue - in this case, the importer's HQ is at the dealer. The dealer gave the car a clean bill of health, and so it clunked its way out of the service bay and back into the test...
Quote from: Galaxy on September 06, 2009, 04:32:24 PM
Seat is not the first brand that comes to mind. Which is probably a large part of their problem.
Touch
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:40:54 PM
I agree. I suppose that if you can suggest a fix (throttle linkage) in addition to describing the problem (jerkiness), you're fine.
I can easily describe the symptoms of a problem in lots of detail, but I can't really say too much about the cause. But it's an issue you can't miss when you drive the car; I'm sure they're aware of it.
Quote
Sabbatical. For the next year or so, at least. I hadn't programmed anything in a while, and when the opportunity arose, I jumped on it. Thing is, you still wind up marketing something or other.
What is your personal car while you're there? I seem to recall you having a Camaro in the US, or is hazy memory just mixing that up with your username?
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 04:44:17 PM
I can expertly describe the symptoms of a problem, but I can't really say too much about the cause.
Well, they used to say that of the best F1 drivers.
QuoteWhat is your personal car while you're there? I seem to recall you having a Camaro in the US, or is hazy memory just mixing that up with your username?
I am currently driving a car that absolutely no one on this board has ever driven. Guaranteed. I'd start another guessing game, but this thread is long enough. Zastava Florida In L.
And I'll briefly explain how that happened. Much though I was trying to stay out of the car industry, I wound up doing marketing for the company that once brought you the Yugo. A fun year, in many respects. I had a hand in bringing Autocar magazine to Serbia, to review Zastava's current line-up (great article, remind me to post it). Was given free reign to advocate the virtues of some rather cheap and cheerful cars (a big change from previous stuff) -
- and then Fiat steamrolled in and starting building Puntos at the factory.
Cars still in the U.S. - currently 1 Camaro, 1 Buick. The BMWs went back a while ago; and I sold the Renault, it seemed cruel to leave it parked, particularly when the guy who bought it was almost in hysterics over having found one that ran perfectly.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 04:52:42 PM
Well, they used to say that of the best F1 drivers.
I am currently driving a car that absolutely no one on this board has ever driven. Guaranteed. I'd start another guessing game, but this thread is long enough. Zastava Florida In L.
And I'll briefly explain how that happened. Much though I was trying to stay out of the car industry, I wound up doing marketing for the company that once brought you the Yugo. A fun year, in many respects. I had a hand in bringing Autocar magazine to Serbia, to review Zastava's current line-up (great article, remind me to post it). Was given free reign to advocate the virtues of some rather cheap and cheerful cars (a big change from previous stuff) -
- and then Fiat steamrolled in and starting building Puntos at the factory.
Cars still in the U.S. - currently 1 Camaro, 1 Buick. The BMWs went back a while ago; and I sold the Renault, it seemed cruel to leave it parked, particularly when the guy who bought it was almost in hysterics over having found one that ran perfectly.
That's right, I remember the Buick. Regal GS, no?
Your having BMWs may help narrow down this mystery comparison test though...
Then again, maybe "Yugo" is the clue...
I'm actually rather fond of this thing, by the way. It weighs less than 1,900 lbs, seats 5, does 120 mph, gets 35+ mpg even when you cane the hell of it. I'd forgotten how much fun a light car can be.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:01:20 PM
Then again, maybe "Yugo" is the clue...
Right. I have to find that Yugo with the big engine but no options.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 05:02:41 PM
Right. I have to find that Yugo with the big engine but no options.
Unfortunately, I've now amassed enough knowledge to be able to tell you that, in that case, you'd be looking for EFI Yugo GV Plus models sold between 1990 and 1991, with the larger, 1.3-liter (72-horsepower) engine.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:05:25 PM
Unfortunately, I've now amassed enough knowledge to be able to tell you that, in that case, you'd be looking for EFI Yugo GV Plus models sold between 1990 and 1991, with the larger, 1.3-liter (72-horsepower) engine.
The larger 1.3-liter engine...but no air conditioning! That would have pushed the car past the comparison's $940 price point.
Yugo versus Swift.
Let's go.
A glimpse of the things we got up to... :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzzrSuoT-M4
Watch the whole thing, it's worth it.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:25:10 PM
A glimpse of the things we got up to... :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzzrSuoT-M4
Watch the whole thing, it's worth it.
Some would dare to criticize a car that doesn't keep all four wheels on the ground when going around a corner.
Quote from: ifcar on September 06, 2009, 05:27:36 PM
Some would dare to criticize a car that doesn't keep all four wheels on the ground when going around a corner.
They'd be completely wrong.
Cars that lift their inside rear wheel to enable the driver to tune the cornering line have included the original Golf GTi; Golf II GTi, and the Peugeot 306 GTi-6, all of which are regularly acclaimed as legendary performance cars.
Keep in mind that the car you're watching is cornering at insane speeds.
Malcolm Bricklin -- the man responsible for importing Yugos -- started out with Subarus, among a few other upstarts. Could your mystery car have been a Subie?
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:25:10 PM
A glimpse of the things we got up to... :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzzrSuoT-M4
Watch the whole thing, it's worth it.
That actually looks like a ton of fun
The suspension + tires + engine are pretty much perfectly matched and the limits of the car are well within the reach of a mere mortal. Plus I can tell by the suspension's reactions that the car is just damn fast and not being shown in fast motion
Actually looks like a blast
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:25:10 PM
A glimpse of the things we got up to... :cheers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JzzrSuoT-M4
Watch the whole thing, it's worth it.
That looks to handle quite like the Swift- a car that has been called "the worst handling car I've ever owned." I can see why you needed the training wheels.
Quote from: NACar on September 07, 2009, 07:44:49 AM
That looks to handle quite like the Swift- a car that has been called "the worst handling car I've ever owned." I can see why you needed the training wheels.
I had a Chevrolet Sprint Turbo for a while - and believe me, the Florida has a much longer wheelbase, and handles quite a bit better. The front suspension is derived from a Fiat Tipo; the rear is Volkswagen Golf II/III.
Those aren't training wheels - they're attached to a (patented) high-speed driver's training device which simulates drifting in front-wheel-drive cars.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 07, 2009, 07:53:05 AM
I had a Chevrolet Sprint Turbo for a while - and believe me, the Florida has a much longer wheelbase, and handles quite a bit better. The front suspension is derived from a Fiat Tipo; the rear is Volkswagen Golf II/III.
Those aren't training wheels - they're attached to a (patented) high-speed driver's training device which simulates drifting in front-wheel-drive cars.
I don't believe you. Tipos and Golfs are junk. Florida is where old people live. Longer wheelbases do not necessarily improve agility. That thing needs some suspension tuning.
I disagree with virtually everything you said, but fair enough.
The longer wheelbase promotes stability; that car is being pushed virtually to its limits, and yet it's fairly predictable. I certainly cannot say the same of the Sprint (fun though it was).
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 07, 2009, 08:14:26 AM
I disagree with virtually everything you said, but fair enough.
The longer wheelbase promotes stability; that car is being pushed virtually to its limits, and yet it's fairly predictable. I certainly cannot say the same of the Sprint (fun though it was).
By stability you mean understeer, and by understeer, I mean not desireable.
Swift's wheelbase is also much longer than your Sprint's
Quote from: NACar on September 07, 2009, 08:21:00 AM
By stability you mean understeer, and by understeer, I mean not desireable.
By stability, I mean neutrality with a hint of understeer. The people who thought they wanted oversteer died in a slew of accidents in Britain, in the '80s, in Peugeot 205 GTis, leading Peugeot to muse that they'd probably never make another car like it again.
QuoteSwift's wheelbase is also much longer than your Sprint's
I don't have time to look up the numbers - but I have to say I'd doubt it. Are you sure?
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 07, 2009, 08:27:58 AM
By stability, I mean neutrality with a hint of understeer. The people who thought they wanted oversteer died in a slew of accidents in Britain, in the '80s, in Peugeot 205 GTis, leading Peugeot to muse that they'd probably never make another car like it again.
I don't have time to look up the numbers - but I have to say I'd doubt it. Are you sure?
People die because they can't drive.
88 inches versus 94.
Swift has 4 independent struts as well.
Quote from: NACar on September 07, 2009, 08:33:34 AM
People die because they can't drive.
... and because they think they can.
Suffice to say that the video took a lot of planning.
That's a reasonable wheelbase difference, though.
I took the front sway bar off, and will be using a 3" lead pipe for the rear. No more understeer. :devil:
Good grief. I was just about to ask if you were planning a stabilizer out back... you have to be kidding about the 3 inches, though. 1 inch would be pushing it.
Either way, don't treat the two ends separately; what you do to one will affect the other.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 07, 2009, 08:51:26 AM
Good grief. I was just about to ask if you were planning a stabilizer out back...
Don't treat the two ends separately; what you do to one will affect the other.
I believe I have already considered how one end affects the other. :devil:
I'd worry about you, but one good, uneven bump at any speed will crack either your 3-inch stabilizer (assuming you're serious) or the pieces to which it is attached. Just make sure you're going straight at the time.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 06, 2009, 11:12:15 AM
The Legend was priced alongside the 5 Series. I don't know what it competes against in the US but I've only seen two Legends in my lifetime. I think they would have to price it around 3 Series money to stand a chance, and even then they'd be struggling. Badge is the main reason, but that aside, the car just isn't good enough.
I must say; I've never seen a single current-generation RL/Legend - not even at the local Honda dealer.
Quote from: CaMIRO on September 06, 2009, 05:31:37 PM
They'd be completely wrong.
Cars that lift their inside rear wheel to enable the driver to tune the cornering line have included the original Golf GTi; Golf II GTi, and the Peugeot 306 GTi-6, all of which are regularly acclaimed as legendary performance cars.
Keep in mind that the car you're watching is cornering at insane speeds.
I was going to say: Shouldn't Zastava's be decent handling? They're based upon Fiats.......
Quote from: 2o6 on September 09, 2009, 06:36:29 AMI was going to say: Shouldn't Zastava's be decent handling? They're based upon Fiats.......
Yep - and the Fiat 128 was head and shoulders above the mainstreamers of its day. Things have moved on, sure, but the basic principles remain valid, and more modern cars have become too heavy.
To keep this out of the Luxury forum...
http://www.carspin.net/forums/index.php?topic=19863.0
You're all invited.
I don't think Edmunds was supposed to post up these pics.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/2009/09/2009-bmw-m3-sedan-or-2011-infiniti-m56-which-would-you-choose.html#more
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-1.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-2.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-3.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-4.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-5.jpg)
Why not?
Quote from: 565 on September 19, 2009, 11:12:02 AM
I don't think Edmunds was supposed to post up these pics.
http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/2009/09/2009-bmw-m3-sedan-or-2011-infiniti-m56-which-would-you-choose.html#more
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-1.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-2.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-3.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-4.jpg)
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/roadtests/M3-and-M56-5.jpg)
M3 plz
Quote from: CJ on September 19, 2009, 11:13:23 AM
Why not?
Isn't the offical debut not till december? It's a rather casual way to post the first pics of the actual car.
Damn, looks a lot bigger and bulbous in the flesh
Looks like Infiniti is going for the CTS/STS deal. I'm still holding out hope for a Q return with an optional V12
Quote from: 565 on September 19, 2009, 11:15:28 AM
Isn't the offical debut not till december? It's a rather casual way to post the first pics of the actual car.
Who cares? It's ugly anyway.
I think it looks really good.
I like it :thumbsup:
Looks awesome!
I think the interior beats out the XF
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2011-infiniti-m56-sport-int2.jpg)
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 19, 2009, 07:55:24 PM
I think the interior beats out the XF
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2011-infiniti-m56-sport-int2.jpg)
That is very nice, but I have a feeling it will look over styled in person, as holds true with the exterior.
well what do you know, it looks better in real life pics than in the fancy rendering
Quote from: Vinsanity on September 19, 2009, 08:17:54 PM
well what do you know, it looks better in real life pics than in the fancy rendering
That's very true.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 19, 2009, 07:55:24 PM
I think the interior beats out the XF
(http://blogs.edmunds.com/straightline/2011-infiniti-m56-sport-int2.jpg)
I don't care for the two-tone set-up, but with colors that contrast better or in solid black it would be quite good looking. Infiniti interiors are really excellent these days.
I'm not really sure what to think. It's not bad, but it seems to have eaten one too many pies.
I actually prefer the outgoing model. This looks bloated. The interior looks great in terms of materials but the design doesn't appeal to me. I like simple interiors that flow and don't look too high tech.
^Quote editing is fun, eh?^ :thumbsup:
Quote from: cawimmer430 on September 21, 2009, 01:12:09 PM
I actually prefer the outgoing model. This looks bloated. The interior looks great in terms of materials but the design doesn't appeal to me. I like simple interiors that flow and don't look too high tech.
Outgoing model was outdated performance-wise. Assuming the pricing doesn't change much the new car will be much more competitive.
And I agree that it looks bloated. But it is still a pretty sharp design. Plus to me the interior is win. For cars like this, arguably the interior is more important than the exterior (which is why I could prob see myself getting a last gen TL Type-S over an E60 530i or W211 E350).
IMO Lexus better shape up, the weak ass GS doesn't stand a chance.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2009, 06:21:12 AM
Outgoing model was outdated performance-wise. Assuming the pricing doesn't change much the new car will be much more competitive.
And I agree that it looks bloated. But it is still a pretty sharp design. Plus to me the interior is win. For cars like this, arguably the interior is more important than the exterior (which is why I could prob see myself getting a last gen TL Type-S over an E60 530i or W211 E350).
IMO Lexus better shape up, the weak ass GS doesn't stand a chance.
The GS has been at the back of the class since it came out yet people still seem to buy them :huh:
I can't wait for the new 5-series and A6 to come out. I am going to have a good time picking out a new car for my dad from this class--lots of competition.
Quote from: TBR on September 22, 2009, 09:20:53 AM
The GS has been at the back of the class since it came out yet people still seem to buy them :huh:
Not too many, but definitely more than should.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on September 22, 2009, 09:44:29 AM
I can't wait for the new 5-series and A6 to come out. I am going to have a good time picking out a new car for my dad from this class--lots of competition.
Any news on when a new A6 is coming out? They just did a fairly significant update to the current car so it seems like it would be a while, but it has been out for 4-5 years already.
Quote from: TBR on September 22, 2009, 09:20:53 AM
The GS has been at the back of the class since it came out yet people still seem to buy them :huh:
Some ppl just don't know about cars
Quote from: TBR on September 22, 2009, 09:20:53 AM
The GS has been at the back of the class since it came out yet people still seem to buy them :huh:
Because it's the best value.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=19598.msg1165065#msg1165065 date=1253653717
Because it's the best value.
Even if it is the cheapest in the class (a point which I'll concede merely because I don't care enough to research), it isn't necessarily the best value. A car that is markedly worse than its competitors yet costs only slightly less than a few of them (thinking Jaguar XF, Audi A6, and Infiniti M) can't be the best value, or even a good value.
If you want to argue value based purely on the lowest price, then the Acura RL wins, and it's probably a better car too.
Quote from: TBR on September 22, 2009, 04:16:41 PM
Even if it is the cheapest in the class (a point which I'll concede merely because I don't care enough to research), it isn't necessarily the best value. A car that is markedly worse than its competitors yet costs only slightly less than a few of them (thinking Jaguar XF, Audi A6, and Infiniti M) can't be the best value, or even a good value.
If you want to argue value based purely on the lowest price, then the Acura RL wins, and it's probably a better car too.
I don't, I don't know where you got the idea.
I've driven it, and I have a hard time believing that not only are the other cars noticeably better (with the possible exceptions of the 5 and E), but also that they are better in ways the target market will care about. It's considerably cheaper, and also comes packed with features that add thousands to the price of an Audi, BMW, or Mercedes. Mercedes sells the E class without leather standard, for fuck's sake. You've got to be kidding that it's not the best value.
As for the RL being a better car, that's probably a joke too, right?
Quote from: Raza on September 23, 2009, 07:18:37 AM
I don't, I don't know where you got the idea.
I've driven it, and I have a hard time believing that not only are the other cars noticeably better (with the possible exceptions of the 5 and E), but also that they are better in ways the target market will care about. It's considerably cheaper, and also comes packed with features that add thousands to the price of an Audi, BMW, or Mercedes. Mercedes sells the E class without leather standard, for fuck's sake. You've got to be kidding that it's not the best value.
As for the RL being a better car, that's probably a joke too, right?
Reviews I've read of the GS say it falls behind in both ride and handling, and I can say it very obviously lacks interior space for its size.
Where would you say it makes up for that?
Quote from: Raza on September 23, 2009, 07:18:37 AM
As for the RL being a better car, that's probably a joke too, right?
One would hope.
Quote from: ifcar on September 23, 2009, 07:26:35 AM
Reviews I've read of the GS say it falls behind in both ride and handling, and I can say it very obviously lacks interior space for its size.
Where would you say it makes up for that?
Price :)
Quote from: Raza on September 23, 2009, 07:18:37 AM
I don't, I don't know where you got the idea.
I've driven it, and I have a hard time believing that not only are the other cars noticeably better (with the possible exceptions of the 5 and E), but also that they are better in ways the target market will care about. It's considerably cheaper, and also comes packed with features that add thousands to the price of an Audi, BMW, or Mercedes. Mercedes sells the E class without leather standard, for fuck's sake. You've got to be kidding that it's not the best value.
I am not talking about BMW or Mercedes. I am talking about Audi, Jaguar, and Infiniti. All three make a better midsize sports sedan for not just a whole lot more.
Quote
As for the RL being a better car, that's probably a joke too, right?
No.
The GS is a very nice car. No way it's bottom of the class IMO.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 23, 2009, 02:39:08 PM
The GS is a very nice car. No way it's bottom of the class IMO.
Your opinion is based on...
Quote from: TBR on September 22, 2009, 10:37:52 AM
Any news on when a new A6 is coming out? They just did a fairly significant update to the current car so it seems like it would be a while, but it has been out for 4-5 years already.
Based on sales, it didnt help...
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 23, 2009, 02:39:08 PM
The GS is a very nice car. No way it's bottom of the class IMO.
What's worse?
Doing some very quick research indicates that AWD V6 to AWD V6, the Infiniti costs pretty much the same and the A6 3.0T costs about $2000 more than the Lexus.
The Infiniti remains the best value in class since it is a better car than the GS for the same price.
I'd much rather have the GS over the Infiniti, which is ugly. I'd take a pre-update A6 over all of them.
Quote from: CJ on September 23, 2009, 06:48:27 PM
I'd much rather have the GS over the Infiniti, which is ugly. I'd take a pre-update A6 over all of them.
Something is wrong with you.
Quote from: CJ on September 23, 2009, 06:48:27 PM
I'd much rather have the GS over the Infiniti, which is ugly. I'd take a pre-update A6 over all of them.
That sucks. The Lexus drives significantly worse than the Infiniti. The post-update A6 is better than all three that you mentioned.
I don't like the interior on the Infiniti either. It's an all-around bad looking vehicle, in my opinion. The Lexus has always looked good to me. The interior is pretty nice as well. I also don't like the updated A6's tail-end.
Quote from: CJ on September 23, 2009, 07:04:41 PM
I don't like the interior on the Infiniti either. It's an all-around bad looking vehicle, in my opinion. The Lexus has always looked good to me. The interior is pretty nice as well. I also don't like the updated A6's tail-end.
:facepalm:
Quote from: CJ on September 23, 2009, 07:04:41 PM
I don't like the interior on the Infiniti either. It's an all-around bad looking vehicle, in my opinion. The Lexus has always looked good to me. The interior is pretty nice as well. I also don't like the updated A6's tail-end.
So in other words, you are a woman?
Quote from: Catman on September 23, 2009, 06:53:53 PM
Something is wrong with you.
I would rather have an auto G35 coupe than a GTO... it doesn't matter how good a car is if it's dirt ugly. Just ask Acura.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 22, 2009, 06:21:12 AM
Outgoing model was outdated performance-wise. Assuming the pricing doesn't change much the new car will be much more competitive.
And I agree that it looks bloated. But it is still a pretty sharp design. Plus to me the interior is win. For cars like this, arguably the interior is more important than the exterior (which is why I could prob see myself getting a last gen TL Type-S over an E60 530i or W211 E350).
IMO Lexus better shape up, the weak ass GS doesn't stand a chance.
I probably will never see this car in real life. Infiniti "has been sold over here" for quite some time now and I've never seen any. Oh wait, that's because when an Infiniti press release talks about "sales in Europe" they mean Russia! :facepalm:
Quote from: ifcar on September 23, 2009, 07:26:35 AM
Reviews I've read of the GS say it falls behind in both ride and handling, and I can say it very obviously lacks interior space for its size.
Where would you say it makes up for that?
I've driven a GS and say it doesn't fail in ride, but I didn't have the chance to test the handling really. I haven't looked at numbers, but if it's low on interior space then I didn't notice it. It fit four adults comfortably.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 23, 2009, 08:22:46 PM
I would rather have an auto G35 coupe than a GTO... it doesn't matter how good a car is if it's dirt ugly. Just ask Acura.
But the GTO looks so much better than the G35 coupe.
Quote from: TBR on September 23, 2009, 04:45:10 PM
The Infiniti remains the best value in class since it is a better car than the GS for the same price.
Quote from: Colonel Cadillac on September 23, 2009, 06:57:46 PM
That sucks. The Lexus drives significantly worse than the Infiniti. The post-update A6 is better than all three that you mentioned.
Source?
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 11:15:49 AM
Source?
All the comparison tests that placed the Infiniti in front of the Lexus :huh:
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 11:12:17 AM
I've driven a GS and say it doesn't fail in ride, but I didn't have the chance to test the handling really. I haven't looked at numbers, but if it's low on interior space then I didn't notice it. It fit four adults comfortably.
Doesn't.
Quote from: TBR on September 24, 2009, 11:23:02 AM
All the comparison tests that placed the Infiniti in front of the Lexus :huh:
Show me the tests.
Quote from: ifcar on September 24, 2009, 11:24:51 AM
Doesn't.
That's funny, because all four adults in the car were comfortable.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=19598.msg1166305#msg1166305 date=1253813245
That's funny, because all four adults in the car were comfortable.
I guess they have low standards. Comfortable compared to what? Any other sedan that costs $45,000, or even the average compact car? I'd think not.
Quote from: ifcar on September 24, 2009, 11:28:18 AM
I guess they have low standards. Comfortable compared to what? Any other sedan that costs $45,000, or even the average compact car? I'd think not.
It was me, my brother, my father, and the salesman. 50% of them have no idea what an average compact car is like. And I saw four adults fit comfortably in my car as well, which is a compact, so that should be a pretty good benchmark. How much less room does it have than an A6 or Infiniti M? I remember hearing that the M was cramped.
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 11:26:45 AM
Show me the tests.
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/06q4/2007_bmw_550i_vs._infiniti_m45_lexus_gs450h_m-b_e550-comparison_tests
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=2221&page_number=1
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0505_japanese_car_comparison/index.html
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106555
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104808
So Lexus gets 1 of 6. Impressive.
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 11:30:50 AM
It was me, my brother, my father, and the salesman. 50% of them have no idea what an average compact car is like. And I saw four adults fit comfortably in my car as well, which is a compact, so that should be a pretty good benchmark. How much less room does it have than an A6 or Infiniti M? I remember hearing that the M was cramped.
Salesmen are paid to act comfortable in anything they're trying to sell, and that sounds like it was a fairly short drive. The A6 and M are much roomier.
FWIW,
The GS placed 3rd in this comparo link (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests)
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 24, 2009, 11:38:48 AM
FWIW,
The GS placed 3rd in this comparo link (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests)
But behind the M.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 24, 2009, 11:38:48 AM
FWIW,
The GS placed 3rd in this comparo link (http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests)
Ahead of 4 cars that have either been significantly redone or completely redesigned.
Quote from: ifcar on September 24, 2009, 11:35:46 AM
Salesmen are paid to act comfortable in anything they're trying to sell, and that sounds like it was a fairly short drive. The A6 and M are much roomier.
It wasn't a short drive, it just didn't involve twisty roads. And are you implying that I, my brother, and my father judge our own comfort levels based on how comfortable another person looks?
Quote from: TBR on September 24, 2009, 11:35:28 AM
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/05q2/2005_acura_rl_vs._2005_audi_a6_2005_bmw_530i_and_five_more_luxury_sedans-comparison_tests
http://www.caranddriver.com/reviews/comparisons/06q4/2007_bmw_550i_vs._infiniti_m45_lexus_gs450h_m-b_e550-comparison_tests
http://www.roadandtrack.com/article.asp?section_id=31&article_id=2221&page_number=1
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0505_japanese_car_comparison/index.html
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=106555
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=104808
So Lexus gets 1 of 6. Impressive.
Thank you. I'll read over those when I get a chance and come back to you with my response.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=19598.msg1166272#msg1166272 date=1253812549
Source?
One of my friends has a GS430 that I've driven a lot, and of course I've driven my father's M a lot. The M drives much better than the GS. The steering is
much better (the GS has really vague and slow reacting steering), it handles better, and it's more predictable since I have an idea of what's going on with the wheels. The post-facelift A6 is awesome, I'm just assuming it's better :lol:
The GS looks a lot better (I think the Infiniti is a bit ugly), but whenever I drive the GS I can't get over the fact that my friend got it. His family owns a Toyota dealer and a Nissan dealer, so he could choose between Infiniti and Lexus and he went with the Lexus since it has higher snob appeal (I'm guessing, he would totally do that).
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 11:46:49 AM
It wasn't a short drive, it just didn't involve twisty roads. And are you implying that I, my brother, and my father judge our own comfort levels based on how comfortable another person looks?
You yourself implied that in the post ifcar quoted.
I doubt the GS is "uncomfortable". The one before it was plenty comfy for 4 fully grown adults, and I can't imagine the one that followed being uncomfortable.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 24, 2009, 12:39:27 PM
You yourself implied that in the post ifcar quoted.
I doubt the GS is "uncomfortable". The one before it was plenty comfy for 4 fully grown adults, and I can't imagine the one that followed being uncomfortable.
I said that all four of us were comfortable. We didn't sit, look at the salesman, and then decided we were comfortable because he looked comfortable. That's ridiculous.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on September 24, 2009, 12:39:27 PM
You yourself implied that in the post ifcar quoted.
I doubt the GS is "uncomfortable". The one before it was plenty comfy for 4 fully grown adults, and I can't imagine the one that followed being uncomfortable.
The old one had more space than the new one.
You can't speak for the salesman's comfort level, is what I was trying to say. He's not allowed to admit he's uncomfortable even if he is.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=19598.msg1166365#msg1166365 date=1253817673
I said that all four of us were comfortable. We didn't sit, look at the salesman, and then decided we were comfortable because he looked comfortable. That's ridiculous.
Yet, that's exactly what you did! :mask:
Quote from: ifcar on September 24, 2009, 11:35:46 AM
Salesmen are paid to act comfortable in anything they're trying to sell, and that sounds like it was a fairly short drive. The A6 and M are much roomier.
Addressing some of the comments about ride and comfort:
"Despite the supple ride, there is discipline in the chassis..."
"Comfortable in front and back, the GS cossets you in every way..."
That's just from the first review Tim posted.
Quote from: Raza on September 24, 2009, 07:48:42 PM
Addressing some of the comments about ride and comfort:
"Despite the supple ride, there is discipline in the chassis..."
"Comfortable in front and back, the GS cossets you in every way..."
That's just from the first review Tim posted.
I'm sure the ride is fine compared to the sports-package cars the other manufacturers provide. That doesn't mean it's nearly as good as it should be for the price, considering that comfort is the car's focus, not sport.
That review is simply inaccurate on the interior comfort. The GS is at the bottom of its class.
Quote from: ifcar on September 24, 2009, 07:55:31 PM
I'm sure the ride is fine compared to the sports-package cars the other manufacturers provide. That doesn't mean it's nearly as good as it should be for the price, considering that comfort is the car's focus, not sport.
That review is simply inaccurate on the interior comfort. The GS is at the bottom of its class.
I imagine the S-type makes anything of similar size seem to have a roomy and comfortable cabin.
I thought the GS had a pretty good ride. It is definitely very comfortable :huh:
Quote from: TBR on September 23, 2009, 04:40:41 PM
What's worse?
The current shape M35, the Audi A6 and the Acura Legend (whatever it's call in the States) are inferior IMO. I'd have a GS over any of those cars, it's my favourite Lexus.
It's also massively more attractive than the new E-Class, for me at least.
I'm not a Lexus fan but I do like the GS.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 27, 2009, 07:47:01 AM
The current shape M35, the Audi A6 and the Acura Legend (whatever it's call in the States) are inferior IMO.
Based on?
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 27, 2009, 07:55:57 AM
My opinion and what I've read.
Right, I meant specifically what characteristics of the car you felt -- based on your opinion and what you've read -- made it better.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 27, 2009, 07:47:01 AM
The current shape M35, the Audi A6 and the Acura Legend (whatever it's call in the States) are inferior IMO. I'd have a GS over any of those cars, it's my favourite Lexus.
It's also massively more attractive than the new E-Class, for me at least.
I'm not a Lexus fan but I do like the GS.
Well, I happen to believe that both the A6 and the M35 are radically better. And, the automotive press seems to agree with me.
Quote from: ifcar on September 27, 2009, 07:56:52 AM
Right, I meant specifically what characteristics of the car you felt -- based on your opinion and what you've read -- made it better.
Against the Infiniti, I think the Lexus looks better, inside and out. Maybe the Lexus can't match the interior of the A6 but it's just as appealing from a styling POV. I never liked the proportions of the A6.
I never thought the M35 looked very upscale for what it is. It doesn't have much presence for me.
Quote from: nickdrinkwater on September 27, 2009, 12:44:25 PM
Against the Infiniti, I think the Lexus looks better, inside and out. Maybe the Lexus can't match the interior of the A6 but it's just as appealing from a styling POV. I never liked the proportions of the A6.
I never thought the M35 looked very upscale for what it is. It doesn't have much presence for me.
So when you're saying "is better" you mean "looks better"?