They have failed time and time again, from the Cimarron to the G20 to the Mitsubishi Carisma based S40. Lately though, mainstream manufacturers have been injecting some premium aspects into their once humdrum compact cars, like the Honda Civic EX-L Nav, the Mazda 3 and the forthcoming Ford Focus. And yet, luxury manufacturers keep pushing to get into the market, despite history showing their volumes will not be able to make it a truly profit making endeavor. What do you guys think?
Personally I think we stand to gain more from the bottom up (i.e. new Ford Focus) approach. Mainstream manufacturers can save $$$$ through volume while providing a generally higher quality car, whereas a luxury manufacturer will have to cobble bits and pieces together to make a car that just won't sell (at least in America. I know in Europe they have BMW 112d's). The prospect of something like a turbocharged, navi + leathered up, possibly 4WD stickshift Focus for about $25K excites me more than ANY other cars out now. The future is looking bright!
Will mainstream manufacturers be able to FINALLY bring some credibility to the small premium car?
I think the problem for lux-makers is that their attempts are seen as cheapening the brand (at least in the US).
For mainstreamers, once you've thrown enough options at a small car (Focus) the price starts to make a roomier, 'nicer' car (Fusion) viable for the same price.
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/2010_Volkswagen_Golf_4-door_--_10-31-2009.jpg/550px-2010_Volkswagen_Golf_4-door_--_10-31-2009.jpg)
(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/88/2010_Suzuki_Kizashi_SE_3_--_03-13-2010.jpg/550px-2010_Suzuki_Kizashi_SE_3_--_03-13-2010.jpg)
Quote from: Jon? on March 15, 2010, 06:11:39 AM
I think the problem for lux-makers is that their attempts are seen as cheapening the brand (at least in the US).
For mainstreamers, once you've thrown enough options at a small car (Focus) the price starts to make a roomier, 'nicer' car (Fusion) viable for the same price.
I don't see how a stripper Fusion could be considered nicer than a fully loaded Focus just because of interior space. I think America needs to move away from its obsession with carniverous interiors equating to being luxurious.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 07:38:04 AM
I don't see how a stripper Fusion could be considered nicer than a fully loaded Focus just because of interior space. I think America needs to move away from its obsession with carniverous interiors equating to being luxurious.
If that were all luxury seekers cared about, the 3-Series wouldn't be a huge seller.
A base Fusion is a nicer-feeling car than a loaded Focus today because a loaded Focus feels like a cheap car with leather seats, while the Fusion feels more substantial, higher-quality, and more comfortable -- because it is. That's not inherent to a larger car, of course, but it's easy to see why someone would make that choice given today's offerings. Few mainstream compacts billed as "premium" have done much to change that; the two I posted above are the first in years to really do something there, and they're both brand new models.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 07:38:04 AM
I don't see how a stripper Fusion could be considered nicer than a fully loaded Focus just because of interior space. I think America needs to move away from its obsession with carniverous interiors equating to being luxurious.
It's a better overall built car. It's larger and has more space in the trunk. Something the average person wants and many need. A focus with all the bells and whistles is still a entry level small car.
a fully optioned current focus is like putting lipstick on a pig... hopefully the next gen won't be as bad
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 07:38:04 AM
I don't see how a stripper Fusion could be considered nicer than a fully loaded Focus just because of interior space. I think America needs to move away from its obsession with carniverous interiors equating to being luxurious.
I don't know if I'd categorize the Fusion interior as cavernous. Depends what you're using your car for. If you're a single guy and never have anyone in the car with you, then a Focus might be fine. If you intend to put people in the back, then having something a little bigger helps. I need a larger trunk so I can haul people and golf clubs. A Focus wouldn't work for me, even if it did have leather and NAV. Maybe a Fusion would.
In the relatively (though far from pure) capitalistic US auto market, virtually no one would chose to buy a "premium" small car over a mid-level midsizer, hence, why virtually none are offered here.
"Premium" small cars exist because governments' Draconian taxation and regulation make them so. You do not want that on US shores under any pretenses or for any apparently benefit.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 07:38:04 AM
carniverous interiors
:lol:
That's
cavernous, not carnivorous.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:17:50 AM
In the relatively (though far from pure) capitalistic US auto market, virtually no one would chose to buy a "premium" small car over a mid-level midsizer, hence, why virtually none are offered here.
"Premium" small cars exist because governments' Draconian taxation and regulation make them so. You do not want that on US shores under any pretenses or for any apparently benefit.
There's a huge market for luxury compact cars, and back when the VW Jetta was still a premium compact car (1999) its sales took off. People who want a nice car but don't need a huge interior and/or who want something small for urban conditions don't have too much to choose from in the low $20ks -- but that's not to say they wouldn't buy something there.
Sales won't challenge either a Camry or a Corolla, but they could be significant.
Quote from: 93JC on March 15, 2010, 08:26:20 AM
:lol:
That's cavernous, not carnivorous.
but I prefer my interiors to strictly be meat-eaters
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 08:44:10 AM
There's a huge market for luxury compact cars, and back when the VW Jetta was still a premium compact car (1999) its sales took off. People who want a nice car but don't need a huge interior and/or who want something small for urban conditions don't have too much to choose from in the low $20ks -- but that's not to say they wouldn't buy something there.
Sales won't challenge either a Camry or a Corolla, but they could be significant.
I have to think that if there was a significance opportunity automakers would offer those cars here.
I challenge that people buy VW because they want ze German experience but can't afford MB, BMW or Audi.
I hope that we start to see more options in the small car market, not just luxury features, but powertrains options as well.
If they built the Focus you described, I'd be interested as well, though I don't care as much for AWD.
In any case, luxury features on a small car are great, just don't under-power the thing to the point where I don't want to drive it for an hour on the highway each day. That's more a jab at cars like the Fit and Fiesta.
The S40 and G20 never failed.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:57:12 AM
I have to think that if there was a significance opportunity automakers would offer those cars here.
I challenge that people buy VW because they want ze German experience but can't afford MB, BMW or Audi.
Or, maybe they simply don't want it.
I find the Camry and Accord to be wasteful for a single person. If I had the money, I would spring for a similarly priced (but smaller and more rewarding to drive) Volvo S40 or Cooper Clubman.
Quote from: Jon? on March 15, 2010, 08:02:33 AM
I don't know if I'd categorize the Fusion interior as cavernous. Depends what you're using your car for. If you're a single guy and never have anyone in the car with you, then a Focus might be fine. If you intend to put people in the back, then having something a little bigger helps.
Nor would I classify it as carnivorous.
Quote
I need a larger trunk so I can haul people and golf clubs. A Focus wouldn't work for me, even if it did have leather and NAV. Maybe a Fusion would.
Many compacts have large trunks. For example, my Jetta has about as much trunk volume as the Fusion. Also, I believe your friends will like you better if you don't put them in the trunk with your golf clubs.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:57:12 AM
I have to think that if there was a significance opportunity automakers would offer those cars here.
I challenge that people buy VW because they want ze German experience but can't afford MB, BMW or Audi.
I agree with your point about the govts in Euroland dictating the direction of the market.
However this post I've quoted is just wrong... though I will refrain in providing reasoning behind why you in particular would come to such a conclusion.
Quality issues aside, something like a VR6 GTI would be PERFECT for someone like me. I need something with a small profile that can carry groceries, things like bikes and occasionally people. I want something engaging to drive with a higher quality interior than a Civic or WRX. For me something like a Mini or GTI is perfect, and I see a lot of them around here. In an urban environment, for a single dude, something like a huge newish Accord sedan makes no sense.
Admittedly the market may be relatively niche.... but if Ford can convince people the new Focus will provide the experience and panache of the Germans low end at a better value, I think they will have a hit.
The current Focus is an econocar, but the next one looks legit in and out.
Quote from: Raza on March 15, 2010, 09:49:47 AM
Many compacts have large trunks.
Yep.
And that's what makes them so popular in Europe. They're spacious inside, they have large trunks and their smaller size makes them ideal for city environments where parking is a hassle. With my sisters BMW 118i I really have no trouble parking in small spaces here. Try doing that with a Mercedes E320. :facepalm:
The trunk of the 118i is also quite spacious. I should take a picture sometime after a food-shopping trip - because when I shop for food I make sure that it will last for a few months.
I admit, my view on what is 'premium' is skewed. My calibration of the levels of NVH that are acceptable are tuned so that my car is acceptable. I recently rode around in a 2010 Mazda 3 and was blown away by the way the suspension absorbed bumps, and by how solid the whole structure felt. Cars have come a long way. Even a "bad" car like a Neon SRT-4 is a nice car to me.
The Neon SRT-4 was bad!??
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 10:12:25 AM
The Neon SRT-4 was bad!??
A 4-cylinder. No V8. Yes. It was bad.
:evildude:
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 10:12:25 AM
The Neon SRT-4 was bad!??
Driving around back-roads or to and from work it was okay. Ten hour road-trips: bad.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 10:12:25 AM
The Neon SRT-4 was bad!??
All Neon's are bad. I don't care how fast some are it's still put together like crap.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:57:12 AM
I have to think that if there was a significance opportunity automakers would offer those cars here.
I challenge that people buy VW because they want ze German experience but can't afford MB, BMW or Audi.
Automakers always get everything right, of course.
And many have tried to offer such cars here, and failed on the execution rather the concept.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 09:51:28 AM
I agree with your point about the govts in Euroland dictating the direction of the market.
However this post I've quoted is just wrong... though I will refrain in providing reasoning behind why you in particular would come to such a conclusion.
Quality issues aside, something like a VR6 GTI would be PERFECT for someone like me. I need something with a small profile that can carry groceries, things like bikes and occasionally people. I want something engaging to drive with a higher quality interior than a Civic or WRX. For me something like a Mini or GTI is perfect, and I see a lot of them around here. In an urban environment, for a single dude, something like a huge newish Accord sedan makes no sense.
Admittedly the market may be relatively niche.... but if Ford can convince people the new Focus will provide the experience and panache of the Germans low end at a better value, I think they will have a hit.
The current Focus is an econocar, but the next one looks legit in and out.
You may like the car, but are you in a position to buy a new $25k - $30k car? The reality is your demographic (young single male urbanite) is in the same position; meaning you and others like you would likely not be buying such a car new (and not much of any other demographic would either).
In Europe these cars are sold in place of CamCords (i.e., non enthusiasts).
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 12:39:28 PM
Automakers always get everything right, of course.
And many have tried to offer such cars here, and failed on the execution rather the concept.
Sometimes it's a disaster (Aztek) and sometimes it's better than expected (Camaro) but yeah, they pretty much almost always get it right.
Not many of your CamCord buyers are going to opt for a gussied up Focus or Civic of the same approximate cost.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 01:34:44 PM
You may like the car, but are you in a position to buy a new $25k - $30k car? The reality is your demographic (young single male urbanite) is in the same position; meaning you and others like you would likely not be buying such a car new (and not much of any other demographic would either).
How would YOU know what he makes? Even so, he's been toying around with the idea of buying another car.
In Europe these cars are sold in place of CamCords (i.e., non enthusiasts).
Upscale compacts when decontented are just regular compacts. Even so, they are not as strong sellers in comparison to regular midsizers and compacts.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 01:34:44 PM
Sometimes it's a disaster (Aztek) and sometimes it's better than expected (Camaro) but yeah, they pretty much almost always get it right.
Not many of your CamCord buyers are going to opt for a gussied up Focus or Civic of the same approximate cost.
I never said they would. Different target market. And a Civic with leather seats isn't a premium compact.
For someone who values free choice and letting the market decide what it wants, you sure are contradictory.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 01:41:44 PM
For someone who values free choice and letting the market decide what it wants, you sure are contradictory.
I thought the old TSX was the perfect small, in that not too large sense, premium car. It looked good inside and out, had a pretty good powertrain, was agile and fun to drive, had an upscale feel, and wasn't too expensive (IIRC, the started at ~27k). The new TSX doesnt look as good, is larger and heavier, and isnt as fun to drive while also being more expensive.
Quote from: Xer0 on March 15, 2010, 02:06:12 PM
I thought the old TSX was the perfect small, in that not too large sense, premium car. It looked good inside and out, had a pretty good powertrain, was agile and fun to drive, had an upscale feel, and wasn't too expensive (IIRC, the started at ~27k). The new TSX doesnt look as good, is larger and heavier, and isnt as fun to drive while also being more expensive.
I would think the integra was very successful as a small premium car, they seemed to be everywhere in the 90s.
The Saab 900 and 9-3 also enjoyed modest success.
What makes a car 'premium' in people's eyes?
I spent time in an EX-L Accord and same year TSX, and they have the same dash, engine etc. So why can't an equally equipped Civic be considered premium?
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 03:49:52 PM
What makes a car 'premium' in people's eyes?
I spent time in an EX-L Accord and same year TSX, and they have the same dash, engine etc. So why can't an equally equipped Civic be considered premium?
It could be, in theory. The current Civic just doesn't have the power, refinement, interior quality, or driving dynamics of anything but an economy car.
C30 ??
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 03:52:06 PM
It could be, in theory. The current Civic just doesn't have the power, refinement, interior quality, or driving dynamics of anything but an economy car.
(http://www.enciclopedia.com.pt/images/acura_CSX.jpg)
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 04:49:43 PM
(http://www.enciclopedia.com.pt/images/acura_CSX.jpg)
Are you trying to suggest that a Civic with an Acura badge is a legitimate premium compact?
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 04:50:56 PM
Are you trying to suggest that a Civic with an Acura badge is a legitimate premium compact?
Canada seems to think so. :lol:
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 04:50:56 PM
Are you trying to suggest that a Civic with an Acura badge is a legitimate premium compact?
I would venture to say the Integra sedan was a legitimate premium compact in its hey day. It had the performance, luxury, refinement and driving dynamics of a much more expensive car. The GS-R was basically a Type-R with more sound damping.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 05:09:14 PM
I would venture to say the Integra sedan was a legitimate premium compact in its hey day.
So was the G20. And the Saab 900 was probably the best of them all.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 05:09:14 PM
I would venture to say the Integra sedan was a legitimate premium compact in its hey day. It had the performance, luxury, refinement and driving dynamics of a much more expensive car. The GS-R was basically a Type-R with more sound damping.
A friend of mine had a 1st gen Integra when I had my 240SX. There was nothing about that car that was more premium than the 240.
Quote from: MX793 on March 15, 2010, 05:12:40 PM
A friend of mine had a 1st gen Integra when I had my 240SX. There was nothing about that car that was more premium than the 240.
The 1st gen Integra is about 25 years old.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 05:20:17 PM
The 1st gen Integra is about 25 years old.
And this was about 10 years ago. Might have been an early 2nd gen. It was of roughly the same vintage as my S13. Regardless, it didn't strike me as any more premium than any other sport compact of that vintage.
The base Integra wasn't; the GS-R was much nicer.
Quote from: ifcar on March 15, 2010, 04:50:56 PM
Are you trying to suggest that a Civic with an Acura badge is a legitimate premium compact?
Lexus did it with the HS250h. :devil:
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:17:50 AM
In the relatively (though far from pure) capitalistic US auto market, virtually no one would chose to buy a "premium" small car over a mid-level midsizer, hence, why virtually none are offered here.
"Premium" small cars exist because governments' Draconian taxation and regulation make them so. You do not want that on US shores under any pretenses or for any apparently benefit.
What a silly argument.
For the german market:
The Audi A4 sedan 2.0 TFSI quattro, 6spd costs ? 138/year in taxes.
The Audi A3 hatchback 2.0 TFSI quattro, 6 spd costs ? 148/year in taxes.
The A3 is an older design and uses more fuel=CO2, so it pays more in taxes. Of course the A4 has a higher sticker price then the A3, so the buyer will pay more in sales tax, but it shoud not be a main deciding factor. Has it occured to you that in a country with 82 million people, slightly smaller the Montana a small car might be more livable on a daily basis, and yet at the same time one does not want to miss the features and material quality of a luxury car?
For the record here is the min/max taxation rate of the A3-A4 gasoline range.
A3 1.2 FSI ? 38/year, Audi S4 sedan ?270/year.
And since you are always harping about the diesels being a product of socialism:
Audi A4 2.0 TDI quattro = ? 248/year. The extremely popular Audi A6 Avant 3.0 V6 TDI quattro costs ? 403 per year in taxes.
I should add that the A4 outsells the A3, the 3er outsells the 1er, and the C class outsells the A/B class.
That post makes me sad - that you get taxed on your cars in such a manner is flat-out depressing.
And proves my point. You'd have to be nuts to buy an A3.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
That post makes me sad - that you get taxed on your cars in such a manner is flat-out depressing.
And proves my point. You'd have to be nuts to buy an A3.
If you don't need a bigger car, you'd be nuts to pay extra for an A4.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
That post makes me sad - that you get taxed on your cars in such a manner is flat-out depressing.
And proves my point. You'd have to be nuts to buy an A3.
MAYBE THEY WANT ONE, DUDE.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 01:34:44 PM
Not many of your CamCord buyers are going to opt for a gussied up Focus or Civic of the same approximate cost.
I agree, but that's mostly because of the poor reasoning behind the idea of size equaling value.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=21542.msg1289234#msg1289234 date=1268747971
I agree, but that's mostly because of the poor reasoning behind the idea of size equaling value.
As well as the Premium compacts (although sharing bits) being totally different cars.
Quote from: Raza on March 16, 2010, 07:59:31 AM
I agree, but that's mostly because of the poor reasoning behind the idea of size equaling value.
Depends what they're looking for. Leather, Nav, etc. is easy to give up dollar for dollar if it means a useable rear seat and nicer ride.
Quote from: Jon? on March 16, 2010, 08:02:33 AM
Depends what they're looking for. Leather, Nav, etc. is easy to give up dollar for dollar if it means a useable rear seat and nicer ride.
Define usable.
I don't think there's any car on sale that has a rear seat that two adults can't sit in to some degree of comfort.
Quote from: ifcar on March 16, 2010, 07:53:09 AM
If you don't need a bigger car, you'd be nuts to pay extra for an A4.
I'm sorry, personal preference and/or need doesn't come into play here.
Also, all, please keep in mind that the BMW 3 series, for example, is a compact car. It's the same size as my Jetta (actually, 1" shorter).
Quote from: ifcar on March 16, 2010, 07:53:09 AM
If you don't need a bigger car, you'd be nuts to pay extra for an A4.
In America, thankfully wants = needs.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 08:03:37 AM
Define usable.
I don't think there's any car on sale that has a rear seat that two adults can't sit in to some degree of comfort.
(http://www.familycar.com/roadtests/lexussc430/Images/RearSeat-med.jpg)
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:05:01 AM
In America, thankfully wants = needs.
Okay, if you don't WANT a bigger car.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=21542.msg1289241#msg1289241 date=1268748283
Also, all, please keep in mind that the BMW 3 series, for example, is a compact car. It's the same size as my Jetta (actually, 1" shorter).
I was going to say that. So is the C-class.
When the E21 came out in 1973, sales doubled.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:05:01 AM
In America, thankfully wants = needs.
And jugding by the success of the 3-series, A4, A3, C-class and especially the entire MINI lineup, that notion is changing.
Quote from: ifcar on March 16, 2010, 08:06:19 AM
(http://www.familycar.com/roadtests/lexussc430/Images/RearSeat-med.jpg)
I meant mainstream car........not a 2+2.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 08:03:37 AM
Define usable.
I don't think there's any car on sale that has a rear seat that two adults can't sit in to some degree of comfort.
Define degree of comfort. It all comes down to what you intend to use your car for. For most people a Cam/Accord is more flexible than a Civic/Corolla. Maybe not as fun to drive, but that's not a primary consideration for most people.
If the cost of loading up a smaller car puts it into the same price range of a larger car, many will look at the larger car.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:51:25 AM
And proves my point. You'd have to be nuts to buy an A3.
If you have to search for a parking spot every morning, cars like the Golf, A3 make much more sense.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:05:01 AM
In America, thankfully wants = needs.
BS.
The average American patriot wants a ZR-1 and a Gulfstream G 650, well not the hippies, but he can't afford them.
Quote from: Galaxy on March 16, 2010, 08:20:26 AM
BS.
The average American patriot wants a ZR-1 and a Gulfstream G 650. Well not the hippies.
The average American does not want those things; the average American does not know they exist (especially the former).
The average American wants (needs) a 5,500 lb, 300+ hp, 4wd dreadnought; a.k.a., a full-size pick up, to the tune of 1,000,000 units a year (even in a horrific economy).
Quote from: Galaxy on March 16, 2010, 08:17:01 AM
If you have to search for a parking spot every morning, cars like the Golf, A3 make much more sense.
Maybe, but then I'd challenge that one shouldn't put oneself into a situation whereby one has to search every morning for parking.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:05:01 AM
In America, thankfully wants = needs.
And if you don't
want a bigger car?
Quote from: Raza link=topic=21542.msg1289270#msg1289270 date=1268750484
And if you don't want a bigger car?
Irrelevant. Statistics show that you want one. And if you want one you need one.
Quote from: Jon? on March 16, 2010, 08:07:41 AM
Define degree of comfort. It all comes down to what you intend to use your car for. For most people a Cam/Accord is more flexible than a Civic/Corolla. Maybe not as fun to drive, but that's not a primary consideration for most people.
If the cost of loading up a smaller car puts it into the same price range of a larger car, many will look at the larger car.
Maybe it's a perception thing. I know when I look at a loaded up smaller car (as long as it's not loaded up with frivolities) against a more stripped larger car, I go straight for the smaller car. I don't consider size a luxury; if anything, I consider it a negative. If I had bought a Passat instead of my Jetta (while my Wolfsburg was bargain priced, a comparable GLI does run into the Passat 2.0T range), I'd be paying more in running costs and getting a less fun car to drive (though it's conceivable my insurance would be cheaper) with fewer amenities--depending on model year, a Passat with a stickshift and sunroof was just not available--just to have size that I don't need. I've had four cars in my life, and if we disregard the little side adventure I call co-owning a Boxster S, I went from midsize to midsize to compact...each time I've gotten a new car, I've been happier with it than I was the time before. That's without even mentioning that my compact Jetta is about the same size, with a bigger trunk, more power, more amenities, and the same or better gas mileage (it's really loosening up now that I've past 25K; I'm getting 27-28 where I used to get 24-25, and got 25 in my Passat) than the midsizer I had before. We once did a line by line comparison of the Jetta against the last generation Legacy, and though the Legacy is a midsize, in most meaningful measures it came up short.
And yes, I understand for many people, size
is a consideration. I don't have a family, and would do fine with an even smaller car. But then again, it should be said that size class does not always equal more usable space.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:30:10 AM
Maybe, but then I'd challenge that one shouldn't put oneself into a situation whereby one has to search every morning for parking.
That is a bit difficult. In a 82 million smaller then Montana country land costs are high on average, so employers, superstores, etc are scrooges when it comes to parking spaces.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 15, 2010, 08:57:12 AM
I challenge that people buy VW because they want ze German experience but can't afford MB, BMW or Audi.
What's wrong with that? A solid German car for a decent price is somehow something that you look down upon?
FWIW, in my family we've switched between VWs and Audis over the years. It usually comes down to which dealership is offering a better bang for the buck and which marque is offering which cars at the time of the purchase.
Quote from: Galaxy on March 16, 2010, 09:17:14 AM
That is a bit difficult. In a 82 million smaller then Montana country land costs are high on average, so employers, superstores, etc are scrooges when it comes to parking spaces.
Then one must leave one's county then, mustn't one?
Quote from: 2o6 on March 15, 2010, 09:37:44 AM
The S40 and G20 never failed.
Yeah, I was kinda scratching my head on that one too. It seems like every other car on the road here is an S40. And there were plenty of G20s around during their heyday. My aunt still has one from the early 00s.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 15, 2010, 04:46:34 PM
C30 ??
Do want. T5. Sign here, sir.
The inner-city suburbs clustered around the CBD of all the major Australian cities are a haven for the A3/Golf/1/3/C30-type cars. In dense areas like that where off-street parking isn't a guarantee, laneways and side streets are narrow, and income is relatively high, a premium small car makes good sense.
Quote from: Raza link=topic=21542.msg1289274#msg1289274 date=1268751229
I don't consider size a luxury; if anything, I consider it a negative.
Bingo. I see size as an obstacle to parking and superior cornering. I have no use for a large vehicle, but plenty of use for premium aspects of any vehicle.
Also, I agree on Passat vs. Jetta. I didn't really look at the Jetta when I was buying the Passat (I got a good deal on a loaded Passat so I took it) but I was recently riding in a friend's M/T 2.0 Jetta and was very impressed. My friend let me drive and it was more fun than the Passat and I liked that it was a little smaller.
I'm still kind of enamored with the Eos, though... Just have to drive one.
Quote from: Raza on March 16, 2010, 08:53:49 AM
Maybe it's a perception thing. I know when I look at a loaded up smaller car (as long as it's not loaded up with frivolities) against a more stripped larger car, I go straight for the smaller car...
And yes, I understand for many people, size is a consideration. I don't have a family, and would do fine with an even smaller car. But then again, it should be said that size class does not always equal more usable space.
Right, and again, it comes down to what you need the car for. I took a very
very quick look at the Honda site and priced out a completely loaded Civic, with Nav and leather vs. a comparably priced Accord. For less than $800, you can bump yourself into an EX trim Accord and really only lose the leather and the Nav. An EX trim Accord is by no means a stripper version. It's hard for me to think that the smaller car is more compelling, unless driving dynamics are paramount, in which case the Civic is simply more fun.
I owned a Civic Coupe prior to my CTS. The Civic was fun to drive and very cheap on gas and I liked the car (apart from head restraints that gave me a sore neck and eventually forced me to sell it, but that's another story). But there are occasions when I need to make use of the back seat to shuttle people, and it was simply not a place to put friends. In this case, driving dynamics weren't compelling enough for me to keep it. Ten years ago, maybe, but with family and friends, it just didn't work.
Quote from: TurboDan on March 16, 2010, 09:53:06 AM
Bingo. I see size as an obstacle to parking and superior cornering. I have no use for a large vehicle, but plenty of use for premium aspects of any vehicle.
One of my kids has an '04 Saab 9-3. I had a chance to drive it the other day and it was a hoot. Much lighter than my CTS and much more fun to drive fast. But here's the thing, when he needed to make a three hour road trip over this past weekend, he asked to borrow my Caddy. He said the Saab was frankly noisy for a long trip and the CTS would be more comfortable.
I told him to suck it up and drive the Saab. :evildude:
C30
Quote from: omicron on March 16, 2010, 09:50:43 AM
Do want. T5. Sign here, sir.
.
I would have gone into debt for one, until I saw one the other day and realized they don't have 5seats. (I have 3 kids..)
Quote from: TurboDan on March 16, 2010, 09:42:48 AM
What's wrong with that? A solid German car for a decent price is somehow something that you look down upon?
FWIW, in my family we've switched between VWs and Audis over the years. It usually comes down to which dealership is offering a better bang for the buck and which marque is offering which cars at the time of the purchase.
The point being the trade-off going with VW ain't worth it IMO. One gives up too much in the reliability department.
FWIW, my family will never buy German (still a bit worked up over the war).
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:11:38 AM
The point being the trade-off going with VW ain't worth it IMO. One gives up too much in the reliability department.
FWIW, my family will never buy German (still a bit worked up over the war).
I could see how many people would trade marginal reliability against a perception of reliability, especially if they don't value feedback or driving dynamics.
And it was 60 years ago, get over it. Japan was on the other side of the war too...
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:11:38 AM
The point being the trade-off going with VW ain't worth it IMO. One gives up too much in the reliability department.
FWIW, my family will never buy German (still a bit worked up over the war).
So I assume you're saying the trade is reliability versus fun to drive? Aside from the recent issue I had with my car last week, it's been absolutely perfect to 114K miles. It's arguably the most reliable car I've ever owned. And even without reliability on its side, I'd say VW is worth it because, let's face it, we spend a lot of time in our cars and I'd rather enjoy some of that time rather than tool around in a soulless appliance.
And also, FWIW, VW is tied with your sainted Honda (and Ford) for fewest repairs:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/cars/microsite/auto-show/Honda+Ford+least+repairs+firm+says/2662083/story.html
If I couldn't buy a car because the country did something wrong in war at some time in it's existence I couldn't buy any car ever made.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:11:38 AM
The point being the trade-off going with VW ain't worth it IMO. One gives up too much in the reliability department.
When did those other German marques become more reliable than VW?
Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.
No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.
Ugh. MAYBE PEOPLE DON'T LIKE FLOATY MIDSIZE SEDANS. THEY'D RATHER HAVE SOMETHING SMALLER AND MORE AGILE.
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
The Passat also was nicer inside.
Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.
No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.
No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.
Mini's reliable? :rolleyes:
But seriously, overall in terms of reliability for modern cars, none are too far off from each other, you will no more likely encounter a major failure that will leave you stranded for a new modern car (sold in the US) regardless of brands.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:11:38 AM
FWIW, my family will never buy German (still a bit worked up over the war).
What ever your family drives it will have something from Bosch under the hood.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 08:30:10 AM
Maybe, but then I'd challenge that one shouldn't put oneself into a situation whereby one has to search every morning for parking.
Have you ever been to Europe? We simply do not have the space that you have in the US. We live in smaller houses, we have less space for everything. Somehow, the average family in Europe manages to pack themselves into a Fiesta or a Polo, or a Clio or a 207. Cars of this size the best sellers in most European markets.... yes, taxation does not encourage people to have bigger cars in some countries, but it is more practical considerations that affect people's choice more than anything else.
If I was feeling polite, I would simply point out that this yet further proof that there are different requirements in different markets, which is why the "world car" is quite a challenging concept.
If I was feeling less polite, well, let's not go there.........
Not many people want "more agile" - just take a gander at the top 10 selling vehicles in the US...
A bit awkward on that one - meant MINI was worse than VW...
I'm not too worked up over the war; quite the contrary, I am fascinated with a lot of the tech ze Germans managed to develop...
I'm sorry, but if you have search to for parking every morning, you're doing something wrong...
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 01:37:56 PM
Not many people want "more agile" - just take a gander at the top 10 selling vehicles in the US...
Perhaps not many Americans want agile. However considering that more and more cars in america use "european" suspension setups that can be argued against.
There was a reason the Camry failed miserably in Europe and was replaced by the Avensis. The Camry handled rubbish.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 01:37:56 PM
Not many people want "more agile" - just take a gander at the top 10 selling vehicles in the US...
A bit awkward on that one - meant MINI was worse than VW...
I'm not too worked up over the war; quite the contrary, I am fascinated with a lot of the tech ze Germans managed to develop...
I'm sorry, but if you have search to for parking every morning, you're doing something wrong...
You can't ignore seemingly smaller segments of the market.
Otherwise, companies would only create one model.
Quote from: sportyaccordy on March 15, 2010, 06:00:17 AM
Will mainstream manufacturers be able to FINALLY bring some credibility to the small premium car?
When they can make a decent profit on one.
Until that day, your choice will be limited.
Quote from: Colin on March 16, 2010, 01:34:18 PM
Have you ever been to Europe? We simply do not have the space that you have in the US. We live in smaller houses, we have less space for everything. Somehow, the average family in Europe manages to pack themselves into a Fiesta or a Polo, or a Clio or a 207. Cars of this size the best sellers in most European markets.... yes, taxation does not encourage people to have bigger cars in some countries, but it is more practical considerations that affect people's choice more than anything else.
If I was feeling polite, I would simply point out that this yet further proof that there are different requirements in different markets, which is why the "world car" is quite a challenging concept.
If I was feeling less polite, well, let's not go there.........
Wrong, American way is the only way.. if you want anything that's no American mean you're a communist! You want big government and their socialist controlling ways.
I don't think the reason why the Camry failed in Europe was solely to do with its handling.
For a car of that class, buyers want a premium badge..... hence Lexus and not Toyota. this is clearly the reason why the Ford Scorpio was not replaced, and why the Omega was not replaced, and why (outside France) the 607, Safrane and Vel Satis bombed. Even quasi-prestige badges like Saab and Volvo struggle against the perceived desirability of BMW, Merc, and Audi.
As cars have crept up in size, there is now evidence as the sales volumes of the Mondeo, Insignia, Laguna, Avensis plummet, the same thing is happening a class down.......... there were a lot of rumours a while back suggesting that Renault will not replace the Laguna as the volume is no longer there (a less bland car might have helped them, but that's another story).
Quote from: Colin on March 16, 2010, 02:17:02 PM
I don't think the reason why the Camry failed in Europe was solely to do with its handling.
For a car of that class, buyers want a premium badge..... hence Lexus and not Toyota. this is clearly the reason why the Ford Scorpio was not replaced, and why the Omega was not replaced, and why (outside France) the 607, Safrane and Vel Satis bombed. Even quasi-prestige badges like Saab and Volvo struggle against the perceived desirability of BMW, Merc, and Audi.
As cars have crept up in size, there is now evidence as the sales volumes of the Mondeo, Insignia, Laguna, Avensis plummet, the same thing is happening a class down.......... there were a lot of rumours a while back suggesting that Renault will not replace the Laguna as the volume is no longer there (a less bland car might have helped them, but that's another story).
The Camry is in the same price bracket as the Avensis is it not? And the Avensis is quite successful. Granted I simplified it a bit to much. The Camry not only had a poor suspension, the interior was rubbish as well (The current one appears much improved however). Plus the space efficiency left something to be desired.
The Ford Scorpio is a bad example imo. Ford could not have found a way to style that thing in a more revolting fashion. And Saab as a company is dated technogy wise. perhaps the new 95 could have helped but with all the negative news and the still uncertain future, mostl likely not.
No. When we had a Camry and the Carina (precursor to the Avensis), the Camry was the class above the Carina/Avensis. I'm in no way trying to defend the Camry, as it was never going to win class honours, but the point is that Toyota figured that the only cars they could hope to sell in that class would need a badge other than Toyota. They sold a handful of the 96 model (4th generation Camry) and even fewer of the 2002 edition and gave up after a couple of years.......... which is why Wimmer gets so excited when he spots one in Germany!
Yes, the last Scorpio had some rather challenging looks, but 20 years ago, the UK Corporate car parks were stuffed full of Granda/Scorpio, Carlton/Omega and the like...... the German marques were low volume sellers in comparison. Gradually as people found ways of affording a more prestige badge, they did. In droves.
And whilst your argument about the SAAB is also fair for the last few years, this has been a problem for SAAB for the last 10 years plus. They were never a volume seller, but as they alienated their traditional market with inferior product (the mid 90s 900 model) and then elderly products (the outgoing 9.5), they stood no chance ......
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
The Accord is good at going in a straight line and making a lot of road noise. Its handling is average (read: boring) and I've never really liked Honda interiors, so maybe I'm just biased, but the VW interior absolutely blows away the Accord's in every way, shape or form.
Plus, the Accord is simply too big for me. That thing has been growing and growing since the first generation. Really, the TSX (European Accord) should have been the regular American Accord from the start.
Quote from: Colin on March 16, 2010, 01:34:18 PM
If I was feeling less polite, well, let's not go there.........
Please, do. My fellow Americans have to be schooled on this stuff. Though, for the most part, people on this forum and others "get it."
Quote from: TurboDan on March 16, 2010, 03:41:22 PM
The Accord is good at going in a straight line and making a lot of road noise. Its handling is average (read: boring) and I've never really liked Honda interiors, so maybe I'm just biased, but the VW interior absolutely blows away the Accord's in every way, shape or form.
Plus, the Accord is simply too big for me. That thing has been growing and growing since the first generation. Really, the TSX (European Accord) should have been the regular American Accord from the start.
US Accord = Euro Accord = Japan Accord from Gen 1 up till Gen 4. And then it started diverging.
For 5th Gen, US Accord = Japan Accord but Euro is seperate where in 6th Gen, every individual region has their own look. For 7th and current gen, the Japan/Euro Accord is the TSX.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 02:07:47 PM
You can't ignore seemingly smaller segments of the market.
Otherwise, companies would only create one model.
Cougs Motors: any car you want, as long as it's an Accord V6 automatic sedan.
Quote from: ifcar on March 16, 2010, 05:13:29 PM
Cougs Motors: any car you want, as long as it's an Accord V6 automatic sedan.
If you buy anything else, you're stupid because the Accord is the best value in the planet!!
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.
No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.
U dont like German cars because of ur family's beef from the war. U consistently write off German car owners as poseurs. Ur justification of the CamCord as the only rational choice for every man ironically teeters on socialist, and again screams of Dwight from the office. Ur opinion here is null + void
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
I'm not sure about that. Most of the people around here have performance cars or something more so then an Accord.
I don't hate the Accord by the way.
I have a car.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
Actually I think most people on this forum can appreciate a well designed car like an Accord. Its unfortunate owner list leads to it getting shrapnel.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
You know, it's bad enough when someone uses an actual performance car as a compensation device.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
I like the Accord.
Sporty has an Accord.
Ifcar's reviews have praised the Accord.
CJ's family owns an Accord.
Before his Miata, Secret Chimp's car was an Accord.
J86 totaled an Accord.
What are you talking about?
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
It's pretty boring, dude.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 07:56:08 PM
J86 totaled an Accord.
Goddamn you've got a good memory! Was hopin' that fell off the radar!
Quote from: J86 on March 16, 2010, 08:03:15 PM
Goddamn you've got a good memory! Was hopin' that fell off the radar!
I don't even remember that...but I do drink a lot more than he does.
And one in the hat, I almost bought an Accord V6...until I drove a Passat 1.8T.
Quote from: Raza on March 16, 2010, 08:36:34 PM
I don't even remember that...but I do drink a lot more than he does.
And one in the hat, I almost bought an Accord V6...until I drove a Passat 1.8T.
In line with that, when I was looking my freshman year of college, I looked at a Passat but then realized what a money pit they were :lol:
I like the steering feel on my parent's 6th-gen Accord. It's a tad on the numb side, but pretty direct and has a nice heft. They have an LX 4-cyl, and I don't know if you gain a bit of agility over the V6, but I've had a good time with it in the Rockies. It understeers perhaps too early, but really, how hard are you going to push a car like that?
Notably, it isn't any heavier than the same year Jetta (both right at 2900-3000lbs), and neither is the new Accord any heavier than the current Jetta (~3200lbs). This despite the fact that the Honda is actually larger in both instances, and presumably roomier (although I might be wrong about the space).
I haven't got a chance to drive the new Jetta (or the 7th-gen Accord), although I have good seat time in the old Jetta, including an example with some expensive, high-quality suspension work done to it. I'll give a slight nod to the VW in terms of sport, but I don't think there's a clear winner in terms of which is the "better enthusiast's" car. They're both rather mundane vehicles, relatively speaking.
Honestly, I feel some of you guys are a bit over-dramatic when it comes to that evaluation. There are small tradeoffs WRT any automotive purchases, but oftentimes the differences aren't really that large and don't affect your overall enjoyment of the product.
I know I've said this before, so maybe I'm beating a dead horse, but I really detest the idea that just because you aren't drawn to a car that the press and certain segments of the automotive community seem to favor, you can't possibly enjoy driving. In fact I think the idea that a "true enthusiast" is going to get "X units" of enjoyment out of one particular car over its competition to be very silly. There's a lot of subjectivity in the decision that just isn't capable of quantification.
But that's not what we are arguing.
We all like the Accord.
However to say that small premium cars shouldn't exist is a fallacy.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 08:59:03 PM
But that's not what we are arguing.
We all like the Accord.
However to say that small premium cars shouldn't exist is a fallacy.
Part of the discussion has morphed since the OP.
I was speaking more to this line of posts:
Quote from: TurboDan on March 16, 2010, 03:41:22 PM
The Accord is good at going in a straight line and making a lot of road noise. Its handling is average (read: boring) and I've never really liked Honda interiors, so maybe I'm just biased, but the VW interior absolutely blows away the Accord's in every way, shape or form.
Plus, the Accord is simply too big for me. That thing has been growing and growing since the first generation. Really, the TSX (European Accord) should have been the regular American Accord from the start.
I do NOT like our Accord. The engine is FANTASTIC, and it looks great, but it's not built well and it rattles.
My parents' Accord has a glovebox rattle that is absolutely maddening, and I agree with you there.
In terms of build quality, I don't agree.
No worries Tave, they is just beating up on the Accord because I own one (meaning, it's an attempt at punishment for my, uh, talent in spurring conversation). They've failed of course, but we'll save that for another post.
No one is bashing the Accord.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 09:27:03 PM
No one is bashing the Accord.
I kind of was, but more from a defensive standpoint. I've driven the current generation Accord and really don't like it. I think the ride is rough and noisy (but without the good, tight cornering/handling to back it up) and the interior placement of controls, etc. drove me batty.
It was a decently powerful engine, but that's it. The car is simply too bland and getting a little too bulbous in its current form.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 09:27:03 PM
No one is bashing the Accord.
I am. I really don't like our car. All of its faults are on the inside, where you spend time.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 09:17:16 PM
No worries Tave, they is just beating up on the Accord because I own one (meaning, it's an attempt at punishment for my, uh, talent in spurring conversation). They've failed of course, but we'll save that for another post.
No, if you owned an Accord yet said that the Camry was the only car anyone should ever want to own, no one would mention the Accord.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
LOL
Quote from: J86 on March 16, 2010, 08:44:22 PM
In line with that, when I was looking my freshman year of college, I looked at a Passat but then realized what a money pit they were :lol:
Hehe, other than scheduled maintenance, it didn't cost me a penny. :lol:
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
There was no 7th generation Accord that could keep up with the Passat W8.
Plus I do think that for the most part VW AG does have "soul" as silly as that may sound. Yes the current Passat is a bit bland imo, and the Tiguan as well. However VW unlike most companies does things that make no rational business sense what so ever. Things that makes one believe that to a large extent the company is run by enthusiasts, who believe that they make something more emotional then a simply appliance.
Spending money on giving the Touareg`s lockers, a transfer case and disconnectable sway bars made no business sense.
The V10 TDI, makes no business sense. They even skipped the more cost effective common rail system, and gave each cylinder it`s own independent diesel pump.
Spending money on the Phaeton as a bespoke car (VW of America missed this memo, they offered the Phaeton of the lot, like cheese sold at a super store) and the glass factory that can serve as a art gallery made no business sense.
Spending money on Lamborghini and Bentley probably makes no business sense.
Spending money on Bugatti and building the thing in a French castle made no business sense.
Offering economy cars like the Golf with 38 different exterior colors (VW of America missed this memo as well) , makes no business sense, since the logistics will ballon the production costs.
VW Marine most likely makes no business sense.
What does Honda have on offer? The NSX is gone. The successor cancelled. The S 2000, gone as well. Well, they do have the upcoming small sports car that should be good, but VW should be able to beat it with the coming mid engined roadster.
Edit: To be fair I need to mention the Honda jet and the robots. Those are also enthusiast projects.
Quote from: Galaxy on March 17, 2010, 07:21:24 AM
There was no 7th generation Accord that could keep up with the Passat W8.
Sure there was, at least in terms of acceleration; the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 16, 2010, 09:27:03 PM
No one is bashing the Accord.
The USDM Accord is about a big of a POS as the USDM Mazda6
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 07:37:36 AM
Sure there was, at least in terms of acceleration; the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.
I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 17, 2010, 10:07:48 AM
I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.
2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec. (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/112_0506_2003_volkswagen_passat_w8/specs_overview.html)
2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec. (http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/6429c6661bbe40c5dbf134ba2e08de73.pdf)
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 09:17:16 PM
No worries Tave, they is just beating up on the Accord because I own one (meaning, it's an attempt at punishment for my, uh, talent in spurring conversation). They've failed of course, but we'll save that for another post.
:facepalm:
No, because you claim the Camcord is the only logical choice for any buyer because of it's better performance to value to whatever arbitrary quality you decide to pick up at the time you make your posts vs any other car.
By the way qualify cars, a Camcord is a better car, in your opinion, than a Ferrari Enzo or McLaren F1 because it can carry more passengers and cargo, and is a better value.. and performance doesn't mean squat because your Camcord is still better performing than (according to you) 80% of member's car.
This in itself is a retarded argument.
Quote from: NomisR on March 17, 2010, 12:40:12 PM
:facepalm:
No, because you claim the Camcord is the only logical choice for any buyer because of it's better performance to value to whatever arbitrary quality you decide to pick up at the time you make your posts vs any other car.
By the way qualify cars, a Camcord is a better car, in your opinion, than a Ferrari Enzo or McLaren F1 because it can carry more passengers and cargo, and is a better value.. and performance doesn't mean squat because your Camcord is still better performing than (according to you) 80% of member's car.
This in itself is a retarded argument.
No offense but this is a terrible post. I'll leave it to someone else to point out why.
Typical Cougs.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 01:12:27 PM
No offense but this is a terrible post. I'll leave it to someone else to point out why.
I'm just responding in a typical Cougs fashion.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 12:18:04 PM
2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec. (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/112_0506_2003_volkswagen_passat_w8/specs_overview.html)
2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec. (http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/6429c6661bbe40c5dbf134ba2e08de73.pdf)
http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8
Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s
Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s
:evildude:
In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 07:37:36 AM
the AT V6 Accord was about its equal, and the MT V6 Accord a bit quicker.
:huh:
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 11:43:05 AM
Sure people trade reliability for "fun to drive" (read: badge snobbery). Look how many people still buy BMW and M-B.
A Passat has as much "soul" as a 7th generation Accord with the added "benefit" one would need to opt for the ~$40k W8 version to keep up with a $23k LX V6.
Japan got The Bomb Germany didn't.
No German makes are more reliable than VW save for Mini. I don't mean to offend or troll, just how I see it.
Okay.
When I look for advice on fun to drive, I won't ask the guy who doesn't think steering feel matters.
So, because we nuked Japan, you're okay with buying their cars?
When I drove both cars, I didn't want either of them, and had no feeling either way about the makes. I wanted a WRX at the time. If anything, I was biased
against Volkswagen at the time, because I was a snob. It was the Passat that won me over and created the Volkswagen bias we all see today.
Quote from: AutobahnSHO on March 17, 2010, 10:07:48 AM
I'd have to see numbers on that one, I'm dubious. Unless that Passat was hella heavy.
The W8 Passat was a tank. Just shy of 4000 lbs.
Quote from: Galaxy on March 17, 2010, 01:47:37 PM
http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8
Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s
Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s
:evildude:
In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.
It should be noted that Edmunds Inside Line tests 0-60 without "rollout", while all other magazines (R&T, C&D, MT) use rollout. Thus, their times are significantly slower than other magazines.
C&D got a 6.9 0-60 time from their W8 Passat back in '02. They got 6.6 for an '06 Accord V6 with the automatic gearbox.
Point being, the W8 Passat doesn't accelerate any quicker than a V6 Accord. That said, even I can admit that the Passat has much more to offer than the Accord than straight-line acceleration
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 12:18:04 PM
2003 Passat W8 6MT: 0-60 in 6.4 sec and 0-100 in 17.2 sec. (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/oneyear/112_0506_2003_volkswagen_passat_w8/specs_overview.html)
2006 Accord V6 6MT Sedan: 0-60 5.9 sec and 0-100 in 15.0 sec. (http://www.caranddriver.com/var/ezflow_site/storage/original/application/6429c6661bbe40c5dbf134ba2e08de73.pdf)
wowsa.
Quote from: Galaxy on March 17, 2010, 01:47:37 PM
http://www.insideline.com/honda/accord/2003/full-test-2003-honda-accord.html
http://www.roadandtrack.com/tests/car/2002-volkswagen-passat-w8
Accord V6 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 7.0s
Passat W8 5 speed auto 0-60mph in 6.8s
:evildude:
In my audacious opinion my auto samples are more accurate. Since I assume they just floored it. With you're 5.9s time I have a sneaky suspicion that Car & Driver abused the clutch.
Nah, the Accord Sedan V6 AT is quicker than 7.0 sec 0-60. Of note, the AT has issues with launch and earlier tests (such as this 2003 test - the first model year) this was not realized. If you brake torque the ECU cuts power by 20% resulting in a bogged launch. The best launch measure is to stomp the gas (i.e., no break torque) and why later tests show quicker results in the mid 6 sec range.
It's much harder to abuse a clutch in a 2WD vehicle; you get little benefit from slipping it, and dumping it isn't really abuse. The W8 with its AWD is much more prone to clutch abuse owing to its traction (i.e., slipping the clutch would be more beneficial).
As more of a qualitative gut check regarding comparison between the two cars, the Passat W8 at 3850 lbs and 270 hp = 14.3 lbs/hp and the Accord V6 Sedan at 3350 hp and 244 hp = 13.7 lb/hp. Thus, given that each car has good gearing and traction and equivalent size and Cd, one should/would expect the Accord to be a bit quicker.
Very useful if you live on a drag strip, too.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 16, 2010, 07:03:51 PM
I casually remind the forum that all this hate spat on the Accord is ironic considering it's more of a performance vehicle than 80%+ of the vehicles owned by members of this forum.
Cougs.... just stop. You're in over your head.
*EDIT* This is your last warning.
What the heck did sporty say for it to get edited?
Quote from: Raza on March 17, 2010, 02:38:07 PM
Okay.
When I look for advice on fun to drive, I won't ask the guy who doesn't think steering feel matters.
So, because we nuked Japan, you're okay with buying their cars?
When I drove both cars, I didn't want either of them, and had no feeling either way about the makes. I wanted a WRX at the time. If anything, I was biased against Volkswagen at the time, because I was a snob. It was the Passat that won me over and created the Volkswagen bias we all see today.
The only thing that turns me off a review of a car more than carrying on about "steering feel" is blathering about cup holders.
Yes, Japan got there's.
You have your reasoning for your bias, and I have mine.
Quote from: 2o6 on March 17, 2010, 06:06:07 PM
What the heck did sporty say for it to get edited?
Ummm....he edited himself....
'Cause I think he finally realized that I was and am correct.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 06:28:22 PM
'Cause I think he finally realized that I was and am correct.
Your argument would be more viable if you didn't have this high class air coming from each one of our posts. We all are (sort-of) functioning adults with different experiences. Why are yours worth more, and ours aren't? And don't give me that "good internetery" BS.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 06:15:10 PM
The only thing that turns me off a review of a car more than carrying on about "steering feel" is blathering about cup holders.
What? You don't care about that?
Quote from: Onslaught on March 17, 2010, 07:00:08 PM
What? You don't care about that?
It's become pretty apparent to me that Cougs' definitions for "performance" and "fun to drive" revolve heavily around straight line acceleration.
Quote from: MX793 on March 17, 2010, 07:13:09 PM
It's become pretty apparent to me that Cougs' definitions for "performance" and "fun to drive" revolve heavily around straight line acceleration.
I don't know about the kinds of cars he likes.
I edited that. It was an empty threat. Still though, I'm tired of Coug's baseless opinions. "German cars suck. An Accord is the only car anyone will ever need. The govt should mandate that. The govt needs to stay out of people's business." It's gotta be for the lols. Nobody can simultaneously be so coherent and so obtuse.
Do you guys really not understand the straw man concept???
Where's Tave? He's usually the one to straighten you guys out. I'm just old old and have done it far too many times.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 08:38:35 PM
Do you guys really not understand the straw man concept???
Where's Tave? He's usually the one to straighten you guys out. I'm just old old and have done it far too many times.
Go back to being DLP. You were more entertaining.
Quote from: Jon? on March 17, 2010, 08:52:12 PM
Go back to being DLP. You were more entertaining.
Are you angry your fancy car would also get walked by a 7th gen Accord V6?
Anywho, 'DLP' was too easy.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 09:59:51 PM
Are you angry your fancy car would also get walked by a 7th gen Accord V6?
Anywho, 'DLP' was too easy.
I'm pretty sure it's at least as fast...http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0308_2004_cadillac_cts/index.html (http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/sedans/112_0308_2004_cadillac_cts/index.html)
6.4 to 60
1/4 mile in 14.9
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 09:59:51 PM
Are you angry your fancy car would also get walked by a 7th gen Accord V6?
Anywho, 'DLP' was too easy.
Naw. I sold an Accord to buy the fancy car. It's plenty fast for me and infinitely more comfortable.
I like Hondas. I've owned five of them (not at the same time).
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 09:59:51 PM
Are you angry your fancy car would also get walked by a 7th gen Accord V6?
Anywho, 'DLP' was too easy.
I wouldn't be. There are many things that are faster than my Volvo (Well, pretty much everything...except a 240), a 7th generation Accord being one of them. Our V6 Accord is rape-sauce compared to my 940. It's faster, but that's really about it. Looks are subjective. My 940 now handles better than the Accord and rides better too. The Accord is a little quieter, but I mainly have engine noise. That'll change once my friend does a +T on it. +T means turbo. All I need to get is the IC and piping. My friend's got everything else. My car is VASTLY more comfortable. It has heated mirrors and seats, as well as a sunroof. The Accord has none of that. The Accord has more interior room, but my car has a much bigger (AND USABLE!) trunk.
Quote from: GoCougs on March 17, 2010, 09:59:51 PM
Are you angry your fancy car would also get walked by a 7th gen Accord V6?
Anywho, 'DLP' was too easy.
You're crippled by your pragmatism. You hate German car drivers because they have the guts to make non practical factors a priority.
I'm pretty sure a base Boxster would get walked by your car on a drag strip. It also doesn't have the same passenger or cargo capacity. Would you call it a worse car than a 'i hate driving a little less than a Camry' Accord V6.
I think it's really difficult, on many levels, to create a small luxury car.
Luxury dictates that you have very low levels of NVH, ample space, ample power, and high levels of automation & amenities. These are difficult to achieve PROFITABLY in small cars. Tarting up a volume-produced small car ain't going to do it - you are into silk purse / sow's ear territory, & (Cadillac Cimmarron) you run the risk of cheapening the whole brand. So this means you'd have to engineer it from the ground up, & the margins you'd make would be negligible.
The six cylinder BMW 1 series is the closest I can think of to a small premium car (my mother-in-law has one), but I think most people in the showrooms give them no more than a passing glance on the way to the 3 series; they don't like the compromises that small cars entail.
Ahem what about the luxury "roadsters"?