http://finance.yahoo.com/loans/artic...alue&.pf=loans


1. Lincoln Town Car
2. Mercury Grand Marquis
3. Jaguar X-Type
4. Jaguar S-Type V6
5. Mercedes-Benz E550
6. Lincoln MKZ AWD
7. Cadillac STS V6
8. Cadillac DTS V8
9. Ford Expedition
10. Cadillac SRX

With all the talk of poor resale values for the RL (there's my obligatory reference so that it is forum related ) I was surprised it wasn't on the list.

Also surprised about the Benz. The article states that poor reliability is the biggest factor.

Not really surprised about the rest, especially Jaguar.

 

Luxury car?

That list isnt really that suprizing except for the MB. Jagaur of course is going to have bad resale because they sell about as many cars in a year as Acura sells in a month. The RL cant be that bad because Acuras in general have good resell, so I would think the RL is about average.

 

Grand Marquis and Expedition have no place on a Luxury Car list.

 

I agree. At around 45% after 3 years the RL is about average. Never understood what people were complaining about. Also, if you factor in the incentives everyone usually gets, the resale for you is above average. Don't forget, these stated depreciation figures are based off MSRP and factor in market conditions INCLUDING manufacturer incentives.

Having said that, it's bad news Acura just started offering these APR financing deals for the 07/08 RL. That's not going to help us on the back end (unless you got it of course).

 

That's kinda odd.

 

Our biased towards these cars notwithstanding keep in mind that a loaded Expedition probably has all the amenities you'll find in a luxury vehicle.

I'll use my Land Cruiser as an example. Sure it has the non-Luxury themed "Toyota" emblem, but the interior will rival anything you'll find in a typical luxury car.

Full leather
Full power accessories
Power tilt wheel
"Voice activated" Navigation
Bluetooth enabled
Premium sound system
Rear back-up camera
Electronic Brake force distribution
Stability control
Full complement of airbags

Plus lots lots more.

With a MSRP just north of $60K, it hardly qualifies as a economy car.

The same argument can be made with a Mercury Grand Marquis.

 

Hawks, a Land Cruiser may have a Toyota emblem, but globally it is a luxury transport right up there with Land Rover (better IMHO).

An Expedition is based on F series trucks. And a Grand Marquis is as elemental a rwd chassis still on the road. You can load them up with diamonds and I would never consider them luxury rides.

 

+1 well said. I agree.

 

An Expedition is based on F series trucks. And a Grand Marquis is as elemental a rwd chassis still on the road. You can load them up with diamonds and I would never consider them luxury rides.[/QUOTE]

This is true.

 

When I got my RL, the first thing out of a friend's mouth when he saw it was "Acura is a good move...they have great resale value". That had never crossed my mind when buying because I keep cars for 10+ years but it was nice to know.

 

If you're 85 and on Social Security alone the Grand Marquis is indeed a luxury car and a potent weapon for entering stores and restaurants.

 

I witness that everyday!

 

It handles well in farmer's markets, too!

 

You're bad. I was thinking the same thing but decided not to say it

 

There's more to life than just resale value:

True cost to own

LL

 

in fact the toyota land cruiser is rebadged and sold as a lexus lx470. its great for what it is. but its not worth 60 grand.

 

I never understood why they even bother with a Lexus version. The Land Cruisers are like 50K+, might as well wear the Lexus badge with that price tag.

 

But then Lexus would lose opportunity to add 5K worth of content, add some car jewelry and an 'L' to justfy charging 10-15K+ more! Its called marketing to brand whores.

 

Whether or not a car is worth $60K is subjective. One can argue that the RL isn't worth what it is either.

The fact of the matter is that Land Cruisers are legendary for how their built. True off-road vehicles (I know most people never take them off road) that have been driven through the deserts of the mid-east all the way to the arctic.

If you've ever driven one you'd understand.

 

The only thing the LC doesn't have for $15K less is the height adjustable suspension which I wouldn't want anyway due to known problems, and memory seats.

THe warranty on the Toyota isn't has long as Lexus, but a $1,400 100K warranty took care of that.

 

I know...you'd think the Land Cruiser would have everything. Did I mention it's a friggin 50K+ SUV?!

<---loves the boxy & big look of the Land Cruiser.

 

Actually it's over $60K now.

It also doesn't have dual zone (driver and front passenger) climate control, but it does have seperate controls for front and rear.

The next generation LC is due out next year and it promises to be a gadget delight. I saw some intial pictures and press releases over at Clublexus (LX forum) and IH8MUD.com (LC forum) and it looks pretty impressive.

What most people don't understand is that Land Cruisers can easily reach 200K miles with nothing but oil changes and tire rotations. Go over to those forums and see. Most any other vehicle is pretty tired at that point. Actually it's not uncommon to run across LC owners who have 300K-400K miles on their rigs. While most dealers wholesale out trade-in that are reaching 6 digits on the odometer, Toyota dealers keep them and put them on their used car lots..... AND SELL THEM.


My first LC was a '98 that looks pretty much like the current model from the exterior. I traded it in when it had 90K miles for a new '04. The interior was freshened (new dash layout, nav, and other toys), but from a driveability perspective there wasn't a difference from jumping from the '98 to the '04. It's more of a testament to how well the '98 held up. No squeaks, rattles. The vehicle was still tight.

The plant where the Land Cruiser is built is considered sacred among 'Cruiser heads because of their legendary reputation for quality.

THAT IS WHAT you pay for. The thing though is that most people don't keep them that long, but because of their reptuation, used ones don't stay on the market long. People snatch them up.

Unfortunately though, the quality issues that Toyota has been having due to their growing pains are even beginning to show up even with the Land Cruiser. Not with the mechanicals, but more with the prolliferation of electronics in the cars.

The only SUV that can match the Land Cruiser's off-road ability is anything coming out of Land Rover, but Land Rover build quality is nightmarish.

 

I would think the Gelaendenwagen wouldn't be a slouch, either.

 

Agree, but that just fugly. The Land Rovers are beautiful, but I would never own one.

 

LC are regarded as luxury world wide. My brother is a foreign service office who just got posted to Africa for his tour. He sold his Bimmer and directly went for a LC. He reasoning is that with it's superb reliability, good resale value, and brand equity he'd have no problem maintaining it there and probably selling it for a profit in 3years.

Who ever thought Acuras did not have good resale value? There' like wine, with age they get better. My mom has a 93 Legend with close to 200K miles on it and it's still running.

 

Are you talking about old school Land Rovers and Land Cruisers..?

I'd have to go with the Mercedes G with the AMG package. Or just go hardcore and get a Pinzgauer or Unimog?

 

My fist Acura: 1992 3.2 sold at 238k for $4200

Current: 1997 RL 3.5 bought for $8900 w /109k these are great cars --- buy a good one if you can.

The other brands are nice ... But they are not an Acura!

Dave

 

Even though I've owned two Land Cruisers, I don't think I could ever call any of the recent models (including mine) beautiful. They're nice looking, but not beautiful.

I could never get into the G-Wagons. I know they're very capable, I just can't feel them.

On the other hand I think the Range Rovers are pretty sharp.