Well, like I said in either this or another thread on here in automotive news, my biggest problem with Infiniti, is that they don't do enough or change their models enough when they go from one generation to the next.

Don't get me wrong, I love the new M, inside and outside and its much better than the previous one, BUT, and its a big but, I don't think Infiniti did enough to change it. I think it's going to age very quickly and within maybe 2-3 years be outdated looking already, especially with a new GS and A6 on the way.

They've done this with a lot of their models. The G Sedan and FX are great examples of this. Except for changing a couple of things on the front and rear ends of each vehicles, and interior upgrades, their overall body style and size has not changed since their introduction. That means, a 2010 G Sedan looks much like a 2003 G Sedan, except for some cosmetic changes inside and outside the car. Same thing with the FX, a 2010 FX looks much like a 2003 FX, except for some comestic changes inside and outside the car. That means, they have had the same body style/size for almost 8-9years now.

I think what Infiniti needs to do, is become even more aggressive when they change bodystyles from generation and generation and stop this waiting 2 generations before making big styling changes. When they went into the 2G FX in 2009, they should have given a complete overhaul of its design, but they didn't. Now, it looks like an ugly catfish.

 

Based on sales these days, the MDX would be more the anchor.

 

Say what you will about their designs or lack of changes, Infiniti is doing very well with the G and M. Why would they make big changes if it's selling well? Acura kept the TSX changes somewhat minimal between generations and sales are fine. They went off the deep end with the TL and now we see the results. Big changes in design are not always good.

 

Oh no. I've awakened the ultimate defender of Infiniti on this sight. Swords out! (I'm kidding. Your posts are intelligent and lucid all the time. Always interested in your thoughts. I mean that.)

I didn't mean to say anchor. I noticed that after I read my post again and was wondering if someone would challenge that as we all know the word "anchor" is meant to describe the best selling model in the lineup. I was trying to say how the flagships is supposed to be the car that sets the bar for image and prestige for the brand. Should be the most prestigous car in the original maritime sense of the word. Thanks for catching that.

As far as that is concerned, I just don't get that same feeling at all when standing next to it or sitting in it as I do when i sit in a 750, S, LS.

So, to answer your direct question. Yes, of coure it certainly qualifies as their flagship, just as the RL is Acura's, I just don't think it's a very good one . They need a third sedan. Full sized. Higher price point. Not a rebadged Nissan. Speaking purely from an image pierspective; Until then it feels like they are still stuck in limbo with Acura, Buick, etc. in this strange place above Honda's, Toyota's, Chevy's, etc., and below MB's, Lexus's, BMW's, etc.

 

I agree. it'ls not a criteria to success. Case in point. The 911 series

 

I agree the styling directions are more evolutionary as opposed to revolutionary. Most enthusiasts tend to think that not having a new vehicle grow every generation is good thing.

The first gen G hasn't aged well at all. I'm not a huge fan of the rear on my G, while I still turn my head to look at a 3G TL. I believe the 2nd gen G will fare much better as time goes by.

 

how is M37/M56 selling well?. when RL was introducced in Japan. its First Month was closer to 1800 sales. It was named Japan car of the year. and most advanced car award. It was good export success.
3.5 V6 in 2004 for $50K is alot better than selling 3.7 V6 for $50k in 2010.

 

^ Unfortunately for Honda, like many others, the car industry is one of "what have you done for me lately?". Nobody cares what it did last year, much less in 2004.

 

That is true, Infiniti is like BMW in their styling, evolutionary rather than revolutionary, I don't know about the Essence concept though, that my break that cycle . I guess your right, if sales are decent then there is no real big incentive to make mass sweeping changes between generation. I too think the 2G G Sedan is aging better then the 1G. I still prefer my 1G FX over the current one, but I'm bias of course.

I thought that Acura did a pretty good job on the 2G TSX evolution. They changed enough without going to dramatic, well some feel the grill is dramatic but its the only Acura model right now I don't mind the new grill on so whatever. The Lexus IS is another model that has aged really well. Its been around since 2006 without really any changes to it and still looks fresh and new when I see ones on the road today.

 

And the RL was released in 2004 as a MY2005 when the economy was still humming along.

Then dropped like a huge ass boulder ever since. Like all new models, the M starts out strong and stabilizes, but didn't DROP LIKE A BOULDER like the RL through its life, and has even outsold the GS.

It's not selling as well as the E or 5, but at the current rate of sales and even the rate of sales of the last generation through until it was replaced, it's a decent seller, especially for a brand without the cache of BMW/Lexus/Audi/MB.

But of course it'll never be up there with the RL, because we all know how popular that model is and they just can't keep up with production and how it has such great resale since everyone and their mom wants one.

 

^^ You speak the truth and I give you that. The M is not a flagship to compete with the 750, but then again they didn't say it was supposed to be did they. To their credit, I don't hear Infiniti talking BS about wanting to compete with BMW, et al. like Acura tends to do. Infiniti just does their thing and lets their products speak for themselves. For all we know, Infiniti is right where they want to be and are happy. If that's the case then there's really nothing wrong with the M as their flagship. It's easier to pick on Acura because they say things inconsistent with their actions. It's annoying.

 

And the second sentence says what?

 

What the hell?

 

Surely Japanese economy was that much better in 2004 than in 2010 that they can afford 1800 Honda Legend in a single month.
It is not that much in 2005-2006. RL was about 1000 car per month. Now it is under 200. drop of 800 or so. does 800 seem a big drop percentage wise. yes but quantitively it is much less than number of drope in others like BMW 5 when they get into 6-7 year.
I said M37/M56 is way cheaper at introduction than Acura RL when it was introduced in 2004. look at car financing in 2005-2006 period. the rise of Japnense Yen.
RL has the greatest resale value despite competing against similar size Acura TL which is more sportier, HDD, 19inch HPT.
G37 is not same size as M37.

 

You wrote

"I'd like to boast of my intellect and judgment by saying I called this!

My post from some time ago:

"Could be wrong, but at the least it must've lost a lot of steam after at least 2005-2006/7."

Genius, this man."


You left out "Problem is I don't think the RL ever sold all that well." so your statement of "I called this" doesn't make sense.

 

My first sentence was LIES!

Though obviously I already had it figured out....that post hasn't been updated or anything so I think it's time to stop overanalyzing it.

 

ok

 

fixed

 

Is that true? Hope so for selfish reasons, but I never saw an analysis of resale values on individual cars in it's segment. The Acura brand certainly has the best resale value in the lux market. I've seen that many times. here's an example with a quick Google;

https://www.alg.com/ResidualValueAwards
Luxury Brand Residual Value Rankings

1. ACURA
2. LEXUS
3. AUDI
4. INFINITI
5. LAND ROVER
6. BMW
7. MERCEDES BENZ
8. PORSCHE

This fact always makes me think a little bit. Why is this? Is it just because Acura's and lexus's hold up so much better over time? Is it because they are less costly to maintain after warranty? A little of both?

Interestingly enough, if I had to list cars in terms of "value for what you get", I think the list would probably go something very close to this also. You could argue that the typical used car buyer is far more value focused than the new car buyer and is probably a better guage of real true "value" as it equates to tangible features vs cost.

 

OMG you are dense!

You ask how the M37/56 is selling well, but you bring up RL sales in Japan to defend your argument? How does the RL sales have anything to do with anything in the scope of that argument?

Not only that, you say that a drop from 1000 to 200 isn't a big drop "quantitatively". Really? You're actually going to use this to defend the RL?

But this seems to be your modus operendi on all of your posts...you post shit that has NOTHING to do with the argument at hand because you are WRONG and CAN'T win the argument at hand, so you bring up bullshit that's off the main topic to make yourself look smart (hint: it's backfiring on you).


You keep on bringing up the RL's greatest resale value. Please provide some proof of this. I need to see sources, links, numbers, everything because you bring this up over and over and over and I have yet to see any proof. I have a very hard time believing that the resale of car that can barely sell when new is so strong. If yo'ure gonna keep using this line, provide some proof.


I wonder if you're one of those moles from Honda who have to defend honda and acura no matter how WRONG you are, so even if you know you're completely wrong you still have to twist facts and numbers and throw people off topic just to think you win your argument. Newsflash, you're the only one who thinks you're winning.

 

I would like to see the resale values for Acura broken up into models. As SSFTSUX keeps on claiming, the RL has the "greatest" resale value which I find hard to believe. I'm sure the TSX/TL/MDX is up there, but I have a very hard time believing the RL's resale is up there at all.

It might be up there when compared to actual discounted sales price, but comparing apples to apples (resale based on MSRP), I find it hard to believe otherwise.

 

^^ I tend to agree. A quick check on KBB shows my car at about 50% of MSRP right now. Purchase MSRP was $53k, WHOLESALE is at 25k with the low mileage I have on it. That sounds about average to me. If I have time later I may dig on this subject if no one else posts before then

EDIT: My car is a 2007 model with only 25k miles. But, it's coming up on 4 years and has a good number of accesories. As we know, accessories are money down the drain and hurt your resale percentage. That's what makes it hard to use an individual car to guage resale value. I'd need to see professional analysis that compares apples to apples to determine anything legit

 

And that's also why I'd like to see SSFTSUX's sources. He keeps claiming the RL has the greatest resale, but I have yet to see any proof. It may be average, but average is FAR from "greatest".

 

OK. I officially have too much time on my hands right now.

I didn't find any nice analysis already done for us in a pretty table and graph, but, I did notice that KBB has a nice "Resale Value" section for each car. So, here are the links to a few cars that could be considered competitors to the RL. I tried to choose AWD where possible. The Lexus ES was a stretch but I picked that because KBB didn't have data for the GS for some reason and the NADA sight didn't have comparable data to use.

After 4 years the typical retained/residual value is:
RL 33%
M 35%
A6 36%
535 37%
E350 38%
ES 41% **

So, if you can believe KBB (and I think I can) then bad news for Mikey. The RL is actually the WORST performer in resale. Statistical average from this small list would be 36.6% putting the RL, M, and A6 below average and the 535, E350, and ES above.

Again, we may need to question the ES since it's neither AWD or RWD and is priced considerably lower than the others in this list. But a quick check of the LS shows it at 40% so not sure where the GS might be. My guess is lower since it's not popular as a new car so stands to reason it would not be popular as a resale (as seems true with the RL)

Edit: Sorry, here are the links:
http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/audi/a6/2010/resale-value

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/mercedes...category=sedan

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/lexus/ls/2010/resale-value

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/lexus/es/2010/resale-value

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/infiniti...0/resale-value

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/acura/rl/2010/resale-value

http://www.kbb.com/new-cars/acura/rl/2010/resale-value

 

Dammsit why can't I just put SSFTSX on ignore, but it's just so fun read the bullshit he types up!

 

Nice, thanks for the info.

I'm sure SSFTSUX has some explanation why everything you provided is wrong and why the RL has the "greatest" resale value, and im' sure he won't provide any source to support it except for what comes out of his ass.

 

Maybe he's one of those moles from Honda that troll the web looking for forums that criticize Honda and no matter how WRONG he is, he has to find a way to counter the criticism.

 

KBB values are unrealistic. 2007 Acura RL with 25K miles Dealer asking prices are atleast $33K with transaction closer to $28K-$29K. So trade in $25K.
$25K is 50% of $50K transaction price for new 2007 RL (Car Pre-MMC)



This is 2008 BMW 535. not 2007.
2008 BMW 535 with following options is atleast $70K. ( It is MMC car with new transmission, engine upgrade). This one even has parking sensors, 50K free maintainance. It is car under warranty 2007 RL are mostly out of warranty. This is asking price with transaction closer to $32K.







here is another one. This 2009 ES350 loaded is closer to $47K new. Lexus Navigation, AFS, push buttons options are not cheap.



http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/ctd/1890945791.html
2009 Lexus ES350 Navigation 13K Miles (((Like New-One Owner Car))) - $29999 (san jose west)
14k Miles and under Lexus warranty
- Paint color is Matador Red Mica
- Interior color: Parchment Leather Trim with Brown Walnut Accent
- 3.5L V6 272 Hp and 254 Lbs Tq
- 6 speed automatic transmission
- navigation system- adaptive HID headlights
- keyless start
- telescoping steering wheel
- dual-zone automatic climate control
- in-dash 6 CD changer with cassette
- heated/cooled seats
- adaptive cruise control
- bluetooth
- New windshield wiper blades
- Exterior and interior in fantastic shape
- Safety Check Done
- Oil Change Done
- VIN# JTHBJ46G792322054
[/quote]
Can you show me any Acura Dealer Asking $29K for 2009 Acura RL with $14K miles?. It is impossible. RL is the king of resale value.

 

Haha, did i call it or what?

He says KBB's values are unrealistic, and the evidence he provides is from craigslist.

Craigslist, such a great source of information...you can find car listings and use the ASKING prices in ONE region to assume it's a more accurate resale value for all markets than an industrial publication like KBB. Not only that, you can mosey on over to the personals section and find a cheap hooker for Friday night!

 

Damn you can't even make this shit up!!

 

These are dealers ad prices not some private. so you cannot make excuse abotu craigslist.
Look at the options. It is $60K car.

GS350 has best fuel economy in mid size sedans. On Edmunds test it achieved 24 mpg. and RL is barely 18mpg.
So you cannot say RL is value in maintiance and running. there is no push button in RL 2007. Lexus advance engine and transmission make it more than SH-AWD value.

 

 

First my friend, take a deep breath and hear me on this one; I am not trying to bash the RL. Hell, I own one. But facts are facts.

Also, since I own one I am fairly in tune with it's value. You are right. My 3 year old RL CMBS is worth around 25k right now. My dealer said that what he'd give me right now as a possible trade in. KBB says it also. He also told me honestly that he figured to fetch around 28-29k for it. All that actually jives with what you said above.

Where you start going off the rails, is when you say the KBB is unreliable. I guess it's accurate for the RL but off for the others? Keep in mind, this isn't really KBB's opinion. It's not subjective really. They are just compiling data from sales at auction and by dealers. Even if it's skewed, at least it will be skewed consistently and the general ranking between the different cars will be valid even if the specific percentages are not exactly true to life. That's why I didn't grab the NADA number for the GS. It was compiled using different methods and would be invalid in the set for comparison.

About Craigs List. KBB are not making this shit up. To compare this source of data to "for sale" cars on Craigs List is invalid. That's like comparing the price of "for sale" to "Sold" houses and expecting them to be the same. People can ask whatever they want for their cars and houses. What matters is what it actually SOLD for. The two groups (for sale and sold) are not relatable.

I'm not getting sucked into a pissing match with you. You made a statement. It perked my interest. I got some data to confirm it. There's the data. Believe it or don't believe it. But for me, the question is answered.

EDIT: Regarding the last sentence you wrote above. Keep in mind it's true my dealer seems willing to give me slightly less than 50%. But it's low mileage, in MINT condition, and NOT 4 years old yet. It's only 3. The percentages I pulled from KBB were all for 4 year old cars. Sorry, if you didn't notice that in the original post with those numbers

 

SSFTSX saying Craigslist as more accurate than KBB

 

2007 is clearly 4 year old even if it is 3 year in operation. It is a pre-MMC car.
2007-2008-2009-2010. unlike 535 and GS350.
and remember 2010 models are already discounting since 2011 models of mid size are on sale. BMW 2011 5 series is onsale since June. similar is 2011 M37.
KBB is pulling 4 year old 5 , ES, M values and all of them are pre MMC. Even MMC models are deeply depreciated. E class values are basiclly in toilet.

Only 2009 Audi A6 3.0T are holding values.

 

nope it is dealer advertizments. not personal sales on craigslist.

 

I guess its accurate to know what people are asking for their cars, but how can that ever relate to the resale value listed on KBB, NADA, Black Book which is equated from actual sales? I can post an ad to sell my RL tomorrow and ask $60,000. That doesn't mean I'm going to get it! Means nothing in terms of deciding actual worth. I've actually seen other people in other situations struggle with that concept eventhough it seems hard to imagine.

Bottom line; How much is your car or house worth? Whatever someone is willing to give you. Doesn't matter what you think or ask

 

These are dealers asking prices not some random personal adds. 2008 RL with 27K miles. still Pre-MMC car from Infiniti Dealer.

http://sfbay.craigslist.org/sby/ctd/1893762300.html
2008 Acura RL 3.5 Sedan 4D - $36995 (San Jose)

Contact Dealer

Beshoff Infiniti
(888) 458-1387

 

It doesnt matter what they are asking, it matters what (and in this case IF) they sell for.

 

Does anyone hear that? Sounds like someone is speaking but I can't make out what they're saying. Just sounds like a bunch of jiberish?