MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

He's right. Yes, there is the odd buyer or two that will cross shop anything but it's certainly not the norm. And you aren't a 5-Series owner so he wasn't even referring to you in the first place.

winstrolvtec

I NEVER SAID IT WAS.

My last post did not imply that the areas where the TL is objectively better are necessarily luxury but neither are your arguments about utility, ipod integration, etc, etc. The point was more along the lines of how you consider everything that you find superior as automatically luxury when that may not be the case to everyone which clearly represents personal bias, which does exist on both sides but you display yours very strongly, proving another point. To say you prefer this or that instead or what is missing in comparison is fine and is one thing but to consider it all luxury related and not consider or exclude the subjective, to make a case that this is more or that is less luxury, is ignorant.

Your intrepreting luxury however you want or only what that means to you without actual standards or official definition (which don't exist) but don't allow others to also do so. Size is not luxury but size is no less luxurious than any of your points, it depends on your perception. At least more size gives an added dimension of space and comfort which is more luxury related than utility, advanced features or permanent AWD which many mainstream cars have just the same.

I wouldn't go around implying we don't consider what is missing in the TL or what others have. Most of us TL owners don't agree to the extent that you make it out to be and others who do probably don't feel it isn't worth it financially but what you are missing is the same consideration of what is missing on the other side as well, whether that relates to your definition of luxury or not, cause it might to someone else.

I also wouldn't say no one is cross shopping a TL and 5 series no matter how well equipped, afterall you basically cross shopped a TL and an S4 and based on what you paid for each, it's roughly the same difference as what you could have got a loaded 5 series or A6 for, which is what a large mid sized consumer would be looking at instead of an S4, in the same price range. You basically prove what you are making an argument against (again) which is an obvious contradiction on your part.

Steven Bell

iTrader: (2)

Guys, if this debate can't stay civil, we'll just stop the discussion. It's a hot topic, but when it starts getting personal, we start getting away from the real topic.

Don't lash out personally, stay on topic, and we'll continue. Otherwise, we'll call it a day.

lesha

5 series and TL owners are cross shopping each other. It is just some people with less money to spend realize that they can get into a TL with same options as 5 series (similar car, similar performance, also "luxury") and save 15-20K. Or some people with money to spend, simply choose not to pay extra for the BMW badge or the difference between 5 series and TL is simply not worth the extra $ to them. Also for same $, a person might choose a fully equipped TL vs. base 5. But if $ is not an issue, I would assume people go for the 5.

compewterbleu

Go Lesha, go Lesha, go, go, go...*doing the mixing bowl dance*

TechnoCat

Wow! 5 paragraphs for you to set up and beat a straw man!

Every time you mention size and value, you show your bias and inability to grasp the basis of "luxury". There is no rational definition of luxury that includes "value" other than perhaps "flaunts a lack of..." And in cars, the priciest are the smallest - e.g. Ferrari, Porsche, Lamborghini... by your consistent inclusion, a Honda minivan is a better luxury car because it has all the same features, but is larger and cheaper.

The iPod interface is, however, indicative. In every definition.

• In horology (watches), attention to detail and completeness of implementation, such as the finishing (decoration) of the (typically ETA or Selita) movement and the engraving of the crown.
• In shirts and jackets, properly taped seams.
• In a luxury hotel, that the linens coordinate with the decor and that things just work... though, in another affront to your "value" fetish, they charge for things that are included at hotels costing half as much.
• A luxury home will have the screws on the light sockets either hidden or all pointing the same direction.

These things do not define luxury. Most of them aren't relevant to the basic operation of the item, and most people will never notice the stitches. But they aren't pointless either; the drape is better, the presentation nicer, the attention to detail implies that nothing else was missed either.

The iPod interface is a possible symptom, not a sole measure. The sunroof noise, the lack of folding seats, the hard surfaces everywhere, the lack of integration in the electronics are all just symptoms. A symptom isn't proof of a disease, but get enough together and you can form a picture.

Size and value are anti-symptoms. Tell someone you just bought a car with leather, nav, AWD, sunroof, bluetooth, seat heaters... and it's a station wagon and you got it for $25,000. Ask if it's a luxury car like a Mercedes.

I understand your insecurity on this, but please stop projecting them onto anyone disagreeing with you. The TL is an amazing large sports/performance sedan; it doesn't have to compete with Mercedes et al.

Mr Marco

^Someone missed Your memo>

compewterbleu

Uh oh, Technokitty is in an uproar now playa!

winstrolvtec

Your basis of luxury is only what it means to you or how one wants to interpret it, having nothing to do with size or value on my end.

Where did I say my idea or any idea of luxury was or should be value or size? The concepts of luxury and value don't mix, I agree, but when it comes to how they apply to automobiles, I don't see how value and luxury can't co-exist.

A few months back BMW was clearing out 2010 5 series for $10k under sticker, while that is regarded as more luxurious car than a TL or A/S4, it now becomes the better or equal value also.

Size alone is not luxury but when a few cars compete within the same perceived level of luxury, such as entry level, mid level, etc, the larger car can create a more luxurious effect but that doesn't mean size is luxury necessarily. Do you consider grey areas in life or does everything have to be so black and white?

Simply because a TL costs less and is regarded as a good value, does not mean it has to be less luxurious. There is obvious differences in production and costs of Japs, Americans, and Germans and that includes profit margins and how what they charge reflects that. Price alone does not dictate luxury or value.

I agree but the issue is you only consider that for one side. There are plenty of areas where the TL is better in those regards and areas Audi missed in the A4 also which have nothing to do with size or value but you don't include them (if you even can see what they are) because it only takes away from your position but unlike you, I am not here declaring anything more or less luxurious, you are, and what I am saying is that I don't think there is enough to warrant that claim for either car, which ultimately is highly subjective when you are dealing with two cars around the same perceived level of luxury. We are not talking about a Bentley and a Corolla, we are talking about two luxury brands entry level cars, it's as simple as that.

Ask? Who am I asking? It's more important what I think than what someone tells me. Again, that's perception. Perception is not necessarily luxury either. Why can't the station wagon be as luxurious? Does it not rival it in a number of luxurious ways? Can't it also have areas that are considered more luxurious, especially if we use your definitions of luxury which includes utility, differences in features, and personal biases?

You must be as insecure as you suggest that I am to be projecting it just the same, if not more, with anyone who disagrees with you as well. Your right, a TL does not have to compete with a MB in terms of luxury at all but it does and we are talking about a C class in particular which is nothing fancy or anything that is amazingly more luxurious than a TL and that includes the 3 series and A4.

MB, BMW, and Audi are more luxurious brands than Acura, I would not disagree but that should not be confused with how every competitive model compares to the other individually.

TechnoCat

That bit in purple I nominate for Run-On Sentence of the Week!

What specifically am I overlooking that the TL has and the S4 lacks, other than items that are mutually-exclusive to a higher level of luxury? (For example, the cup cover is mutually exclusive to the fully adjustable in both height and reach of the center armrest, which the TL lacks.) I have granted that the use of TPM is probably more luxurious, though lower tech and less convenient, than the differential monitoring the Audi uses; what are some other examples?

Another straw man. It's a false comparison. Your choices are to either speak the language everyone else is, or to make up your own definitions. You are doing the latter, every time you bring size and value into luxury. On the other hand, at least you acknowledge it (and even seem proud of it); I'm just saying that as long as you take the position that "words mean exactly what I choose them to mean, no more, no less" (paraphrasing from Alice), you have little grounds for attacking anyone else's.

I agree, but do you agree? How, given how personal you consider the concept of luxury, and that you consider value and size to be parts of it, can you possibly say any brand is more luxurious than another?

smarty666

I can't understand your insecurities that Audi is not the luxury car company that BMW, MB , and Lexus are in this country.

I agree with you on some points but the things you pick in choose as saying Audi is better than Acura in luxury terms shows your bias against Acura.

As I pointed out in another thread you went off topic on, Audi is if anything, on the same level of Acura and Infiniti. There is much much more to luxury and image then what offerings there are, what features are offered, etc and that is what your argument is as to why Audi is so much better then Acura and on the level of MB, BMW, and Lexus.

Problem is, there is more to luxury then that which myself and many other Acura people have been trying to get through to you but it's like having a conversation with a wall, it just bounces back. You can't say that all things that make Acura advantageous and luxury are not really luxury and Audi is better, but then throw a blind eye as to the things that are still making Audi a lesser "luxury" company. That is just extreme hypocrisy on your part.

Let's talk about some of the things that don't put Audi in the same luxury category as MB, Lexus, and BMW.

1) They have consistently failed in sales in the 50K plus market (just like Acura and Infiniti has)

2) There total sales are near the bottom of the luxury market, with Acura and Cadillac selling more than Audi does consistently each month.

3) Audi stealership experience is about the same level as Acura and Infiniti but no where near that of BMW, Lexus, or MB which makes Audi less luxurious then the former mentioned.

4) Except for the super rich, I mean $70k plus market, reliability is a factor in consideration for luxury for most common sense folk. Audi still has lack luster reliability across most of its model line-up, while BMW and MB have been able to gain quite an advantage over them in this regard

5) Brand image is similar to that of Acura and Infiniti as well. I know of common folk (people not interested in cars) that didn't even know Audi was a luxury company but as soon as you mentioned the word Lexus, BMW, or MB they knew exactly what you were talking about or when asked, named one of those 3 brands in the same sentence as luxury. That has all to do with brand image and prestige then anything else which unfortunately Audi is lacking as is Acura now.

If anything, Audi is no better (or more luxurious) then Acura when all is said and totaled, but b/c they offer certain models and features but fail in other luxury defining categories that Acura does the same or better in, they both equal out. What I find quite comical with you is, when people disagree with your assessment, you post back that they are just full of BS and that you really can't compare car company to car company, yet you consistently post about how better Audi is to Acura and compare the two brands.

Have you even been to Audizine? You should really check it out. I've read horror stories of new 2009 and 2010 Audi owners that have scared me shitless!

I never knew I'd come to the defense of the 4G TL people. Damn, I must be in the holiday spirit or something!

HAPPY TURKEY DAY EVERYONE!!!

winstrolvtec

That's not actually my point as we can pointlessly sit here all day discuss details and functions and how they related to each owns' variation of what luxury is. The point is, it's ok for you to defend those areas as mutaully exclusive for the Audi but you don't also do so for the TL and it appears you think no one else should be able do so either.

Again it's a perception issue because you consider that for one side but not the other which only suggests strong bias and a higher regard for one over the other and that's fine but don't go putting everything through your fliter and declaring the S4 the king of luxury when there are more luxurious options for it's price points or that it is in another league or that Acura doesn't and basically can't compete. You don't see anything wrong with making such bold statements? Who the hell are you?

So I am the one making up definitions? This is coming from the guy who thinks Celsius temperature readouts and fold down seats are the epitome of luxury. I bring up size and value but not pertaining to luxury only to the cars in comparison and you can't seem to differentiate that. I am not attacking you, sorry if you feel that way but besides what any term means or how it is interpreted by either one of us, I noticed that you can't seem to consider how or where a modern day station wagon could be as luxurious or more than MB, lets say a C class. Are you suggesting that it is not possible? Or maybe that only public perception defines the reality of the situation?

It's not what I think personally in relation to it but how each individual's thoughts on it come to be, which should not always be what everybody else thinks or wants you to think.

As I have said a couple of times now value and size are not a part of luxury so why you keep running with that idea, I don't know. To your question, when you are talking about a Rolls vs a Civic there is no mistake about what is luxury what is not. When you are talking about mid levels or entry vehicle's, etc, they are considered that for a reason so to make a case that this or that is on another level and that they don't compete is foolish. When they are very similar in this regard, luxury becomes much more subjective than it already is and personal biases should be regarded as so and not luxury.

I am not here to suggest that what you find superior in an S4 is not superior, it may be to you but understand that most of it is largely subjective and may not be the case for everyone. I am sure there are objective versions of that as well and many of those I would probably even agree with but just how much of it (be it objective or subjective) is luxury related is really up for debate, you should know that.

The value and size of the TL is a personal bias and is not related to luxury but I do believe that many of your personal biases are also not luxury related although you consider them to be probably because it's an Audi and we know how you feel personally about how Audi is regarded as a luxury brand over an Acura.

JM2010 SH-AWD

Nice!

You see, the beauty of Acuras (and Infinitis and Lexuses) is that after 18 years, they aren't all crapped out with blown water pumps, fuel pumps, rusted out quarter panels, fritzed electronics, and so on. So, perhaps contrary to your experience, an 18 year old Acura is still more than serviceable. Take a look at the pix in my garage and I think you'll agree.

For me, the price of a 5 Series was not the obstacle you suppose it to be. What were obstacles were inferior value, sketchy reliability, missing features and and a lesser driving experience. The fact that the TL was 20K less was a bonus.

winstrolvtec

Thank you for also pointing this out, I know I am not the only one to see this. We all will disagree to an extent, it's an internet forum afterall but one can't be so one sided.

One can't point out all these areas why a car is more luxury than another (even why one brand is and the other is not) when the cars and brands are already perceived as being on the same level (for the most part) and most of the areas and points in discussion might not really have anything to do with luxury and/or are mostly a basis from opinion. One could argue that they do because luxury is such a variable, arbitrary, and subjective term but then one can't, at the same time, say that other areas like reliability, resale, crash test, value and size can't also be argued or included in that and that is what is taking place.

There is no consideration in the reverse and you can't make a case using those types of examples without also doing it the other way or for the other side, otherwise it is obvious justification of what is being favored, in this it's Audi and the S4. For the record I am not staking a claim for anything being more or less luxurious so I can't really be guilty of the same thing this time.

TechnoCat

Shortly after I got the S4, I posted a comparison of the two and it included omissions in the S4 relative to the TL. The Audi quality problems lately are not really a reduction of luxury - Porsche had a terrible engine problem 10 years ago, and BMW has had quite a few problems of late - but Audi's handling of the B8 S4 water pump failures will do a lot to destroy Audi's reputation for taking good care of people and not stranding them.

Still, when you think of the ultra-luxury brands, you probably include Ferrari, Maserati, Lamborghini, etc.. None known for even middling reliability. Aston Martin used to be terrible; the Lagonda was a reliability disaster. Lotus was dreadful for a long time too, before retooling into lightweight cars with Toyota engines. This is why I don't consider "reliability" a big "luxury" factor, but certainly it will hurt Audi sales and reputation.

Winslovtec, where you and I seem to part paths is that I am willing to acknowledge that, for (e.g.) $42K, you get a faster sportier (and, yes, larger and reliable) car with a TL SH-AWD, but you get a more luxurious car with an Audi A4Q optioned up to that price. In contrast, you are unwilling to see your baby as not being the best at everything, and therefore keep pulling size (and value) into the "luxury" equation. Despite not having owned both... which I have.

winstrolvtec

Reason being, your lists of reasons for the Audi being more luxury are not exclusive to the Audi. The same things you use to make the case that it is more luxurious are the same exact types of things that can also be used in favor of the TL as well and one can make the same exact case in the opposite direction using the same differences, points of emphasis, functions, features, etc, that have nothing to do with value, cost, reliabilty, size, and things of that nature which are not necessarily luxury to both you and I.

The difference is the rest of us see a large list of points on one side and a large list for the other so that all washes out. You must see that the same things exists for both sides and I just can't understand anyone making a case for areas that are not exclusive to only one. Your reasoning is not exclusive or concrete enough to make the claims you do. No one here has made any claim that the TL is more luxurious, like you have and using the same criteria, for that same reason.

You want to tell me you like this better and perfer that instead, I have no problem with it but most of us see that you are mistakingly confusing using your personal perception, biases, and preferences and that you have owned both cars, in attempt to justify your claim and position without doing so the other way, which then would be fair and nuetral.

Try this, prentend you are a 3rd party observer and have no dog in the fight, now make an AS compelling case for the TL being more luxurious than the A/S4 just as you already do for the Audi and include areas that maybe you have not noticed, considered, or are not of great importance to you personally and maybe you will understand what many of us are saying.

TechnoCat

When asked for examples of the TL being more luxurious, you always beg out. Check up-thread a few posts. Plus you consistently add size and value into the mix, where they simply don't belong.

If you really believe it, cite some examples for a change. List some areas where the TL has luxuries not found in the cars you keep comparing it to, that aren't prevented by other higher luxuries in those cars. Again, I come back to you mentioning the cup holder cover; the S4 has a fully adjustable center armrest, in both reach and angle, and therefore necessarily lacks the cover, but the armrest is almost certainly more of a luxury feature. (And the counter - the tire pressure monitors, where I conceded that the TL's would qualify as higher luxury because they read off the pressure, even though the Audi one is higher tech and allows cheaper replacement wheel/tire sets; again, value isn't part of the equation, so in this case the TL wins.)

winstrolvtec

Ok I'll do that but it will take some time as there is a lot to cover and explain so bare with me. Understand this might be largely subjective, a point I have been trying to make but I will try to limit that as much as possible and when you say areas not prevented by other higher luxuries, it's not only another double standard because you haven't done so yourself, it's also the subjective on top of the subjective.

For example, you defend the adjustable arm rest instead of cup holder cover as "higher" luxury but that is largely subjective and just like the same areas and many other areas of the TL and A/S4 as well, they could have done both but only chose one. An adjustable arm rest for comfort is understandable but both a fixed armrest and cup holder cover could be as, less, or more luxury to someone else. Then when I say larger seating surfaces and more space in the TL you will say that's size and has nothing to do with it but who's to say? So perception and preference will be another issue as I have also said. That's why I usually avoid this type of debate and still don't understand why you only engage in that. You are trying to turn what is one of the most subjective automobile criteria's (especially when the two cars are already close) into the objective.

It already sounds as though you can't indentify with what I am talking about while I see your point and understand the differences of these (and any) two vehicles, I just don't agree with how you establish your luxury claims and when I do agree, it's not to the same extent, so for me to go through the trouble and then you defend against what I am saying without an open mind it will be pointless but since this needs to turn into a pissing contest of two cars already perceived at the same level, that's what we'll do. Check back soon.

smarty666

See where you lose credibility is when you make statements like that! It has cause Audi to still be a reduction in luxury and causing a lot of people, such as myself, to still not get one of their products, despite liking the looks of them. BMW and MB have improved much more than Audi and almost every chart, graph, magazine, review, etc I have read that in. I'm not saying Audi isn't improving, but not to the extent BMW and MB have.

I haven't brought up the size issues as others, but if you check in either this thread or the TL vs Accord I brought up a short list of reasons I could think of off the stop of my head as to why Audi as a company is at the same luxury level to Acura/Infiniti in this country and not on the MB, Lexus, or BMW level. This being sales, customer service, reputation, reliability/quality issues, and others.

Be happy you haven't had repair or reliability issues with your Audi products. You seem to be in the minority on that one!

What I find interesting in your luxury feature option argument, as being more luxurious compared to other vehicles lacking those features, such as the TL in your case, my Maxima has a heated steering wheel, heated and cooled front seats, auto dimming side mirrors, panoramic moon roof, power rear sunshade, rear audio/climate controls, sport bucket seats, and other luxury features you usually can only get on a luxury sedan but I have in a Nissan Maxima. Correct me if I'm wrong, but you can't get some of these luxury features in an A4 even loaded fully so you could say based on your argument that my Maxima is more luxurious then your A4! You could make the same argument with say the Hyundai Genesis which has similar luxury features that you can't get in an A4 thus making it more luxurious then that!

TechnoCat

Obviously I don't agree about the direct-connection, but I will be more emphatic than you that Audi quality now is lower than five years ago. They've had huge problems and have plummeted in the latest quality surveys. It is a problem.

Most Audi owners don't have problems - even the worst cars today are better than the best 20 years ago - but Audi is going the wrong way on both reliability and handling it. If not for Toyota's and BMW's recent problems, Audi would be looking really bad right now.

Your point on the Maxima has been my point on this topic all along. If you accept Winslo's view that value is part of the equation, a Scion is more of a luxury car. WRT the Maxima: 1, that has always been an amazing car. A near-luxury sports-sedan without the name. And 2, the "luxury" is in the completeness of the features, not just their presence. Winslo is the one saying that a feature count (and size and value) == luxury. My position is that it's more which features (for example, selectable dash colour is more something I'd expect in a Mitsubishi, and underseat tactile transducers might be an interesting Scion option, but they wouldn't be luxury options) and in how well done (e.g. having a nav system that can't load addresses off the phone is, well, stupid and counter-luxury.)

But I do agree that these are all invisible sliding-scale perceptions. This being a fan-forum, nobody will listen to external opinions anyhow. Winslo doesn't care that Acura doesn't consider itself "luxury", or that an almost-random sampling of upscale women (at a Nordstrom and a bar in Bellevue, WA) all considered BMW and Audi in "luxury" and Acura to not be luxury. He will use the words, as he admitted, to mean what he chooses. And there's no controlling definition.

So basically I agree with you.

pickler

jeez a car is a car who gives a fk what brand it is. if everyone thought acura is the best and was driving the same car the roads would be fking boring wouldn't it. im glad different ppl like different cars but plz don't dip ur nose into our laps sayin my car is better than yours i had the money to buy what u like but i didn't because i like what i own better. now get a fkin life.

winstrolvtec

First off that is clearly not my stance on luxury, that is another perspective on luxury vehicles outside of just luxury. It is what is brought into consideration along with luxury, it's not luxury by itself. A "complete" purchase or decision in other words.

I agree about the completeness of features and all that but the REAL issue is you only consider that for Audi and not for Acura as well. What you are suggesting is that the TL does not have as much completeness (which can mean what anyone wants it to mean) and you are strongly mistaken, you really should re-consider some statements you make. It's a big perception problem on your end which you keep proving true with how you always reference what others think or how something is regarded.

Acura is not so called Tier 1 because they have no luxury sport or sedan flagship and a cheaper entry vehicle with below luxury offerings like the TSX which brings their luxury "image" down but perception and image is not necessarily luxury either and make no mistake about how the other models compete. I will prove it to you, just finishing up some points on a monster post. Coming soon.

cp3117

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

HAWAII-TSX

I just want to add. I leased a loaded 07 bmw 550 for $13000.00 dwn and $650/Month for 24 months. Then I went to an 08 bmw x5 3.0 si for $5000.00 dwn and $650/month. I decided to purchase a 2010 Acura Tl tech fwd with 18" wheels and with the 0.9% @ 5 years I spend $675 /month with $3000.00 dwn. So my point is that anyone who purchases an Acura can afford to lease a BMW which is why you can cross shop. I think comparing leasing a BMW to purchasing an Acura is a good point because I would never want to own a bmw with all its problems. I dont care if other people consider Acuras a luxury brand or not. All I care about is that I love my car. AND I DO!!!

shabadoo25

I just read a golf magazine that had a special section on luxury cars. Every kind of beamer, Mercedes and Infiniti were discussed. Heck, even the Hyundai Equus was talked about.

There wasn't a single Acura in there.

smarty666

Every once in a while you'll see something like that. It's funny, in my local AutoShopper, there is a luxury used car dealer about 20 minutes from me who list vehicles in their every week. Consistently, week after week, they have used BMW, Audi, MB, Infiniti, Lexus, and Caddies but never any Acura's!

Must have something against Acuras

YetiTL

This is OT as it relates to the buy/lease question.

While I agree that I would lease a german car and buy a japanese one, one thing to take into perspective is that at the end of your loan, you have an asset worth something. Maybe not much 10-15k or whatever (20k if you're happier that way). So if you apply your asset value against your payment, you'll see you ended up paying 500 $ or so a month for the TL.

Yes people cross shop BMW, Acuras, Audi, MB and all that. I did and I still do. What I think is that we'll see a shift in the car buying perception in the next 5-10 years. As generation Y ages, the border between luxury vs. premium will diminish steadily. It has already started quite a bit.

As for smarty666, in my home province, all the premium and luxury cars = old people cars. They are much more expensive up North (Canadian TL SH-AWD have an MRSP of 48,5K + taxes so it's a 55-60k $ CDN car). Acuras might be more appealing to younger people perhaps?

TechnoCat

Just to fan the flames here a bit...

One of my friends just wrote me that he's considering switching from BMW (he's on his second) to Audi, knowing I'd owned Audis for years and that I have an Acura TL SH-AWD 6MT (I'd given him several rides in it.) Apparently he didn't know I'd traded it in a few months ago. His response when I wrote him back?

And prior to him getting his first BMW, he was a confirmed repeat Honda buyer.

Of course "cheap feeling" isn't quantitative. It's personal, it's perceptual and it won't make it into a checklist. If you like your car, it doesn't feel cheap to you.

docboy

Do you know why your friend wants an Audi now? Is there something about his BMW, or BMW in general, he does not like?

draph

Wow, five pages of "what is luxury". All I can conclude from this debate is that the automotive marketing types have had huge success on impacting the car-buying population.

My personal opinion is that those who really care about whether their car is classified as "luxury" are the types who care more about image than how it drives. This is why BMW is slowly slipping away from being an ultimate driving machine to the ultimate image-mobile, where LED everything and lots of cool interior ambient lighting matter; but lifeless, non-communicative electric steering doesn't. Of course, you still need to have 400+ hp, even if 95% of your buyers rarely go past half-thottle, or the "luxury" won't seem sufficiently authentic- you can't forget about the dictionary definition of luxury being an indulgence one rarely, if ever, needs.

Acura isn't immune to the marketing - they know they've been chasing BMW in performance and image. They also know they can't or choose not to afford a dedicated rwd architecture to really compete. SH-AWD is a nice compromise technology that helps a fwd Accord architecture mimic a rwd under acceleration; and the shared architecture helps them keep the price down. Hence, their new marketing paradigm: "smart luxury", which is just another name for "value". All the features without the image for less money. Quite frankly, that's smart marketing. Would you rather be considered a shallow, image oriented person who wastes his money trying to show-off to others, or a "smart" person who get's all the performance, and better reliability for less money?

Thanks to the free-market system, there is, indeed, a class of people in our society who worry more about image than functionality. Fortunately for them, there are plenty of businesses willing to spend 10% more on materials and labor (above the mainstream competition) to fabricate a product, put a snooty label on it, charge 50% more, and those folks will buy in droves. The challenge for Marketing is to get the credibility in their product to demand the premium price. I think the best case is Macintosh for audiophile equipment. Somehow they successfully convinced a buying population that outdated tube technology sounds better - and I'm sure it does when they are playing their vinyl albums on their $25,000 turn tables through it...

TechnoCat

Other than the service and wanting more power (which he could have bought in a higher model), he's been happy with them. All he said was he test drove both the S4 and the 335 and preferred the S4. I'll learn more when we get together this week.

TechnoCat

I'm not a big fan of BMW, but I'm not in complete agreement.

BMW built their image by building reasonably reliable (not ultra-reliable) very well performing quality well appointed comfortable fast cars. There are some brands of cars you don't have to research to know that you're getting a class car. BMW and Lexus, and possibly Mercedes, fall into that category. There are other cars you don't have to research to know that they're reliable and basic. Honda comes to mind. But not Acura, even if it's more reliable in reality; it just doesn't epitomize anything so concrete.

BMW has worked on building a luxury name, of course, but you do know what the nameplate means. It isn't confused by a wide range of extremely different values.

Mr Marco

^Right on the money. Great place to end the discussion, with someone who is grounded in reality.

jazzpicker

Agree

Glashub

According to Forbes 7 out of 10 people in the PNW are on antidepressants. Portland is listed as the unhappiest city in America. You can extrapolate that through the PNW since the primary driver is lack of sun. Long, lonely days in a twilight with nothing to do but post inflammatory comments on Acurazine.

Not pointing any fingers...I'm just saying.

Here's the link, http://images.businessweek.com/ss/09...e_cities/2.htm

Mr Marco

Close but not exactly right. I have the real answer. According to the Mayan calendar, the world is in for a big change in 2012. If you look closely at this crop circle from July of this year, you can defiantly see the new grille design for the 2012 MMC TL.

Glashub

That's very cool. Thanks for the laugh.

Kingmeow

Possible that BMW, MB and Infiniti are big advertisers in that magazine.

compewterbleu

How I interpreted that; Technokitty's friend is a manic depressant on so many pills that an Isuzu Impulse might be mistaken for having better handling than a Corvette....

MyCarIsntInMyWifesName

I see more childish personal battles in this thread every time I poke my head in. Let's move on guys.