Audi vs. BMW vs. Mercedes (brakes, Acura, driver, Benz)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And; supposedly, the 1993 Lexus LS400 is arguabiley (sp) the most reliable car ever built.
Now for a good laugh: till recently, one could not buy a Lexus in Japan.
But; Toyota would gladly sell you a Toyota Celsior
What pisses me off is that their versions are so much better than ours. For instance, our Lexus IS300 was their Toyota Altezza. But their Altezza was so much better than our IS300, IMO.
What pisses me off is that their versions are so much better than ours. For instance, our Lexus IS300 was their Toyota Altezza. But their Altezza was so much better than our IS300, IMO.
I take it you are referring to the higher output engines in older Japan market cars?
Supposedly; the main reason that Toyota, etc. was leery of offering the hot stuff here was due to potential reliability issues------better the so-called 'truck' engines vs. the high winding turbo versions.
In fact: what prompted Subaru and Mitsubishi to release the WRX STi and EVO was the popularity of the above models in movies and/or the Internet.
A customer at where I work has a 2001 Japanese spec Mitsu EVO------RHD and all. I have aligned it several times.
I take it you are referring to the higher output engines in older Japan market cars?
Supposedly; the main reason that Toyota, etc. was leery of offering the hot stuff here was due to potential reliability issues------better the so-called 'truck' engines vs. the high winding turbo versions.
In fact: what prompted Subaru and Mitsubishi to release the WRX STi and EVO was the popularity of the above models in movies and/or the Internet.
A customer at where I work has a 2001 Japanese spec Mitsu EVO------RHD and all. I have aligned it several times.
Yes, Im referring to the better engines/suspension/bodies/etc. All their stuff is better than ours IMO. They even LOOK better.
And the only truck engined *** car that I can think of off the top of my head was the old Nissan 240SX with the KA engine. Once again Japan shunned us of any killer turbo setups that their Silvias had.
Also, turbo engines are not "high-winding" in any sense of the word. Its the N/A Japanese sports cars that rev to kingdom come (ie S2000, NSX, Si, etc) and those high-winding motors mostly came from Honda only.
Road test data would show that's not necessarily true.
And I think their styling is ridiculous... the same old blob- or egg-shaped "styling." Hard to tell them apart.
What? Take a look at any of the cars that are sold in Japan and sold here, theirs almost always are better in every aspect. All the stuff we get from them is de-tuned here, softened up there, porked up here and there, etc. And even though they offer us fast cars like the Lancer and STi, their version (s !!!!) are better.
As for styling? I know your tastes lie in bulking, slab sided musclecars, and thats ok. But to call these cars rediculous?
Were those photos you posted supposed to convince me?
Now that '70 Plymouth Superbird is more like it. True, some people don't like the styling, but many did and they are selling for big bucks today. The big-block engines they had didn't hurt, either.
I liked it better when cars weren't of the cookie-cutter type. In the '60s, you could tell what most cars were 100 feet away.
What? Take a look at any of the cars that are sold in Japan and sold here, theirs almost always are better in every aspect. All the stuff we get from them is de-tuned here, softened up there, porked up here and there, etc. And even though they offer us fast cars like the Lancer and STi, their version (s !!!!) are better.
As for styling? I know your tastes lie in bulking, slab sided musclecars, and thats ok. But to call these cars rediculous.
"Bulking?" Back then the American muscle cars were mid-sized. They seem large now, but that's because so many of today's cars are small, with those stumpy rear ends. Yes, I still think they look ridiculous.
Location: Lived Large in Parsippany NJ - Lived Larger in Livingston, NJ -- Now Living Huge in Bethlehem PA
466 posts, read 2,202,473 times
Reputation: 448
Hmmmmm
I test drove the 2008 Audi S6 and all I can say is wow....that will definitely be my next car -- a 435 hp V10 engine, Quattro all-wheel-drive -- I have a bimmer M3 which is rear wheel drive and sucks bigtime in snow. I have an infiniti FX35 AWD which I love as well but the 08 Audi S6 is it.
It is what I have been waiting for all this while... - IMO if bimmer can offer serious features like Audi & AWD systems with the M3 then I will stick with them else Audi here I come. -- Audi's are huge in Europe though and they sell a lot over there than they do sell here in the US.
Mercs I have not been a fan of and will never be - why? - it is not for the adrenaline rushing, live like there aint no tomorrow kind of guys like me...Mercs are for the cool relaxed folks.
============
Quote:
Originally Posted by infinity & beyond
I must admit, the quality of Mercedes has been slipping for some time - their interior materials - the plastics, woods, and leathers - are extremely cheap. I notice the same thing about BMW - interior style has deteriorated and there's definitely an air of cheapness among these makes.
Audi, on the other hand has vastly improved their vehicles since the 1980's. The quality of their interior materials is mind blowing. I always wonderred why Audi isn't as popular as Mercedes or BMW.
As far as I'm concerned, the product is just better, and this is throughout the entire lineup.
"Bulking?" Back then the American muscle cars were mid-sized. They seem large now, but that's because so many of today's cars are small, with those stumpy rear ends. Yes, I still think they look ridiculous.
Yes, theyre indeed bulky cars. Back then, like you said, might have been a different story, but Ive never seen a sports car with long overhangs, theyre all "stumpy" in the rear.
Yes, theyre indeed bulky cars. Back then, like you said, might have been a different story, but Ive never seen a sports car with long overhangs, theyre all "stumpy" in the rear.
Yes, the definition of "bulky" would vary in different decades. However, many larger modern cars (Audi, Mercedes, BMW) weigh about the same as some of the '60s muscle cars. A typical '60s muscle car weighed about 3,600-3,700 lbs.
The long overhangs did come in handy. For instance, I can keep a bicycle in the trunk of any of my cars without even bothering to take the wheels off.
And for items such as suitcases or grocery bags or boxes, no need to carefully arrange it- just toss them in!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Hmmmmm
