Dear fellow Clublexus members,
I would appreciate your help in simply completing the following 7 question survey for my university assignment:

http://www.surveymonkey.com/s.aspx?sm=Hx4TUV9279D3dmSBbgQ56w_3d_3d

one down. hope that helps.

Done ... :)

Two down.

Chris

Okay, I did the survey but my answers are not that accurate since you left out a lot of choices. One example is looks. There are a lot of people that take exterior looks into account. I wouldn't buy a lot of great cars simply because I don't like the looks of it.

Did it and done.

Just finished it.

Done.

I chose BMW for the Luxury car question. FLAME ON! :D

Done.

I chose BMW for the Luxury car question. FLAME ON! :D

yea, i did too ... because they're sort of the standard when you're talking about what class of lux car you're thinking about

ie: "like a 3-series or something"

done... I chose the Benz :)

It is done.:thumbup:

OK......Done.

A big factor in luxury cars, however, is ride comfort....that issue was not factored into any of your questions/choices. Many so-called "luxury" vehicles today (in fact, most of them), judging by the suspension/seat/tire stiffness, are not "luxury" vehicles at all, but sport sedans. Seats, in turn, have also gotten much stiffer and more firmly-padded. There are almost no mass-produced vehicles left today that, ride/seat-comfort-wise, I would call TRUE luxury cars....the Lexus LS460, Lincoln Town Car, Cadillac DTS, Buick Lucerne, and Mercedes S-Class (non-AMG) come closest; but even THEY are somewhat stiffer and more responsive than their forebearers. The days of true soft-riding luxury-cars, IMO, are gone.

Done.

OK......Done.

A big factor in luxury cars, however, is ride comfort....that issue was not factored into any of your questions/choices. Many so-called "luxury" vehicles today (in fact, most of them), judging by the suspension/seat/tire stiffness, are not "luxury" vehicles at all, but sport sedans. Seats, in turn, have also gotten much stiffer and more firmly-padded. There are almost no mass-produced vehicles left today that, ride/seat-comfort-wise, I would call TRUE luxury cars....the Lexus LS460, Lincoln Town Car, Cadillac DTS, Buick Lucerne, and Mercedes S-Class (non-AMG) come closest; but even THEY are somewhat stiffer and more responsive than their forebearers. The days of true soft-riding luxury-cars, IMO, are gone.
It's funny because my first car was a Buick Century (ten years old when I got it). I'm sure the suspension and shocks were shot, but my friends and I all called it a "couch on wheels" because the ride was so soft. I look back with fondness at that car even though it didn't last very long and essentially fell apart very quickly. It didn't qualify as a luxury car though. Perhaps wannabe luxury :).

While I would agree with you mmarshall, I'm going to argue anyhow ('cause I'm strange like that).

Who says 'luxury' has to be soft? Luxury is often defined as something completely inessential but condusive to personal pleasure. So perhaps cushyness gives you inessential pleasure but that seems like only a part of what can be concidered luxury.

Hunting & jumping w. horses is concidered a luxury sport, but I don't really see too much cushyness going on there. Or how about yachting? Sure the boat may have nice amenities but as for a plush soft experience there really isn't one; the decks and outdoor lounging serfaces are hard-er, the sea can put up a bit of a fight in your destination (even when the water is calm, it's not like walking on air or anything). Lastly, how about flying? Not commuter flights in economy class, but in first class or maybe even flying the plane your self. Sure it's better than many other ways to get from A to B but it is aslo very a inessential method and not the most soft experience.

Those are all concidered 'luxury' and I think sometimes luxury is in the inessentialness of the activity, not necessarilly in the air-like comfort of it.

While I would agree with you mmarshall, I'm going to argue anyhow ('cause I'm strange like that).

Who says 'luxury' has to be soft? Luxury is often defined as something completely inessential but condusive to personal pleasure. So perhaps cushyness gives you inessential pleasure but that seems like only a part of what can be concidered luxury.

Hunting & jumping w. horses is concidered a luxury sport, but I don't really see too much cushyness going on there. Or how about yachting? Sure the boat may have nice amenities but as for a plush soft experience there really isn't one; the decks and outdoor lounging serfaces are hard-er, the sea can put up a bit of a fight in your destination (even when the water is calm, it's not like walking on air or anything). Lastly, how about flying? Not commuter flights in economy class, but in first class or maybe even flying the plane your self. Sure it's better than many other ways to get from A to B but it is aslo very a inessential method and not the most soft experience.

Those are all concidered 'luxury' and I think sometimes luxury is in the inessentialness of the activity, not necessarilly in the air-like comfort of it.

No problem. I understand your views. :) The traditional view of luxury on wheels, though, is the way I defined it....softness, plushness, and noise isolation. Those cars, over the years, have either all disappeared or have been converted to semi-sports sedans. That's partly because today's automakers are trying to have it both ways.....doing "luxury" interiors with "sport" underpinings, and dropping traditional luxury touches like wood/fake wood for aluminum and carbon-fiber.

Of course, your view of "luxury" has merit, and I don't dispute it. However, it is not the traditional view....and many of today's car buyers who like traditional luxury are all but being ignored. That is going to hurt a lot of car manufacturers in the next few years when the enormous Baby-Boom generation (the largest generation in U.S. history) retires in force and is ready for new cars. Many of them are not going to want sport sedans, but plush-mobiles like the Caddys/Lincolns/Buicks their parents had back in the 60's and 70's. Cadillac, for example, is dong well right now by selling imitation BMWs, but that's not going to work in the long run....they will have to get back to their roots.

I did one!


and to also add to the "luxury" discussion,

I think with a lot of "new money" buying power available to people a lot younger than some decades ago, I think the definition of "luxury" has evolved differently for different folks. In essence, it does seem that the main-stream "luxury" makers, BMW, Audi, MB, and Lexus...and...maybe...Jaguar.. seem to embody the different definitions of "luxury" in their cars.

I did one!


and to also add to the "luxury" discussion,

I think with a lot of "new money" buying power available to people a lot younger than some decades ago, I think the definition of "luxury" has evolved differently for different folks. In essence, it does seem that the main-stream "luxury" makers, BMW, Audi, MB, and Lexus...and...maybe...Jaguar.. seem to embody the different definitions of "luxury" in their cars.

Yes...........of the vehicles you name in your list, Jaguar and older Lexus models probably did the best job of doing true "luxury" cars. The Mercedes S-Class (non-AMG) has an excellent luxury-car ride, but, like the rival BMW 7-Series, has too many electronic and nanny-gadgets that are difficult and complex to deal with while trying to keep your eyes on the road and drive.

Done, hope this helps... :)

glad to help!

well organized and good questions. I hope this helps

Done.

I chose BMW for the Luxury car question. FLAME ON! :D

I didnt...cause here in scandinavia most MB and BMW's are the El cheapo versions...4 cylinder...no extras...cloth seats...no nav...(a few years back...most even came without el. rear windows!) whereas Lexus doesnt offer inferior equipped versions of their cars...hence why i chose Lexus ;)

Everyone, thanks for your help and suggestions! :thumbup: