IS-F owners, why chose this over the new C63?
08-08-08, 06:30 PM
#17
Well I guess my next step is to actually go sit in an IS-F as I have never even seen the inside of that car.
Thanks for the post on the AMG interior - the front seats look great but it's the rear that kills me, unles they made the AMG look different than the C350 I sat in.
Service wise I used to own a GS400 and quite frankly I think both brands are a rip off in terms of what they charge. Lexus tried to deny my warranty with a bolt on exhaust and I had to fight their legal side to warranty my problems.
Both sides charge an arm/leg to fix things out of warranty so don't think there is any advantage there.
Lexus service advisors are just simply much nicer for the most part.
rk
Thanks for the post on the AMG interior - the front seats look great but it's the rear that kills me, unles they made the AMG look different than the C350 I sat in.
Service wise I used to own a GS400 and quite frankly I think both brands are a rip off in terms of what they charge. Lexus tried to deny my warranty with a bolt on exhaust and I had to fight their legal side to warranty my problems.
Both sides charge an arm/leg to fix things out of warranty so don't think there is any advantage there.
Lexus service advisors are just simply much nicer for the most part.
rk
08-08-08, 06:40 PM
#18
And another reason to buy Lexus...
Lexus tops JD Power and Associates 3-Year Quality for the 14th Year in a Row:
Vehicle dependability improved 4.6 percent across the auto industry in 2008, according to a new study by J.D. Power and Associates.
The 38 brands included in the survey averaged 206 problems per 100 cars sold during the third year of ownership. That's 10 fewer problems than in 2007.
Lexus led the industry in the study, which is based on the results of a survey of 52,000 original owners of 2005 model-year vehicles. There were 120 problems per Lexus sold, Power said. Lexus has been atop the vehicle dependability study for 14 years.
Power said it found that customers are much less likely to recommend a vehicle if they experience significantly more problems in the third year they own it compared to during the first 90 days. Customer satisfaction increased with models that had problems per 100 vehicles sold increase by less than 35 percent.
"There is an overwhelming relationship between dependability and satisfaction," said David Sargent, vice president of automotive research at Power.
It's important that customer satisfaction stays high after owning a vehicle for three years because that's around the time when people start thinking about buying a new car, Sargent said. If someone isn't satisfied with the car she currently owns, then she's less likely to buy that same model or brand.
Every vehicle shows increases in problems by the third year compared with the first 90 days of ownership. Brands and vehicles with the lowest increases in problems topped the study.
"The ability of the manufacturer to minimize that quality deterioration has a profound effect," Sargent said. "The love of the vehicle actually blossoms over time."
That bodes well for brands like Mercury -- whose problems per 100 vehicles sold rose 25.8 percent from the 2005 Power initial quality study -- and Acura, whose rate of problems increased 37.9 percent.
Those two brands had the lowest increases in problems per 100 vehicles. The Acura MDX, Mercury Monterey and Mercury Sable had the lowest problem increases, Sargent said. The problem rates for each nameplate grew by less than 5 percent. The industry averaged a 74.5 percent increase in problems per 100 vehicles sold.
The top five brand performers (problems per 100 vehicles sold in parentheses):
1. Lexus (120)
2. Mercury (151)
3. Cadillac (155)
4. Toyota (159)
5. Acura (160)
And the worst:
33. SAAB
34. Isuzu
35. Kia
36. Suzuki
37. Land Rover
PRESS RELEASE: J.D. Power and Associates Reports
Deterioration in Vehicle Quality During the First Three Years of Ownership
Has a Major Impact on Customer Satisfaction and Advocacy
Lexus Ranks Highest in Vehicle Dependability for a 14th Consecutive Year
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.: EMBARGOED UNTIL 7 AM EDT Thursday, August 7, 2008 -- Deterioration in vehicle quality during the first three years of ownership--determined by comparing long-term dependability rates to initial quality problem rates--strongly affects overall customer satisfaction as well as customer willingness to recommend their vehicle model, according to the
J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Vehicle Dependability StudySM (VDS) released today.
The study, which measures problems experienced by original owners of 3-year-old (2005 model year) vehicles, finds that, on average, customers report experiencing 75 percent more problems in the third year of ownership than during the first 90 days. Those models with the largest increase in problem levels show the most pronounced declines in satisfaction and the likelihood of owners to recommend their vehicle model. In addition, while no model has fewer reported problems in the third year of ownership compared with the first three months, those models that average less than 35 percent problem growth actually demonstrate improvement in overall satisfaction during the three-year period.
"Understanding and minimizing quality deterioration is critical for manufacturers, as it is a key driver of owner satisfaction and word of mouth recommendations," said David Sargent, vice president of automotive research at
J.D. Power and Associates. "It is imperative that manufacturers design models that not only achieve high levels of initial quality but also attain high levels of longer-term dependability. Vehicle models that stand the test of time will help automaker profitability through superior owner satisfaction and recommendation rates."
The study also finds that five of the top 10 problems reported industry-wide in the 2008 Vehicle Dependability Study were also among the top 10 most frequently reported problems in the 2005 Initial Quality Study, suggesting that the problems are identified by owners during the initial ownership period, but have not been rectified by automakers during the three-year ownership period.
The problems include:
1. Excessive wind noise
2. Noisy brakes
3. Vehicle pulling to the left or right
4. Issues with the instrument panel/dashboard
5. Excessive window fogging
"Although automakers have achieved tremendous gains in initial quality and dependability in recent years by specifically addressing customer concerns, these particular problems still prove challenging for manufacturers," said Sargent. "The fact that these problems have endured throughout the industry for many years suggests that additional focus on these issues prior to vehicle launch would benefit not only consumers, but also automakers through increased customer satisfaction."
For a 14th consecutive year, Lexus ranks highest in vehicle dependability, improving by 25 problems per 100 vehicles since 2007 to achieve a score of 120 PP100. Following in the top five rankings are Mercury, Cadillac, Toyota and Acura, respectively.
In addition, Lexus garners six segment awards--the most of any nameplate in 2008--for the ES 330, GX 470, IS 300, LS 430, LX 470 and SC 430. Toyota follows with five segment awards for the Highlander, Prius, RAV4, Sequoia, and Tundra. Ford and Honda each capture two awards. Ford models receiving awards are the Crown Victoria and Ranger, while Honda earns awards for the Element and S2000. Models by Buick, Chevrolet, Hyundai, Mazda and Mercury each rank highest in one segment.
SAAB is the most improved brand in the study, although it continues to rank below the industry average. SAAB improves by 65 PP100 since 2007.
The study finds that long-term vehicle quality has improved by 5 percent industry-wide in 2008--with an overall decrease of 10 problems per 100 vehicles--compared with 2007. More than 60 percent of the 38 nameplates included in the study improve in 2008, compared with 2007. Among the 19 segments included in the study, the midsize premium MAV segment demonstrates the most improvement in 2008--36 PP100 fewer than in 2007. The compact car and midsize car segments also have much lower problem levels in 2008 than in 2007, and together account for more than one-half of the overall industry improvement.
"The gains in dependability for compact and midsize vehicles are good news for consumers who are downsizing their vehicles due to increasing fuel prices," said Sargent. "Consumers who purchase these smaller vehicles benefit not only from immediate gains in fuel economy, but also from improvements in long-term dependability, compared with previous years."
The 2008 Vehicle Dependability Study is based on responses from more than 52,000 original owners of 2005 model-year vehicles. The study was fielded from January through April 2008.
Find more detailed findings on vehicle dependability as well as model photos and specs by watching a video, reading an article and reviewing brand and segment dependability ratings at JDPower.com.
Lexus tops JD Power and Associates 3-Year Quality for the 14th Year in a Row:
Vehicle dependability improved 4.6 percent across the auto industry in 2008, according to a new study by J.D. Power and Associates.
The 38 brands included in the survey averaged 206 problems per 100 cars sold during the third year of ownership. That's 10 fewer problems than in 2007.
Lexus led the industry in the study, which is based on the results of a survey of 52,000 original owners of 2005 model-year vehicles. There were 120 problems per Lexus sold, Power said. Lexus has been atop the vehicle dependability study for 14 years.
Power said it found that customers are much less likely to recommend a vehicle if they experience significantly more problems in the third year they own it compared to during the first 90 days. Customer satisfaction increased with models that had problems per 100 vehicles sold increase by less than 35 percent.
"There is an overwhelming relationship between dependability and satisfaction," said David Sargent, vice president of automotive research at Power.
It's important that customer satisfaction stays high after owning a vehicle for three years because that's around the time when people start thinking about buying a new car, Sargent said. If someone isn't satisfied with the car she currently owns, then she's less likely to buy that same model or brand.
Every vehicle shows increases in problems by the third year compared with the first 90 days of ownership. Brands and vehicles with the lowest increases in problems topped the study.
"The ability of the manufacturer to minimize that quality deterioration has a profound effect," Sargent said. "The love of the vehicle actually blossoms over time."
That bodes well for brands like Mercury -- whose problems per 100 vehicles sold rose 25.8 percent from the 2005 Power initial quality study -- and Acura, whose rate of problems increased 37.9 percent.
Those two brands had the lowest increases in problems per 100 vehicles. The Acura MDX, Mercury Monterey and Mercury Sable had the lowest problem increases, Sargent said. The problem rates for each nameplate grew by less than 5 percent. The industry averaged a 74.5 percent increase in problems per 100 vehicles sold.
The top five brand performers (problems per 100 vehicles sold in parentheses):
1. Lexus (120)
2. Mercury (151)
3. Cadillac (155)
4. Toyota (159)
5. Acura (160)
And the worst:
33. SAAB
34. Isuzu
35. Kia
36. Suzuki
37. Land Rover
PRESS RELEASE: J.D. Power and Associates Reports
Deterioration in Vehicle Quality During the First Three Years of Ownership
Has a Major Impact on Customer Satisfaction and Advocacy
Lexus Ranks Highest in Vehicle Dependability for a 14th Consecutive Year
WESTLAKE VILLAGE, Calif.: EMBARGOED UNTIL 7 AM EDT Thursday, August 7, 2008 -- Deterioration in vehicle quality during the first three years of ownership--determined by comparing long-term dependability rates to initial quality problem rates--strongly affects overall customer satisfaction as well as customer willingness to recommend their vehicle model, according to the
J.D. Power and Associates 2008 Vehicle Dependability StudySM (VDS) released today.
The study, which measures problems experienced by original owners of 3-year-old (2005 model year) vehicles, finds that, on average, customers report experiencing 75 percent more problems in the third year of ownership than during the first 90 days. Those models with the largest increase in problem levels show the most pronounced declines in satisfaction and the likelihood of owners to recommend their vehicle model. In addition, while no model has fewer reported problems in the third year of ownership compared with the first three months, those models that average less than 35 percent problem growth actually demonstrate improvement in overall satisfaction during the three-year period.
"Understanding and minimizing quality deterioration is critical for manufacturers, as it is a key driver of owner satisfaction and word of mouth recommendations," said David Sargent, vice president of automotive research at
J.D. Power and Associates. "It is imperative that manufacturers design models that not only achieve high levels of initial quality but also attain high levels of longer-term dependability. Vehicle models that stand the test of time will help automaker profitability through superior owner satisfaction and recommendation rates."
The study also finds that five of the top 10 problems reported industry-wide in the 2008 Vehicle Dependability Study were also among the top 10 most frequently reported problems in the 2005 Initial Quality Study, suggesting that the problems are identified by owners during the initial ownership period, but have not been rectified by automakers during the three-year ownership period.
The problems include:
1. Excessive wind noise
2. Noisy brakes
3. Vehicle pulling to the left or right
4. Issues with the instrument panel/dashboard
5. Excessive window fogging
"Although automakers have achieved tremendous gains in initial quality and dependability in recent years by specifically addressing customer concerns, these particular problems still prove challenging for manufacturers," said Sargent. "The fact that these problems have endured throughout the industry for many years suggests that additional focus on these issues prior to vehicle launch would benefit not only consumers, but also automakers through increased customer satisfaction."
For a 14th consecutive year, Lexus ranks highest in vehicle dependability, improving by 25 problems per 100 vehicles since 2007 to achieve a score of 120 PP100. Following in the top five rankings are Mercury, Cadillac, Toyota and Acura, respectively.
In addition, Lexus garners six segment awards--the most of any nameplate in 2008--for the ES 330, GX 470, IS 300, LS 430, LX 470 and SC 430. Toyota follows with five segment awards for the Highlander, Prius, RAV4, Sequoia, and Tundra. Ford and Honda each capture two awards. Ford models receiving awards are the Crown Victoria and Ranger, while Honda earns awards for the Element and S2000. Models by Buick, Chevrolet, Hyundai, Mazda and Mercury each rank highest in one segment.
SAAB is the most improved brand in the study, although it continues to rank below the industry average. SAAB improves by 65 PP100 since 2007.
The study finds that long-term vehicle quality has improved by 5 percent industry-wide in 2008--with an overall decrease of 10 problems per 100 vehicles--compared with 2007. More than 60 percent of the 38 nameplates included in the study improve in 2008, compared with 2007. Among the 19 segments included in the study, the midsize premium MAV segment demonstrates the most improvement in 2008--36 PP100 fewer than in 2007. The compact car and midsize car segments also have much lower problem levels in 2008 than in 2007, and together account for more than one-half of the overall industry improvement.
"The gains in dependability for compact and midsize vehicles are good news for consumers who are downsizing their vehicles due to increasing fuel prices," said Sargent. "Consumers who purchase these smaller vehicles benefit not only from immediate gains in fuel economy, but also from improvements in long-term dependability, compared with previous years."
The 2008 Vehicle Dependability Study is based on responses from more than 52,000 original owners of 2005 model-year vehicles. The study was fielded from January through April 2008.
Find more detailed findings on vehicle dependability as well as model photos and specs by watching a video, reading an article and reviewing brand and segment dependability ratings at JDPower.com.
08-09-08, 02:28 AM
#20
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will make this very simple....today, my cousin went down to Beverly Hills MB and bought a brand new C63. 32 minutes after leaving the dealership, the "CHECK ENGINE" light came on and hasn't been off since. The car is going back to the dealer tomorrow. That would never happen with the beloved F. I rest my case.
08-09-08, 05:07 AM
#21
Driver
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MO
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will make this very simple....today, my cousin went down to Beverly Hills MB and bought a brand new C63. 32 minutes after leaving the dealership, the "CHECK ENGINE" light came on and hasn't been off since. The car is going back to the dealer tomorrow. That would never happen with the beloved F. I rest my case.
sorry thought that was funny. Sorry about your cousin C63, cause that type of stuff on the real aren't very funny after all. However I still haven't had any problem with my F, which makes me very happy
08-09-08, 05:44 AM
#22
Think of it this way, the c63 as a lambo, and the isf as maybe a 911 or nsx. While the c63 is a lot faster the is-f is just an easier car to live with and while it could burn almost anything that would ever pull up to you, it can also be used as a daily driver without worry
08-09-08, 05:57 PM
#23
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Illinois
Posts: 987
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I personally cannot comment on the reliability of Mercedes. But I wouldn't go so far as saying the C63 is so much faster than the IS-F. I agree with the previous post that said the ISF is more of a driveable car. I've spoke with race instructors who have run driving schools for both the ISF and the C63. And they told me the fastest quarter mile they could lay down with the C63 was around a 12.7-12.8. Their jaws dropped when i told them I already hit a 12.8 in my ISF. They also said the seven speed tranny in the C63 is not even in the same league as the Lexus 8-speed tranny. Fit and finish and reliability of Lexus have always been second to none.
I think anyone would be more than happy to have either, but the Lexus definitely wins in my book. It is just a very capable car, whether you want to drive more mildly it can be subtle, or open it up and it becomes a monster. Good luck with your decision.
I think anyone would be more than happy to have either, but the Lexus definitely wins in my book. It is just a very capable car, whether you want to drive more mildly it can be subtle, or open it up and it becomes a monster. Good luck with your decision.
08-09-08, 07:56 PM
#24
Reliability (I've personally had 2 brand new MBs that had too many problems), fuel consumption (not a real big deal, but I wanna be green for my children), and to me, it just looks plain better.
I'd imagine that the C63 engine/exhaust noise would/could get to me after a while. When I had an intake on my IS350, it was simply too loud to live with. I like the dual nature of the IS-F. Quiet, refined, smooth, and fuel efficient when you just drive it normally and loud, rough, gas guzzler, quick when you want it to be.
In addition, Lexus ergonomics/electronics are more intuitive and IMO, ahead of MB.
I'd imagine that the C63 engine/exhaust noise would/could get to me after a while. When I had an intake on my IS350, it was simply too loud to live with. I like the dual nature of the IS-F. Quiet, refined, smooth, and fuel efficient when you just drive it normally and loud, rough, gas guzzler, quick when you want it to be.
In addition, Lexus ergonomics/electronics are more intuitive and IMO, ahead of MB.
08-09-08, 08:15 PM
#25
Driver
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: MO
Posts: 116
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's me again I agree with all the above, plus i personally think the front of the C63 is mean, nice, and agressive(i love the front side view of it) but omg the back is so ugly but that's just me tho
I agree with all the above, plus i personally think the front of the C63 is mean, nice, and agressive(i love the front side view of it) but omg the back is so ugly but that's just me tho
08-10-08, 09:03 AM
#26
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: NC
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will make this very simple....today, my cousin went down to Beverly Hills MB and bought a brand new C63. 32 minutes after leaving the dealership, the "CHECK ENGINE" light came on and hasn't been off since. The car is going back to the dealer tomorrow. That would never happen with the beloved F. I rest my case.
I will stick with the ISF for sure.
08-10-08, 10:07 AM
#27
Driver
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 197
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would recommend (is that s4play who first posted?) you test drive both and let us know what you think.
I wanted a C63 originally after a "paper" review but nobody would return my inquiries for a drive (I guess I was not important enough, even though a veteran MB customer) so I leaned to the ISF (I did not consider the M3 because of its "antique" manual gear box, if they had had a DSG perhaps I would have tried it). Note that no car in this group is much faster than the other, we are just talking about 1% to 2% depending on the test, which can easily be overcome by the driver experience or his "payload" in the car at the time.
Yes MB is expensive to own because it's not reliable (I can detail on that and show you how much it cost for "unscheduled" maintenance to own my last MB). Also, MB and BMW are everywhere around here (like people believe if they buy a MB they change their class status - as told by my previous MB dealer when I bought my last one) and having an ISF is a little more exclusive. That said some MB are really nice (CL65, SL65).
Let us know.
I wanted a C63 originally after a "paper" review but nobody would return my inquiries for a drive (I guess I was not important enough, even though a veteran MB customer) so I leaned to the ISF (I did not consider the M3 because of its "antique" manual gear box, if they had had a DSG perhaps I would have tried it). Note that no car in this group is much faster than the other, we are just talking about 1% to 2% depending on the test, which can easily be overcome by the driver experience or his "payload" in the car at the time.
Yes MB is expensive to own because it's not reliable (I can detail on that and show you how much it cost for "unscheduled" maintenance to own my last MB). Also, MB and BMW are everywhere around here (like people believe if they buy a MB they change their class status - as told by my previous MB dealer when I bought my last one) and having an ISF is a little more exclusive. That said some MB are really nice (CL65, SL65).
Let us know.
08-10-08, 10:25 AM
#28
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: CA
Posts: 45
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I wanted a fun daily driver that was RELIABLE and the Lexus IS-F seemedto fit the bill. The European cars I've owned in the past (95 M3, 2002 C240, 01 Porsche Turbo) have been plagued with problems, especially the C240. Right now I'm stuck with a 5 grand transmission rebuild for my 01 911 Turbo which should have been covered by warranty 
Now I know people will bring up warranties, but even if the repair bill is free there's the issue of time. I have a very busy work schedule and I value my time. In the case of the MB C240 I had to go back to my local dealer multiple times within the FIRST year of ownership just to get simple electronic problems fixed.
Sure the C63 or M3 might be a few tenth of a seconds faster around some
course, but in the real world these differences are insignificant and don't mean anything to me. I want a car that will be reliable and which I wont have to keep wasting my time taking it back to the dealer.
Also I haven't seen another IS-F yet here in OC/LA, which is interesting since you'll see all types of cars on any given day in So Cal.
Now I know people will bring up warranties, but even if the repair bill is free there's the issue of time. I have a very busy work schedule and I value my time. In the case of the MB C240 I had to go back to my local dealer multiple times within the FIRST year of ownership just to get simple electronic problems fixed.
Sure the C63 or M3 might be a few tenth of a seconds faster around some
course, but in the real world these differences are insignificant and don't mean anything to me. I want a car that will be reliable and which I wont have to keep wasting my time taking it back to the dealer.
Also I haven't seen another IS-F yet here in OC/LA, which is interesting since you'll see all types of cars on any given day in So Cal.
08-10-08, 07:48 PM
#29
Pole Position
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: CA
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well I guess my next step is to actually go sit in an IS-F as I have never even seen the inside of that car.
Thanks for the post on the AMG interior - the front seats look great but it's the rear that kills me, unles they made the AMG look different than the C350 I sat in.
Service wise I used to own a GS400 and quite frankly I think both brands are a rip off in terms of what they charge. Lexus tried to deny my warranty with a bolt on exhaust and I had to fight their legal side to warranty my problems.
Both sides charge an arm/leg to fix things out of warranty so don't think there is any advantage there.
Lexus service advisors are just simply much nicer for the most part.
rk
Thanks for the post on the AMG interior - the front seats look great but it's the rear that kills me, unles they made the AMG look different than the C350 I sat in.
Service wise I used to own a GS400 and quite frankly I think both brands are a rip off in terms of what they charge. Lexus tried to deny my warranty with a bolt on exhaust and I had to fight their legal side to warranty my problems.
Both sides charge an arm/leg to fix things out of warranty so don't think there is any advantage there.
Lexus service advisors are just simply much nicer for the most part.
rk
FYI... I got the Lexus because that is what I wanted, I don't care for euro cars. You should decided what you want and not let us decide for you.
08-10-08, 10:09 PM
#30
Rick when you came by on Thur, you should have asked me for the keys to the car. Anyways come over anytime you can go for a test drive.
FYI... I got the Lexus because that is what I wanted, I don't care for euro cars. You should decided what you want and not let us decide for you.
FYI... I got the Lexus because that is what I wanted, I don't care for euro cars. You should decided what you want and not let us decide for you.
thanks Steven for the offer you are too kind but I have this thing for driving other people's cars!
I appreciate all the replies and yes I'm leaning heavily towards a Lexus for my 4-door sedan as I had great experience with my GS ownership back in college.
Will go test drive an IS-F at Magnusson Lexus later this week and report back.
rk