What Makes a Premium Car these days?

[Linas.P]

I was thinking to get IS220d or IS200t - two worst cars Lexus made and then moan here about them every day.

It is Cat-N, which means I can simply continue driving it as it is.... 

 

[Guest]

I was thinking to get IS220d or IS200t - two worst cars Lexus made and then moan here about them every day.
It is Cat-N, which means I can simply continue driving it as it is.... 
 

Sorry to hear that Linas. I can see the attraction of driving a cat N. Park anywhere, drive with no concern for stone chips and other damage. Ahhhh psychological relief.

I'm with you anyway, nothing for me in the lexus range beyond rcf. BUT I do think they are good cars. It's just if getting a hybrid I'd save cash and buy a toyota or kia.

You could get a 2012 is250 v6 with low miles quite cheap now I'd think.



Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[Big Rat]

I've got an extended loan nearly two weeks now  on a CT 66 Plate Fsport, I think it's great put £40.00 in it and done almost 480 miles so far, admittedly I'm deliberately driving it like Miss Daisy.

I think it's great well built quiet and loads of kit what's not to  like.......... Mrs Rat........ you know you want one...........a Yaris GRMN.... you say....... 😫

🐀

[Vlady]

15 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Yes you right it is 8 speed auto, not 7. But then it is incomparable with manual gearbox anyway - my point was that automatic gearbox have a choice of 8 gears to use and it tires to predict what you want, but never gets it right (that is the problem). On manual gearbox - you know exactly what you want and therefore you will shift to the gear you want, you are not predicting anything + I guess it was 5/6 gears manual so obviously you had much longer gears and wider power band in each gear to play with.

Petrol turbo engine have wider power band then diesel ones, but still nowhere near as wide power band as NA engines. Furthermore, when you see power curve of the engine that is usually done on the engine without drive train (i.e. no gearbox connected) and only from say ~2500-3500rpm to rpm limiter e.g. on diesel engine you would get hp/Torque curve for 2500-5500rpm which disregards gearing etc. and it would look rather smooth (on top they will apply smoothing as well). The realistic power delivery will be much more spiky in entire rev range even within the single gear, never-mind throughout all gears.

I think with more gears you engine has to rev less and your rev band is narrower therefore it is more economical, probably it does confuse some gearboxes but not the best (ZF) of them, this is why today auto gearboxes are quicker from standstill and slightly more economical (on paper at least) than manual GB. I agree that the manual GB gives you better car control though.

 

 

[Ben01]

Back to the topic - I have dropped subject here and there for discuss, and it looks interesting conclusion, or consensus rather, somehow close to my feelings (but in other parts I was WTF): What is important for perception of the premium car these days, this place, in "my crowd" (perception of real car, not a badge, a price tag, a brand, etc):

1) performance - yes, not, maybe; in personal preferences

2) electronic and IT gadgets - minor factor, two for a quid everywhere

3) luxury materials & gadgets - in personal taste

4) reliability - in elder cars maybe, nobody cares in a brand new car

5) styling - minor factor (over my dead cold body!)

6) comfort, ergonomy - yes

7) quiet - in personal taste, but for normal non-petrolhead public, fat YES

8 ) size of interior - combined with p.6) KING OF THE HILL, literally nobody from family, friends, etc. judge small car could be really premium. Could be premium brand car, but not premium car itself.

And it looks pretty valid - designers could deliver or marketing could fake anything and babling about CT or beema 1 series or A klasse as "premium cars", but it is impossible to squeeze big comfy 4 people interior into compact car (or solve any similar problem)... So common perception of space and of the cost of space look like very good points to judge what is real premium from what is marketing simulacrum. And there is some interpolation about what is the norm (squeezed diesel compacts) and what is above the norm.

And in broader view it is very philosophical conclusion about modern world and what we can easy make/fake and how fool our minds (gadgets, bells, whistles, styling), what is more difficult (comfort, sound proofing, performance) and what is still a cost and impossible to fake (real living space in our cars, houses, gardens, etc).

[dutchie01]

I have come to the conclusion that Premium is in the eye of the Beholder.

It means different things to different people.

[NemesisUK]

3 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

I have come to the conclusion that Premium is in the eye of the Beholder.

It means different things to different people.

This ^^^^^^^ 

[colin79666]

1 hour ago, dutchie01 said:

I have come to the conclusion that Premium is in the eye of the Beholder.

It means different things to different people.

Exactly. I can't explain it but I know it when I see it 👍

[st4]

I think with more gears you engine has to rev less and your rev band is narrower therefore it is more economical, probably it does confuse some gearboxes but not the best (ZF) of them, this is why today auto gearboxes are quicker from standstill and slightly more economical (on paper at least) than manual GB. I agree that the manual GB gives you better car control though.
 
 

Also as the car gets older an automatic gearbox poses a potential bigger bill. With a manual you can put in a new clutch and off it’ll will go for another 100k for a few hundred quid - with an automatic replacing most if not all the transmission at several thousand pounds is the only way. Id be happier in many ways with a manual and changing the gears myself.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[NemesisUK]

17 minutes ago, st4 said:

 

Also as the car gets older an automatic gearbox poses a potential bigger bill. With a manual you can put in a new clutch and off it’ll will go for another 100k for a few hundred quid - with an automatic replacing most if not all the transmission at several thousand pounds is the only way. Id be happier in many ways with a manual and changing the gears myself.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

What about the extremely simple (mechanically) e-CVT transmission? All the benefits of an automatic with the robustness of the manual but in a smaller and lighter package.

e-CVT (or versions thereof) will be the transmissions of the future. 

[Linas.P]

5 hours ago, st4 said:

Also as the car gets older an automatic gearbox poses a potential bigger bill. With a manual you can put in a new clutch and off it’ll will go for another 100k for a few hundred quid - with an automatic replacing most if not all the transmission at several thousand pounds is the only way. Id be happier in many ways with a manual and changing the gears myself.

 

Cannot agree... over lifetime you probably will spend more money maintaining manual, then you do automatic. Maybe there are unreliable boxes, but taking for comparison IS250 MT vs AT, in 300k miles you most likely have no issues with AT, whereas you would be dealing with DMF and few clutches on MT... so I guess depends what specific box you are talking about. Certainly not the rule which you can apply broadly, at least for cars from last 20 years that isn't the case.

I agree that you will understand what is premium car when you see it, equally you will know very well what isn't premium.

[Ben01]

6 hours ago, st4 said:

Id be happier in many ways with a manual and changing the gears myself.

Sorry, I never fully understand this kind of sentiment. What ways exactly? And why people always grief about trannies, not about "I want my manual choke back" or "I'd be happier to set ignition timing manually". Disclaimer - last question is rethoric of course, I perfectly know why: because still there is a choice, MT vs AT, and it is enough to make an issue.

And back to the topic - true automation, as "set the owner/driver free from chaffeur-like manual occupation", was always significant factor for premium cars, am I right?

[NemesisUK]

3 minutes ago, Ben01 said:

And back to the topic - true automation, as "set free owner/driver from chaffeur-like manual occupation", was always significant factor for premium cars, am I right?

Yes 

[Ben01]

BTW I had a fat deja-vu about this "MT vs. AT" arguments (not like "again", because it is again and again, but "I remember this type of discuss, but what was that?"), and just remember what was that: automatic A/C. 20 (or slightly less) years ago, what an ocean of kB was spilled over issues of automatic A/C in all corners of internet, "it's always wrong temperature, it blows into my face, blows not here, but there, I don't get how it works and why it changes this or that, it's costly gadget, it's all wrong and witchcraft, I prefer my oldie goldie "two knob and button" manual A/C". Today - automatic A/C is a standard, manual is for peasants and vans, and I don't think anybody seriously complains (except peasants, for the lack of automatic A/C 😉 ).

So wait a moment, a decade or two, when CVT/AT will be de facto standard, and MT for motomaniacs and poor people only - public will forget all this "I would be happy with a manual". Exactly like US now... But I bet we will find something to whine about, maybe on "how dare they ban manual steering and cars without LIDARs in this city zone, safety-shmafety, AI-shmai, my old lexus is fine and I would be happy to steer and brake myself, like good ol'days" 😁

[Vlady]

16 hours ago, colin79666 said:

Exactly. I can't explain it but I know it when I see it 👍

I think it's like holding an expensive watch or a pen or a lighter - you will know it's an expensive quality product due to material, weight etc, the same with cars. :)

 

[st4]

Sorry, I never fully understand this kind of sentiment. What ways exactly? And why people always grief about trannies, not about "I want my manual choke back" or "I'd be happier to set ignition timing manually". Disclaimer - last question is rethoric of course, I perfectly know why: because still there is a choice, MT vs AT, and it is enough to make an issue.
And back to the topic - true automation, as "set the owner/driver free from chaffeur-like manual occupation", was always significant factor for premium cars, am I right?

MT gives you greater control of the car and as the car gets older the repair costs are less. A new clutch is a few hundred quid, diagnosing and repairing/replacing automatic gearboxes can run into the thousands.

And MT is not difficult to use, it’s just an extra pedal and lever in the car.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[NemesisUK]

Manual gearboxes are open to misuse/abuse though. Misuse can labour the engine, far worse than high revs.

Auto boxes will always have the engine in the optimal rev range.

Unless using the car for track days, I can't see why one would want to stir the cogs manually..

e-CVT even better, when one feels the need to 'go manual' one is rewarded with near instant 'gear' changes, almost PlayStation like.

[royoftherovers]

6 minutes ago, NemesisUK said:

Manual gearboxes are open to misuse/abuse though. Misuse can labour the engine, far worse than high revs.

Auto boxes will always have the engine in the optimal rev range.

Unless using the car for track days, I can't see why one would want to stir the cogs manually..

e-CVT even better, when one feels the need to 'go manual' one is rewarded with near instant 'gear' changes, almost PlayStation like.

Are there ANY reports of an e-cvt box ever requiring significant maintenance/repair/rebuild?

[st4]

Manual gearboxes are open to misuse/abuse though. Misuse can labour the engine, far worse than high revs.
Auto boxes will always have the engine in the optimal rev range.
Unless using the car for track days, I can't see why one would want to stir the cogs manually..
e-CVT even better, when one feels the need to 'go manual' one is rewarded with near instant 'gear' changes, almost PlayStation like.

Only for a bad driver - a good driver chooses the gears correctly.

Autos can slip, not always locking the TC up - my GS is quite prone to this - more even than the Mercedes 5spd. Gives very smooth progress but I’m not sure I like it. I prefer a more direct drive where the revs fall and rise as you accelerate without this “slip” that it does. I often knock it into manual mode to get the direct drive lock up of the TC :)

I have another car which is manual - driving it is no hardship and in sometimes preferable. For my main big car I could go back to a manual but I understand if others don’t.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[st4]

Are there ANY reports of an e-cvt box ever requiring significant maintenance/repair/rebuild?

To be fair not that I’ve heard.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[Ben01]

 

1 hour ago, st4 said:

MT gives you greater control of the car

Maybe, but in very very theory. When and where and for what driver? For Stig on the track on sunny day? For Sabine on Nurburgring? In what other circumstances me, you or any normal human being need "greater control of the car" gears than any modern AT provide (plus any sport mode etc. if the car has any). And in which part of Argyll exactly? (I am serious, maybe I missed any great road here)

I hear this "I need MT for sporty control" all and all in rants on AT. And most funny was friend, who was totaly unhappy with his first AT, and next we have recognised he NEVER EVER pressed pedal to the metal enough to proper switch on the kickdown, in 150HP auto... 🤣

And don't get me wrong - if MT makes you happy, fine. But why make up any strange rationalisations and "facts". Do you like vibrating stick in your hand, or love to slide pure mechanical stuff like proper rifle bolt? admit it without shame.

BTW other comments - you could not abuse engine too much with MT these days, modern ECU cuts your stupid ideas first. You could abuse tranny and clutch, axles, etc. but to really abuse engine you have to put good ol'lovely carburetors back. With manual choke for "greater control".

28 minutes ago, st4 said:

Autos can slip, not always locking the TC up

I my very humble opinion if AT is weaker link than tyres/grip, fix the car, find better one, etc.

[Linas.P]

The whole MT vs. AT discussion is pretty pointless nowadays. In the past MTs had advantage for faster shift times, more reliable and cheaper to repair etc. Nowadays it is pretty much the difference between having clutch or not having one, ATs are fast enough (never mind PDK, DSG etc. which are much faster the any human can blink, never-mind change the gear). When it comes to maintenance AT boxes actually needs less maintenance and if they go wrong nobody fixes one, it is almost always cheaper to find used box and replace it. Historically ATs would have been much more expensive to replace, partially because they were much rarer - nowadays when it is almost standard I reckon it could be cheaper to get used AT, then MT for some cars. Now as @st4 mentioned "clutch" is £200, but AT box is "thousands" to repair - again nobody repairs gearboxes anymore, secondly say replacing clutch on IS250 is not that small of the job - you will needs springs, cylinders and whilst you under the car anyway DMF and pressure plate replacement are just no-brainer... all in all clutch replacement on IS250 will be say £700 all inclusive with labour. That is not far off the cost of entire IS250 write-off car and certainly about the same as entire AT gearbox costs. So now imagine your IS250 AT box explodes at 300k, you would have already saved 3 times the price of the whole car just merely in costs of replacement "clutches". MT are certainly more expensive to run and will cost more in lifetime, ATs are sealed units which needs no maintenance and by the time either box fails any work would exceed the value of the car anyway. There is no economical reasoning for MTs, mostly on modern cars there are no "control/speed" resoning and when it comes to premium car - it is no reasoning to have one with MT... 

Vintage,Historic cars, low-end race cars, weekend cars - yes MT makes sense there.

[st4]

The whole MT vs. AT discussion is pretty pointless nowadays. In the past MTs had advantage for faster shift times, more reliable and cheaper to repair etc. Nowadays it is pretty much the difference between having clutch or not having one, ATs are fast enough (never mind PDK, DSG etc. which are much faster the any human can blink, never-mind change the gear). When it comes to maintenance AT boxes actually needs less maintenance and if they go wrong nobody fixes one, it is almost always cheaper to find used box and replace it. Historically ATs would have been much more expensive to replace, partially because they were much rarer - nowadays when it is almost standard I reckon it could be cheaper to get used AT, then MT for some cars. Now as [mention=61115]st4[/mention] mentioned "clutch" is £200, but AT box is "thousands" to repair - again nobody repairs gearboxes anymore, secondly say replacing clutch on IS250 is not that small of the job - you will needs springs, cylinders and whilst you under the car anyway DMF and pressure plate replacement are just no-brainer... all in all clutch replacement on IS250 will be say £700 all inclusive with labour. That is not far off the cost of entire IS250 write-off car and certainly about the same as entire AT gearbox costs. So now imagine your IS250 AT box explodes at 300k, you would have already saved 3 times the price of the whole car just merely in costs of replacement "clutches". MT are certainly more expensive to run and will cost more in lifetime, ATs are sealed units which needs no maintenance and by the time either box fails any work would exceed the value of the car anyway. There is no economical reasoning for MTs, mostly on modern cars there are no "control/speed" resoning and when it comes to premium car - it is no reasoning to have one with MT... 

Vintage,Historic cars, low-end race cars, weekend cars - yes MT makes sense there.

 

If your car had the A960E auto box like mine and it crapped out replacement would be closer to £5000 - they have been known to let go closer to 140k miles which isn’t ideal.

 

And yes, I do enjoy changing the gears in a manual car. I find it rewarding and it makes driving the car more “fun”.

 

 

Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[Linas.P]

18 minutes ago, st4 said:

(1) If your car had the A960E auto box like mine and it crapped out replacement would be closer to £5000 - they have been known to let go closer to 140k miles which isn’t ideal.

(2) And yes, I do enjoy changing the gears in a manual car. I find it rewarding and it makes driving the car more “fun”.

 

1 - my IS250 has same gearbox and same engine as your GS250, I never ever heard of one failing ever. If you have the source please share it with us - everyone will benefit from it. My claims of manual gearboxes needing replacement clutch, DMF are well known and prices are well known, and by the way  - if either of those things fails the bast way is to replace whole set, so it might even need doing more often then 100k miles. Secondly, you claim of £5000 replacement is sorry for language but total bull****! The  entire IS250 doesn't cost that - maybe dealership going to quote that cost internally (as that is tax efficient), but that is not the cost of replacement. If we looking at values "like for like" for which is "used to used" - then the engine gearbox combo is £800, the gearbox alone ~£300-500, entire write-off IS250 is £500-1000 depending on the damage, so your £5000 gearbox charge is simple non-sense. What would be the cost of manual gearbox replacement quoting same dealer prices, I guess something like £3800? Apples and oranges comparison.

2. yes you are right, many people like many different things. I doubt it has anything to do with "premium brand" or "luxury car"... sounds more like negative thing for me in luxury car. IN performance/sports car different thing, but that is different topic.

Finally, do you actual mean manual or dual-clutch auto counts, does sequential box counts, does "manual-ised" auto counts, does fast-auto counts (like AA80E)? - or you saing everyone in IS-F, RC-F, GS-F doesn't have proper control of the car, because of non-manual box? I mean I understand and agree, that being in control of the gears gives extra control, but you can have auto and be in control nowadays, it is not necessary to have clutch to do that anymore.

[st4]

1 - my IS250 has same gearbox and same engine as your GS250, I never ever heard of one failing ever. If you have the source please share it with us - everyone will benefit from it. My claims of manual gearboxes needing replacement clutch, DMF are well known and prices are well known, and by the way  - if either of those things fails the bast way is to replace whole set, so it might even need doing more often then 100k miles. Secondly, you claim of £5000 replacement is sorry for language but total bull****! The  entire IS250 doesn't cost that - maybe dealership going to quote that cost internally (as that is tax efficient), but that is not the cost of replacement. If we looking at values "like for like" for which is "used to used" - then the engine gearbox combo is £800, the gearbox alone ~£300-500, entire write-off IS250 is £500-1000 depending on the damage, so your £5000 gearbox charge is simple non-sense. What would be the cost of manual gearbox replacement quoting same dealer prices, I guess something like £3800? Apples and oranges comparison.
2. yes you are right, many people like many different things. I doubt it has anything to do with "premium brand" or "luxury car"... sounds more like negative thing for me in luxury car. IN performance/sports car different thing, but that is different topic.
Finally, do you actual mean manual or dual-clutch auto counts, does sequential box counts, does "manual-ised" auto counts, does fast-auto counts (like AA80E)? - or you saing everyone in IS-F, RC-F, GS-F doesn't have proper control of the car, because of non-manual box? I mean I understand and agree, that being in control of the gears gives extra control, but you can have auto and be in control nowadays, it is not necessary to have clutch to do that anymore.

Google a960e failure. You’ll see several threads about is250s with gearboxes that have gone bang. It’s not common but not super rare either.

Never driven aa80e but heard it’s a good box and tends to be quite reliable. I’m not against automatics - I wouldn’t have owned 7 over the last 10 years if I was but I do like choice and if I was choosing the car from new I might not tick the AT box and I think premium makers should give you that choice.

Off topic I went to buy a new Mercedes E class - I thought about running one as a company car through my business - but it didn’t work out but the premium maker had a few issues. If you wanted the v6 diesel you had to have air suspension, if you wanted a sunroof you had to add a premium pack bringing an expensive stereo (I don’t care much for music so it seemed pointless). If you wanted the sports seats with the thigh extenders - that was ok so long as you chose black for the seats and headliner. If you wanted a petrol engine it had to be the AMG model which meant air suspension which I don’t like.

I didn’t feel the car was that “customisable” and the whole buying process put me off. I feel a premium car should allow you to fully customise the car to your exact tastes and offer you to make it yours. Some would chose the manual option.

In the end I didn’t go down the “company car” route and that was that


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk