Best Overall "Major" Car Company [Archive] - Sports Car Forum

View Full Version : Best Overall "Major" Car Company

Refefer

02-16-2005, 09:55 PM

Before I start, let me define some things:

"Best Overall" - This includes best in all categories, not just sports/super cars.

"Major" - Since GM owns Saab, you can use Saab to support of your argument for that GM is the best company, for example.

This is retroactive btw, so despite Jaguar not being owned by Ford in the 60's, those cars are still game.

Now, at risk of being flamed off the board, I'm gonna say Ford is the best overall company and this is why:

Every day car

They've got the best "every day" cars out there, thanks to Mazda. The Mazda 3 is a blast to drive when loaded with the 160 bhp engine. They've also got an excellent sedan with the 6 series. Mazdas also refuse to break down no matter how much you abuse them and also get great mileage (My first car, a 95 protege, was in 6 crashes thanks to my sister, 3 of them major and STILL ran without a hitch. My mpg on long trips was usually in the mid 40's, manual transmission)

The Mazda3 is now gaining a large aftermarket and consequently i'm seeing more people to the rice hell out of.

Mazda sells well in both America an Japan (I'm not sure about Europe)

...and for Europe we got the Ford Focus. Good car, popular as hell, decent mpg and crash test.

Low-end Sports Car (Under $40k)

We've got a couple of here:

Let's get the obvious ones out of the way straight up:

Mustang V6/GT/Cobra - Good engine, good looks (IMO), and a hell of a lot of history. Most American boy's dream car in highschool, especially with the muscle car appeal. Best sound from their engines IMO also.

Mazda Miata - Small, sporty, convertible, and cheap. I would never drive one, but I know plenty who would.

Mazda RX-8 - The only acceptible 4-door sporty car. Good handling, looks good, etc.

Performance Cars

Ford Focus - I add this here because of it's rally abilities. It's a dominant factor in in such races, thus deserves a spot under performance cars.

For "European" appeal, we've got the DB9... need I say more? Refined, fast as hell, and beautiful.

Ford GT - Also beautiful, awesome performance, but not as fast as...

Jaguar XJ220 - Not the fastest street legal car in the world anymore, but still ridiculously speedy. Handling, breaking, power... it's got it all

Luxury cars

Can you say Jaguar XJ-series? Luxurious, prestigious, and perfect for those who have much more money than I do.

History

I don't think anyone can argue that Ford doesn't have an impressive history, dating back to the turn of the 20th century.

Jaguar also has a decent history, going back to around the 50's and has definate pedigree.

Racing wise they've had a fair amount of success, as anyone who has ever heard of the GT40 and knows anything about the Le Mans has to give it props for 4 years of 1st place victories (66,67,68,69)

Iconically, Ford boasts several cars with history also:

Shelby Fastbacks - While not strictly a Ford company, it's Ford VINs they stick on the new models, so I'm gonna count it.

GT - Already Explained

1957 Jaguar Roadster - YES. Luxury car anyone? Also is very beautiful.
------------------------------------

Alright, I'm done...

What you got for me? :D

skituner

02-16-2005, 10:07 PM

btw the ford gt is way faster than the db9

findleybeast

02-16-2005, 10:25 PM

really hard question. something to think about. I can't decide... particularly since a lot of the groups include companies i really dislike....

SilviaEvo

02-16-2005, 10:41 PM

ferrarif1fan89

02-16-2005, 10:44 PM

why isnt bmw on this?

graywolf624

02-16-2005, 10:49 PM

Refefer

02-16-2005, 10:54 PM

Grr, I knew I was missing some... too many compaines.

graywolf624

02-16-2005, 10:56 PM

From a purely financial stand point.. Toyota.. they have the highest profit margins.. but there cars seem to lack soul..

From best overall.. Gotta be gm.. they have the most variety, and thus the best overal. Most sales as a result.

Cars in all ranges that gm has some kinda hand in.. financial or otherwise.. that I would consider exceptional:
Caddilac CTS-V, Corvette, STS-V, WRX/Wrx sti(25 percent stake), Pontiac GTO/Monaro, Vauxhall VX770.

History:
Theyve raced and won in so many groups its hard to list them all. The only one I dont recall them in is f1.

Size does matter in the long run..

That isnt to say that on an individual marque or car bases there arent better, just that overall gm has the most variety simply because of its size.

ZfrkS62

02-16-2005, 11:04 PM

Nissan?
Normal-Altima, Maxima, Primera
Luxury-Infiniti Q45, I35, G20
Sports-Nissan 350Z, Skyline, 300ZX, Datsun Z, Infiniti M45, Infiniti G35
SUV-Murano (dont like it but it works), Pathfinder, FX, QX56, QX4
You consider renault a good company?

Renault doesn't mean shit in the states gray :wink: Nissan has been a fairly good company. They've had their missses, but in terms of decently priced performance, they're hard to beat.

1. BMW
2. Nissan (strictly for the Z)
3. everyone else except Mercedes

100. Mercedes

SilviaEvo

02-16-2005, 11:17 PM

vexor

02-16-2005, 11:20 PM

I voted for Daimler Chrysler.... well mainly because of Mercedes-Benz

Best low-end sports car - Dodge SRT/4, kick ass pocket rocket
Performance car - SLR, enough said
Luxury car- Chrysler 300C, really big even for me and I'm 6'3". The Maybachs are also very, very nice luxury cars.
History - Mercedes did very good in past races.

as for Every day car, I actually don't know what to say.... I guess Mercedes C class.

ferrarif1fan89

02-16-2005, 11:41 PM

^^^is the 300c really a luxury car? i thought it was priced as a mid-sized sedan. but as far as luxury cars go, my favorite is the audi a8. BTW, i voted for renault, because i think they own nissan.or atleast a part of it. :)

vexor

02-17-2005, 01:33 AM

^^^ yeah I would agree with you, it is more of a mid-size sedan but I've sat in one and it was HUGE. I had all the leg room and head room that I needed.

dingo

02-17-2005, 05:14 AM

Refefer, polls usually go in the 'Polls' section :wink:

possessed_beaver

02-17-2005, 12:37 PM

Audi?

i voted honda, always had a soft spot for em!

blah

02-17-2005, 02:40 PM

Where is BMW? I had to vote for Diamler Since BMW isnt there.

|Nuno|

02-17-2005, 03:15 PM

Well, my personal favourite is Fiat. But lets say that things aren't going well nowadays...so I can't vote them for Best Overall.

So my vote goes for VAG, mainly because of the reasons that dani said.

Skyliner

02-17-2005, 03:23 PM

BMW.....i

Makes a variety of very fun and sporty cars... got a lot of history to, winning pretty much everything (at least on track)

But since they was not on the list, i voted for the VAG group...

02-17-2005, 03:24 PM

If only McLaren was a member of Daimler-Chrysler, I would consider voting for them...As it is, VAG is on my top spot followed by Fiat.

BADMIHAI

02-17-2005, 07:29 PM

Handling, breaking, power... it's got it all

It's fucking hilarious you should put braking and handling as a plus in the Jaguar XJ220. It's well known it is a pig in the corners and the brakes are shit. :fist:

As for putting the old Jags under Ford: It's just fucking stupid. That's like putting Mopar muscle cars under Mercedes. :roll:

In my opinion, the best car company is Toyota. As mentioned by gray, they have the best profit margins and their employees seem to be the happiest. Also, if you tour one of their factories, you will be simply amazed by how clean and organized they are.
As for the Ford Mustang: it is a piece of shit. I've seen a damn stock 4-door Accord V6 automatic hang with a Mustang GT. :roll:

Refefer

02-17-2005, 07:49 PM

Im not surprising anybody with my vote I guess,but its the obvious alternative.......

When you look at it you got everything you want from VAG and then some.....

you got your cheap small cars wich can compete with anything in its class when it comes to safety and comfort....

you got your avarage size cars in all prize ranges with the same great comfort and safety....

In the luxury department they also got it covered 5 ways from the sun....
and if you want some sporty to go along with that luxury its covered....

you got the SUV`s even if I dont like them, they make some of the best of them......

the sports cars they offer are also the best money can buy.......

And all these cars comes with engines in front of what are made.........

If we are talking racing heritage in various racing branches most likely you will find one of the brands involved and doing well......you might say changing the sports and taking it to the next level.........

hmmm what are the words Im looking for....... :?

AHHH got it.......Vorsprung durch Tecknikâ€™ ................... :D

It's good that they can compete on all levels, but so can DC, Ford, and GM, and pretty much all the others.

In terms of sports cars and super cars, I don't disagree that they win hands down... but what about the rest of the market?

Their huge weakness is in their cheaper(lower priced) cars/econoboxs. With the exception of the Golf, they don't have any particular good sub 20k cars... and even then, the Mazda3 wins hands down over the Golf.

They also lack in the cheaper sedan market: the cheapest I've seen of any sedans of reparable quality is the Jetta (which this year's model is supposed to break down a bit too much) and Audis. With the price exception of the Jetta, the cheapest Audi runs about $25k for it barebones (the A4). For that much cash I can get a full option Mazda 6 which many people say is the best sedan available.

Since you included SUVs, I think I will add trucks to the argument.

Ford trucks are the best in the world. The F-150 and its many models has earned too many awards to type. Practical, well priced, and better than any of the competition.

We also have Jeeps... yeah.

In terms of engines, they have gotten a lot better than Ford's early years... and they sound oh so good (though that doesn't really count). The new rotary engine used in the RX-8 is a masterpiece of design, a big step forward for that type of engine. The engine's in the new mustangs have gotten good reviews over all, so I think the advantage from VAG over them is a bit slimmer.

As for the Ford Mustang: it is a piece of shit. I've seen a damn stock 4-door Accord V6 automatic hang with a Mustang GT. Rolling Eyes

Musta been a really shitty driver in the mustang since the '04 Accord V6 runs 0-60 in 7s, while a '98 GT runs it in around 6.2s... and that was a shitty car, the new ones all being better and faster... even the new '05 V6's run a 0-60 of 6.9s.

MadKorean

02-17-2005, 07:53 PM

Voted for Ford...

Hey, they're paying my college tuition ;-)

That, and I absolutely love the new GT and the '05 Stang

~DJ

Vadim-4DSC

02-17-2005, 10:10 PM

Hey guys, Nissan's line up isn't bad either. 8)

Refefer

02-17-2005, 10:16 PM

Voted for Ford...

Hey, they're paying my college tuition ;-) ~DJ

How's that work?

GTO

02-17-2005, 10:36 PM

Subaru, entire range AWD, tough and realiable ,power to the people :p

Mopsdrops

02-18-2005, 12:57 PM

I'd take Honda. they've made many good cars that aren't to expensive. they made lots of cars I don't like but if I see the CRX, Civic, Integra, Prelude, NSX I just love them so much. :D they're fast for not much money, have luxery and the engine size isn't so big.

mindgam3

02-18-2005, 01:02 PM

Hard decisionas each group has their good and bad points but i have to say....

Ford.... which includes

Ford themselves
Lincoln
Mecury
Mazda
Volvo
Jaguar
Land Rover
Aston Martin

Something for everyone ;) but mainly because they include a lot of great british marques but also because of fords, jaguars, land rovers and aston martins history

VAG in second place for me

bmwmpower

02-18-2005, 02:53 PM

Toyota or somethinnk german, bmw

artypossum

02-18-2005, 05:16 PM

I'm also gonna have to go with VW, for the same reasons as Dani; such an enourmous variety of sheap and efficient to outright outrageaous cars. Good job Bernd Peschtweishctereshezershezer (I think that's how it's spelt) :o

Sir_GT

02-19-2005, 07:23 PM

BMW AG

Mini's? Top sellers
BMW's? Top sellers
Rolls Royce? beyond words

I think Nissan deserves the award for "most improved company". Sure the money came in from PSA, but Nissan is governed by that Ghosn chap I believe, who has a pretty independent rule over Nissan.

I think DaimlerChrysler deserves the award for "most disappointing company".

SLR? It's not a performance car. Ron Dennis described it as a GT, but in that case, one would rather buy a 612 Scaglietti, or a Bentley GT, probably a DB9, or if you want to go the full monty, a Rolls-Royce... which is in fact CHEAPER than the SLR, and doesn't have a plastic dash.

Don't forget the Chrysler Crossfire, which is rubbish. Or that Hearst-styled one, which is past rubbish, more of in between recycled and muck.

What about the Vaneo? which is a Mercedes Benz milk delivery van? Or the actual VAN that Mercedes makes? or the M-class? Voted Britain's worst car. What about the over-rated SL? On which the foldable roof is apparently the biggest problem of Merc dealerships here - one SL roof a week has to be fixed, as the rumours state.

What about the A-class? Which is (and this is the honest truth) used as a GOLF CART in certain Arabian countries. What about Merc's new "sporty" R-class? Which is really a 7-seat VAN. Or the B-class? Which is a MINIVAN.

Don't get me started on their F1 team... christ.

DaimlerChrysler? Please, spare me. They are the automotive industry's biggest joke. They've been going downhill since the merger, and I don't see any rescue in sight.

Sir_GT

02-19-2005, 07:48 PM

It's good that they can compete on all levels, but so can DC, Ford, and GM, and pretty much all the others.

If you think of American cars there are no way it can compete with VAG or pretty much any other Euro brand of some standard....

Not because the Euro cars are so much better, cuz they are not, but if you put your clean nice ass in a Audi or other euro car of some standard and then into a (Insert AmCar here) there is no way the build quallity or quallity feel can compete the same with Asian cars....

Thicker plastics doesnt mean its more luxurious than the ones with thiner plastic interior.......

In terms of sports cars and super cars, I don't disagree that they win hands down... but what about the rest of the market?

Their huge weakness is in their cheaper(lower priced) cars/econoboxs. With the exception of the Golf, they don't have any particular good sub 20k cars... and even then, the Mazda3 wins hands down over the Golf.

They also lack in the cheaper sedan market: the cheapest I've seen of any sedans of reparable quality is the Jetta (which this year's model is supposed to break down a bit too much) and Audis. With the price exception of the Jetta, the cheapest Audi runs about $25k for it barebones (the A4). For that much cash I can get a full option Mazda 6 which many people say is the best sedan available.

They got the rest of the market covered too my friend.....

Im not sure you are aware of the brands included in the VAG family...... :wink:

for the cheaper cars they got Skoda and Seat and of those two...Skoda got cars in the upper mid class when it comes to luxury and still they are cheap for what you get....
Seat got small sporty cars wich is cheap.....

both brands got the same great engines as Audi got and the cars are buildt at brand new factories with every modern gizmo available........

dont forget that there is a tax on foreign cars wich gives the domestic an advantage......

I know the Mazda 6 is a good car my father got one and its much more sporty than you would expect from Mazda......no argument BUT it doesnt give me that warm and fuzzy feeling that I get from a nice Euro car its kind of without soul........

Since you included SUVs, I think I will add trucks to the argument.

Ford trucks are the best in the world. The F-150 and its many models has earned too many awards to type. Practical, well priced, and better than any of the competition.

We also have Jeeps... yeah.

If you think of the world as the US you might be right, but even if you guys call your baseball league the world series its not really the world series you know....... :P :wink:

I like the F-150 its good looking and some of them goes like stink......however its a truck and holds often not more than two persons I wouldnt compare it to SUV`s....I dont like either of them......

For trucks it might be up there, but it cant hold a candle up to the tuareg at the end of the day.......

Yeah you got jeeps its sad..... :P :wink:

In terms of engines, they have gotten a lot better than Ford's early years... and they sound oh so good (though that doesn't really count). The new rotary engine used in the RX-8 is a masterpiece of design, a big step forward for that type of engine. The engine's in the new mustangs have gotten good reviews over all, so I think the advantage from VAG over them is a bit slimmer.

Im not saying VAG are a ocean away on every front but thats not the question either, even if the VAG engines are great machines..... :wink:
the point is VAG provide a car in the top part of the list for every segment they sell cars in and for every car the competition comes up with they got a car to match it if not beat it........

oh and did I mention Vorsprung durch Tecknikâ€™ ................... :D

You write a good argument, but most of it is based on a best case scenario... one which leans towards the VAG end of the scale.

No doubting that, overall, VAG builds good cars (I would choose an Audi over a Merc, or a Murcielago over pretty much anything out there in the £160,000 price range), but VAG's sheer size is both their boon and their bane.

You can't, for example, expect to have Volkswage compete with Audi. The Phaeton was a horrible move, and so was the Passat. Nobody is going to pay that price for a VW=badged car, and that's the bottom line. If the Phaeton was badged "Audi A10" or something, I bet you it would have sold by the bucketload. Instead, they tried to step above Audi, and ended up falling flat on their face.

You can't, also, expect Skoda to compete with VW. You already have one budget brand, complete with the Polo et al for the real cheap end of the market, so why have another company compete directly with you? Throw in SEAT and their line up, and you have three companies competing directly with each other, even though they all belong to the same parent company. Why cannibalize YOUR own sales when you should be focusing on your competition?

You also can't expect to share parts with your top end marques (such as Bentley, Bugatti, Lambo, etc.) and your bottom end ones, and not expect people to notice. Talk about eroding brand desirability.

BUT... even with that in mind, they are still a far better company than DaimlerChrysler or GM business-wise, arguably on-par with Ford, but lag behind Toyota.

This may sound stupid, but if there was one company that is going to become a model for brand management, it is going to be Fiat, especially with Luca di Montezemolo at the helm. They've got their products sorted properly, and it is that sort of proper brand management that VAG needs to learn from...

...but if they need a better example, BMW's just near their HQ anyway. ;)

Anonymous

02-19-2005, 07:53 PM

BMW. . .

Good choice of cars from entry luxury to all the way up to top of the line. BMW driving experience, the character of the car. The way it feels when it is connected with the road.

Most importantly that feeling is across the entire line.

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 08:50 AM

I hope VAG never go the direction of Bimmer, today the brand sucks big time with not one good looking car, and they are walking away from their own "guidelines".......

In your opinion.... sales figures say otherwise, both Audi and BMW are selling extremely well almost all over the world. I personally like all the new design BMW's, in the flesh they don't look outrageously styled as they do in the magazine but they have more personal style than most other competing brands, plus IMO they have a better philosophy for building cars. MINI's have been selling like hot cakes, especially in the UK and steadily more so in the US. not much can be said for VW however :P

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 10:09 AM

pagani

02-20-2005, 10:31 AM

I voted because of it's past cars like to toyota mr2 turbo toyota supra (turbo version) toyota mr-s and because i love japanese cars.
Me second vote is on ford because of cars like the ford escort cosworth ford sierra rs 500 ford sierra cosworh ford focus gt 40.
Still think that ford are the best eurpean car makers.
:D :)

Sir_GT

02-20-2005, 10:34 AM

We didn't have the full annual sales figures last time as it was still 2004. I think the full annual sales figures speak for themselves :P

In 2004:
Audi sold 779,441 cars worldwide - an increase of 1.2% over 2003
BMW sold 1,023,575 worldwide - and increase of 10.3% over 2003

Autocar reported something similar. Apparently, out of all the volume manufacturers, only 3 companies had a sales increase last year, and the rest were down a few good percent. These same figures also pointed out that BMW was the only quality marque to have seen a sales increase last year.

BADMIHAI

02-20-2005, 10:46 AM

its not hard to understand really......

Are you trying to say that BMW sold over 200 000 X5s last year? :mrgreen:

Sir_GT

02-20-2005, 10:47 AM

it is that sort of proper brand management that VAG needs to learn from...

...but if they need a better example, BMW's just near their HQ anyway. ;)

I am not totaly agreeing with you on the canibalizing thingy its not a good thing, but what they are doing is giving people a choice to buy within the company if they dont like the VW they can buy the Skoda......

even if it looks like it, the brands are not the same.....

Skoda are meant to be cheap alternative, Seat the brand for the young with a range of small cars, VW are what the name says a brand for the people with cars in every segment.....Audi covers also alot of the same ground as VW but in a more luxury and sporty way.....
the rest of the lineup need no explanation...... :wink:

One thing I agree 100% on are when they put the same components in the lambo as in the Skoda somebody should be shoot in the system....thats just not right.......

I hope VAG never go the direction of Bimmer, today the brand sucks big time with not one good looking car, and they are walking away from their own "guidelines".......

I'm going to have to disagree with your opinion on BMW's aesthetics. Although I do agree that some of their models are a bit visually challenged (never been a fan of the 7 or the rubber-bumber X3 for example), I do feel that their intentions were right. BMW said that the reason for the flame surfacing was to make every car line (1,3,5,etc.) look different and distinct from each other, but still recognizable as a BMW. THAT is an excellent approach, and a major step from their past mundane style (7 looked like a big 5, 5 looked like a big 3, and so on), and is a selling factor that most manufacturers miss.

One case in point would be my father-in-law, who has the money, but isn't the least bit interested in cars. He can't tell the difference between a new car or an old one, or a higher model from a lower one. The only way he can guess is by the year on the licence plate (which, when personalized, completely dumbfounds him), and/or the size of the car.

Right now he's in the market for a new one, so walked into mercedes, and could NOT tell the difference between the S-class and the E-class. He looked at the pictures (side view) and showed them to me, and said: "Why would I pay 20 grand more for this one (S-class)? It looks just like the other one."

That was point number one.

Point number two came when I showed him the BMW booklets. Where he immediately noticed the difference between the 7 and the 5... on which he actually considered paying up for a 7 because it was so obviosuly different from the lower model.

I swear, this is true, and not made up. It really just proved to me that BMW new what they were doing, but just didn't execute it completely right.

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 12:03 PM

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 12:50 PM

its not hard to understand really......

Are you trying to say that BMW sold over 200 000 X5s last year? :mrgreen:

lol, exactly.... I highly doubt the whole 10.3% increase was entirely down to X5 sales.....

wrong. we've already discussed this before. it WAS attributed solely to X3s (new model, hence the increase).

sorry. please try again ;)

Wrong, it was a combination of the X3, 1 series, 5 series and the 6 series.

Why should it matter if it's a SUV or not anyway?

Are you not going to take into account annual sales when the Audi Q7 SUV comes out? :P

I suppose that will be the all conquering almighty SUV will it?

X5 sales were actually 0.5% down on 2003 :P

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 02:14 PM

Why should it matter if it's a SUV or not anyway?

It doesnt matter what it is, the point is its a new model wich havnt been represented in the BMW lineup before........dont act stupid......

You mean like the 1 and 6 series? :roll:

As i said, the X3 didn't take up all of the increase.

BMW have seen market gaps and filled them - they didnt have a relatively cheap city car so they made the 1 series. Same with 6 series and X3. Even though there doesen't seem to be enough of a difference between the X3, touring and X5, you can't say that BMW haven't found a market gap, otherwise it wouldnt be selling like it is - as you kindly pointed out ;)

Anonymous

02-20-2005, 04:34 PM

^ Yeah, didn't we talk about this before?

mindgam3

02-20-2005, 05:07 PM

5 series - 229,593 - up 23.8%
X3 - 92,647 - available from last year
6 series - 21,403 -
1 series - 39,247 - available since september

And as you said, the 1 series and full range of 6 series isnt available in the US yet... the biggest car market.

And as i said, the figures speak for themselves, newly released car or not.... BMW have innovated and found a market gap and so should rightly have greater sales figures than Audi :P

Sir_GT

02-20-2005, 11:49 PM

Sir_GT

02-21-2005, 09:47 PM

Audi makes great cars, but they still have a long way to go before the layman views the brand as something on par with BMW or Mercedes-Benz. My father-in-law loved the A8 (more than the 7-series, and found it smarter looking than the S-class), but didn't consider it because he felt he was downgrading in status to "only" an Audi.

The truth remains... when you own an Audi, and you switch to BMW or Mercedes-Benz, the ordinary person will look at it as a sign that you are moving up the ladder, and not the other way around.

LOL I have no respect for those people your father in law included, if they are more hung up in status than in what they get they are just stupid.....

But I dont agree for the European market at least, you are seing more and more Audis as government and royal cars......if there is a top meeting there are always some Audi S8`s there... :wink:

You and I actually see things the same way. Personally, a black A8 would be my limo of choice, and not an S-class or a 7. But, like you, I am slightly more educated with regards to cars when compared to the ordinary man, who views cars as an extension of their jewelry. Sort of why people will pay the same amount of money for a crap Rolex instead of a superior Tag or Omega.

Which is, unfortunately, the norm and not the exception. Which is why Audi really still has quite a way to go to reach "that" status.

Sir_GT

02-23-2005, 12:32 AM

You and I actually see things the same way. Personally, a black A8 would be my limo of choice, and not an S-class or a 7. But, like you, I am slightly more educated with regards to cars when compared to the ordinary man, who views cars as an extension of their jewelry. Sort of why people will pay the same amount of money for a crap Rolex instead of a superior Tag or Omega.

Which is, unfortunately, the norm and not the exception. Which is why Audi really still has quite a way to go to reach "that" status.

If you change the A8 to S8 we are totaly on the same page...... :wink:

S8 then. :)

Still... the A8 = tops for the money.