Z4 M vs Boxster S vs SLK 55

In article <Sx%sg.37830$AB3.15248@fed1read02>,
Jim Keenan > wrote:
>
>"Richard Sexton" > wrote in message
...
>> In article <J3%rg.10587$Nv.8919@fed1read10>,
>> Lawrence Lugar > wrote:
>>>the mercedes is a sissy status-seeking sport's car,
>>
>> The 6's were. The 55 will out-evrything the Prosche.
>
>The only areas MB outdoes Porsche is on the JD Power Initial Quality and
>Reliability surveys, where Porsche leads or is near the top of the list on
>both, while MB languishes well below the industry average - MB just racks up
>so many more black marks. Hell, Ford and Chevrolet are doing better than MB.

Hey, I only do old cars and all this is quite academic to me. All I know
is from watching the (very) odd "Top Gear" and I was stunned to hear they
felt it outdid the boxter in every category and they'd pick that car
every time.

Don't shoot the messenger! Take it up with them.


--
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net

In article .com>,
Filmophile > wrote:
>> The only areas MB outdoes Porsche is on the JD Power Initial Quality and
>> Reliability surveys, where Porsche leads or is near the top of the list on
>> both, while MB languishes well below the industry average - MB just racks up
>> so many more black marks. Hell, Ford and Chevrolet are doing better than MB.
>
>Which is really sad, because Mercedes cars used to be renowned for
>their build quality and long term reliability. My grandfather owned a
>1979 350SD and a 1990 560SEC as new cars - great machines. More
>revently he's owned a 1998 500SL "Sport" and a newer E500 wagon. I
>liked both, but the rock solid build isn't there anymore, nor is that
>"special feeling" the older ones gave off. An uncle recently traded in

Sure, but keep in mind a Mercedes used to cost (a lot) more than
a Toyota and this is (absurdly) no longer true.

People want cheap. So now they've got cheap Mercedes with overcomplicated
electrics and bits that fall off and electromechanical systems so
bizarre that MB techs I know have quit claiming the cars are unfixable.

One wag says "MB has jumped the shark the way Jag did a decade ago".

The long Maybach is still nice though :-) But the days of handbuilt
111 coupes in the somewhat affordable range are gone, period. Which
is fine , new cars suck anyway :-)




--
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net

In article <Su2tg.37854$AB3.22619@fed1read02>,
Jim Keenan > wrote:
>My dad had an '88 300 SEL - had a leaky sunroof and needed top end motor
>work at 65K miles while on a trip. The day after he sold it to the mechanic

Newsflash: that engine sucked. The top ends on most (vergasser) MB's
seldome last mroe than 150K miles but the bottom ends seem to never
die. 65K is a little early and sounds like too infrequent oil
changes.

>who had worked on the car most of its life, the tranny suffered a major
>malfunction. I talked him out of an E wagon in favor of a Lexus RX330 about
>18 months ago. I'd be very leery of buying a MB right now.

Sadly that's true, but it's not endemic to just MB. Any contemporary
German car out of warrenty is too scary to consider - the shadetree
mechanic has somewhat less of a fightiung chance these days which is
putting it mildly.

>BMW makes some nice cars, but I haven't seen a 300 series where the door to
>fender creases weren't off a bit. Saw the same on a brand new 750iL
>today...........when we took delivery of our Carrera I went over that car
>with a microscope - the fit and finish were perfect. Of course, BMW makes
>about 10 times the number vehicles Porsche does annually, but you'd think
>they could at least get the fenders on straight.

You get what you pay for.

--
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net

In article . com>,
Filmophile > wrote:
>> The 914-6 was may favorite Porsche ever, frankly, being a sucker for
>> mid engined card. My understanding is the 914 was a VW and sold in
>> Europe as such but that the 914-6 was built by Porsche.
>
>Porsche and VW designed the chassis and body togethor, 914/4 models got
>VW engines, transmissions and suspensions - 914/6 models got a de-tuned
>911 motor, gearbox and suspension. In Europe, 914/4 models were sold as
>VWs while Porsche sold the 6s under their own badge. Marketing B.S.
>made them sell both versions as Porsches here in the states.

The difference being, (and "as I understand it") VW (karmann?) built
the 914-4 and porsche built the 914-6.

>> But this has nothing to do with "what's a real porsche" just the
>> simple economics of the day when for $3K more you could have a 911.
>
>The price difference between the 914/4 and the 911 may have been bigger
>than that. Also, keep in mind that in 1974 you could still buy a
>domestic sedan for $3,000 dollars, it wasn't a small amount of money at
>the time.

PLitting hairs. The point was "in for a penny in for a pound" and the
reason cited I alwsys read for the poor sales of the 914-6 and 912
was the nearness of he 911 in price.

>> Uh huh. And if pigs had wings they could fly. 911's still dominate
>> racing. Call me if that ever changes.
>
>First of all, please read the part where I made a point of Porsche's
>habit of giving the Boxster line less powerful engines than the 911
>line - this is done intentionally to ensure that the 911 goes
>unthreatened. If they planted a 360 Hp 911 motor into a Cayman and gave
>it slight suspension tweaks it'd blow the doors off a 997 S. The Cayman
>S is already as auick to 60 as the 996 was and it's about as fast as a
>base 997 around the Nurburgring.

I understand all this. Whether the boxster comes close to or surpasses
the 911 remains to be seen.

--
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net

>Porsche makes several variants of an SUV

They make one SUV in four trim leves.

>soft and hardtop mid-engined
> two-seaters

Essentially two versions of the same car that Porsche has intemtionally
kept back to protect the 911.

>and is designing a four door front-engined sedan for
> introduction in 2009 or so.

A mistake, IMO. The Maserati Quattroporte's poor sales will speak to
this.

How is this pandering to enthusiasts who want to
> keep the marque locked into the past?

Porsche has long known that the 911 is a valuable part of the lineup
and have intentionally protected it by doing things like limiting the
amount of power given to the Boxster and Cayman. Given another
*compareable* choice, I'm not sure the 911's sales would remain so
strong. Market demand for the 911 is high in part because the next
closest thing is the Ferrari F430 at near double the money.

>You might be horrified to look up the correct meaning of the word
> "prestigue". I do not disgaree with the rest of your post but this
> was an unfortunate choice of words.

Well "Prestige", which is the word I choose (not "Prestigue") means the
following:

1. The level of respect at which one is regarded by others; standing.
2. A person's high standing among others; honor or esteem.
3. Widely recognized prominence, distinction, or importance: a position
of prestige in diplomatic circles.

I think that works fine.

>> One wag says "MB has jumped the shark the way Jag did a decade ago".

MB may have jumped the shark, but Jags have always been **** for
reliability- they just used to be *classy* pieces of ****.

>> The difference being, (and "as I understand it") VW (karmann?) built
> the 914-4 and porsche built the 914-6.

Karman built the 914/4s entirely within their own facility. Cars
destined to be 914/6s were partially built by Karmann and then sent to
Porsche for the engine, gearbox and tranny.

>> PLitting hairs. The point was "in for a penny in for a pound" and the
> reason cited I alwsys read for the poor sales of the 914-6 and 912
> was the nearness of he 911 in price.

No, I'm sorry but this isn't splitting hairs. You could have bought a
914/4 and a Mercury sedan for what a 911 cost in 1974, that's huge. In
addition, the 914 actually outsold the 911 in 4-cylinder guise.

>> I understand all this. Whether the boxster comes close to or surpasses
> the 911 remains to be seen.

I'm not sure why this is such an issue for you. The Cayman S produced
times around the Nurburgring nearly identicle to a 997, even with less
power. Given the same engine and the same level of suspension tuning,
the Cayman's superior dynamics would win, period.

On 13 Jul 2006 22:43:28 -0700, "Filmophile" >
wrote:
>Porsche has long known that the 911 is a valuable part of the lineup
>and have intentionally protected it by doing things like limiting the
>amount of power given to the Boxster and Cayman. Given another
>*compareable* choice, I'm not sure the 911's sales would remain so
>strong.

They would. I agree with you, but the fact is the 911 is, to most
of its buyers, a dream car. People tend to be irrational about dream
cars, and overlook their flaws and pay happily for the privilege, from
911 engine placement to Ferrari maintenance costs to Corvettes using
leaf springs *decades* and Mustangs using drum brakes decades after
you could get a cheap hatchback with a better suspension and 4-wheel
disc brakes.
epbrown
--
"Everybody wants a normal life and a cool car;
most people will settle for the car." Chris Titus
2003 BMW 325i Black/Black, 2003 BMW Z4 Black/Black

In article .com>,
Filmophile > wrote:
>>> The difference being, (and "as I understand it") VW (karmann?) built
>> the 914-4 and porsche built the 914-6.
>
>Karman built the 914/4s entirely within their own facility. Cars
>destined to be 914/6s were partially built by Karmann and then sent to
>Porsche for the engine, gearbox and tranny.

Ok, thanks.

>>> PLitting hairs. The point was "in for a penny in for a pound" and the
>> reason cited I alwsys read for the poor sales of the 914-6 and 912
>> was the nearness of he 911 in price.
>
>No, I'm sorry but this isn't splitting hairs. You could have bought a
>914/4 and a Mercury sedan for what a 911 cost in 1974, that's huge. In
>addition, the 914 actually outsold the 911 in 4-cylinder guise.

They're VW's. Not really a fair comparison. And as I've repeatedly said
this is just what I've read.

>>> I understand all this. Whether the boxster comes close to or surpasses
>> the 911 remains to be seen.
>
>I'm not sure why this is such an issue for you. The Cayman S produced
>times around the Nurburgring nearly identicle to a 997, even with less
>power. Given the same engine and the same level of suspension tuning,
>the Cayman's superior dynamics would win, period.

Would.

This is a pointless discussion. Let's see who takes the checkered flag.


--
Need Mercedes parts? http://parts.mbz.org
Richard Sexton | Mercedes stuff: http://mbz.org
1970 280SE, 72 280SE | Home pages: http://rs79.vrx.net
633CSi 250SE/C 300SD | http://aquaria.net http://killi.net