Here is an excerpt from an article I saw on MSN:

"But the "new luxury" is decidedly not about buying a Jaguar.

Why not? Because ultimately, high-end autos like Jaguars may not be the best quality cars, and certainly they may not represent the best value in the eyes of consumers. “I have a friend who had a Jaguar,” says Koch. Sure, it’s a fancy name, but the reliability problems and extra maintenance costs meant the Jag wasn’t really a luxury for the owner. “I drive a Honda Accord, and it is a well-made car, so it is a joy,” says Koch. “I believe I’ve got the luxury car.”

The Jaguar-vs.-Honda example offers a good lesson about how consumers have reinvented the concept of luxury."

Here is the link: http://moneycentral.msn.com/content/P67432.asp

So what do you guys think? Does this apply to post 1995 MB owners as well

I voted New Luxury, having 3 herniated disc's makes me very fond of modern ergonomics.

Since when are luxury cars supposed to be cheap to maintain? They never were, the Jag. vs Honda comparrision is the worst one I have every heard. How can you compare a British sedan to an appliance on wheel's. Lets see, so a complicated $70k British car is supposed to be as cheap to maintain as a simple $20k Honda. I like old school W126 luxury.

The Maybach is nice, even wonderful, but it's not a 600. The Maybach tries too hard with too much wood, too many doodads, etc. as if trying to make a point that its presence alone falls short of making. Ends up falling in the 24" stretched Lincoln category. Looks more pimped out than luxurious. The 600 speaks for itself and clearly says, "If you don't like me, you don't know what luxury is."

I don't think the Maybach introduced as many technologies as the 600 did back in 63 (oh, what a night...).

Ergonomics is a good point. If it's not comfortable then it's not luxurious so I guess the Maybach wins that one.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
83 300SD ... $950, see cars forum - luxury for under 4 figures

Arent Jags just real expensive fords now? Maybe the honda comparison isnt so bad.

Well, personally, I'm with the old-school yo. But not the 126, too much luxury no sport. But i dont like BMW, little luxury, focus on sport. Any jag, just not real great in either realm, and dont like the looks too much either. Cadillac, only if its got a flat-head. Lincolns are just no. Sure would like one of them $$$ mil. Bugattis.

The Mabach, I thought it was pretty kool, like a combination of the real luxury cars, like the 300S and 770K type stuff with all mercedes has to offer in terms of technology, power.

"Arent Jags just real expensive fords now?" no. The new XK8 and XJ8 are not. The X type is not a Jag. The S type is nice though. It's looks are growing on me.

Elegant, formal, stately and luxurious. If I want sports, I'd buy a Ferrari. Modern MB S-CLASS sporty not formal like mine.

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
"I have spent MOST of the money I have made in my life on expensive women, expensive cars, and expensive drugs. The rest I just wasted." - Myself "Belief in the supernatural, reflects a failure in the imagination." - Edward Abbey "Give me a firm place to stand, and I will move the Earth." - Archimedes

Says it all...

Attached Thumbnails

 

__________________
"I have spent MOST of the money I have made in my life on expensive women, expensive cars, and expensive drugs. The rest I just wasted." - Myself "Belief in the supernatural, reflects a failure in the imagination." - Edward Abbey "Give me a firm place to stand, and I will move the Earth." - Archimedes

I'm convinced that "0ld" is better. My 230/8, manual with no A/C nor PS, get my vote. The Sienna is OK with my wife aboard, but the feeling of mechanical excellence of the the old MBs can't be beat for pure luxury. Now when I get all the front end bushings replace I'll really be back to 1969.

If you read the article carefully, a W126 actually might be classified as "new luxury."

The article talks about people looking for quality and value, not prestige simply due to price. They are no longer willing to overlook the operating costs and overall build quality of a luxury car simply becasue it carries a certain badge.

It's VERY interesting, and compaines like Mercedes should be paying close attention. Mercedes was the epitome of this not long ago. You might pay more upfront for a Mercedes automobile, but after 250,000 miles, there was no cheaper car on a per mile basis. Owning a Mercedes could be a frugal decision if you're willing to keep your car for 15-20 years.

The point is that the luxury marques have lost that edge. It's possible to buy a Honda that is as well made and will last as long and give as low or lower long term operating costs as the costs-three-times-as-much E-Class. Or is it? That is the debate!

My wife is the perfect example of this. She likes her leather interior, AC, heated seats, ABS, AWD, and so on. And she has it in her Subaru, that is much more reliable than her now gone E-Class.

Let's face it guys, the last 5 years have been a challenge for Mercedes. The brand has been hit hard with the merger and it's fall from grace with JD Powers and Consumer Reports.

I hope they hit one oout of the park...

__________________
John Shellenberg
1998 C230 "Black Betty" 240K

http://img31.exs.cx/img31/4050/tophat6.gif

I finally read the article and realize that my first response has nothing to do with the topic JC initiated. So I guess the 600 and Maybach are in the same category of old luxury.

My cousin came by in his new Accord today and I guess you could call it luxurious. I think it's a great car but it falls short of luxurious to me simply from the standpoint that I believe luxury requires an element of exclusivity. If it's something anyone can have then it's a standard, not a luxury. In the same vein the W126 was the king of the mid 80s but an 87 300SDL doesn't shine as brightly against an 04 Accord as it did against an 87 Accord. So what was a luxury in 87 is mainstream in 04. In fact I'm not really sure what the SDL does that the Accord can't other than be reliable, cost less and look better than just decent after 15 years.

Sixto
95 S420
87 300SDL
83 300SD ... $950, see cars forum

Hmmm,.. The SDL rides better, has loads more room, is collectable, cost much more new and is built to that standard. Doors are like tank hatchlids, car is very heavy and thus has better stability at higher speeds. Plastics are of VERY high quality, leather is top rate, zebrano/burl wood paneling is thick everywhere, lots of carpeted surfaces, great visibility, and the three pointed star aiming down the highway over that massive aluminum hood. Also has bumpers that will stop a truck.

Should I go on?

In 10 years the Accord will not be worth that much, but a car like a 300SDL or 350SD/SDL will actually appreciate due to their limited production. They will become classics.

__________________
1987 300SDL (324000)

1986 Porsche 951 (944 Turbo) (166000)

1978 Porsche 924 (99000)

1996 Nissan Pathfinder R50 (201000)

Hm... I would say, Old Luxury..... But not too old either... Some where around early - mid 90's should be just fine.... IMHO, they are best compromised between Modern technology and old-school craftmanship......

__________________
1992 Mercedes-Benz 400SE
http://members.shaw.ca/AKRY/W140_Side.gif

2002 Acura TL Type S
http://members.shaw.ca/AKRY/type_s_side.gif

Considering they only made a few thousand of these cars, I think so.

Sixto does really know his stuff, and I agree with him about exclusivity. Limited production is the key, and any S-Class Benz is a classic.

As opposed to millions of Accords on the road.

__________________
1987 300SDL (324000)

1986 Porsche 951 (944 Turbo) (166000)

1978 Porsche 924 (99000)

1996 Nissan Pathfinder R50 (201000)