Are expensive cars worth it?

[walking Bass]

A number of factors make cars more expensive: tighter specifications, better fit and finish and better materials. A friend worked for a parts supplier and Honda had tighter specs than Chevy for the same parts. The competing Honda was better regarded and more expensive.

That only goes so far with watches. A gold watch costs much more and won't last as long as stainless since it's a softer metal. Expensive movements are complicated for the sake of complication, not to make them tell better time. On the other hand, I have a steel Rolex (Air King model) from the early '70s that cost me $365 at Tiffany. I had to replace the band and have it serviced once. It still keeps perfect time and is worth about $3,000 on the used market.

 

[Mike N]

The original Saturn SL1, SL2, and SC were totally separate from the rest of the GM portfolio. They did not share architecture, engines, transmissions, sheet metal or anything else with any GM products. The first Saturn Vue was a variation of the first generation Equinox architecture, but just barely.

By the time Saturn Aura and Saturn Astra came in, Saturn vehicles shared content with Opel vehicles (GM’s European arm at the time), but not necessarily Chevrolet. I say not necessarily because eventually Saturn Aura, Opel Vectra, and Chevy Malibu shared architectures and powertrains and 2nd Gen Vue was basically a rebadged Opel Antara crossover a little smaller than Equinox. When Saturn died it was rebadged Chevrolet Captiva.

Don't forget the Saturn Ion that was basically a Chevy Cobalt/Pontiac G5.

 

[Mike N]

Are expensive cars worth it? That depends...

View attachment 3137235

Other than ugly, what is that?

 

[Mike N]

Again, using my car as an example...Base Corvettes have a 6.2L 460 hp V8. Uplevel Corvettes can have an optional 655 hp supercharged V8. My Camaro has a 6.2L 455 hp V8. Basically the same engine as the base Corvette. The 5 hp difference is pretty much exhaust system tuning differences and is lost in the rounding. All automakers do this.

Good to still see GM making power with pushrods.

The 5hp difference between your Camaro and the 'Vette is purely marketing. Think back to 1970..... the LT-1 in the 'Vette was rated at 460HP and the same LT-1 in the Z/28 was 450HP. Can't have another car in the lineup with more power than the flagship sports car.

 

[fdeck]

I'm not sure how it can be said that there isn't a significant technological difference going from a cheaper car to a more expensive car. I'm pretty knowledgeable about automotive technology and I can tell you that a $70,000 Porsche actually does have 2-3 times the technological architecture of a $20,000 Volkswagon. The difference is far more than cosmetic and it is in no way comparable to a 20$ ordinary purse and a much more expensive "designer" purse. With more expensive cars, it usually isn't cosmetics you're buying.

I do think you have a point when it comes to very expensive cars, though. Once you get above the $100,000 range you've not adding as much in performance technology as status.

Amusingly, even what we consider to be a more "advanced" technology is subjective. Engineering is an aesthetic as well as technical discipline.

I work in a business that makes products ranging from a few $k up to a few $100k. My job is to guide development of architecture, i.e., how the pieces work together and how the overall product works.

In some cases, the lower priced product is the one with tighter specs, because it has to be manufactured in volume, whereas the high end product is made in a few units per week. Sometimes, getting rid of **** is actually harder. Also, there's a tacit expectation that the lower end product will often be used under more demanding circumstances, such as a non air conditioned factory in a tropical country.

This is borne out in car design too. The Boxster is a technological marvel, but the Corolla is more reliable and is manufactured by the millions. Toyota has always had more advanced design-for-quality than VW. What counts as more "advanced" depends on your perspective.

But what you say about price is true, because of competition. If someone else could make a car with the same complications as a Boxster, for $10k less, they would, and VW would have to follow suit.

 

[Alkali Ike]

I stand re-educated about Saturn. I’d forgotten most of what I used to know.

One easy “tell” in econobox cars is the use of soft-touch plastic on interior surfaces, vs hard plastic. Door panels etc. soft-touch plastic is more expensive.

Status badges like Porsche do spend more on driving refinement. Noise suppression, handling, even the sound the engine makes are precisely dialed in. Less expensive cars not so much.

I own two 2017 VW Golfs: A GTI, and an e-Golf EV. To most casual observers this is ludicrous because they’re the same car! But in reality they’re VERY different driving experiences. Not just because one uses gas and the other is electric. Suspension, steering response, cornering, etc etc are worlds apart.

Refinement in design and engineering usually come with a price tag.

 

[socialleper]

I'm not sure how it can be said that there isn't a significant technological difference going from a cheaper car to a more expensive car. I'm pretty knowledgeable about automotive technology and I can tell you that a $70,000 Porsche actually does have 2-3 times the technological architecture of a $20,000 Volkswagon. The difference is far more than cosmetic and it is in no way comparable to a 20$ ordinary purse and a much more expensive "designer" purse. With more expensive cars, it usually isn't cosmetics you're buying.

I do think you have a point when it comes to very expensive cars, though. Once you get above the $100,000 range you've not adding as much in performance technology as status.

Those differences aren't well known, or made available. If you read a review of a car its generalities with subjective feelings. The big car magazines don't nerd out on the details. I wish they would.

 

[Alkali Ike]

Another VW story. Keep in mind that VW, Porsche, and Audi are under the same general ownership.

A while back Porsche decided it needed an SUV for the North American market. They developed the Cayenne with the goal of making an SUV that would handle more like a sports car. Or at least not like a truck. But it still had full SUV off-road ability etc. Quite an engineering achievement. The Cayenne is the #1 selling Porsche in NA by quite a big margin.

The Audi Q7 and VW Touareg are basically the same vehicles as the Cayenne. In fact the Q7 & Touareg are built on the same assembly line in Bratislava if I’m not mistaken. The Cayenne’s body panels come from Bratislava but I think they’re built in Germany.

I’ve owned a Touareg and the driving experience is like no other SUV I’ve ever driven. Way more refined and sporty-ish. The Touareg has genuine Porsche DNA but at a lower price.

I forget what my point is. You can probably figure it out.

 

[malthumb]

Don't forget the Saturn Ion that was basically a Chevy Cobalt/Pontiac G5.

Yes. That came along with the Aura, Astra, and 2nd Gen Vue. By that time there were opposing camps in GM. One camp wanted to keep Saturn and homogenize it with the rest of GM, the other wanted to keep it separate with separate portfolio. The homogenists “won”.

 

[buldog5151bass]

Yes. That came along with the Aura, Astra, and 2nd Gen Vue. By that time there were opposing camps in GM. One camp wanted to keep Saturn and homogenize it with the rest of GM, the other wanted to keep it separate with separate portfolio. The homogenists “won”.

And the public lost. GM couldn't have gotten you know what in a you know what house, and they killed the one good thing they had.

 

[Mike N]

I own two 2017 VW Golfs: A GTI, and an e-Golf EV. To most casual observers this is ludicrous because they’re the same car! But in reality they’re VERY different driving experiences. Not just because one uses gas and the other is electric. Suspension, steering response, cornering, etc etc are worlds apart.

I own two second generation Camaros..... a 79 Z/28 and an 81 Sport Coupe. Same body style but different driving experiences..... for sure. One runs 10's and couldn't corner worth a chit and the other runs 12's and is also a canyon carver.

 

[malthumb]

Good to still see GM making power with pushrods.

The 5hp difference between your Camaro and the 'Vette is purely marketing. Think back to 1970..... the LT-1 in the 'Vette was rated at 460HP and the same LT-1 in the Z/28 was 450HP. Can't have another car in the lineup with more power than the flagship sports car.

Back then, yes. Today, no. The Corvette and Camaro teams are pretty well integrated and at the very top report to the same person. That person has made it clear that since they have very different customer bases, Camaro doesn’t have to “dumb down” for Corvette. There is enough difference in exhaust restriction to result in a minor difference. Now, is it exactly 5 hp? I doubt it. But I couldn’t tell you if it was more like 3 or more like 7 hp.

The Camaro ZL1 gets the 10AT and the Corvette Z06 with the same engine can get an 8AT. ZL1 with 10AT is right on top of Z06 for performance. The extra two gears and smarter electronics help make up for the deficits in mass and aero.

 

[Alkali Ike]

GM was in a death spiral. They killed off Saturn, Pontiac, Hummer all at once. Cold hard survival decisions and they still needed a public assist.

Oldsmobile had been discontinued before the bailout.

 

[Mike N]

Yes. That came along with the Aura, Astra, and 2nd Gen Vue. By that time there were opposing camps in GM. One camp wanted to keep Saturn and homogenize it with the rest of GM, the other wanted to keep it separate with separate portfolio. The homogenists “won”.

And the public lost. GM couldn't have gotten you know what in a you know what house, and they killed the one good thing they had.

I liked the Saturn lineup and wish they stayed as their own. By the time the Aura, Ion etc rolled out they were the same as the other GM models..... no wonder they went away. At least when Gm built the Chevelle, Cutlass, LeMans and Skylark (the famous A body) you actually got a Pontiac engine in the Pontiac, a Buick engine in the Buick and so on.....

Now, I don't blame GM for killing off Hummer and Oldsmobile. Pontiac, otoh, I would have kept around.

The one I would have killed would have been the Chevy Truck. Now, before you grab the pitchforks and torches, hear me out. The Chevy truck can pretty much only be sold at a Chevy dealer, while the GMC truck could be sold at any GM dealer. Market the truck as a GMC and you instantly have more exposure/sales opportunities.

 

[Downunderwonder]

I'm not sure how it can be said that there isn't a significant technological difference going from a cheaper car to a more expensive car. I'm pretty knowledgeable about automotive technology and I can tell you that a $70,000 Porsche actually does have 2-3 times the technological architecture of a $20,000 Volkswagon. The difference is far more than cosmetic and it is in no way comparable to a 20$ ordinary purse and a much more expensive "designer" purse. With more expensive cars, it usually isn't cosmetics you're buying.

I do think you have a point when it comes to very expensive cars, though. Once you get above the $100,000 range you've not adding as much in performance technology as status.

If your desired performance is met at 20k then it's all status after that.

 

[Mike N]

Back then, yes. Today, no. The Corvette and Camaro teams are pretty well integrated and at the very top report to the same person. That person has made it clear that since they have very different customer bases, Camaro doesn’t have to “dumb down” for Corvette. There is enough difference in exhaust restriction to result in a minor difference. Now, is it exactly 5 hp? I doubt it. But I couldn’t tell you if it was more like 3 or more like 7 hp.

Wonder what they did to the exhaust to cut HP down? Many years ago, we did some exhaust testing on our own with a 9 second Nova. 468 cubes, open headers and a TH400. The headers back then were always a tight fit with the steering box (remember the X body and first gen F body had the steering box behind the crossmember) so guys would dimple a header tube for clearance. Well, everyone would say that "you're killing horsepower" by dimpling the tube..... we found that you'r have to nearly smash the tube shut before there was any difference in ET. Along the same lines, we tested different mufflers versus each other and open headers and found that cars could be quicker with a muffler..... open headers can make an exhaust so efficient that you wind up over-scavenging..... meaning that you're pulling the incoming air/fuel mixture right out the exhaust valve during overlap.

We eventually ran our quickest ET with 3" Walker Super Turbo mufflers..... the car was quiet and hauled @$$...... the textbook defenition of "speak softly and carry a big stick."

The Camaro ZL1 gets the 10AT and the Corvette Z06 with the same engine can get an 8AT. ZL1 with 10AT is right on top of Z06 for performance. The extra two gears and smarter electronics help make up for the deficits in mass and aero.

Too many forward speeds for me.... what ever happened to the TH400?

And as far as aerodynamics, that is for those that can't build horsepower.

 

[hbarcat]

. The Boxster is a technological marvel, but the Corolla is more reliable and is manufactured by the millions. Toyota has always had more advanced design-for-quality than VW. What counts as more "advanced" depends on your perspective.

Porsches are more reliable. Their cheapest car starts at $45,000. Their base 911 is $60,000


This chart shows that, while there are exceptions, generally, the more expensive brands are more reliable.

But, more importantly, we can see that nearly every automaker is pretty close to the industry average of 142. Nearly every car company is between 120 and 170.


Something interesting here is how far Mercedes has fallen from being at the top of the reliability ratings just a few years ago. And Subaru's fall from grace has to be a huge concern for them.

Also, notice how Chevy is close to the top (a huge improvement for them) while Cadillac (both owned by GM, of course) is near the bottom even though they're so much more expensive.

In the very bottom slot, I wouldn't touch a Chrysler (owned by Fiat) with a 10 foot pole.

 

[Mike N]

If your desired performance is met at 20k then it's all status after that.

My desired performance is $500.

 

[gjohnson441496]

the good deals mostly go to customers who have the ability to be aggressive and adversarial and know how to avoid being manipulated by the psychological gamesmanship of the salesperson.

Yep, sounds like me. Didn't know I was in the minority. Makes me feel good! Thanks for posting the article.

 

[Mike N]

Porsches are more reliable. Their cheapest car starts at $45,000. Their base 911 is $60,000

View attachment 3137360


This chart shows that, while there are exceptions, generally, the more expensive brands are more reliable.

While the expensive brands may be more reliable (on paper, at least) the owners tend to be the cheapest people alive. Can't tell you how many luxury car owners I've had in the shop that insist that whatever problem they're having shouldn't be happening, or should be covered under warranty because the car/SUV is a (insert overpriced brand here). Even something as simple as a nail in a tire, Luxury car owners flip out like it's my fault.

Also, I'm a bit surprised to see Subaru so far down the list. Other than head gasket issues that were common on pre 2010 models, they're a pretty much bulletproof vehicle. In fact, I own two of them.... an 04 and 13 Forester.