Luxury cars do poorly in bumper tests

Very true and there is no longer a need to spend the extra money on a so-called luxury car as most luxury features have already trickled down to lesser cars. An extreme example is the Suzuki SX4 which is very well equipped for its low price with the only thing missing being availability of heated power seats and leather. The seat material was a bit tacky but the seats were comfy and at the right height because the car is tall to begin with. We'll probably end up buying the 2008 C-class however. The 2008 Saturn VUE which my wife wanted was a complete disappointment to both of us.

— EnnNorak (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 2:18:49 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Another screw up for Lexus.

Shame on them!

— EL34 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2007 8:44:35 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Try scratching the front bumper on a Lamborghini.. you'll get more than $5,500 in damages.

— rg12345 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/2/2007 8:48:12 PM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

What bullshit. Does they not understand that a car can only be designed for so many different parameters? Now of course they can all make stronger bumpers, but good look in passing the pedestrians tests. Who the hell cares what it will cost to fix in the long run. Your insurance is going up the minute you strike anything and the cars here with the lowest bumper cost still aren't going to be any cheaper to insure anyway. The BMW 3-Series is going to cost you more than the Lexus ES or Volvo because it is much sportier in nature. See how irrelevant this bumper crap is?

— Mercedes (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 1:25:35 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: -1   

Typical clueless Lexus-loving idiot, always thinking the world revolves around Lexus or that people post with some relevance to Lexus in mind. Get over yourself. I couldn't care any less what type of cars were on the list, only that the test is stupid. Comprehend the post next time before replying to it.

— Mercedes (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 6:24:54 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 0   

Mercedes , don't listen to camarylover david989, your post is very clear. GO BENZ!

— xj13 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 7:33:59 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

interesting to note:

he worst performer in the pack of 11 midsize luxury cars that were tested was the Infiniti G35 which sustained almost $14,000 in damage - that's more than double the cost of repairing a BMW 3-Series for God's sake! The Infiniti was a disaster,” said Institute senior vice president Joe Nolan. "There shouldn't be much or any damage in collisions at these speeds, especially to expensive and presumably well-made cars." The best performer was the Saab 9-3 which sustained "only" $5,243 in damage while the Audi A4 was quite close with $5.831. From the 11 cars tested, 4 broke the $10,000 barrier.

— Agent009 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 9:07:39 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

I really don't know what they're expecting? back in the 70's and early 80's you had cars with thick metal panels and metal bumpers. and if you got into in accdient you maybe had a small dent or crease. Now wiht gov't standards for crumple zones and occupent protection what else is it supposed to do besides fall apart? damages of over $2,500 back then were rare for this type of accident.

Not to mention most car companies make a lot of their money from aftercare (I.E. Replacement parts) Do you really think that tail light costs $600 to make?

— rok_altima (View Profile)

Posted on 8/3/2007 11:47:42 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1   

dont forget these luxury cars also have these sensors in the bumpers n etc which rly do cost more to fix. But of course when u buy a luxury car it always be very expensive to maintain.

— jt716 (View Profile)

Posted on 8/4/2007 9:47:10 AM | reply to this comment | Votes: 1