2006 Auto & Motoring Luxury Sedan Comparison Test - Round 0 (Instabins)
Auto & Motoring HQ, June 2006
Arriving at the office bright and early, the newest batch of Auto & Motoring interns have been tasked with reviewing and selecting the proposed entries for the final comparison test later this summer, and today they start on their first batch..
@oldmanbuick - Artemis Borealis Aether Edition
First up for scrutineering was the Artemis Borealis. Reading through some manufacturing info, the interns realize that the Borealisâs powertrain hasnât been updated for 2006 yet, and in the interest of keeping things fair - the interns take the Borealis off their shortlist.
Instabinned - Does not follow the engine variant year rule, as the engine in your entry is from 2002, not 2006 as per the rules.
2006 Auto & Motoring Luxury Sedan Comparison Test - Round 1
@Evboy - Sierra L12
First up on the internsâ shortlist is the Sierra L12. Reading through some reviews in competing magazines and owner reports, the interns find that the Sierra has limited appeal - most reviews deride the Sierraâs aesthetics, remarking that itâs too simple and lacks a lot of depth, and some reviewers found it to be disproportionate as well. The driving experience wasnât much better, with reviewers stating that the Sierra has uncompliant handling and uncommunicative steering, making for a less than great driving experience. The Sierra also lacks in safety technology, and has one of the worst crash test performances in its segment, and the Sierraâs projected reliability is expected to be very low. Ultimately, the interns agree to remove the Sierra from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Sierra is eliminated for a multitude of reasons - the design is overall very weak, with disproportionate design elements like very large lights and too small door handles, and overall I find it to lack detail and definition. Engineering is a problem too, with well below average drivability, the lowest reliability in the entire challenge, well below average safety, and itâs almost at the max budget with fairly uncompetitive stats across the board. For those reasons, itâs out.
@DuceTheTruth100 - Allure G7
Next was the Allure G7. Reading through some information, the interns learn that the Allure is one of the worst performing cars in its segment - with a poor driving experience, poor material and build quality, unimpressive crash test results, very poor expected reliability, and the interns questioned why the Allure would use an automanual gearbox over a standard automatic transmission and compromise the driving experience. Additionally, the Allureâs design comes across as thrown together with too many conflicting elements and pieces - and thus, the interns agree to take the Allure out of contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Allure is eliminated primarily for engineering - with the Allure scoring below average in every major stat, be it prestige, drivability, reliability, etc. Engineering realism leaves something to be desired as well, with odd choices like an automanual transmission and unnecessary tire stagger. The design leaves a lot to be desired as well, feeling overly simple and thrown together, with a mishmash of design elements and cues that donât work well together, and the entire design feels rushed. For those reasons, itâs out.
@wafuq - Marenzi Majestica
Third up was the Marenzi Majestica. Reading through some provided information, the interns learn that while the Majestica is very affordable - just $45,600 - the driving experience has been described as âsub-optimalâ and ânot in keeping with the rest of its segmentâ, ride comfort is just average for the segment, and material and build quality leave a lot to be desired compared to other entries into the luxury sedan segment. Additionally, thew interns didnât love the design, finding it to be oddly proportioned, with a distinct lack in detail and depth as well. Unconvinced by the Majesticaâs overall package, the interns pull it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Majestica is another primarily engineering-based elimination, with well below average performances in prestige, drivability, comfort, and practicality. That being said, the Majestica is at least very affordable, with the lowest-in-challenge price of $45,600. Design contributed as well - I find the proportions to be odd and unattractive, and the overall design lacks depth, feeling flat and somewhat shapeless, and there were some minor realism concerns, like the fact that the Majestica has solid disc brakes all around, something kind of unusual for this segment and era. Overall a strong effort - but one that doesnât quite reach the level it needs to.
@sutarttt - Krest E400 âPoloâ
Next was the Krest E400. Reading some of the provided information, the interns quickly learn that the Krest is an oddly engineered car - sporting a low displacement fully cast iron turbocharged V8, a lack of variable power steering, the wheels are made out of higher strength steel and belong on a heavy duty truck, and when it comes to living with the Krest - itâs very comfortable and nice enough, but the driving experience leaves a lot to be desired, it isnât as safe as it should be, and thanks to the complicated drivetrain - itâs both expensive to buy, and to service. Ultimately the interns see too many red flags, and thus they remove it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The E400 unfortunately is an engineering realism elimination - the major sins being the tiny, compound turbocharged V8 thatâs made completely out of cast iron, the treated steel body panels, heavy duty steel wheels, and the lack of variable power steering. Design leaves a lot to be desired as well, with an odd front design that sits too low and comes across as too large, a distinct lack of depth or detail, and I find there to be too much chrome on the design. Engineering beyond the aforementioned realism quirks is a bit of a mixed bag - prestige is fine but a touch below average, drivability is significantly below average, comfort is above average, and both the purchase price and service costs are very high. Putting it all together, the E400 just isnât particularly competitive, and thatâs why it doesnât move on.
@Cyder0719 - Reutlinger GS10
Next up is the Reutlinger GS10. Looking into things, the interns find that the GS10 suffers from poor material and build quality, comparatively very low ride comfort, poor expected reliability, and very high expected servicing costs. However, it does make up for some of these shortcomings with a generally very good driving experience, decent real world practicality, and a low purchase price. The design however wasnât something that helped with the GS10âs shortcomings, coming across as too simple and thrown together, lacking a lot of the polish expected of a true luxury sedan, and because of that, and the other aforementioned flaws - the interns pull it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The GS10 fails in a few key areas - design, with the GS10 feeling too simple and lacking in detail, and I find it to be a little thrown together and incomplete feeling compared to some of the stronger designs in the challenge. Engineering had problems too, with well below average prestige, comfort, and reliability, low safety, and above average service costs - that being said, drivability is excellent, practicality is solid, and the purchase price is a good amount below average. Overall, a good first effort - but not one thatâs strong enough to keep up with the top performers.
@superbiirdd - Château Lavigne IX la meilleure
Next was the Château Lavigne IX. Reading through some provided information, the interns come away generally impressed with the overall design, but some werenât as sold on the Lavigneâs design, remarking that the beltline is both too tall and too raked, and proportionally the taillights and the wheels come across as too small. The bigger issue that they found with the Lavigne came down to usability and livability, with poor material and build quality, a less than optimal driving experience, itâs among the most expensive cars to buy and to service, and while it wasnât the most important thing - it was one of the slower cars submitted to Auto and Motoring for contention. That being said, the Lavigne is at least very comfortable, expected reliability is believed to be very high, and safety has been excellent. Overall though, the interns find that the Lavigne simply makes too many mistakes, and thus the interns remove it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Lavigne is eliminated solely for engineering, as the design is generally very good, and a bit of an interesting left-field take on the luxury sedan, though I didnât care for the tall, raked beltline, the tiny taillights, or the wheels that are too small proportionally. Across the board engineering was the problem, with well below average prestige, drivability, a nearly maxed out purchase price, very high service costs, and (somewhat less importantly) sub-optimal performance stats. However, comfort is very good, reliability is above average, and safety is excellent. All of that being said, the Lavigne simply makes too many mistakes to move forward.
@George - GAU M600
Next up is the GAU M600. Reading some of the provided information, the interns are immediately not fans of the GAUâs design, all agreeing that it comes off as much too simple, lacking a lot of detail and surfacing to set it apart from the crowd, and some of the design elements (particularly the headlights) felt disproportionate and too large. The GAU also struggles in usability, with a very poor driving experience, good comfort (however, it still falls behind the best cars in the luxury sedan segment), the GAUâs safety performance isnât where it needs to be, and itâs quite expensive. Ultimately, the interns arenât impressed with the GAUâs overall package, and remove it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The GAU is another less than exceptional design, feeling very flat and shapeless, and I find it to lack a lot of detail, particularly in the front fascia. Engineering is a mixed bag - drivability, practicality and safety are all below average, the purchase price is at the max, and while comfort is above average - itâs still well behind the top cars in the challenge. That being said, prestige is excellent, and service costs are very low. All together, the GAU just canât keep up with the top cars in the challenge.
@HyperMud - Kinsu Velko 650 LS
Net was the Kinsu Velko. Immediate impressions are weak, with the interns unanimously agreeing that the Velko misses the point of the comparison test by a mile, feeling much more performance focused than it should be, and with odd proportions and unflattering design cues - it does little to sway the interns. The Velko as a car hurts things further, with serious deficits in build and material quality, ride comfort, safety technology, and expected reliability, and if there was anything positive to say - itâs that the Velko isnât that expensive, relatively speaking. Ultimately, the Velko is too compromised and makes too many mistakes, and the interns pull it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Velko so completely misses the point of the brief that I question entering it in the first place - the design is a boy racer cliche, with overwrought and busy surface details, a rough and thrown on overall appearance, and odd and unflattering proportions that overall make the Velko one of the lowest scoring designs in the entire challenge. Engineering was overall poor, with well below average prestige, comfort, safety and reliability, itâs much too fast for the desired segment, and about the only positive is that itâs at least not very expensive. Overall, the Velko comes across as a very poor and lazy effort compared to the stronger entries.
@bang6111 - Katami Orion 460GL
Next up was the Katami Orion. Reading through some reviews and additional information, the interns are divided on the design - some finding it to be reasonably solid, but others find it to lack polish, and feature too many disproportionately sized elements, especially the lighting elements out back. The Orion suffers from usability issues, with poor material and build quality, significant deficits in safety technology and crash test performance, poor ride comfort, poor expected reliability, and a just average driving experience. While the Orionâs low purchase price and low service costs donât hurt matters, it simply isnât enough for the interns to justify giving the Orion to the editors for final consideration - and thus, itâs removed from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Orion aesthetically moved in the right direction, but I found the lighting elements (especially on the rear) to be much too large and not well integrated into the overall design, and the design overall is messy and lacking in polish, especially in the front fascia surfacing, and on a personal level I find this to be one of your weakest designs, especially after the rather solid design you submitted for my previous comparison test. Engineering has problems too, with well below average prestige, safety, and comfort, low average drivability, and reliability was below average. On the upside, the Orion is one of the more affordable entries to buy and service, but it simply canât keep up with the more expensive entries on an aesthetic or engineering basis - thus ending its run here.
@Nebulon & @Vanilla - Sesia Aptus V8
Second to last was the Sesia Aptus. Reading through some of the provided information, the interns are generally fans of the design, but in agreement that the proportions arenât the best, especially from the side and rear 3/4 angles, and the overall rear design with the oddly shaped taillights and lack of overall depth won none of the interns over. The larger issue with the Aptus though, is that it simply isnât as competitive as it should be, with sub-optimal material and build quality, poor ride comfort, and while it isnât the worst car safety wise - it still leaves something to be desired. That being said, the Aptus offers an excellent driving experience, good projected reliability, and a good amount of real world practicality. However, at $63,300 - the Aptus just gets edged out by similarly priced vehicles, and thus - the interns pull it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. The Aptus is another car that misses the point of the brief, but not quite to the same level as the Velko did - the Aptus is nicely designed overall, but I didnât love the rear design, and I found the proportions to be odd and not the most flattering from certain angles. Engineering was the bigger issue - prestige, comfort and safety are well below average, and though drivability and reliability are solid, the Aptus is one of the more expensive entries to buy and service, and thus it just gets edged out by the more well rounded entries.
@Koviico - Monroe Calari
Last up for contention - the Monroe Calari. Reading through the provided information, the interns come away generally impressed with the design, though some felt that the proportions were slightly odd, partially due o the relatively low hood and front fenders, and the high mounted taillights that clash with the beltline, and an oddly flat front end from the side view. However, the largest issues with the Calari come down to usability - with a very poor driving experience, solid comfort (though still behind the top cars in the segment), sub-optimal safety technology, and very low expected reliability. Material and build quality however is excellent, and the Calari is one of the more affordable cars to service. All of that being said, when you consider that the Calari is at the maximum purchase price for the comparison test and all of its faults - the things it does get right donât do enough to keep it in the pack, and thus the interns remove it from contention.
End Result - Eliminated. Probably one of the harder decisions I had to make, I liked the design quite a bit, with a good level of detail and depth (though I found the proportions to be just a little bit off from a side view). Engineering was the biggest problem, with below average drivability, above average comfort (but still very low relative to the other cars), and well below average drivability. On the upside, prestige, safety and service costs are all quite good, but with the Calari at the maxed out purchase price - it simply isnât as competitive as it should be.
After wrapping up the final considerations for the editors, the interns pass the bat to the head editor, who schedules a meeting for tomorrow with the testing department and the rest of the editors..
Advancing to Phase 2
@Tragedy
@Sureascanbe
@the-chowi
@moroza
@NotChris07
@ritz
@DoctorNarfy
@yangx2
@titleguy1
@Xepy
@Oreology
@DrDoomD1scord & @chiefzach2018
@Portalkat42
.
