Drew Dowdell

I would call it... "sufficient", but no, it is not ground breaking in any way. The top level K900 is $68,800 US the way I'd want it, but I wouldn't consider it any better engineered than a Chrysler 300. So for me, I'd go with the 300C Platinum V8 with every option box checked and save $20k or more in the process. The trade off being the K900 has the nicer interior but the 300 has a more controlled, yet still comfortable ride.

It's not as though they're bad cars though. I would easily recommend someone to buy a Genesis 90 if they don't give a damn about driving enthusiasm and want all the goodies for a fair price. 10 year power-train warranty most likely... and finally a luxury badge. And the interior though. That's spectacular for the price IMO. And I love good looks. A lickable interior it definitely is. Exactly... they're not bad cars... and you get a lot of car for your money. The Kia K900 would suit me for the price because I really don't care about handling... I care about comfort and effortless acceleration. But if you're looking for the upper eschelons of engineering, Hyundai/Kia isn't it... I hold no illusions that the K900 is a better engineered car than the LS or A8 or CT6.... not even in the same league.

By Drew Dowdell

I think you're blending definitions. "well engineered" isn't a fixed definition. I think, from what you've been saying in this thread, that you equate "well engineered" with "Ring burner"... some high end performance machine that will keep up with the joneses at Nurbergring. While it's currently a bit out of date, the Lexus LS is very well engineered... and would never be considered a "ring burner". It's a big, posh, well engineered luxury sedan. That said, I don't think there is sufficient evidence in either direction on the engineering level of the Continental. There simply isn't enough information to make an assessment. As for Hyundai, I don't consider them to be well engineered for their stated goals. They want to take on the best from Germany and Cadillac, and I don't think they've done that. The Genesis leaves me with the feeling that some executive took his favorite cars from competing brands, made a check list, and told his engineers to match that. "Must have RWD." "Must have V8"

So then, why bother trying to stretch the engineering envelope at all? Luxury is both subjective and objective. Objectively, a luxury car has to be able to do things that a non-luxury car cannot. Subjectively, it has to do these things in a refined manner. Otherwise, we would all be driving pods. .... again. There are different goals out there. It can take just as much engineering prowess to tune a comfortable yet controlled suspension as it can to make a ring burner.

Oh.. the other part I forgot to mention. There is a huge "Caravan" culture there. They'll strap a camper up to just about anything and go take a road trip somewhere.

From 1957 through 1991, the Mercury Colony Park reigned supreme as the biggest and sometimes most expensive vehicle in the Mercury lineup. During the early years it was a hybrid of sorts, often sharing its platform with whatever full-size Ford sedan was in production at the time while occasionally plucking engines or suspensions from the Lincoln catalog. After 1978, the Colony Park's fate was forever tied to its Marquis sedan brother and the Ford cousins, no longer did it have equipment ties to Lincoln. For 1992, the big Ford and Mercury sedans were redesigned to the new Aero look introduced ten years earlier on the Tempo/Topaz and made into a best seller with the 1986 Taurus. Unfortunately for the Colony Park, that also meant the end of the line. By 1992 Mini-vans and SUVs were all the rage, so Ford canceled the big wagons. For some people, that end of the Colony Park just wouldn't do. If you're one of those people, you just missed out on a great E-Bay find. This 1999 Mercury Grand Marquis Wagon with 44,000 miles sold on E-bay for only $2500. It was a mere 900 miles old when it was rear ended and a shop teacher converted it (with parts from a Mercury Sable I presume) into the wagon you see here. The seller says that car runs and is complete with only a minor rust area over the right front wheel well. Unfortunately, there is no side facing third row in this conversion. So what do you think? For $2500, would you have rocked a 1999 Mercury Grand Marquis Woody Wagon? View full article

Why did GM kill the Avalanche and ditch QuadraSteer on GMC trucks? Low take rate on the Quadrasteer... The avalanche? Because they're idiots.

So why do Europeans in general (and Germans in particular) prefer wagons over crossovers? They don't see the benefits of SUVs. Cons for SUVs in Europe: 1. Less stable at very high speed driving. The autobahn is well known for it's lack of speed limits in some places, but other countries have very high speed limits too. France's top speed limit is over 80mph. 2. Lower fuel economy v. wagons. Pros for Wagons and hatchbacks in Europe: 1. 90% of the utility of a crossover... sometimes better utility than certain crossovers. 2. sedan like handling 3. better fuel economy than a crossover The fuel economy thing is probably the biggest factor. Even with a diesel, a FWD Opel Astra Wagon 1.6 CDi gets much better fuel economy (3.8 liters / 100km)* than a FWD Opel Mokka 1.6 CDi with the same engine and transmission (5.1 liters / 100km)*. *lower is better, converted to the US measurement it is roughly 51mpg v. 46mpg. Yet both vehicles have roughly the same utility. Europeans in general are highly conscious of fuel consumption due to the high cost of fuel, but Germans in particular are very financially frugal (even credit cards are looked down on there, the way they do mortgages on houses is very different too) Another factor is winter driving. In most parts Germany specifically and in all of the Nordic countries, you are required to run snow tires on your car during certain months of the year, so having AWD is less of a "thing" for them. If I could get by in a RWD CTS with snow tires, than a FWD Astra wagon would do at least as well. Many people in the US seem to think that if they spend $2,000 on AWD, then they can "save" having to spend $500 on snow tires... and people automatically equate AWD with SUV even though that isn't the case. And since AWD is a negative on fuel consumption, they value saving fuel over some marginal increase in snow going ability. Aside from freaks like Dfelt who are too tall , the vast majority of crossover drivers in the US would be better served by a wagon..... but because SUVs/CUVs are status symbols, wagons have become unpopular. That said, I would totally buy a wagon, but even I can't sell it to my other half.....

When do you take delivery?

At the rate we're going, I'm not going to get to do any skiing here on the east coast Careful what you say.. last year the north east got BLASTED! I'd like a little more snow than we got here in the STL area. While the rest of the US got hit hard at times we only really had 1 snow. and I didn't get to ski any of it because of my crazy travel schedule

Escalade just barely tickles $100k... if you buy an ESV Platinum. The Grand Wagoneer will need to start in the $50k range (base price of the Yukon XL is $51,260) and then maybe option up to $100k for the PHEV Summit Extended length.