|
|
|
|
IntelliChoice Value Rating
The chart above shows the purchase price versus ownership cost for each car from a specific vehicle class. The cars with better than average ownership cost/purchase price correlations are the best values, and these best value cars are represented by the dots below the curve. (i.e. the cars that have a lower ownership cost compared to its purchase price.) Those cars, which are worse than average or poor values, appear above the curve.
One way to view the graph is to draw a vertical line through any purchase price. You may see several dots that fall on this line - each of which is a car with a similar purchase price. However, notice the difference in ownership costs of each car represented by the vertical position of the dot. Two cars with the same purchase price can have thousands of dollars difference in ownership costs. This is what separates "good value" cars from "poor value" cars.
What is a good car value?
A "good car value" is one whose cost to own and operate is less than expected. The lower the cost to own and operate a car compared to what is expected, the better the value of that car.
But how do we know a car's "expected cost"?
For each car in the class, IntelliChoice plots the car's purchase price against the total five-year cost to own and operate it as determined by IntelliChoice research. Each dot on the above chart represents a specific car. Generally, we find that as the purchase price of the car increases, the cost to own and operate that car increases. This is why the dots on the graph tend to rise upward and to the right. This phenomenon also makes intuitive sense - as the purchase price rises, financing costs tend to rise, as do insurance, depreciation, taxes, and most other car ownership costs.
This is an important concept. It's normal for car ownership costs to rise as purchase price rises. Therefore, we can't just establish one "average" ownership cost number for each class, since cars in the class have different purchase prices. (This is why the "Relative" shown on each chart is different for cars in the same car class.)
Using statistical techniques, IntelliChoice "connects the dots" to form a curve that defines, for this car class, the relationship between the car's purchase price and car's ownership costs. This curve is our "expected cost" curve. The curve defines, for any car in the class, the five-year ownership cost that we would expect to see at each possible purchase price. If every car in the class were an average value, then all the dots would fall exactly on the curve. However, it's rare that any dot is exactly on the curve. Some dots are a little higher or lower, and some are a lot higher or lower. The dots that are a little lower are better than average car values, while the dots that are a lot lower are excellent car values (A dot that is a lot lower than the curve has ownership costs much lower than expected for a car of its purchase price). Conversely, a dot a little higher than the curve is a poorer than average car value, while a dot that is much higher than the curve is a poor car value.
Value is a relative term, not an absolute term. It is performing better than the logical expectation.
So is a Mercedes-Benz E320 expensive to own and operate? Certainly in an absolute sense. Most other cars cost less. But, when its cost to own and operate is plotted against cars with comparable invoice prices, the E320 costs less. So the E320 is not expensive to own and operate - it is a good car value. The Mercedes does not have low ownership costs, but it has low ownership costs for its invoice price.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Review From Motor Trend Magazine
At the test track, the R32 ripped from 0 to 60 mph in 5.8 seconds and through the quarter mile in 14.4 at 94.5 mph. Compared with the GTI, with its 200-horse, 2.0-liter turbo, the R32 is 0.5 second quicker to 60 and 0.3 quicker through the quarter. Its fiercest competitors-the Mitsubishi Evo and Subaru STI-are speedier machines, but they lack the R32's overall refinement, due in part to the Jekyll-and-Hyde nature of their turbo engines. In contrast, the R32's iron-block motor is as linear as a runway, always urging you to push it past 6000 rpm, if only to enjoy the vociferous barks through the center-mounted dual exhaust with every pull of a shift paddle. Moreover, the R32 feels like an Audi (indeed, the R32 is really a reconstituted A3 3.2 S-line quattro), and as such seems more solid and sophisticated than the two Asians.  Meandering through the lush hills of Malibu Canyon, the R32 feels planted and composed, its Haldex all-wheel-drive system in tune with the torquey V-6, its electric power steering nicely weighted for every speed and condition. While diving deep into turns yields mild understeer-the Haldex system routes power to the rear wheels when traction demands; thus, under braking, the R32 behaves like a front-drive car-getting back on the throttle mid-turn eradicates the push, rotating the rear, tucking in the front, and launching the car out of a turn like a spurred stallion. Although there are only 250 horses on tap, the power is tailormade for the car. The lighter GTI comes across more playful-400 fewer pounds and a turbo will do that-but the R32 feels more mature, a seasoned sense that becomes clear through the slalom (68.4 mph) and in 60-to-0 braking (111 feet), in which the R32 outperforms the GTI as well as the $70,000 Audi RS 4.  Whatever the exercise, the harder you push the R32, the more it comes alive. That VW only plans to import 5000 per year is a crying shame-so many will miss out on the most satisfying Golf ever built. ... >>next page
|
|
|
| |