Oh, BusinessWeek, what's with "Luxury Cars for Fun and Fuel Efficiency"?
Does anyone really think a 21-mpg BMW 328i is a fuel-efficient vehicle? Apparently Jim Henry of BusinessWeek does.
Henry has written an article that tries to make the point that drivers with fat wallets don't need to "sacrifice driving performance for fuel efficiency." That's a fine case to try and make, but when Henry starts his article by finding that "A list of the most fuel-efficient luxury-brand models includes some impeccably prestigious, comfortable, and well-performing cars," methinks he's been going about his task all wrong.
Seems to me that the right way to write an article on the topic of fuel efficiency and driving performance is to look at high-mpg cars, and then find the ones that might be considered luxurious. Sure, you might end up with the same cars (Henry includes the hybrid Lexus RX 400h, the diesel-powered Mercedes-Benz E320 Bluetec (pictured), and the Porsche Cayman and another dozen or so more as meeting his green-but-golden criteria), but at least your focus was on the fuel savings, not on ways to shoehorn a green label onto luxury cars. Granted, we like to write about some of these same cars here on AutoblogGreen because they showcase the efforts (such as they are) by automakers to increase efficiency, but to flat-out call them fuel-efficient? Hmm.
In any case, when you're talking about these luxury buyers, good mileage isn't a concern. Henry writes that a source confirmed for him that "luxury buyers in particular, continue to be much more concerned with factors such as the manufacturer's reputation or whether a vehicle is well made and fun to drive. Fuel economy is far down the list."
[Source: BusinessWeek]
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Jim Henry 6:58PM (5/02/2008)
Hi, I'm glad to find people reading article and commenting. I accept the criticism that 21 mpg is nothing to brag about, but if you look at a spreadsheet where mileage for all the luxury brands is spelled out, as I did, you find that's actually not too bad by comparison. I think that's terrible and needs to change and will change, but if you only look at quote-unquote luxury brands, it is what it is. I think that's different from saying, "Henry seems to think 21 mpg is 'good mileage,' what's the matter with that guy?" That's a little out of context. For my personal use, I agree with the writer who said 30 mpg highway and up.
Reply
Jack S. 4:33PM (9/30/2007)
I think when there's no longer any cognitive brain activity they call that "brain-dead". Perhaps that explains the article.
Reply
Michael Hippenhammer 7:34PM (9/30/2007)
You chose the 21 mpg for city driving while the 238i gets 30 on the hwy. My dad lives in Seattle and averages 28 combined mpg and gets over 30 mpg on long trips. All this in a sports luxury vehicle. A much smaller VW Jetta gets about the same mpg. Bad choice for picking on a sports lux car.
Reply
UH2L 6:29PM (9/30/2007)
Luxury is buying what is not necessary for reasons that support egos and appreciation for finer things. So many luxury cars are inefficient. But it's all relative and if a luxury car gets 24 mpg instead of 20 mpg, that is an improvement. The diesels really do have impressive fuel economy and I've averaged more than 28 mpg with my 9-3 wagon. I've seen Nissan Versa road tests showing them getting comparable fuel economy, and they're slower and less safe with less cargo room. Don't dismiss the article completely. I would expect the Audis and Volvos to fare very well in real world fuel economy.
Reply
grimmex 3:14AM (10/01/2007)
Mmm, okay this is how it works.
Luxury cars basically represent exactly what everyone wants in a day to day car, but can't afford. No expense is spared to make the driver and the passengers comfortable. The seats are leather because leather is (or at least, most people think it is) the best possible material to make seats out of. The car is large because that gives the maximum amount of space for passengers to sit in. The stereo system is the best there is. The navigation system is the best there is. Heat and air conditioning keep the passengers cozy. And the engine is big so that you can run it all and haul it around fast enough to keep up or exceed everyone else's speed. Fuel economy? Who cares? There's plenty more money where that came from.
You want to stop the fur trade? You have to make people not *want* fur. As certain furs became rarer and rarer, it became something *more* desirable, especially as the price went up exponentially. At the end of the 19th century, the fact that there were only 6 of a certain animal in the weasel family in the deepest, darkest jungle of India somewhere, meant to the rich and powerful that if you had a coat made of those last 6 weasels, that *you were the man*!
This is why the Big Three say, unequivocally, that even as gas prices go through the roof, fuel efficient (or better yet, fuel free) cars are not in demand. At the end of the 21st century, when only the rich and powerful can afford to burn oil as fuel, only the rich and powerful will, and they *will*, just to show each other how rich and powerful they are.
In Japan though, in 30 years the wealthy will be driving the very latest in technology instead, because that's their driving motivation.
Reply
GoodCheer 9:44AM (10/01/2007)
In what respect is a Jetta "much smaller" than a BMW 3 series? Other than the price, they're about a similar as you're likely to find, and according to the EPA, the Jetta gets 10-15% better mileage.
http://www.edmunds.com/apps/nvc/edmunds/VehicleComparison?styleid=100778036&styleid=100814243&maxvehicles=5&refid=&op=3&tab=specs
Reply
Chris Adams 10:54AM (10/01/2007)
Also since they are using the 2008 EPA standards it doesn't sound like the BMW does very well. I routinely beat the pre-'08 EPA highway mileage rating in my old Benz c-class. As long as you are not stuck in NY traffic in the middle of winter anyone can beat the 2008 EPA standards. So 30MPG plus is a realistic possibility for the 328i. I'm also reading from end-user-reports that the Benz diesel SUV is getting close to 30MPG. From a 4900 pound vehicle! Of course the '08 EPA says only 24MPH on the highway. So WTF???
Reply
mike.sheridan 6:26PM (10/01/2007)
Actually...
If you take a look at all of the EPA estimates for model years 2006 - 2008, and you throw out the 'death trap' cars (Nissan Versa, etc -- the really small cars) and the hybrids, then what
you'll find is that there are hardly ANY cars that meet a reasonable criteria for 'decent' fuel economy (my own cut-offs are 20 city, 30
highway -- post '08 adjustments).
The handful of cars that do meet that criteria include the Audi 2.0T models, the Benz BlueTec, and the Porsches. Really, only the TSX, the Cadillac, and the Infiniti shouldn't be on the list.
If you consider cars based on their relative performance, then (unfortunately) the BW
article actually got the list right.
Reply
Paul 2:25AM (10/02/2007)
You people protest too much. There's nothing wrong with the ABG article. 21mpg should not be touted in the national press as an example of efficiency, especially considering the cost and size of the car in question. It's 2007, see? We have the means and the need to do better. Now pull your heads out of the sand. Thanks.
Reply