Jump to content

Talk:Luxury car/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1Archive 2

2Dino

  1. F-Segment and Luxury Car is THE SAME according to European Comission! You should not remove this information. I've provided enough sources that indicate that F-Segment aka Luxury Car is an official classification in Europe.
  2. Reverting well-referenced edits is a major no-no and can eventually earn you a ban.
  3. Not to men1tion you've reverted edits than had nothing to do with F-Segment, such as {{fact}} template.
  4. If you disagree with other editors' edits, discuss first, find a consensus, edit then. That's a cornerstone of Wikipedia. Reverting is not a good way to find a consensus. Netrat (talk) 23:18, 27 February 2009 (UTC)
Did you read your sources? They go on to say "The boundaries between segments are blurred by factors other than the size or length of cars. These factors include price, image and the amount of extra accessories. Also, the tendency to offer more options like ABS, airbags, central locking etc. in small cars further dilutes the traditional segmentation". The F-Segment is for cars such as Rolls-Royces. The BMW 3-series falls firmly into the D-Segment. There is nothing about it that is more luxurious than a Citroen C5 or Mazda 6 other than the badge, and even that I'd argue is more one of a 'sport' marque than a 'luxury' one. It is exactly this sort of arbitrary classification that we are trying to avoid here. If you're going to insist that Luxury Vehicle and F-Segment are synonymous then I'm afraid that your list of examples doesn't include a single F-Segment vehicle. You're using the EU's vague definition of F-Segment to attach some sort of objectivity to the term Luxury Vehicle and then list examples based on your own subjectivity. Dino246 (talk) 07:22, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
That's what I'm saying: "luxury car" = largest sedans from luxury brands. BMW 3 is not a "luxury car" according to EUC. It is a D-Segment car from luxury make. You were the one who insisted that "luxury car" is a term that should not be applied to a particular class of vehicles. Now you are saying things that are quite opposite. Netrat (talk) 00:54, 3 March 2009 (UTC)
? 2 days ago you listed the BMW3 as an example of a luxury car and today you're accusing me of inconsistency? I'm saying that "F-segment" and "Luxury Vehicle" are not synonymous. You are now agreeing with me.Dino246 (talk) 08:11, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

So

As now we have enough sources defining what "luxury car" is (from European Comission), I think it's time to restore AT LEAST SOME sections previously deleted Dino246 and 842U. Netrat (talk) 17:16, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

There are no sources defining what Luxury Car is. You have one source attempting to define what F-Segment is and conceding that it is ill-defined and increasingly irrelevant as a classification in the current marketplace. Defining Luxury Vehicle and attempting to objectively list examples of it is as ludicrous as defining luxury soap and granting it a Wikipedia article.Dino246 (talk) 17:40, 25 March 2009 (UTC)

Dino, stop this childish behaviour! This is VANDALISM!

The current state of this article is an insult to anyone who knows just a little bit about cars! Your actions actually amount to vandalism!

You do seem to have a PERSONAL problem with the term "luxury", or perhaps just with the cars labeled as such.

Well, dude, there's is huge number of things on this planet whose definitions are ambiguous or not agreed upon by various individuals, but, somehow, many of those things have articles on wikipedia without being vandalised by people like you.

Your logic is unbelievable flawed! How about removing the term luxury completely from wikipedia just because you belive it's very abiguous and abstruse? According to your logic, people should be confused by any use of this term... —Preceding unsigned comment added by Marcos800 (talk • contribs) 18:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)

No need to get personal. I have no issue with the word luxury and I happen to know a thing or two about cars. My issue is simply with any sort of list of 'trluxury cars' because it is de facto original research and amounts to declaring open season for arguments between fans of various marques. A cursory search of Wikipedia appears to indicate that no other product, with the exception of cars, has a page dedicated to 'luxury' versions of it. Luxury apartment, luxury stereo, luxury soap, luxury suit, luxury jet, luxury drink.. all redlinks. Of course there are such things as luxury cars but who are you or I to decide what is and what isn't? It's the listing of examples that I object to because while few would argue that a Rolls-Royce isn't or that a Tata Nano was, there is a huge grey area in the middle and Wikipedia is not the place to argue about whether a BMW 3-series is more luxurious than a Ford Mondeo. There are forums for that, here we stick to facts, and the fact is that there is no accepted definition for 'luxury vehicle'.Dino246 (talk) 19:14, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
You should have tried harder: Luxury real estate, Luxury yacht, Luxury resort, Luxury good, Luxury box and so on...Marcos800 (talk) 13:10, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The issue of verifiability is central to Wikipedia articles. The cited articles are germain, if only because they highlight how little verifiable information they contain and how little verifiable information surrounds the use of the word "luxury." Aside from the Luxury real estate article, these are very poor articles by Wikipedia criteria: Luxury real estate: the article refers to a specifically defined and referenced term within specific geographic markets. Luxury yacht: the article contains two references and little verifiable information. Luxury resort: the article contains no references and no verifiable information. Luxury good: the article contains no references. Luxury box: the article contains no references.

Wikipedia isn't a repository for the conjecture of "people who know about cars." Articles are to be structured around reliable sources. Because there is no agreed threshold on "luxury car-ness" and because ascribing the descriptor to any product is itself an act of peacockery, it seems most appropriate to keep the article sober, referenced and free from the agrandizement the very word luxury suggests. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.165.67.131 (talk) 15:36, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

Rebuild this article

This article has no place in a reference work. There is not a single agreed upon definition of luxury, hence the entire article is conjectural.

I strongly suggest we start over with this article. Comments?

See Weasel Words. 842U (talk) 23:11, 14 April 2008 (UTC)

Fully support you. Let's BE BOLD and tidy this mess up. Dino246 (talk) 12:10, 15 April 2008 (UTC)
This has gone from inadequate to awful. It reads like it was written in one sitting with no research done on the topic, and the notion that it is now somehow neutral is off-base. For example, just because any manufacturer can call any car "luxury" doesn't mean that they DO. The term "luxury vehicle" needs a definitionally precise article rather than an arbitrarily opinionated one; if someone is up to the task of fixing it and fast, I salute you; if not, I'll revert it. Bflorsheim (talk) 00:02, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

A definitionally precise article would be great -- far better than reverting the article. Try to find that definition though. 842U (talk) 00:51, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Definitionally reasonable, then. I mean, look at this sentence:
"Nonetheless [nonetheless of what?? certainly not anything in the preceding paragraph, it doesn't apply], the term is both a weasel word and a peacock term [this links to a Wikipedia term page, not something normal reference users are going to be seeking] -- and as such can encourage the listener [?] to infer conclusions not implicit in the word. [that's "phrase," and additionally, what term CAN'T have non-implicit conclusions derived from it?]"
You sound like you want to tie this term up and stab it to death with an ice pick. What did luxury cars ever do to you? Give me ONE reason the new version of the article is better than the previous one, what with its lack of pictures, sources/citations, examples, neutrality, and any semblance of a definition in terms of what a luxury CAR--the vehicle implied, not the term itself--actually is. Bflorsheim (talk) 01:41, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback on the article — your opinions are valuable here. Whatever happens, lets keep discussing this — there are no hard feelings, and maybe we can get to a place where the article really works.

In the meantime, if you read this entire discussion page, this issue has festered for a long time — ice picks aside, several folks have identified the deeply flawed nature of the article in its previous state.

We know SUV's derive from trucks, that Crossover's are built on unibody chassis, that a convetible allows open air driving — but what precisely do we know about luxury vehicles?

Granted, the current article is flawed too.

The current brief article is better than the long flawed article, because its easier to build on and revise. The sheer bulk of the last article gave credence to something for which there is no credence: that there is a definition for a luxury vehicle. 842U (talk) 11:07, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

The new version is little more than a foundation on which to build but I firmly believe that the old version was beyond repair and that starting from scratch is the best course of action. I intend to find time to contribute here and help write an encyclopedic article on luxury vehicles rather than the random list of opinion that was here previously. Dino246 (talk) 12:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

This is great — with a few of us taking care to recraft the article, perhaps we can arrive at a functional reference. 842U (talk) 12:45, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

I bit the bullet and wrote something. Yes, it's unreferenced and written largely from my own personal knowledge of the motor industry, but I believe we can back up most of what I've written so let's take an active approach to find supporting sources rather than just fill it with {{Fact}} tags. I dropped in specific names of marques where I felt it was necessary but I don't think this article needs to have a comprehensive list and I'd discourage people from simply adding 'Lancia' or whatever without a good specific reason why. In true Wikipedia spirit though, this article belongs to everyone so be bold and edit away. Dino246 (talk) 14:34, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Dino, I have a problem with what you added, retracted it, and hope you will come up with a "sandboxed" edition that uses a less conjectural tone and reliable sources. 842U (talk) 15:43, 18 April 2008 (UTC)

Dino, in ref to your lates edit:

Some (see weasel words) motor manufacturers (who?) produce only luxury vehicles (again, what is this?) and these are considered (by whom?) to be luxury brands (again, what is this?). However, most (see weasel words) motor manufacturing companies have some sort of luxury vehicle (again, what is this) or luxury vehicle brand in their range and today, the term luxury vehicle is applied to some small cars and 4x4s as well as the more traditional four door saloons and Grand Tourer sports cars that were exclusively considered (by whom) to be luxury vehicles in the past.

It's ineffective to have this conversation about luxury vehicles, when the term itself is vague. Again, we need real sources here -- otherwise the article will become a lot of conjecture again. 842U (talk) 13:26, 27 April 2008 (UTC)

Reverted article to the stable description of "luxury vehicle" -- without the marketing hype and puffery of various brands of automobiles. CZmarlin (talk) 18:59, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

The article as it is.

Unless one of the people who impose the old article can come up with one (an article) without using a large ammount of weasel words, or saying 'Luxury Vehicle is a biased term' in fancy wording, I will continue to revert the artcle back to it's orginal state because, although it has faults, it is much more accurate than the poor excuse being presented. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.166.67.107 (talk) 07:24, 1 July 2009 (UTC)

There is no recognized "luxury vehicle" standard. Such models can be described as "high-quality car which is expensive and has many additional features"(See here). An encyclopedia article should cite sources and avoid peacock terms. Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 19:11, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
I am well aware of this. But, the current article doesn't even really contribute even half the information of the old article. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.179.39.58 (talk) 21:12, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
The old article didn't contain information, it contained original research and unreferenced, unsupported claims. The newer version is far from perfect but it has stood broadly stable for well over 12 months now after much discussion and debate and to roll back to the deeply controversial and by consensus, unacceptable version without proper discussion here is not the Wikipedia way. There is a current stable version that needs work. Please offer your contributions but do not unilaterally turn the clock back to last year's version while hiding behind an IP. See the talk above Talk:Luxury_vehicle#Rebuild_this_article there was clear consensus to abandon the old version and write a new one. If you want to help us to do that then please please do. Dino246 (talk) 21:31, 1 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I over-read that consensus, I only saw the above talk in relation to it. And, the reason for my IP editing was I was just getting back into Wiki. —Preceding unsigned comment added by TLCinMD (talk • contribs)


I believe that we can restore the backbone of the old article, as long as we trim lots of weasle words, and add lots of sources. I'll push ahead for the time being and see what might result.
I think that we can base this on Consumer Guide, US News auto rankings, or other buying guides (other editors are more familiar with those in Britain and Europe), while accounting for differences in international classification.
Obviously, the goal is to keep this objective and avoid debates on opinion, otherwise Dino246 may revert it to the ultra-safe version. Maybe we could put this article on probation ? GoldDragon (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

OK, let's try and do this, but without arbitrary, contentious and subjective examples. Dry sourced definitions, nothing more. It must be clear that there is no consensus on what a 'luxury car' is, the second we start including examples we are objectivising a subjective topic and opening the door to arguments. Is a base X3 really a luxury car? Are Aston Martins luxury cars or grand tourers? Who are we to decide..? Dino246 (talk) 18:35, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

It is important that we acknowledge the wide variation in the meaning of "luxury vehicle" at the introduction.
We should include clear cut examples that fit both North American and European definitions, generally no major disparities in size versus price ranges, like the BMW 5-Series in the mid-luxury executive car classification, and the Mercedes-Benz S Class in the full-sized/premium luxury. There is obviously going to be considerable price variation, however its not a big deal if we look at the nameplate as a whole and its general positioning (rather than the extremes like the 4-cylinder BMW 3-series versus the M3). I recall the "big deal" the auto press made when the C-Class Sportcoupe came out in the US (first Mercedes-Benz there without standard leather seats), nonetheless as it did come from that marque it was still considered luxury. Harder examples to debate include the Lexus ES and Acura TL, which may not be easily categorized as they are priced similar to compact executive cars but more midsize regarding dimensions (considered entry-level luxury in the US but they don't exist in Europe). GoldDragon (talk) 20:57, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Unless there is an agreed upon metric for measuring luxury-ness of a car, the article shouldn't suggest there is such a thing. In other words, if "luxury" is a term that is merely bestowed by, for example Consumer Reports or J.D. Powers... or any other organization, without a metric or means of measuring when a car meets or doesn't meet the standard, then just leave the article like it is. 842U (talk) 20:25, 14 September 2009 (UTC)


There is actually constructive work being done to improve this article. The "stable version" might be ultra-safe, but quite a few other editors see it as unacceptable since it is completely lacking in information. I was planning to do an overview of the North American luxury market and how it gradually evolved, obviously a European editor can do a similar thing for Europe (i.e. the problems that Lexus is facing trying to break in). Obviously, if you keep insisting on an internationally-agreed upon metric, in effect raising the bar too high, then nothing is going to get done, and I bet that other editors will keep reverting it. GoldDragon (talk) 21:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

This is an encyclopedia article, and not a PR piece for automobile companies. It needs recognized sources and has to avoid peacock terms. CZmarlin (talk) 13:33, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I have the conditional support of User:Dino246 and so far I have been backing up my assertions with recognized sources. GoldDragon (talk) 17:11, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Because luxury is a perceptual, conditional and subjective attribute that can and will be understood differently by different entities, there is no standard of what constitutes the luxury-ness of a vehicle. Nor has any editor thus far offered a definition of where non-luxury ends and luxury begins. Nor is it impossible that luxury does not exist as an attribute of a vehicle itself but exists simply as the perception of the consumer. (cf. Quality)

But it is ineffectual to suggest here that sources are valid references of luxury-ness because their name is recognized — noting especially that the entities in question (e.g., Consumer Reports) don't publish criteria or methodology to define the very thing in question: luxury-ness.

To improve the article, find entities that publish criteria to define the term luxury-ness when ascribed to a vehicle. In the meantime, the article is fair, concise and accurate.842U (talk) 19:13, 15 September 2009 (UTC)


As you've said, there is no standard of what constitutes the luxury-ness of a vehicle, however we can acknowledge that it can and will be understood differently by different entities. By that standard, that means that there is no definition of where non-luxury ends and luxury begins, that would be like seeking the Holy Grail. GoldDragon (talk) 03:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
Forbes has a good article on the several aspects of "luxury-ness" which could go in the introduction. One thing that is definitely clear is that many technological features (safety and entertainment) go into luxury vehicles first before trickling down to mass market vehicles.[2][3] GoldDragon (talk) 03:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

A clear parallel to this article is the article on Quality), which gives a broad definition and then a list of sources with very specific criteria. The list itself confirms the variety of criteria that can be used — without "making up" the list. Some editors feel it's ok to de-stabilize the luxury-vehicle article by dumping unorganized, un-sourced, unreferenced conjecture into this article. The "10" reason that Forbes gives for buying a "luxury car" are essentially covered in the intro to the article as it currently exists.

To improve the article, find entities that publish criteria to define the term luxury-ness when ascribed to a vehicle. In the meantime, the article is fair, concise and accurate. 842U (talk) 11:50, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

The analogy with Quality is inappropriate, as a better parallel is Sports car. I pretty sure that Mercedes or BMW don't follow a "guide" when designing their cars, rather it is more influenced by their competition as well as the market. I understand that you've had problems in the past with some editors, however this is organized, sourced, and referenced. GoldDragon (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

"Organized, sourced, and referenced" doesn't matter nearly as much as what is "organized, sourced, and referenced." Conjecture can be easily organized and sourced — as in the case of the sports car article — which is cited for inaccuracy pertaining to the very characteristics of the cars the article refers to. In other words, that article fell into the same pot hole some editors keep steering this article into. What the article needs are discreet definitions of "luxury vehicle," not inaccurate conjecture. No need to keep arguing the same thing; the article is no place for peacock terms, conjecture and original research. 842U (talk) 20:49, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

I'll let you take care of the discreet definitions, however this article needs a lot more than just that. And as auto guides and the motoring press are not peacock terms, conjecture and original research, then we can finally move forward. GoldDragon (talk) 21:41, 16 September 2009 (UTC)

Auto guides and the motoring press are not good sources for an encyclopedia article about "luxury vehicle". This is because automakers feed the press a lot of BS (Boastful Superlatives) who then work hard to write articles adding even more BS to describe their products. The press earns credits from the hands that feed them. Add to this the fact that potential and actual purchasers of luxury vehicles have an insatiable appetite for this type of BS. Classifying a particular vehicle as "luxury" is also designed to easily make it superior to other vehicles even if the differences are superficial. Using self-serving BS in marketing claims is a very, very old invention that helps sell products, as well as fuel the fan base with "bragging" rights to which vehicles are "luxury". On the other hand, it is more difficult for most marketers to be humble and genuine. That is why an encyclopedia article has to avoid falling into the trap of using traditional marketing superlatives and hyperbole. — CZmarlin (talk) 17:30, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Consumer Reports purchases their own vehicles to avoid any conflict of interest. Aside from that, though, it is clear that the buying guides are there to give potential customers information, rather than necessarily promoting a particular marque. I don't see any marketing superlatives and hyperbole. GoldDragon (talk) 16:51, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

This discussion is nearly irrelevant, like arguing with a table. Sorry, not interested anymore.842U (talk) 19:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

There is only two editors, 842U and CZmarlin, that agree with the "stable" (if also completely devoid of content) version of the article. Surely this is not anywhere close to consensus. GoldDragon (talk) 02:41, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

the article with those examples has opinions and is somehow not npov... --Typ932 T·C 06:00, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

How is having examples NPOV ? I'm not picking borderline debatable examples here, as a BMW 5 Series is clearly a mid-level luxury car by both North American and European classifications, with regard to both size and price (excluding the BMW M5). I think that these editors are just blanket reverting and not even reading any of the changes to the article.GoldDragon (talk) 17:14, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

example cars from one country only seems somehow npov, in my opinion... --Typ932 T·C 20:09, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
The reverts are to the most stable article without puffery and statements that are sourced from unreliable cites, such as blogs. Even your own edits claim that: "I've never heard of any minivan being called a luxury vehicle" which contradicts numerous sources that describe several models as "luxury" minivans. Where is a recognized definition that some brand "is clearly a mid-level luxury"? Therefore, you cannot insist on having an article that contains marketing superlatives and peacock terms. Thank you — CZmarlin (talk) 17:42, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm picking specific examples such as the BMW 5 Series since they are recognized on both sides of the Atlantic as a mid-luxury car. (Other editors are free to add more examples, such as the Lexus GS, as it has a comparable size and price specification). I removed the minivan reference since that is not recognized in Europe (they have compact MPVs or smaller vehicles but mostly made by mass market manufacturers), and nor is it made by a luxury marque.
What is a marketing superlative and peacock term in this article ? GoldDragon (talk) 17:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
There is now additional referenced research about "luxury" models in automobile history in "the article as it is". This will avoid the edits that include speculative claims about individual models and how they are classified as "luxury" in various markets. The very descriptions of new market segments, such as "entry-level luxury", are pure peacock terms. The fact that there is "price-overlapping with well-equipped non-luxury cars" means that these "marketing" descriptors are hyperbole and undefined BS. Most importantly, there is no general agreement as to what is a "luxury marque" .. in part because there have been many during various eras in the history of automobiles. Most of the current brands have become established in the minds of some consumers because of their targeted advertising and marketing. For example, the so-called "luxury" divisions of mass-market Japanese automakers have been built on skillful promotion and differentiation of their products. Specific "luxury" versions are perceived by some of the public to be superior to the automaker's other lines, even if the actual differences are minor. In summary, an encyclopedia article about luxury vehicles must avoid the BS (Boastful Superlatives) that is found in the descriptions of individual "luxury-type" car marques and models. CZmarlin (talk) 19:22, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
We editors didn't invent the term "entry-level luxury", so it isn't a peacock term as you think it is. As long as it has been used frequently in the press and auto guides during the last decade, that gives it legitimacy. It isn't necessary to have a definition on what constitutes "luxury" and "non-luxury", as "price-overlapping with well-equipped non-luxury cars" was a fact noted by an auto journalist when he reported on the sales of the auto industry.
Yeah, I acknowledge that there is some skillful promotion and differentiation for luxury divisions of Japanese automakers, however it must be noted that a Lexus *is* manufactured to a higher standard than a Toyota.

[1][2] GoldDragon (talk) 23:54, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

It is not a question of who "invented" a term. The fact remains that descriptions such as "near-luxury" are not encyclopedic, precisely because they are undefined. They are peacock terms that even auto journalists will argue about. For example, the articles in auto magazines that describe the new Hyundai luxury models as true "luxury" cars at mass-market prices. Your reference to the Dawson book is interesting because he provides the background to the development of the Lexus. However, the book is a flawed "love story" designed written for for Toyota enthusiasts lacking proper rigor and distance from the subject. Once again, please do no not include superfluous marketing and promotional material in the article. An encyclopedia article is not to do "the job of auto journalists, automakers, and salesmen". Please refrain from adding undefined marketing terms and superlatives. Wikipedia is not the forum to promote "luxury" vehicle brands. Thank you CZmarlin (talk) 04:08, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Because Hyundai luxury models may be the subject of debate, I have not used that as an example. The reason why only select nameplates have been included is NOT because they are being promoted, rather it is because they clearly fit in for both North American and European classifications.
I understand that you are disgusted about luxury vehicles because it is partially due to marketing, however this is not an acceptable reason to be reverting the article. Luxury cars are generally ahead of mass market cars with regard to technology and comfort, plus their sales have generally been more resillient to economic downturns.
Again, please stop throwing around accusations of peacock terms and superlatives. GoldDragon (talk) 16:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
GoldDragon, Please stop reverting the article. Your additions have not achieved consensus. Thank you — CZmarlin (talk) 19:04, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

This appears to be an edit war -- we can ask that the article be locked.842U (talk) 20:39, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

It would be good to lock down the article. It seems that GoldDragon is the only contributor that insists on including opinions and unverifiable claims. Thank you! CZmarlin (talk) 20:48, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
Agree. Dino246 (talk) 04:17, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
I'll take out the classifications for now, the rest of the material should not be contentious. GoldDragon (talk) 17:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

RFC

Comment: This article is one of those few articles that I would imagine to be a complete nightmare, so I will try to be as impartial as possible. Global References should be greatly expanded as this is, quite possibly, the only non-contentious part of the article. Characteristics should be removed entirely and stay removed else the entire section will simply devolve into he-said-she-said with people using increasingly worse and worse cites as justification for including their definition. History and sales if done correctly good be quite an informative section; it should focus on general trends rather than individual cars or brands. I will also suggest that its use as a marketing term should be included; perhaps in history or it's own section, but this should focus on the history of the use of the term Sanguis Sanies (talk) 11:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Comment from uninvolved user. This is a difficult RfC to participate in, because many questions seem to be posed at the same time. My only comment at the moment is that "Global references" is an odd title for the section. "Definitions" would make more sense, and the section would still be laid out by country or region. Could you make use of standard histories of motoring or of car manufacturing to say how the concept of "luxury vehicle" has developed over the ages? Such history books will include examples. Illustrations would be helpful in the article. Itsmejudith (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

Currently, the characteristics section is not a he-said-she-said, but given the potential for abuse, we'll monitor it carefully in order to control what goes in it. Rather than have editors use their own definition, they should use a recognized source such as Forbes or Consumer Guide. There is definitely lots of material on the front-engine rear-wheel drive platforms and how they are no longer used for mass market cars but still on premium cars. GoldDragon (talk) 18:47, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Obviously, I would like to be as general as possible rather than specifically referred to an individual car or brand, however the sources often track particular marques rather than the overall state of German or British luxury imports. I do use more generalizations in the characteristics section, using a specific example only when required. GoldDragon (talk) 18:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

GoldDragon: You have once more added a considerable amount of "opinion" to this article that is best characterized as Boastful Superlatives (BS) with self-serving automotive journalists repeating the automaker's marketing departments' peacock and weasel terms. The referenced general description of the "luxury car" is not a "debate", but a well-researched definition by an expert author. Although you may think of it as "debatable", it is a far better definition of these vehicles than many "debatable" examples that you have included in the various "luxury car" market segments. There are no official definitions that have been established by government agencies or respected trade associations. Your "it is a debatable opinion" reasoning means that all the examples of "luxury" vehicles and market segments are "debatable". This is because the "luxury car" term itself is highly variable, perceptual, conditional and a subjective attribute that is understood differently by everyone (as per the previous discussions noted above). I hope you can see why a cited description of these types of vehicles by a reliable source (see WP:SOURCES, does not belong in a separate "debate" section. Thank you! CZmarlin (talk) 02:57, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Dawson, Chester (2004). "Lexus: The Relentless Pursuit", pp. 72, 116. John Wiley & Sons (Asia) Pte Ltd., Singapore. ISBN 0470821108.
  2. ^ [1]

Premium compact segment

Major sections of this article are full of peacock and weasel terms promoting brands and models. Now we have a contributor who insists on including a section describing "premium compacts". It is full of Boastful Superlatives (BS) to describe the vehicles that simply repeat the automaker's marketing departments. Furthermore, claiming automotive journalists as "reliable sources" is just rehashing the self-serving prose of automotive journalists that serve each automaker's publicity efforts. The proliferation of market segments and sub-segments using the term "luxury" is so overused that it no longer has any value. "Luxury" is now used to refer to every possible model made by every automaker. However, one of the sources in to support the "premium compact segment" (linked here) does not even use the term "luxury" to describe these small, but very expensive for their size and class vehicles. So why include them in this article? Wikipedia guidelines do not allow advertising and promotion. Thank you, CZmarlin (talk) 18:12, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Chrysler 300C

Chrysler markets its 300C as a full-size vehicle, not a mid-size. It says on http://www.chrysler.com/en/2011/300/ that it is part of the "Upper Large Car Segment". Plus, the AWD 300C weighs 4513 lbs, more than the 4409 lbs of an Audi A8, which is considered a large car. Ekcrbe (talk) 02:42, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

That the Audi A8 is a thoroughly engineered lightweight aluminium car does not make everything heavier and less advanced "luxury". Dino246 (talk) 21:56, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Range Rover

Of all four-wheel-drive vehicles, the first luxury one was the Range Rover, the design that started the brand, which had an aluminium V-8 engine (with air conditioning) and interior fittings such as in a British luxury car (wood and leather elegantly applied). It also was the only car ever displayed in the Louvre because it was considered that beautiful. British people know this. Why don't they put it on the page? 4.154.251.32 (talk) 01:58, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I believe the honours for first luxury 4WD goes to the Jeep Wagoneer in 1963.  Stepho  talk  13:15, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

volvo s40!!! Hyundai Equus (High-end luxury car) !!!

volvo s40 is never meant to be a luxury car, it is considered an alternative to Toyota Camry in most markets including some 3rd world countries and who classified Hyundai Equus as a high end luxury vechile, it should be a Mid-luxury car at best after all, it's a hyundai with a generic mando suspension and until 2009 it had a front-wheel drive engines with a weak torque (not a real luxury car IMO) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ahmedabady2005 (talk • contribs) 11:39, 27 August 2012 (UTC)

Are the following cars executive or full-size?

The Ford Crown Victoria, Chrysler 300, Holden VF Commodore, and Hyundai Genesis. Noscamsouttherebeinglovedby2013 (talk) 18:42, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

The Holden VF Commodore is an Australian mass market car and the Ford Crown Victoria is often used as a US police car or taxi. The Chrysler 300 and Hyundai Genesis are slightly more upmarket but not out of reach of people on comfortable earnings - they could go either way.  Stepho  talk  22:52, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Recent edits

The quote by the Bentley executive shows the changing demographics of their customer base and who they are marketing to, if you think it seems promotional then you can reword it. In addition, the Maserati Ghibli deserves mention in the executive car section.Brimspark (talk) 13:51, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Please stop removing the numerous updates and corrections to the references in this article with your mass reverts. As far as you specific questions:
1) There is no reason why statements by one corporate executive are significant enough to be included. Of course they are going to promote their products, but an encyclopedia is not a mouthpiece for them. Please review WP style guidelines.
2) There is also no requirement for an article about the general topic to mention every "luxury" car that available in every market segment. This is not a "list of..." nor a comprehensive review of options for potential consumers. There are many other web sites available for promotion of individual automobiles.
Thank you for your cooperation! CZmarlin (talk) 16:44, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
1) This is not meant to be a promotional mouthpiece, rather it should be illustrative of the article stating that such cars are being marketing to different demographics.
2) Funny that Maserati Ghibli is only mentioned under ultra-luxury but not mid-luxury when it belongs in the latter, plus you deleted a source showing what category of cars it belonged to. Brimspark (talk) 16:56, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

NOTE: Due to the ongoing edit war, I have protected the article. Continual reverts of each other is disruptive and was going to result in blocks likely of all parties involved. During the duration of the page protection, please resolve the dispute. --- Barek (talk • contribs) - 16:51, 17 March 2014 (UTC)


Cadillac FF by 1997?

"Chrysler went 100% FF by 1990 and GM's Cadillac and Buick brands for the US were entirely FF by 1997." - Cadillac FF by 1997? There's the Catera... Or is that not considered luxury enough? Also, suppose it is a rebadged import.. Hmm. TheSapient (talk) 00:00, 25 March 2014 (UTC)

Lincoln and Buick

They ARE luxury cars. What do you mean "no"? Lincoln's MKZ starts at $37-38K. Buick's LaCrosse starts at $35K. Its Regal starts at over $30K. Destination is always included!!!! With the ultimate being Cadillac, of course. Chryslers aren't, because the 200, which competes with the Regal, costs as much as the Verano. A fully-loaded LaCrosse Premium I Group and the Regal GS AWD are legitimate BMW contenders. 166.137.191.28 (talk) 20:53, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

I thought Ford was divided into Ford (economy), Mercury (mid-range) and Lincoln (luxury). And GM was divided into Chevrolet (economy), Buick (mid-range) and Cadillac (luxury). But some vehicles from each range cross over into the territory of other divisions.  Stepho  talk  05:17, 28 March 2014 (UTC)

Who made up these standards?

I find it hard to believe that some of the "makes" listed fall under the "Luxury Category." Chrysler, Buick and Volvo? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.150.36.233 (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

I think that the list "US Luxury Car Segments, according to MSRP (in US$)" is baseless, cause it based on only one example - the US, but its not the whole world. The real prices of the premium cars are seriously larger. In average, compact executive car (as Audi A4, BMW 3er, C-class, Cadillac ATS, Infiniti G, Lexus IS etc) costs from 40 to 60, mid-size luxury (like BMW 5er, Audi A6, Mercedes C-class, Lexus GS, Infiniti M, Jaguar XF) cost from 60 to more than 100, and full-size (as BMW 7er, Audi A8, Mercedes S, Lexus LS, Cadillac XTS, Jaguar XJ) are always more expensive than 100k, and high-end (like Panamera or Maserati) is always more expensive than 150-200 .— Preceding unsigned comment added by Rolltheblunt (talk) 10:08, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
I agree. And also, there a few most high-end cars, (for example Rolls-Royce or Maybach) which cost about 1 mln $ — Preceding unsigned comment added by 14.136.236.188 (talk) 14:14, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
In all cases, please provide citations and references (see: Wikipedia:Citing sources). It is not enough to add your own views about specific products or local market situation. Moreover, WP guidelines state, "An article should not include product pricing or availability information." This because, "Prices and product availability can vary widely from place to place and over time." Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 14:33, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

SAAB AND VOLVO NOT LUXURY CARS.........?

WHY SAAB OR VOLVO ARE NOT TO BE CONSIDERED LUXURY MAKES WHEN MOST OF THE REVENUES FROM THEIR PRODUCTS COME FROM CARS PRICED A LOT MORE THAN 29OOO US$ OR 24000 EURO(S60,S80,XC70,XC90,V70,C70 AND ALL SAABS + MOST OF S40 AND V50 CARS SOLD ESPECIALLY IN EUROPE EXCEPT FROM THE 1,6)!!!!YOU SHOULD ALSO CONSIDER THAT THE AVERAGE INCOME IN THE EU-15 IS LESS THAN THAT OF THE US.THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT A FOCUS IS A LUXURY CAR BECAUSE IN PORTUGAL THE TAXES ARE TOO HIGH or because the portuguese are poor...BUT HIGHER TAXES IN EUROPE SHOULD BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT AS VEHICLES WHITH MORE POWER ARE MUCH MORE EXPENSIVE THAN THE SAME IN THE US.FOR EXAMPLE IN EUROPE YOU BUY A VOLVO S40 1,8 FOR 24000EUR(OR 30744 US$!!!!-KINETIC TRIM LEVEL)AND IN THE US THE SAME CAR WITH A 2,4(170PS NOT 140PS)LTR ENGINE(MOMENTUM TRIM LEVEL WHICH IS DEFINETELY MORE LUXURIOUS)CAN BE PURCHASED WITH 24000$ MSRP(18722US$)!FOR THE US IS DEFINETELY NOT A LUXURY CAR BUT FOR EUROPE IT REALLY IS CONSIDERING THE PRICE CRITERION THAT YOU SET. SO I THINK YOU SHOULD RECONSIDER THE OPINION ABOUT THE NEAR LUXURY MANUFACTURERS ESPECIALLY WHEN THEIR TOP SELLING MODELS EXCEED THE PRICE CRITERION YOU SET AND THE MAJORITY OF REVENUE COMES FROM CARS COSTING A LOT MORE THAN 29000 US $ FOR THE US MARKET. ONLY THE GERMANS ARE LUXURIOUS FIRMS?WHA TABOUT THE PAST?WAS VOLVO THE SAME AS AUDI OR SHARPLY MORE LUXURIOUS? NON SCANDINAVIAN ΑΠΟΣΤΟΛΗΣ (This post was left by 87.203.216.224)

Okay, no need to capitalize your entire post. As you can see most of this article is under the heading "(American market)". Volvos and Saads are two cheap. There are several things you need to take into account:

  1. Most Volvos are less than the median MSRP of vehicles sold. (Too cheap-$24k is an average family car)
  2. Not all cars are more expensive in the EU-the MB E-Class is cheaper in Germany than here
  3. Not all Europeans spend considerably less-Germans spend 23,000 Eruos on their new cars versus $26,000 among Americans
  4. Please do not translate currencies-yes right now 24k Euros may be $30k-but what if the currencies change-does the actual domestic buying power of Europeans go down when the Euro goes down-no
  5. Volvo does not have the prestige, few press releases in Germany or here describe the S40 as a luxury car. Not even Volvo calls it a luxury car.
  6. Please provide a reference for "The majority of revenue [for Volvo and Saab coming] from cars costing a lot more than $29k."-I doubt seriously doubt it does.

If you would like to expand the non-US section you can but please don't convert currencies it merely gives an inaccurate depiction of pucharsing power. Also, a Mercedes-Benz E and S-class in the same class as a Volvo S40? Regards, Signaturebrendel 23:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

BRENDEL,APOSTOLIS HERE


Sorry for the capitals,last time.They were annoying and confusing.

The criterion set by the wikipedia site for a luxury car is to have a PRICE ABOVE 30000 US$,ok? Luxury car makers are those manufacturers that more than 50% of their sales comes from cars that cost more than this price tag,ok?

VOLVO CARS SALES 2005

Volvo XC90 85,994 US STARTING UP 36135 US $ GERMANY 42500 Volvo V50 83,202 " " 26690 US $ 22500(1,6) Volvo S40 75,136 " " 24240 US $ 21800(1,6) Volvo V70 70,156 " " 30045 US $ 31670 Volvo S60 62,528 " " 30885 US $ 28870 Volvo XC70 35,357 " " 36420 US $ 39400 Volvo S80 27,568 " " - - Volvo C70 Classic 3,246 " - -

THE All new Volvo S80 is expected to sell more than 50000 cars for its first year with starting price of 39360 US $ or 35950 EURO in Germany.th one referred above is the old one. The all new Volvo C70 is expected to sell more than 50000 cars(20000 ordered in 3 months!) with starting price of 39090 US $ or 33300 Euro in Germany. Consider the fact that average income in EU-15 is less than that of the US and that Germany has in general the lowest car prices in Europe.Even the German GDP per capita is much lower than that of the US.The Europeans tend to work less than the Americans.Volvo S40 is the only near luxury model of VOLVO considering the fact that most of its sales come from 1.8,2.0,2.4 and 2.0 diesel engines.All the other Volvo car models are above the price criterion.Volvo S40/V50 consists only of the 35.66% of total sales... Volvo is definetely a luxury car maker Sure,it does not match the image of Audi or BMW,but is more classy than AUDI,

Sold cars 

2005 2004 +/– 2004

Volvo S40 75,136 53,085 + 41,5% Volvo S60 62,528 73,121 – 14,4% Volvo S80 27,568 32,985 – 16,4% Volvo V50 83,202 47,743 + 74,0% Volvo V70 70,156 74,656 – 6,0% Volvo XC70 35,357 35,876 – 1,4% Volvo XC90 85,994 84,032 + 2,3% Volvo C70 Classic* 3,246 7,012 – 53,0% Others 760 47,714 – 98,4% Total 443,947 456,224 – 2,8%


  • Production of Volvo C70 Classic ended in March 2005.


http://www.volvocars.com/corporation/FactsandFigures/MarketsandSales/


see the prices of Volvo cars on the internet

I am very frustrated by your last comment: "Also, a Mercedes-Benz E and S-class in the same class as a Volvo S40?"It is very unsophisticated and insulting for me!Have I told you anything like this?Volvo S40 is in a car range different than these cars as it is smaller.Why don't you refer to Mercedes C-CLASS or BMW 3 SERIES,AUDI A4?MERCEDES E-CLASS IS AT THE SAME CATEGORY AS VOLVO S80!!!We talk about the entry level models,don't we?In Europe these cars are considered luxury cars.Do not take as an example only Germany.We talk about Europe.In US luxury cars sre considered those that cost more than 30000 US $.In Germany it may be the same.In France?Italy?UK?Spain,Sweden,Belgium,Greece?All these,other than german,markets consist much more in Europe's sales.So when you talk about Europe you should talk about the whole Europe,not only Germany.You are German but the review about Europe should refer to all OECD(Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development-developed countries) European members.Finally do not consider luxury cars from their american definition.In Europe this definition for all these reasons mentioned is totally different.

"Sure,it does not match the image of Audi or BMW,but is more classy than AUDI"- that's what I meant with "Mercedes-Benz E and S-class in the same class as a Volvo S40?". Okay, don't be offended. In the US and Germany we use the term luxury brands for Cadillac, Lincoln, Jaguar, Mercedes-Benz, BMW, Audi, Lexus, Infiniti, etc... As you said, Volvo and Saab are not on the same level as Cadillac or Jaguar. So can we call them luxo makes if we call Jaguar a luxo make? "Mercedes C-CLASS or BMW 3 SERIES,AUDI A4?MERCEDES E-CLASS IS AT THE SAME CATEGORY AS VOLVO S80"-correct only in Eruope but not the US. In the US the S80 goes up against the C-Class in terms of pricing. Therefore the BMW 3-Series or Lincoln MKZ are the entry-level cars in the line-up of the those brands. The Volvo S80 is Volvo's top-of-the-line sedan. Thus Volvo's top sedan is priced in the same class as the bottom line-up sedan of BMW and Lincoln, illustrating the discrpancy between luxo and quasi-luxo brands like Volvo. Also, we don't have a definition of this article for France, Spain, Italy, Sweden. This article currently discusses luxo cars in two markets, North America and Germany. Why? Because I do not understand enough French or Spanish to look up those sources and we have not had an editor on this article who did. If you want to add a section called: "Swedish (or any country from which have a guideline) definition"- by all means do it. Add to the article! Create a section discussing the situation outside the Anglo-Germanic relam. BTW: Thanks for the lower case. Also, I did not in any way try and offend you. Regards, Signaturebrendel 06:37, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

BMW 525i 43500$,AUDI A6 3.2 40820$,VOLVO S80 3,2 39360$,MERCEDES E-CLASS 51325$,ACURA TL 3,2 33325$,INFINITI M 41450$,SAAB 9-5 2.3T 34820$

I think that Mercedes is in a class of its own in the US!!!However all the other models are in the same class as Volvo S80,aren't they?Saab and Acura are a little bit downmarket.These prices are in the US.So why Volvo S80 is compared with the smallest BMW sedan?In Europe the prices of Audi and Volvo are the same,the BMW and Mercedes are a bit more expensive.Mercedes E is very expensive in the US....

Europe(Belgium) prices

MERCEDES E-CLASS 37631 Euro(2.2 CDI),BMW 520d 37100 Euro(525i 41349 Euro),AUDI A6 2.0 TDI 33970 Euro,Volvo S80 35199 Euro(2.4 diesel),SAAB 9-5 30999 Euro

You can easily see that Volvo is at the same category as the others.And even better than Audi.We talk about an average European market as Belgium is. 

In Greece where I live,Saab is more upmarket than Volvo.
I agree American love Mercedes and the E-Class is quite a bit more expensive here than in Europe. Mercedes works hard to keep its prestige high in the US-that's partially why they havn't introduced the A or B-Class here (Also, the 2.2 CDI isn't sold here). I also agree with you that the S80 is a luxury car. I compared the S80 w/ the C-Class becuase its starting price is blow the $40k mark-but I can see how it is comparable to the E-Class. That said, Volvo has only one luxo car in its line-up. Mercedes-Benz, Cadillac, Lincoln, and BMW are all lux in the US (the A/B Class, BMW 2-Series arn't sold here) and even in Europe have more at least two models above the $40k mark. So in the US Volvo is still downmarket from "ture" luxo brands like BMW and Jaguar. Volvo is, however, upmarket from mainstream brands like VW and Ford. That's why for the American market we have listed Volvo as a semi-luxo brand alongside Buick-which featrues similar pricing. You do seem more informed about the European market outside Germany (where Volvo is in a similar position as in the US), so please feel free to add a section about the "Greek market" or Belgium market. There you can say that while Volvo isn't on the same level as MB and BMW in the US and Germany it is a luxo make in Belgium and other average Euro markets. Regards, Signaturebrendel 21:51, 27 August 2006 (UTC)

1So let's talk about the other models

BELGIAN STARTING PRICES IN EURO

BMW X5: 47800 ,MERCEDES M:49557 ,VOLVO XC90:44590 ,AUDI Q7: 49346 ,SAAB 9-7X: 49026 ,CADILLAC SRX 46949 ,JEEP GRAND CHEROKEE: 41900 ,LAND ROVER DISCOVERY(LR3): 41194 ,LEXUS RX: 46555 , PORSCHE CAYENNE: 52151

VOLVO'S BEST SELLING MODEL(19,37% OF TOTAL VOLVO SALES) IS XC90 STARTING AT 44950 EURO

VOLVO S60: 26949 EURO ,MERCEDES C: 29986 ,BMW 3-SEDAN: 25899 ,AUDI A4 : 24299 ,SAAB 9-3: 20000, CADILLAC BLS: 27589 ,LEXUS IS : 31479 ,JAGUAR X-TYPE : 28900,ALFA ROMEO 159 : 23300, VOLVO S40: 22750

VOLVO has two models in this category: S60,a true luxury car(14.08% of Volvo sales) and S40(16.92%),Volvo's near luxury car.The best selling models are those costing a lot more:Volvo S40 1.6Diesel(24750 euro)and all the engines produced in Sweden as only 20% of factory's output are fitted with Ford's petrol engines(1.6,1.8,2.0).The others are diesels(1.6,2.0:26250E,D5:29299E) or 2.4i(26799),2.5 T5(32750).My reference is www.volvocarsgent.be

MERCEDES E-CLASS 37631 Euro(2.2 CDI),BMW 520d 37100 Euro(525i 41349 Euro),AUDI A6 2.0 TDI 33970 Euro,Volvo S80 35199 Euro(2.4 diesel),SAAB 9-5 30999 Euro,LEXUS GS 47005

VOLVO V70 :31799, MERCEDES C-CLASS BREAK: 32277 ,AUDI A4 AVANT : 25514 , BMW 3 TOURING: 28000 JAGUAR X-TYPE ESTATE : 30900 ,VOLVO V50 : 25249

VOLVO has also two estates in the same category:V70(15.8% OF VOLVO SALES)AND V50(18.74%)

Even if we exlcude s40 and v50 and provided that S80(starting at 35199 euro) and C70(starting at 34000 euro) will sell more than 100000 cars in their first year(MORE THAN 1/5th of company's sales),the sales of models that have the same price as Mercedes,Bmw,Audi etc is very big

XC90+S60+V70+XC70+S80(NEW)+C70(NEW) YOU WILL SEE THAT IT IS A LUXURY CAR MAKER FOR THE EUROPEAN MARKET + near luxury S40 and V50(although their price is very close to that of Audis)

The Germans would never agree that their swedish counterparts could be luxurious.

We agree that either Volvo nor Saab and Alfa Romeo produce cars rival to more expensive Mercedes(like CLS,S,CL,SLR,R) and BMW cars(like 7,6,M series) than those mentioned above.But this is not a reason not to consider them luxury.Why then AUDI is a luxury car maker and not a Volvo?The only car it produces above Volvo is A8,but its sales are not an important part of Audi's sales.

VOLVO V70 IS MORE EXPENSIVE THAN JAGUAR X ESTATE AND SOLD 70156 CARS IN 2005. THE WHOLE JAGUAR FIRM SELLS ROUGHLY 80000 CARS PER ANNUM


Volvo,Land Rover,Jaguar,Aston Martin create PAG(Premier Automotive Group), FORD'S company for European luxury brands and Volvo is part of it.

I am having a similar discussion on the German WP, here editors also agree that Volvo is not on the same level as MB or BMW simply becuase they do not have models priced above $40k or 40k E. MB, BMW and Jaguar are not in the same cateogry as Cadillac, Lincoln, Jaguar, not in Germany nor in the US. That said, perhaps things are different in other parts of the world. Car pricing differs greatly acorss the planet. In the US the S60 is not a luxury car neither is the S40, The Cadillac BLS is not sold here and neither are the cheaper E-Class models. AS I said you can open another section for non-German/US markets, there you can list Volvo as being luxury. For the American or German market it would be false to lump Volvo together with the likes of Cadillac and Lexus. But, as I have said, that may not be the situation everywhere. So while Volvo is a semi-luxo brand in the US, it may be a proper luxo brands in say, Sweden ;-) Let me give you the numbers for the American market:
  • Lincoln ($30,000 to $65,000)
    • Navigator $51,000
    • Town Car $43,000
    • LS V8 $40,000
    • Mark LT $40,000
    • Zpehyr $30,000
Average starting MSRP: $40,800
  • Cadillac ($30,000 to $71,000)
    • Escalade $55,000
    • DTS $42,000
    • STS $41,000
    • CTS $30,000
Average starting MSRP: $42,000
  • Jaguar ($33,000 to $112,000)
    • XK $76,000
    • XJ $62,000
    • S-Type $46,000
    • X-Type $33,000
Average starting MSRP: $54,250
Now:
  • Volvo ($24,000 to $39,000)
    • C70 $39,000
    • S80 $38,000
    • XC70 $36,000
    • XC90 $36,000
    • S60 $31,000
    • U70 $30,000
    • U50 $26,000
    • S40 $24,000
Average starting MSRP: $32,500
Mainstream manufacturer:
  • Chevrolet ($10,000 to $48,000)
    • Aveo $10,000
    • Cobalt $14,000
    • Colorado $15,000
    • Solverado $16,000
    • HHR $16,000
    • Malibu $18,000
    • Impala $21,000
    • Monte C $21,000
    • Uplander $22,000
    • Equinox $22,000
    • T. Blazer $25,000
    • Avalanche $33,000
    • Tahoe $34,000
    • Suburban $37,000
Average startung MSRP: $21,714
So, as you can see, Volvo is in-between luxury marques such as Lincoln/Jaguar/Cadillac and mainstram marques such as Cehvorlet. That's why for the North American market we call it a semi-luxury marque. But that's the US only and as I said, the situation may be quite different in other markets. So, add a section for those markets. The list you currently see on this page only applies to the US-add another list for other markets. Sound good? Regards, Signaturebrendel 05:56, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Sorry but how can I add a section?

Oh, very simple. Just go the article click on the edit "Edit this article" tab, scroll to the bottom and add ==Section name== and write your section below. If you need any help let me know. Remember the No. 1 Wiki rule, Be Bold! Regards, Signaturebrendel 07:45, 28 August 2006 (UTC)

Hello again

Just see the average car spending in Belgium,a country that has the same household income as Germany...it's much lower although Belgium is a car producing country...

[4]

The biggest price category is that of 14673-17352(19.3%) and if you make the statistics the geometry median(50%)is at this price tag... The higher 20% of car sales comes from cars that cost more than 22310 Euro. Just see it and you will realise that only Germans spend big sums of money for new cars.They spend their money to buy used cars with higher cilindrity...Just see the auto park of Belgium...[5]

Is Buick the same as Volvo?Just see the prices...You have not realised that Volvo's best selling model is Volvo XC90 wich starts from 36000$ or 45000 Euro in Europe!!!!

Buick isn't sold in Europe and Volvo is cheaper in the US. In the US Buick and Volvo are of equal status. In Europe there are only Volvo, Saab, Lancia and Alfa Romeo in this category as far as I know. In the US Buick and Chrysler are also on par with Volvo and Saab. Also, the dollar is worth less than the Euro, so $36,000 would be 27,000 Euro. Signaturebrendel 04:18, 14 September 2006 (UTC)

Sorry for the inconvenience...but Buick has only one car costing more than 30000 MSRP ,the RAINIER.Volvo in the US sell S80 with 40000$ Msrp(25000 sales expected there;1/5 of total Volvo US sales),XC90 with MORE THAN 36000$ MSRP(40000 sales in the US;1/3 of Volvo US sales),C70 costing more than 39000$(8000sales expected there),S60 costing more than 31000$,V70 with MSRP more than 30000$. What about Buick? LACROSSE(22915$),LUCERNE(262654$),RAINIER(32120$),RENDEZVOUS(25795$),TERRAZA(27295$)

Volvo has only two cars costing in the range between 25000-30000 $:S40 and V50,ALL the other range mentioned above costs a lot more... It's obvious they are not the same...

ACURA is a luxury company and not Volvo?You must be kidding...Just look at the MSRP prices:they are more than 36000$?You set as criterion:"if a car manufacturer's MSP of all vehicles sold is greater than $36,000, then it is a luxury car manufacturer"

ACURA

RSX 20325 TSX 27890 RDX 32995 TL 33325 MDX 37125 RL 49300

The KBB is not a good criterion though...It defines as luxury the mid-lexel of luxury cars and higher...Just look at the source you mentioned [6] It says:"Because the North American luxury car market encompasses a vast range of automobiles priced from under $30,000 to sky’s the limit, it’s helpful to break the segment into easily digestible chunks. Most commonly, we call those chunks entry luxury, mid-luxury, super-luxury, and ultra-luxury. Entry luxury cars usually cost between $25,000 and $40,000, and they don’t always have a luxury brand attached to them. Mid-luxury cars typically run between $40,000 and $60,000, and always carry a nameplate that resonates with image-conscious Americans. Super-luxury cars cost upwards of $60,000 but less than $100,000, and inspire envy in both friends and enemies. Ultra-luxury cars are six-figure expenses guaranteed to land the hottest date in town and the best parking spaces at the trendiest nightspots."

Volvo has not super luxury cars.But does Acura have?No.So you must change your mind and put Volvo at the same category as Acura or downgrade Acura...Just it's not fair...

Finally Volvo XC90 COSTS 45000 EURO IN EUROPE,in the US costs 36000$,so in Europe it is a very expensive car.And it was you that told me not to use money exchange to compare cars... In GREECE Volvo XC90 costs 57000Euro!The average however is that of Belgium.Just see [7]

I have just seen this:you consider Audi a near luxury car maker?Then luxury maker for you is only Maybach or Bentley...

Acura's US line-up is mentioned as being semi-luxury, just like Volvo. Audi is a luxo brand, even though it sells the A4 in the US and A2 in Europe. Here's how the referencing works: The source you mentioned gives us guidelines and KBB tells us who fits those guidelines. Signaturebrendel 23:42, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Volvo is the part of Ford's Premium Automotive Group - the group consisting only of premium/luxury brands.

Also, In Europe Volvo is considered a luxury brand, however not as luxury as BMW or MB. Netrat (talk) 03:30, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

According the Wikipedia policy, article should represent global point of view. The US-centric point of view is a common issue of many article, one of the issues that needs to be fixed. We need to support WP:NPOV, so European market is as much important as American one. So it does not matter if Volvo is not considered to be a lux brand in US. Netrat (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC) Finally, the proper way to find out if customers are paying for the brand or not is to compare the price of a vehicle to the average price of its competitors in the same size segment with the same horsepower and the same options (like leather seats), not to compare the price to your income or the median income in your conutry. That's why exact price tags make little sense. Netrat (talk) 03:44, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

So you're saying that Lincoln and Cadillac are not proper luxury brands? 198.228.216.157 (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2014 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 1 June 2014

99.229.103.103 (talk) 01:00, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

The Lexus ES is based on the Toyota Avalon but this page incorrectly states that it is based on the Toyota Camry (under Entry-level luxury cars).

Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. — {{U|Technical 13}} (e • t • c) 01:37, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Luxury vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:01, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Luxury vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:20, 5 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 10 external links on Luxury vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 05:30, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Luxury vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:08, 28 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Luxury vehicle. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:40, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

Luxury pickups, Escalade

With this edit, 1292simon essentially undid about a half-dozen of my edits, and removed the idea of luxury pickups entirely, despite the fact that Luxury pickup and Luxury Pick-up truck redirect to luxury vehicle. I believe that that revision should be undone. If Simon's edit stands, the article will lack any references to the Cadillac Escalade (a significant luxury SUV) or any of Detroit's luxury crossovers. Also, luxury pickups won't be covered anywhere aside of their individual models. pbp 00:38, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

The concept of a luxury pickup sounds like an oxymoron to me. But since such a beast exists, it should be documented. The rest of Simon's edits were good.  Stepho  talk  00:47, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
@User:Purplebackpack89, it is good manners to wait until the discussion has finished before altering the article - especially on something that has been reverted once already. Simon might have had a good reason for deleting it but we haven't heard his side yet. See WP:BRD.  Stepho  talk  01:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Hi Purplebackpack89. I had intended to move the production pickups (trims levels and a few custom coachbuilt examples are not significant in the history of luxury cars IMHO) to the North American section, rather than delete them. Sorry about that. I agree that the Escalade is significant in North America, so I have added some referenced text about it to that section.

The background to my changes is that I am concerned the article is USA-centric, so I have tried to give it a more balanced global perspective. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 02:25, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

By nature, the luxury pickups section would be US/N. American centric, as luxury pickups are an almost wholly North American phenomenon. As for concerns about US/NA-centrism, I think the solution is to add information about European and Asian cars, not to delete information about North American cars. pbp 04:11, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Yes, that is why I think the text about the Blackwood etc best belongs in the North America section. The US-centric issue is more about how facts/trends which are specific to North America are being implied to apply worldwide. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 21:16, 24 November 2019 (UTC)

Requested move 31 January 2021

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Moved (non-admin closure) (t · c) buidhe 10:33, 7 February 2021 (UTC)


Luxury vehicle → Luxury car – This article solely covers luxurious automobiles. The current title is not sufficiently WP:PRECISE about the subject it actually describes. A "luxury vehicle" could be a yacht or a private jet. It would not be at all unreasonable for a reader to expect this article to cover any and all modes of transport that are deemed luxurious by sources. HumanBodyPiloter5 (talk) 03:52, 31 January 2021 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Images in galleries

There should be a limit to the number of images in the galleries. Three per each modern classification is enough. There are models also mentioned in the text. Unfortunately, like many things on Wikipedia, these galleries tend to grow without noticing. Turning them into picture lists of favorite brands does not provide any encyclopedic value to the article. Thanks! CZmarlin (talk) 16:43, 9 July 2021 (UTC)

Agreed, but there are hundreds of people whose life missions are adding pictures of their particular favorite cars wherever they can. All of the articles on car classes have similar problems.  Mr.choppers | ✎  20:18, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
I remember times when the Car classification article was in constant change and becoming a "list of" examples and image bloat. A consensus was reached that has thankfully continued. This is to have 5 examples in the summary table and 3 bulleted Wikilinks within the discussion sections. Moreover, the Template:Automobile classification includes the following information at the very top for those who want to make changes:
Note: this is not to be a complete list of cars, just a decent mix of brands to illustrate the different classes. Five in each category is more than enough "examples" for the average reader. There is no point to add your favorite models, as there are already enough in each class. It doesnt matter if car model is discontinued or not.
Conceivably this type of guideline can be upheld to limit the expansion of examples and images in this article! Cheers - CZmarlin (talk) 21:22, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Agreed, 5 pics per section is enough to illustrate the idea - no need to make an exhaustive list of every possible car. Each new pic must be thought of in terms of what it brings to the article - in most cases new pics bring very little except clutter.  Stepho  talk  00:57, 10 July 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Luxury_car/Archive_2&oldid=1252255180"