For most people, 50 grand is a lot to shell out for a car. We drop that kind of coin, we expect a lot: a lot of luxury, a lot of technology, a lot of performance, preferably, a lot of all of that stuff. But as is usually the case with luxury items of any variety, the price premium is seldom matched by a commensurate level of bonus features, heightened performance, or other tangible benefits. To the contrary, when it comes to luxury goods, there’s usually an inverse correlation between price and content, as value takes a back seat to more subjective rewards like beauty, exclusivity, prestige, and, of course, brand name as prices climb higher.

Still, even among those that do have $50,000, $75,000, or more to spend on their next car, few are keen on senselessly throwing that money away—especially those who have worked very hard to earn their money in the first place. Fortunately, there are several automobiles in the luxury segment which actually do offer the spoils to match the expenditure.

In fact, in some cases, they offer more—a lot more—some with so much cool stuff that they not only compare very favorably to other vehicles in their price bracket, but they also out-run, out-perform, or out-pamper far more expensive automobiles.

Here, then, is a group of five $50,000 to $60,000 automobiles that we at Car and Driver find mighty impressive for the money, and which have proven even more compelling when put side-by-side with some of their much more expensive—but not much better—counterparts.




Mercedes-Benz E320 BlueTec vs. Lexus LS600hL

For much of its history, Mercedes-Benz has asked for—and gotten—big bucks for its automobiles, sometimes bigger bucks than the cars were actually worth. Then came 1989, when Toyota launched its Lexus brand with products that offered Mercedes-like amenities (and styling) at a tremendous discount, not to mention faultless reliability and top-notch service, at a time when quality-control woes plagued Mercedes. Lexus seduced wealthy wives nationwide who’d rather spend their allowances at the day spa than the car dealership, and Mercedes’s three-pointed star tumbled down to earth.

Now, Mercedes-Benz and value are no longer oxymoronic, and among Mercedes’ most compelling values is the likable, luxurious, and fuel-efficient E320 BlueTec. Its quiet and fabulously torquey 3.0-liter diesel V-6 shoves the $52,675 sedan forcefully forward with jet-like smoothness. More judicious driving can yield fuel economy numbers close to the EPA’s rating of 23 mpg city and 32 highway, the latter number shaming every other vehicle in the luxury sedan segment, even the hybrids.

If we could change anything, we’d liven up the E320’s styling. And perhaps make some options (like real leather upholstery) standard. That said, everything needed to transform the E320 into a bona fide luxury chariot, such as a full-length moonroof, power rear sunshade, and curve-following headlamps, can be added without pushing the price too far above $60,000.

That’s a pittance in comparison to the $104,765 sticker of the Lexus LS600hL, which, in addition to a dizzying array of technology intended to lower the vehicle’s carbon footprint, comes standard with the illusion that you’re actually doing something good for the environment by driving this hedonistic beast. But in reality, even with its supercomputers, electric motors, and sophisticated CVT, the portly, 5100-pound LS600hL musters only 20 mpg in the city and 22 on the highway—no better than the 16/24 rating of the non-hybrid LS460. Sure, the LS600hL qualifies as a Super Ultra Low-Emission Vehicle, but it also qualifies as a gas pig next to the E320. All said, the Lexus may offer more space and be 1.4 seconds quicker to 60 mph, but the E320 BlueTec, particularly when loaded with options, comes close to matching the LS600hL’s cush factor, while saving roughly forty grand.

That ought to buy a lot of time at the spa.




Big-Buck Bargains!: Porsche Boxster S vs 911 Carrera Cabriolet

Ever since Porsche brought us the timelessly attractive and attainably priced Boxster roadster in 1997, Porsche has been mindful to keep some distance between it and the brand’s flagship sports car, the vaunted 911 Carrera. Meanwhile, both the Boxster and the more powerful variant, the Boxster S, have established positive reputations on their own merits, thanks to the innate handling neutrality of their mid-engine layout, distinct engine notes, and splendid proportions. In order to retain the 911 lineup’s credibility, the Carrera has remained rear-engined, somewhat better equipped, and of course, faster.

Well, it used to be faster; in 2007, the performance gap that had been so carefully maintained all but disappeared when the $56,560 Boxster S received a 3.4-liter flat-six engine with 295 horsepower and 251 lb-ft of torque—just nine percent less power than produced by the 325-hp, 273 lb-ft 3.6-liter boxer residing aft of the rear axle of the $84,660 911 Carrera Cabriolet. Uh oh. In our testing, the Boxster S’s 300-pound weight advantage keeps it right on the heels of the Carrera Cabriolet from a stoplight, with a 0-to-60 sprint of just 4.9 seconds.

To be fair, the two cars still feel different from behind the wheel, but now the differences are less akin to those existing between older and younger siblings than between fraternal twins. Indeed, both cars offer cerebrally-connected steering, sophisticated shifters, and astoundingly powerful brakes, especially when equipped with carbon ceramic brake rotors (an $8150 option on either).

Inside, the only real differences between the two involve a nominally higher level of standard equipment with the Carrera, and the fact that the Boxster S’s engine resides in the spot occupied by the Carrera’s miniscule rear seat.

So, what exactly, besides a higher level of street cred, does that extra $28,000 get you with the Carrera again? Unless you’re going to shell out more to move up to the many more powerful and/or all-wheel-drive 911 derivations, not much, especially considering that when you drop the top, you’re under the same sun. In our book, that makes the Boxster S a sterling bargain.




Chevrolet Corvette Convertible vs. Cadillac XLR-V

Few cars in this country ever have or ever will achieve the iconic status of the Chevrolet Corvette. But even though it’s considered an aspirational item—to say nothing of a performance icon—the Corvette has always represented terrific bang for the buck. And never has that been truer than now.

Naturally, GM is very proud that its latest and greatest Corvette, the C6, can accelerate to 60 mph in just over four seconds whilst retaining a base price of $46,950 for the coupe and $55,425 for the Corvette convertible.

But GM is quick to change the subject away from value when we bring up that other Corvette-based sports car. GM gave Cadillac the XLR to jazz up its image, but the car’s smaller, less-powerful engine and $26,000-higher sticker (compared with the Corvette convertible) proved less effective in becoming a halo Caddy than in underscoring what a damn good bargain the Corvette still is. The value difference is even more vivid when the Corvette convertible is considered against the supercharged XLR-V, which makes a very credible 443 horsepower and 414 pound-feet of torque. But at an even 100 grand, the XLR-V costs just shy of twice as much as the Corvette, which, by the way, just got even more powerful itself this year and now makes an obscene 436 horsepower and 428 pound-feet.

To be fair to Cadillac, the XLR has a slick motorized hardtop and comes fully equipped. And, in either base or V trim, the XLR has an interior the Corvette’s new-for-2008 optional interior package is only now beginning to approach for luxurious look and feel. Besides, the Caddy isn’t alone here; there are few cars in the XLR-V’s class, including the Porsche 911 Carrera S Cabriolet, the Jaguar XKR, and the Mercedes-Benz SL550, that can even come close to matching the Corvette’s combination of raw power, scintillating handling, reasonable space, and comfort. And even if they could, they wouldn’t sell it for less.




BMW 535i vs. BMW 550i

We seldom describe BMWs as bargains, especially when they cost 50 grand or more. But when, say, one compares two Bimmers with the same body and the same basic amenities, and one costs nearly ten grand more than the other, either one is ridiculously overpriced, or the other one’s a steal. And since we value the engineering and dynamic brilliance of any BMW so much that even $59,275 for the V-8-powered 550i sedan seems reasonable, we suppose that makes the $50,175 535i, with its luscious, twin-turbo six-cylinder engine, a steal.

Okay, we must admit that $60,000 for a 550i—before options—is a bit steep, especially considering that, besides the additional two cylinders, all the extra $9100 adds to the 535i’s list of features is leather seats and auto-dimming mirrors. To get those on a 535i, one must check a $2100 option box, but even then, the 535i represents a comparative bargain, as there are few needs for power and torque that can’t be met—with pleasure—by the 535i’s sweet, 300-hp, 300-lb-ft inline six.

Recent acceleration tests confirm just how closely matched—and fast!—these sedans actually are. In a November, 2006 comparison of four luxury sedans, we hustled a 550i to 60 mph in a scant 5.2 seconds, a feat we accomplished exactly one year later in an all-wheel-drive 535xi in just 5.4 seconds. With nearly 300 fewer pounds, we surmise that the rear-wheel-drive 535i would tie the V-8 model (which, by the way, isn’t available with all-wheel drive) on the drag strip. The tie breaker? Fuel economy. At 17 mpg in the city and 26 on the highway, the manual-transmission 535i boasts a significant two- and four-mpg advantage, respectively, over the stick-shift 550i.

Otherwise, the two sedans are clones, from the still-controversial styling to interior fitments. And while we still aren’t universally fond of BMW’s infuriating iDrive infonavitainment system, which in one prior review was described by a C/D editor as “labyrinthine”, we aren’t so turned off by it that we wouldn’t recommend the 535i to anyone looking for sport sedan that’s not only a blast to drive, but well worth the money.




Audi S5 vs. Jaguar XK

Luxury coupes are distinctly personal automobiles. They live a charmed life, satisfying few needs aside from vanity, self-indulgence, and a sense of reward. What hardened fools must we be to apply such a pragmatic, left-brain concern as value to the coupe genre?

Well, like anyone with a wish list larger than his wallet, we work hard for such rewards, and when they come, they must compete for dollars with the occasional fancy meal, shiny jewelry, vacations, home entertainment systems, and any non-essentials that are nonetheless deemed necessary, if only to prevent our significant others from walking out on us. Thus, should a luxo-coupe exist that delivers just as much sex appeal and driving pleasure as, say, the stunning $75,500 Jaguar XK, but with over $24,000 cash in the glove box to spend on other goodies, might it end up on our wish list? You bet. Even better, that car actually exists: it’s called the Audi S5.

Now, to be fair, no current Audi—not even the spectacular R8 supercar—can match the long-limbed sensuality with which the Ian Callum-designed XK mesmerizes its audience. But if the curvy XK is a slinky black dress, the square-jawed S5 is an Armani suit—vastly different in appearance but plenty sexy to impress the minions at a star-studded movie premier or swank cocktail party. Other advantages for the German include more straightforward ergonomics, a habitable rear seat, and industry-leading assembly quality.

More importantly, the Audi is faster. With 354 horsepower and 325 pound-feet of torque on tap from its 4.2-liter V-8, the S5 hits 60 miles per hour in a mere 4.8 seconds, embarrassing the 300-hp XK, which requires another second to do the same deed. Both are brilliant handlers, with a lower driving position and rear-axle-only power delivery bestowing the Jaguar with a slightly more action-packed experience. But no matter how much more exotic the Jag may feel from behind the wheel, it would be hard to forget what’s in the glove box. Or rather, what’s not.


- ONLY REGISTERED AND ACTIVATED USERS CAN SEE ALL LINKS - CLICK HERE TO REGISTER


M

Nice find.

Maybe when the S-Class Hybrid comes out I'd like to see them compare it to the LS. The E-Class is going to loose out against the LS in interior space, but it certainly beats the GS in that department inside and in terms of trunk volume too.