Eeek, and I thought Porsche would have the Boxer figured out better than Subaru....  


German cars and electrical issues are like Peanut butter and Jelly it seems.

From what I've heard, the cause of death for first gen Boxsters and 996 911s is usually the intermediate shaft. It just grenades with no warning and takes the engine with it. I'm not sure if the Z4's high marks are a result of them being used as toys rather than daily drivers, but they seem to have Japanese level reliability. I'd want to ask people familiar with the cars on BMW forums before buying to be sure.

I think it took awhile for the German cos to get a handle on their computer systems, which may be why most of them from the mid '90s through the early to mid '00s were pretty lousy. Audi's quality record was never that great even in the pre 60 Minutes days, but BMWs and especially Mercedes were known for being pretty reliable in the '80s, especially when judged against the garbage that Cadillac was peddling. What really shocked everyone were the unbreakable Legends and LS400s.

Pre 80's German cars were awesome, except Audi of course.  Especially the MB Turbo Diesel.  The only older German car I still see, ahem, hear running on the roads today.  Absolutely a tank. 

The difference historically between German and Japanese cars is almost cultural going back to pre WW2.  German favor complexity, versatility and feature sets.  Japanese usually try to keep it simple as simplicity has an elegance and reliability to it.  The way the Germans design their luxury cars now is not that different in philosophy from how they designed their tanks.  Ultra capable, ultra potent, ultra complex, ultra expensive, ultra inefficient to produce, ultra unreliable.

Yeah, let's keep old Cadillac out of it.  I think GM doesn't get what Cadillac is and should be.  They need to go back to their roots and compete w/ Bentley and Rolls as ultra halo cars.  That V-16 should have been a no brainer.  The Cien was a no brainer too, still looks good after more than 10 years.  Rather than thinking of shoring up/making profits for the Caddy division, GM should have realized the significance of Cadillac as a Halo for GM as a whole.  They'd likely have the luxury market cornered in China right now rather than Audi and BMW.  Oh well, Americans tend to suck at the long view.  The significance of Cadillac on automotive history is significant and not given due deference by GM IMHO.

Yep, Panzers and especially Tigers were vastly more complicated than the relatively crude Shermans and T-34s, but it didn't matter, we and they just took them down with overwhelming numbers. The Germans can do crude if they want to (see VW's 2.5L 5-clylinder tractor engine) but that doesn't mean they work properly. VWs still seem to be the worst of the lot.

The Continental MKII that I posted a few pages back and the Eldorado Brougham that Cadillac released to compete were equivalent to the Bentleys and Rollers of the day, and they were priced like them. The Cadillac was over $13K in 1957. Then they did the Cimarron. You don't get to just do a Phantom or Ghost competitor after nearly destroying yourself, or at least, you can't expect people to buy any. See Maybach. Given where the brand is now, I think focusing on cars like the CTS and ATS is the right idea. At least they have some focus, which is more than can be said for Lincoln.

I'm not sure that the Mulsanne and Phantom are vulnerable. There are a lot of brands that should stay dead - Pierce Arrow, Hudson, Packard, etc, but I think it would be cool if somebody brought Auburn back to compete with AMG SLs and M6 convertibles, and it might even work. The XLR couldn't do it, you can't beat those cars by putting the Corvette in a tux. It would need to be something like the Z8, but actually good.