Talk:Executive car

Article overhaul[edit]

Dear All,

I have completely revamped this article (excuse me for not including an appropriate edit summary, it got lost because of edit conflict), and I owe you an explanation, which, I hope, will lead to a further discussion and perhaps further improvement of this important article.

This article has to serve two purposes - first of all, explaining the term "executive car", but secondarily, also discussing this vehicle size class. There are, however, several issues ensuing:

Language/country specificity:
The term "executive car" is commonly used in English Wikipedia with regard to European cars because of the language employed, but it has to be noted that it is a solely British term, and in other European countries there are other terms employed to describe it. I only have knowledge of the German classification, which is quite influential, so I included it in the article.
Official use:
With regard to American size classes, EPA regulations mostly serve as an official guideline, if I understand correctly. In Europe, the only institution I know of that officially uses the term "executive car" is EuroNCAP, and I haven't found the standards their use to determine the size class yet - perhaps somebody can. It seems that in Germany the standard-setting institution would be KBA, but I haven't found their standards either, same goes for rental car classification.
The bottom line is that there little official and objective guidance as to whether to classify a car as executive or not, and more research into that would be beneficial, but we have to abide by what we have. So, if the EuroNCAP denotes a model as an executive car, it is one, and if it doesn't, it isn't. Opel Signum and Skoda Superb are denoted as large family cars, and therefore can't be classified as executive cars.
Information vs. judgement:
Please note that "premium", "prestige" etc. classifications are purely judgemental when not done against a set standard. In Europe, no such universal standard exists, especially with regard to car brands (in some countries, some vehicles were/are subject to varying levels of excise tax, which can be understood as "luxury tax", but this boundary usually runs accross brands and models, with some versions taxed differently than the other, and it is not harmonized within the EU or otherwise). Therefore, no brand should be explicitly labelled "prestige", "premium" or such within this article (or WP in general, actually).
Editorial vs. encyclopedic:
The previous version of the article read in a large part as an article in an automotive magazine rather than an encyclopedic article. An encyclopedic article should focus on facts and informing the user, with special emphasis on having every bit of information referenced from reliable and impartial sources. The current version of the article is not much better with regard to that, as I haven't managed to find sources for most of the statements. It would be good to collectively undertake efforts to fix that.
The list:
I have revamped rather than removed the list, as somebody obviously took great effort to complete it, but in general such lists are discouraged in WP if their role can easily be performed by a category - which is the case. Therefore, I believe we should make sure every executive car is classified as such, and I will gladly see the list go.
The origins of the term:
While "Obere Mittelklasse" is more or less self-explanatory (though it would be good to explain how and when the Mittelklasse split with some good references), it would be interesting how and why it came about that vehicles this size are called "executive" in the UK. Input from British users well-versed in automotive history and terminology is more than welcome.

In general, I invite everybody, especially users from European countries, to contribute to the article by providing better references and further reducing POV (which slips in so easily), sujective or unverifiable claims and providing references for substantial statements.

Regards, Bravada, talk - 11:02, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my issues with the rewrite:

It looks like you've deleted a heck of a lot of information. Are you sure none of it can be salvaged?
It includes external links and cross-language links. These should be avoided. The link to EuroNCAP can be included as a reference.
It's referred to as a "British" term however the article seems to be entirely German-oriented.
The model listing should be a table the way it's constructed, not three bulleted lists.

Fagstein 20:37, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thanks for your interest! As concernes issues you raised:

Most, and I hope all, that has been deleted was not "information" but rather "editorial". Please note that an encyclopedic article should only contain information that can be referenced from reliable and objective sources - I believe only such were left out, in hope that appropriate references will be found in due course.
Please note that not everything that can be labelled as "information" does actually belong in an encyclopedia.
Why should cross-langauge links be avoided? There are no correspondening articles yet in the English Wikipedia. As concerns moving links to references, there is nothing that prevents you or any other editor from doing that. I treat the current version as temporary.
The article is considerably "German heavy" due to the fact that I have more information on the German than the British term, and the need, stated above, to cover both the term and the car classification in general. Perhaps you can think of a better solution to do that.
I agree with that, but it was tiresome enough to create it in its present version, given that I believe it should and will be deleted in due course, to fiddle with a table.

Regards, Bravada, talk - 20:55, 5 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The article was a starter - it was missing from Wikipedia, so I wrote a basic layout for you to go on. -- NaBUru38 00:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Car list[edit]

I checked the list against Category: Executive Cars and then deleted duplicate list. I beleive the original aim of list was to make a point about mainstream brands vs. near-luxury brands & luxury brands - a pretty squishy concept. Also deleted this unclear note: "On the other hand, a growing number of Asian manufacturers started offering executive cars, though some of them backed off facing rather slow sales." Its both vague and laughably wrong. Is there some geographical territory where Lexus, Infinity, Acura do not stand triumphant? If so, ref that geo. 66.229.151.43 08:39, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that territory is a small piece of land called Europe, which you might have heard of, and about which the article is basically about. In case you didn't notice, Infiniti and Acura haven't made it to European shores yet, Lexus sales are at few percent of Mercedes', BMW's, Audi's, and several Japanese manufacturers discontinued their executive models in the European market due to low sales, such as Mazda Xedos 9 (the series was discontinued worldwide without a replacement, but that's another thing), Mitsubishi Sigma, Nissan Maxima, Toyota Camry. I agree good referencing is a must, but this IS a fact. Bravada, talk - 09:22, 6 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Since vehicles that have nothing to do with the British market link to this article, the article has to be of use to others. Thus a comment that Japanese manufacturers are unsuccesful in this market segment is incorrect. You could change it to say 'haven't properly addressed the British market' or something. As to your other recent edits, Bravada, Ford can drop out of this segment because they have of PAG, the French cannot - they used to have a near-luxury brand (Citroen), but no longer, so they keep trying to shift commodity executive class cars. Hard to do, but they have no choice. Your text on the US is confusing and contradictory, yet it's actually very simple - cars like the BMW 5 series are known here as "mid-luxury cars". If you are unable to improve on the existing text, please leave it alone.66.229.151.43 07:05, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, it would be good to log in while making so many quite important edits and taking part in discussions (I am assuming most or all of the edits done from the IP you have signed with are done by the same person, but cannot be sure).

Secondly, which vehicles that have nothing to do with the British market link to this article? Moreover, the article actually discusses more than the British market situation, it pertains to the entire (or at least most of the) European market. If you believe the readers might not get the idea by this paragraph, do add "in the European market".

Finally, there is no law that force automakers to offer executive cars. Some have not and do not and somehow were fine with that. Automakers strive to offer them because they are quite profitable, and also for prestige reasons. Also, if you'd look at the price levels, engines etc. none of the PAG executive cars did actually replace the Ford Scorpio in its most popular versions - it is rather the new Ford Mondeo, which grew in size considerably. French manufacturers offer executive cars, not because they "have no other choice", but because they see it fit to. They still have some market for those, especially in France, they have also reshuffled their concepts for an executive car, most notably Citroën. Bravada, talk - 08:26, 8 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

PS. The EPA, whose classification is the base of American class definitions, classifies most of the executive cars still sold on both sides of the Atlantic (as well as descendants of some executive car models once sold in Europe, such as Toyota Camry) as "mid-size cars" - see [1]. There is nothing like "mid-luxury cars" in the EPA classification.

I did the list so if somebody wanted to write an evolution of the executive cars, he/she would have a list sorted by decade (which would make the search faster). The idea was not that the list would last forever, but so the article could be improved faster. -- NaBUru38 00:07, 9 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Body styles[edit]

The article is about a British car classification and is thus written from a British/European perspective. The British word for a notchback car with four doors is saloon, not sedan. Please do not change it. Bravada, talk - 14:17, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]
PS. This is a message to the anonymous editor who keeps changing the article regardless of the notes left in edit summaries. I seriously doubt it whether he/she is ever going to bother reading this talk page, and I can't leave a message on his/her talk page, as he/she uses alternating IPs. I am past 3RR now, so I cannot revert the change, but could other editors please keep an eye on that? Thanks!

Photo[edit]

Here we shall discuss the all-important photo issue. PrinceGloria (talk) 10:34, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No, because I really can't be bothered over something so pathetic. The gold S80 clearly shows more detail of the car. Enough said. OSX (talk • contributions) 11:04, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What detail specifically? The photo is taken from a worse angle and we get a better overview and less distortion in the the black Volvo photo. I really can't see your point besides pushing a photo of a "newer" car. I am also afraid the gold S80 is an USDM version, and I would be hesitant about putting a photo of an USDM car in this article to avoid any confusion. PrinceGloria (talk) 11:13, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok but we should note that this is not a modern executive car but the older version of the current one that still is an executive car.... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 87.202.58.111 (talk) 15:53, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Daimler[edit]

Daimler always made very expensive luxury cars until the Jaguar takeover. They did also make relatively small, by their standards, luxury cars from the early 1920s following the economic crises between the Armistice and that time. Have a look here. Sadly it is extremely difficult to obtain good images of these cars. The modern equivalent might be a high-spec C-class Mercedes. All that to say I am uncomfortable with the choice of the Daimler Fifteen for the beginning of their "executive" cars. Eddaido (talk) 03:44, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Eddaido. Thanks for your comments. The only Daimlers previously covered in the article were from the 1960s, so I have tried to cover more of their history. For the early models, it is hard to judge whether a model would be equivalent to an exec or full-size luxury car, so I only went back to the Fifteen.

Sorry that my loose wording incorrectly stated that the Fifteen was their first exec car. If you could provide any more detail on those early models, that would be much appreciated. Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 11:31, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Did you follow the link I gave? You may see the matching previous and following models and, when there are photos, catch an idea for yourself. Think of Daimler as then producing a range of cars as does and then did its 'cousin' in Germany. I feel sure they watched each other closely and personnel knew each other well though the British company, run by an American Electrical Engineer, (I suspect) usually provided less complex technical solutions to the everyday problems of building big luxury cars. But then I might be wrong about that.

Daimlers were very expensive cars, their standing was considerably cheapened by having their name plastered on common or garden big Jaguars. Be sure Lyons only did it because he thought it might move his brand up a notch or two. Cheers, Eddaido (talk) 11:48, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Eddaido. I've updated the beginning to talk about the lineage starting with the 16.

That is very interesting about the close connection with Germany. The Jaguar situation sounds quite similar to how Maybach is now just a trim level plastered onto plebian Mercs! Cheers, 1292simon (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think most businesses watch their direct competitors and rewarding ties//links are nurtured. We seem to be in the same time zone. Please would you send me an email. Thanks, Eddaido (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]