Seeking views on S60, Q50 and Mz6

[F1enthusiast]

Hi

 

Am looking for a replacement car of not more than $160k. Some considerations for narrowing down my choices are:

 

a) Reliability;

b) Safety;

c) Performance;

d) FC;

e) Comfort;

f) Maintenance costs (AD) - a range would be helpful;

g) Insurance premium.

 

Have test drove the Volvo T5, Infiniti Q50 and Mazda 6 recently. All 2.0 litre petrol cars. Diesel cars not an option as my mileage not high.

 

Just doing my due diligence before making a commitment. Hence, would greatly appreciate existing/ past owners of the above cars to share experience of their ride; and potential owners to share the x-factors that made them signed on the dotted line.

 

Thanks a lot!

 

[Coltplussport]

Hi

 

Am looking for a replacement car of not more than $160k. Some considerations for narrowing down my choices are:

 

a) Reliability;

b) Safety;

c) Performance;

d) FC;

e) Comfort;

f) Maintenance costs (AD) - a range would be helpful;

g) Insurance premium.

 

Have test drove the Volvo T5, Infiniti Q50 and Mazda 6 recently. All 2.0 litre petrol cars. Diesel cars not an option as my mileage not high.

 

Just doing my due diligence before making a commitment. Hence, would greatly appreciate existing/ past owners of the above cars to share experience of their ride; and potential owners to share the x-factors that made them signed on the dotted line.

 

Thanks a lot!

 

We do have many Mazda 6 owners in this forum, so..........

[Hamburger]

q50.....no contest.

[Thaiyotakamli]

Definitely Q50 for me

[Jamesc]

I vote Q50 too.

 

Simple choice to me.

 

[ER-3682]

$160k,Infiniti Q-50,you get based model,but you got a more powerful turbo engine+RWD,the same amount,you can get a top line Mazda 6,2,5,with alot "toys",but road tax is higher...FC wise,Q-50 is higher,because of heavy weight....the choice is yours.

[Blacksnow]

If you have children, S60 for sure

[F1enthusiast]

Hi Blacksnow

 

Can you share why S60 is the choice if have children.

 

Thanks!

 

If you have children, S60 for sure

[Mkl22]

s60 is cramped in the rear seats.

[ODCmaniac]

Hi

 

Am looking for a replacement car of not more than $160k. Some considerations for narrowing down my choices are:

 

a) Reliability;

b) Safety;

c) Performance;

d) FC;

e) Comfort;

f) Maintenance costs (AD) - a range would be helpful;

g) Insurance premium.

 

Have test drove the Volvo T5, Infiniti Q50 and Mazda 6 recently. All 2.0 litre petrol cars. Diesel cars not an option as my mileage not high.

 

Just doing my due diligence before making a commitment. Hence, would greatly appreciate existing/ past owners of the above cars to share experience of their ride; and potential owners to share the x-factors that made them signed on the dotted line.

 

Thanks a lot!

Having test drove all 3 models, which model stands out?

[Coern]

s60 is cramped in the rear seats.

 

S60 interior is damn dated... Mz6 and Q50 interior are both far nicer.

 

drive wise, q50 is the best.

 

looks wise, Mz6 arguably the most chio.

[Lala81]

Not an owner.

With your budget, just go for 2.5L Mz 6? It should still be cheaper than the other 2 options. 

 

a) Reliability

- anecdotally, all 3 should be about same

 

b) Safety

- S60 and MZ6 are all Good in NIIHS assessment. I would probably rate infiniti lowe

 

c) Performance

- S60/Infiniti > MZ6

 

d) FC

- MZ6 > Infiniti > S60

 

e) Comfort

- S60 rear headroom NTA. Only the V60 is better. 

 

f) Maintenance costs (AD) -  Wearnes confirm more expensive than mazda bah.

 

g) Insurance premium - not sure

 

 

S60 interior is damn dated... Mz6 and Q50 interior are both far nicer.

 

drive wise, q50 is the best.

 

looks wise, Mz6 arguably the most chio.

 

MZ6 >S60 >> Q50

[twizter]

Hi

 

Am looking for a replacement car of not more than $160k. Some considerations for narrowing down my choices are:

 

a) Reliability;

b) Safety;

c) Performance;

d) FC;

e) Comfort;

f) Maintenance costs (AD) - a range would be helpful;

g) Insurance premium.

 

Have test drove the Volvo T5, Infiniti Q50 and Mazda 6 recently. All 2.0 litre petrol cars. Diesel cars not an option as my mileage not high.

 

Just doing my due diligence before making a commitment. Hence, would greatly appreciate existing/ past owners of the above cars to share experience of their ride; and potential owners to share the x-factors that made them signed on the dotted line.

 

Thanks a lot!

 

Had the same choice a few months back, in fact mine was s80 vs q50 vs M6. 

 

Before test drive, perhaps it was M6 > s80/s60 > q50, cos the M6 seems good value for $. 

After test drive, M6 failed for me cos felt under-powered, and the boot space fail. Plus sales was quite stuck up. 

S80 nice drive and most spacious, but too near to end-of-life for me. 

S60 rear seats too cramp to even consider.

 

So in the end I bot q50. Nice drive (RWD), got rarity factor.

But FC for q50 can be quite high if you rev, which is quite hard not to every time I get behind the wheels.. 

[Little_prince]

i would choose the Q50 too.

 

but my wife say the ininfiti logo look like Chery. lol

[F1enthusiast]

Just to add my observations of the cars during the test drives...

 

Q50

- Allows different driving style settings which can be pretty fun (but not sure how long I can sustain that "fun").

- Wider rear seat which left the legroom tight.

- Big centre "hump" can make the passenger at the rear middle very uncomfortable. Moreover, with the rear air-con blowing so close in between the legs.

- Foot brake, similar to Audi (not a fan of such design).

- Not sure if I remember correctly, car comes with 2 batteries. The 2nd one for the start-stop function.

- Value-for-money car as one is paying for a Merc C250 engine with routine servicing (by AD) that costs like a Jap car.

 

S60

- Power output highest among the 3.

- SE mentioned FC around 12-13km/l for a mixture of urban & highway usage.

- Personally prefer locations of rear air-con.

- Car loan interest rate highest among the 3 and do not seem to have much room for freebies negotiation.

(Would appreciate sharing of maintenance costs by AD and insurance premium.)

 

Mz6

- Features pretty similar to a Conti car.

- Not much to wow about then other than one is paying a lower price tag. However, not sure of the maintenance costs (heard proprietary car battery costs $400+).

[1fast1]

Had the same choice a few months back, in fact mine was s80 vs q50 vs M6. 

 

Before test drive, perhaps it was M6 > s80/s60 > q50, cos the M6 seems good value for $. 

After test drive, M6 failed for me cos felt under-powered, and the boot space fail. Plus sales was quite stuck up. 

S80 nice drive and most spacious, but too near to end-of-life for me. 

S60 rear seats too cramp to even consider.

 

So in the end I bot q50. Nice drive (RWD), got rarity factor.

But FC for q50 can be quite high if you rev, which is quite hard not to every time I get behind the wheels.. 

 

"Mz6" please. Whenever people write "M6", I immediately think of...you know... *the* M6.

 

(Ditto with the "Mz3"/"M3" and now that we are soon to have an M2, we're gonna have an issue with that too.  )

Edited October 26, 2015 by Turboflat4

[Lala81]

Just to add my observations of the cars during the test drives...

 

Q50

- Allows different driving style settings which can be pretty fun (but not sure how long I can sustain that "fun").

- Wider rear seat which left the legroom tight.

- Big centre "hump" can make the passenger at the rear middle very uncomfortable. Moreover, with the rear air-con blowing so close in between the legs.

- Foot brake, similar to Audi (not a fan of such design).

- Not sure if I remember correctly, car comes with 2 batteries. The 2nd one for the start-stop function.

- Value-for-money car as one is paying for a Merc C250 engine with routine servicing (by AD) that costs like a Jap car.

 

S60

- Power output highest among the 3.

- SE mentioned FC around 12-13km/l for a mixture of urban & highway usage.

- Personally prefer locations of rear air-con.

- Car loan interest rate highest among the 3 and do not seem to have much room for freebies negotiation.

(Would appreciate sharing of maintenance costs by AD and insurance premium.)

 

Mz6

- Features pretty similar to a Conti car.

- Not much to wow about then other than one is paying a lower price tag. However, not sure of the maintenance costs (heard proprietary car battery costs $400+).

 

What's the prices like?

The mz6 2.0 should be substantially cheaper, yes?

[MQX87511]

Just to add my observations of the cars during the test drives...

 

Q50

- Allows different driving style settings which can be pretty fun (but not sure how long I can sustain that "fun").

- Wider rear seat which left the legroom tight.

- Big centre "hump" can make the passenger at the rear middle very uncomfortable. Moreover, with the rear air-con blowing so close in between the legs.

- Foot brake, similar to Audi (not a fan of such design).

- Not sure if I remember correctly, car comes with 2 batteries. The 2nd one for the start-stop function.

- Value-for-money car as one is paying for a Merc C250 engine with routine servicing (by AD) that costs like a Jap car.

 

S60

- Power output highest among the 3.

- SE mentioned FC around 12-13km/l for a mixture of urban & highway usage.

- Personally prefer locations of rear air-con.

- Car loan interest rate highest among the 3 and do not seem to have much room for freebies negotiation.

(Would appreciate sharing of maintenance costs by AD and insurance premium.)

 

Mz6

- Features pretty similar to a Conti car.

- Not much to wow about then other than one is paying a lower price tag. However, not sure of the maintenance costs (heard proprietary car battery costs $400+).

your comparison is unfair for Mz6 2.0L, Q50 and S60 both above 180k, Mz6 only 135k, 

should be Mz6 2.5L at equivalent class,

Reliability, FC, Value for money, interior specious, Maintenance cost, insurance premium wise definitely Mz6

Q50 and S60 only win over on performance and driving fun