Two of the more interesting 2007 luxury cars on offer are the BMW 5 series and the Jaguar XK’s.  The Ultimate Driving Machine vs. Gorgeous, as their ad lines say.

Automobile engineers have developed the ability to fine-tune their cars to perform exactly as intended.  Engines, transmissions, suspensions and tires are programmed to be soft and comfy, hard, fast and noisy, or any combination of these qualities.  And since the basic quality of cars is about the same throughout all price classes, the result is something like Baskin & Robbins; 31(or more)variations on luxury, price, performance.  Just pick your flavor.

The $50,000 BMW’s flavor is what you’ve come to expect—technical, able, refined and quick.  The 4-door 530 I drove was beyond criticism in its road behavior.  But in contrast to the clean, classical and disciplined lines of BMWs for many years, the newest generation is busier and more cluttered.  One respected auto designer has said that he thinks the new style won’t last long; it will have to be superseded sooner than would a design more in keeping with BMW tradition.

Another gripe has to do with a central electronic controller known as iDrive, which governs climate, audio and navigation.  In thinking about all the advances that have made cars easier to use, from self-starters in 1912, automatic transmissions in the 1940’s, power steering in the 50’s, on to things like intermittent wipers, cruise control or climate control, iDrive stands out.  It’s the only convenience device ever to be annoying.  You may understand the principle, but I can’t imagine you’ll like it.

Still, the BMW is so very good that in spite of these gripes, every reviewer I’ve read loves the car.  Me, too.

The Jaguar XK convertible is a little harder to assess.  Years ago, Jags were fussy; now they routinely earn top marks for reliability.  When people asked me how I liked the Jaguar I had back in 1997, I said “it’s like a Toyota—faultless, only prettier”.  I never had any trouble.

The new car is handsome, powerful and silky-smooth.   It doesn’t have the hard-edge feel of a BMW, to its credit.  While it’s just as capable, Jaguar’s magic has always been in refinement.  The chassis soaks up bumps like a limo, but controls ride motion like a sports car.

The Jag has two very comfortable front seats, tiny rear ones and a skimpy trunk.  It’s ok for the weekenders to Tahoe, Monterey or Mendocino, just as intended.

The most frequent critique about Jaguars is that the style is not as bold, feline and leading-edge contemporary as it used to be.  So it is with the XK.  The shape isn’t very distinctive.  The metallic paint was too metallicky to my eye and the off-white leather seats too feminine.

These criticisms are all about the flavor chosen by this car’s creators.  None of the flavor alters the fact that this is an extremely fast, secure and exhilarating car to drive.  On the right sunny day, with the top down, driving under the redwoods on the Avenue of the Giants, hearing the subtle engine noise, this car is worth every dime of its $80,000+ price.

Safety vs. Revenue

Our city intersections continue to sprout red-light cameras to combat the alleged problem of red-light “running”.  Some traffic experts are beginning to shed a little more light on this idea.

Safety is the justification.  But camera advocates don’t like to talk about the fact that these cameras cause a big increase in rear-end collisions.  Defenders say that’s offset by fewer T-bone incidents, but evidence suggests the rear-enders increase at many times the rate of T-bone decrease.

The safety claim is also called into question by the fact that the camera manufacturers often provide “full-service” to cities, supplying cameras and collecting fines in return for revenue sharing.  Cities that have been caught shortening the yellow-light time haven’t helped the safety side of the safety vs. revenue argument.

If you drive out to Marin County early on Saturday or Sunday morning, you’ll sometimes notice two or three CHP cops stopping northbound cars caught by radar on the bridge.  And if you continue on to Sonoma, there’s often a radar-equipped CHP car on lonely Highway 37.  Is this because the absence of traffic during these hours is a traffic-safety issue, or is there a “shooting-fish-in-a-barrel” revenue enhancement program at work?

Going to the airport or down 280 it seems everyone, including cabs, goes 80 mph.  The first 80 mph limit was on the Kansas Turnpike forty years ago.  Since then, highway deaths have dramatically decreased, cars and their safety systems have gotten much, much better.  But our California speed limits are about the same.  Income from fines is way up though.  Does that explain anything?