DAEDALUS wrote:So, how do the 2 cars compare? Why does the Q cost so much more, given they share the same drivetrain? What features does one have that the other does not?
Hmmm, lots of possible answers to that one. Here is a brief starter comparison (my comments are for the 2003/2004 M45 compared to the 2004 Q45 - my bosses - since I do not have any experience with the 2006 M35/45!):
1. The M is lighter by a little bit. Has stronger acceleration as a result.
2. The Q is larger (width and length) by a little bit. More leg room in the back - the M is almost a bit cramped by comparison.
3. Lots more luxury items in the Q. The rear reclining seats (!) is a simple example of that. Another is the integrated window shades in the rear and rear sides.
4. More plush and comfy seats in the Q. Wider too because of the wider car, so more arm room (so to speak.)
5. Much softer suspension in the Q. More geared towards highway softness than canyon performance.
6. Shorter wheelbase in the M (certainly the 2003/2004).
7. I think the M has tighter steering too. Much better road feel.
I think the Q45 fills a particular spot that does make sense - price and otherwise. Although, not surprisingly enough, a loaded M would have been comparable in price to a spartan non-Premium Q45 - the various packages add a lot of cost.
The 2003 M reminds me far more of the 1991 Q that I had (in terms of performance) than the 2004 Q.