Production Efficiency and Flexibility - A Story About Why Lexus Needs A Camry
06-14-11, 01:11 PM
#1
Production Efficiency and Flexibility - A Story About Why Lexus Needs A Camry
This is a post that I've been thinking about and the topic is something that I have mentioned in two other threads recently, but I figured that it could use its own special attention 
.
Quite simply, I think Lexus is facing an increasing problem: how to remain competitive within their current economies of scope. To some, this might seem like an odd thing to say as Lexus was the most profitable automotive brand at one point and still enjoys much success, despite a few product and manufacturing challenges facing the company right now.
How do you solve it? Lexus needs a Camry. Now, you probably think I am crazy, but let me explain...
Of the 17 models that Toyota currently sells in this country, 5 of them are based on or share common "Camry" architecture, 6 if you include the recently retired Solara. This platform also serves several other products outside of the U.S. and has proved to be tremendously profitable, flexible, and efficient for Toyota.
Lexus has no such congruency in their own lineup: only the RX and ES or IS and GS share enough common parts or hardware to be considered platform mates... and that's a problem.
Here's why:
Toyota builds mainstream cars for the average American family. Lexus doesn't. Lexus' top two selling cars are based off a $19,000 architecture that sells 400,000 units a year in this country, and that's a problem because the first and foremost goal of the Camry is being inexpensive, reliable, basic transportation. Lexus doesn't sell inexpensive, reliable basic transportation...they sell luxury cars.
There was a time, maybe a decade ago, when owning a luxury car meant having a navigation system, a nice sound system, standard leather and a heavy smattering of wood on the interior. A nice 6 cylinder engine, at least, was also a rather standard prerequisite. At that time, adding these features to the Camry platform and repackaging them as Lexus cars made perfect sense. It doesn't anymore and it won't going forward.
I remember reading headlines from a few years ago about how BMW and Mercedes were diving deeper into the red ink because of high labor and overhead costs that seemed impossible to control. The management in both groups took a look at companies like Lexus and realized that they had to streamline their production efforts, consolidate and spread costs over more models, and generally get smarter about how they were spending money. All the sudden we had four door coupes based off humble sedan architecture, sports "activity" vehicles that had the same underpinnings, more real coupes, plenty of crossovers and rather quickly, things started to rebound in Munich and Stuttgart.
The Germans quickly realized that the more they could share and pool costs, thus better managing their economies of scope, the more money they'd save. One other obvious part of this was spreading the costs to more models, as outlined above, but the results are plain to see: each automaker has lineups large enough to consume your entire computer screen.
This day in age, you can buy an X1 with BMW's latest inline 6 and an eight speed automatic and the story is similar at Mercedes with the GLK and C class. Do you know why? Because both companies spread their R&D costs for such items across the entire product range, and the cars are designed to accomodate them from the very beginning of the design process. The $30,000 X1 has the same powerplant and transmission as a $60,000 740i...you're getting flagship quality and hardware at an entry level price. Very good thinking in terms of product and costs.
Now, let's look back at Lexus, whose part and platform sharing is simply all over the board.
Toyota Camry ==> Lexus RX and ES.
GS/IS/Crown/Mark, and to an extent, the LS.
Toyota 4Runner/Land Cruiser Prado ==> GX.
Toyota Land Cruiser ==> LX.
Auris/Prius ==> CT.
LFA stands alone.
Let me preface the coming harsh words by saying that nobody builds an SUV like Toyota, so basing the GX and LX off proven, reliable, capable architecture is nothing short of brilliant and those two products are well executed. Furthermore, when you're trying to seriously control costs in an entry level product like the CT, I think it's perfectly acceptable to stick to this strategy of taking Toyota hardware and Lexus-i-fying it. Toyota has many capable small car platforms to choose from and some great 4 cylinder engines, so why not? You're probably getting a better car than you could if Lexus did it themselves from scratch.
In fact, I'm perfectly ok with the ES too. As an entry level midsize luxury car, I see nothing wrong with adding sleeker sheetmetal, wood and leather to the V6 Camry and slapping a Lexus badge on it. It keeps the cost low and you're still getting a great car for the money. Not to mention that it would put a little space between the ES and GS...two products that have been a little too close in this most recent generation.
For the RX though, it's simply another story. In 1998, the strategy behind the RX made perfect sense: take the successful ES and jack it up 4 inches with new sheetmetal and sell it to everyone wanting an SUV - they'll be amazed at the handling, power and gas mileage! For the first and second generations, this was an unrivaled recipe for success and still in the third generation, nobody can come close in sales. That said, the RX is under fire and it is time to look what the next step in product development should look like.
Put simply, when building a luxury car off mainstream architecture, there are limitations. The 2GR-FE is a very good engine and the required six speed automatic is smooth and efficient...but, are they good enough...for a luxury car? No, they aren't. Part of it is because the RX is really not an entry level product any more and the other part is because of the competition.
Right now an X3 comes with two 6 cylinder engines (one which we love) and an eight speed automatic. The Camry offers no such luxuries, so unfortunately, neither can nor will the RX. It would cost too much to engineer a new engine or transmission options for the RX, especially when the current ones are "good enough." For most RX buyers, "good enough" is indeed good enough and they don't know or care what engine or transmission rests under the hood so why bother?
It's my opinion that the gap between mainstream brands and luxury marques is widening at a noticeable rate and the very definition of "luxury" now encompasses qualities that are more demanding and cutting edge than it did before.
The limitations and "good enough" mentality behind cars like the RX will go from being something that buyers can easily overlook and may not notice, to a true Achilles heel or worse. The new GLK and ML are around the corner, X3 just arrived, and the Q5 is due for a refresh - these cars are not confounded by "mainstream syndrome" like the RX is and they aren't "limited" by architecture that has to see use in both a $20,000 people mover and a luxury crossover. In fact, they benefit from the cost sharing with their larger, more expensive siblings, i.e. E Class, S Class, 5 Series, 7 Series.
Lexus' cost sharing hurts the product but helps the bottom line. BMW and Mercedes' cost sharing helps both the product and the bottom line.
Here is why:
- In an effort to save costs, Toyota has been slow to update cars in between redesigns in recent years and refreshes have been largely cosmetic with few hardware upgrades.
- While this is perfectly fine for the Camry and Highlander, significant advancements are made in luxury technology each year.
- Because these Lexus products are tied to their lesser Toyota siblings, they have to wait until a propper redesign to get the latest technology, which at that point, is already probably outdated.
...vs. Mercedes and BMW who bite the bullet on R&D costs in the beginning but spread them across the entire product range, then make incremental, continuous updates to keep products up to date as needed.
It's my belief that Lexus has realized that they've reached the limits of what can be done with Camry hardware (in the RX) and for this reason, we have not seen a 3 row crossover from the company. It would need more power and a better transmission (for starters) to compete with the X5, GL and Q7 - not things a Camry can do or provide.
If it's not clear already, I believe that Lexus is running up against a wall with what can be done with rebadged "entry level", Toyota-sourced products and parts. There have been instances like the RX, where they have innovated for a period of time, but for the most part, the Germans have eclipsed them with more advanced products, more frequent updates, and as a result, more sales (GS comes to mind).
So, we've now spent some time looking at the problems at the bottom of Lexus' product line, but what happens when we look up? Truthfully, the story isn't much different.
The IS and GS share platforms, technology and many development costs but two cars is too limited of a scale to share costs and match the technology and content that is being put into BMW and Mercedes products right now. Yes, I know about the Toyota Crown and Mark, but Lexus needs to seek more congruencies and efficiencies within their own lineup.
Lexus dumped a massive amount of money into the IS and GS for their second and third generations and while I consider the IS a success, the GS is a prime example of what is wrong with the current strategy. Because these are the only two cars that share platforms, engines, transmissions and parts with eachother, there's a limited budget to update and refresh them. Obviously, in the last few years, the IS got most of the attention and the GS has been relegated to red-headed step child status.
Once again, see how BMW and Mercedes share technology, engines, transmissions and even AMG/M parts between the 3 series, X3, 5 Series, X5 and 7 Series, or C Class, GLK, E Class, ML, GL and S Class. The entire lineup is more advanced, more competitive and more desirable. It makes more manufacturing sense to update one or two engines and then put them under the hood of every car over the course of one or two model years, as opposed to having a few different V6s and V8s that go into different products based on driveline layout or configuration.
The LS has always been the pinnacle of Lexus and as such, I don't think it is as affected by these issues as other models. There are certainly areas where there could be more production efficiency between the LS and other products, but there is more on that below.
Considering these outlined issues with Toyota hardware, costs, economies of scope, and products, I think it only makes sense for Lexus to move to a more "German" method of product development and implementation. This needs to be a two pronged approach - one with platforms and another with with technology and hardware.
Platforms:
One curveball to consider here is Audi. I see Audi as riding the line between how Mercedes and BMW do business versus the Lexus mentality that I outlined above. With VWAG as a parent company, Audi simply has a larger and richer network of resources because of Lamborghini and Porsche. Quick access to high performance engines and suspension tuning know-how have come in handy in recent years. In a way, you could certainly argue that Audi has the best of both worlds - exotic, innovative, top tier resources and an expansive parent company to share costs with.
I'd have never dreampt that I would author a post about how Lexus could learn a few things from Mercedes and BMW about manufacturing and production, especially when the tables were turned so upside down just a few years ago. With that said, times change and it's about time that Lexus looked at their own lineup - instead of Toyota's - for answers about how to build better cars.
.Quite simply, I think Lexus is facing an increasing problem: how to remain competitive within their current economies of scope. To some, this might seem like an odd thing to say as Lexus was the most profitable automotive brand at one point and still enjoys much success, despite a few product and manufacturing challenges facing the company right now.
How do you solve it? Lexus needs a Camry. Now, you probably think I am crazy, but let me explain...
Of the 17 models that Toyota currently sells in this country, 5 of them are based on or share common "Camry" architecture, 6 if you include the recently retired Solara. This platform also serves several other products outside of the U.S. and has proved to be tremendously profitable, flexible, and efficient for Toyota.
Lexus has no such congruency in their own lineup: only the RX and ES or IS and GS share enough common parts or hardware to be considered platform mates... and that's a problem.
Here's why:
Toyota builds mainstream cars for the average American family. Lexus doesn't. Lexus' top two selling cars are based off a $19,000 architecture that sells 400,000 units a year in this country, and that's a problem because the first and foremost goal of the Camry is being inexpensive, reliable, basic transportation. Lexus doesn't sell inexpensive, reliable basic transportation...they sell luxury cars.
There was a time, maybe a decade ago, when owning a luxury car meant having a navigation system, a nice sound system, standard leather and a heavy smattering of wood on the interior. A nice 6 cylinder engine, at least, was also a rather standard prerequisite. At that time, adding these features to the Camry platform and repackaging them as Lexus cars made perfect sense. It doesn't anymore and it won't going forward.
I remember reading headlines from a few years ago about how BMW and Mercedes were diving deeper into the red ink because of high labor and overhead costs that seemed impossible to control. The management in both groups took a look at companies like Lexus and realized that they had to streamline their production efforts, consolidate and spread costs over more models, and generally get smarter about how they were spending money. All the sudden we had four door coupes based off humble sedan architecture, sports "activity" vehicles that had the same underpinnings, more real coupes, plenty of crossovers and rather quickly, things started to rebound in Munich and Stuttgart.
The Germans quickly realized that the more they could share and pool costs, thus better managing their economies of scope, the more money they'd save. One other obvious part of this was spreading the costs to more models, as outlined above, but the results are plain to see: each automaker has lineups large enough to consume your entire computer screen.
This day in age, you can buy an X1 with BMW's latest inline 6 and an eight speed automatic and the story is similar at Mercedes with the GLK and C class. Do you know why? Because both companies spread their R&D costs for such items across the entire product range, and the cars are designed to accomodate them from the very beginning of the design process. The $30,000 X1 has the same powerplant and transmission as a $60,000 740i...you're getting flagship quality and hardware at an entry level price. Very good thinking in terms of product and costs.
Now, let's look back at Lexus, whose part and platform sharing is simply all over the board.
Toyota Camry ==> Lexus RX and ES.
GS/IS/Crown/Mark, and to an extent, the LS.
Toyota 4Runner/Land Cruiser Prado ==> GX.
Toyota Land Cruiser ==> LX.
Auris/Prius ==> CT.
LFA stands alone.
Let me preface the coming harsh words by saying that nobody builds an SUV like Toyota, so basing the GX and LX off proven, reliable, capable architecture is nothing short of brilliant and those two products are well executed. Furthermore, when you're trying to seriously control costs in an entry level product like the CT, I think it's perfectly acceptable to stick to this strategy of taking Toyota hardware and Lexus-i-fying it. Toyota has many capable small car platforms to choose from and some great 4 cylinder engines, so why not? You're probably getting a better car than you could if Lexus did it themselves from scratch.
In fact, I'm perfectly ok with the ES too. As an entry level midsize luxury car, I see nothing wrong with adding sleeker sheetmetal, wood and leather to the V6 Camry and slapping a Lexus badge on it. It keeps the cost low and you're still getting a great car for the money. Not to mention that it would put a little space between the ES and GS...two products that have been a little too close in this most recent generation.
For the RX though, it's simply another story. In 1998, the strategy behind the RX made perfect sense: take the successful ES and jack it up 4 inches with new sheetmetal and sell it to everyone wanting an SUV - they'll be amazed at the handling, power and gas mileage! For the first and second generations, this was an unrivaled recipe for success and still in the third generation, nobody can come close in sales. That said, the RX is under fire and it is time to look what the next step in product development should look like.
Put simply, when building a luxury car off mainstream architecture, there are limitations. The 2GR-FE is a very good engine and the required six speed automatic is smooth and efficient...but, are they good enough...for a luxury car? No, they aren't. Part of it is because the RX is really not an entry level product any more and the other part is because of the competition.
Right now an X3 comes with two 6 cylinder engines (one which we love) and an eight speed automatic. The Camry offers no such luxuries, so unfortunately, neither can nor will the RX. It would cost too much to engineer a new engine or transmission options for the RX, especially when the current ones are "good enough." For most RX buyers, "good enough" is indeed good enough and they don't know or care what engine or transmission rests under the hood so why bother?
It's my opinion that the gap between mainstream brands and luxury marques is widening at a noticeable rate and the very definition of "luxury" now encompasses qualities that are more demanding and cutting edge than it did before.
The limitations and "good enough" mentality behind cars like the RX will go from being something that buyers can easily overlook and may not notice, to a true Achilles heel or worse. The new GLK and ML are around the corner, X3 just arrived, and the Q5 is due for a refresh - these cars are not confounded by "mainstream syndrome" like the RX is and they aren't "limited" by architecture that has to see use in both a $20,000 people mover and a luxury crossover. In fact, they benefit from the cost sharing with their larger, more expensive siblings, i.e. E Class, S Class, 5 Series, 7 Series.
Lexus' cost sharing hurts the product but helps the bottom line. BMW and Mercedes' cost sharing helps both the product and the bottom line.
Here is why:
- In an effort to save costs, Toyota has been slow to update cars in between redesigns in recent years and refreshes have been largely cosmetic with few hardware upgrades.
- While this is perfectly fine for the Camry and Highlander, significant advancements are made in luxury technology each year.
- Because these Lexus products are tied to their lesser Toyota siblings, they have to wait until a propper redesign to get the latest technology, which at that point, is already probably outdated.
...vs. Mercedes and BMW who bite the bullet on R&D costs in the beginning but spread them across the entire product range, then make incremental, continuous updates to keep products up to date as needed.
It's my belief that Lexus has realized that they've reached the limits of what can be done with Camry hardware (in the RX) and for this reason, we have not seen a 3 row crossover from the company. It would need more power and a better transmission (for starters) to compete with the X5, GL and Q7 - not things a Camry can do or provide.
If it's not clear already, I believe that Lexus is running up against a wall with what can be done with rebadged "entry level", Toyota-sourced products and parts. There have been instances like the RX, where they have innovated for a period of time, but for the most part, the Germans have eclipsed them with more advanced products, more frequent updates, and as a result, more sales (GS comes to mind).
So, we've now spent some time looking at the problems at the bottom of Lexus' product line, but what happens when we look up? Truthfully, the story isn't much different.
The IS and GS share platforms, technology and many development costs but two cars is too limited of a scale to share costs and match the technology and content that is being put into BMW and Mercedes products right now. Yes, I know about the Toyota Crown and Mark, but Lexus needs to seek more congruencies and efficiencies within their own lineup.
Lexus dumped a massive amount of money into the IS and GS for their second and third generations and while I consider the IS a success, the GS is a prime example of what is wrong with the current strategy. Because these are the only two cars that share platforms, engines, transmissions and parts with eachother, there's a limited budget to update and refresh them. Obviously, in the last few years, the IS got most of the attention and the GS has been relegated to red-headed step child status.
Once again, see how BMW and Mercedes share technology, engines, transmissions and even AMG/M parts between the 3 series, X3, 5 Series, X5 and 7 Series, or C Class, GLK, E Class, ML, GL and S Class. The entire lineup is more advanced, more competitive and more desirable. It makes more manufacturing sense to update one or two engines and then put them under the hood of every car over the course of one or two model years, as opposed to having a few different V6s and V8s that go into different products based on driveline layout or configuration.
The LS has always been the pinnacle of Lexus and as such, I don't think it is as affected by these issues as other models. There are certainly areas where there could be more production efficiency between the LS and other products, but there is more on that below.
Considering these outlined issues with Toyota hardware, costs, economies of scope, and products, I think it only makes sense for Lexus to move to a more "German" method of product development and implementation. This needs to be a two pronged approach - one with platforms and another with with technology and hardware.
Platforms:
To my "Lexus Camry" point above, Lexus needs to develop a RWD platform that can support the following products:
- Small CUV slotted below the RX. It's my belief that they need such a product here but if not here, most certainly in Europe.
- The RX
- A 3 row CUV or RXL
- IS sedan, coupe and convertible
- GS sedan, coupe and convertible
- SC coupe and convertible
- ...possibly also the LS depending on how clever they can engineer such a chassis, though I know this is a long shot
Technology, engines and hardware:- Small CUV slotted below the RX. It's my belief that they need such a product here but if not here, most certainly in Europe.
- The RX
- A 3 row CUV or RXL
- IS sedan, coupe and convertible
- GS sedan, coupe and convertible
- SC coupe and convertible
- ...possibly also the LS depending on how clever they can engineer such a chassis, though I know this is a long shot
- A corporate V6, most obviously an updated version of the GR-FSE that comes in differing sizes and outputs. Variations of this engine could see work in every model including the LS.
- A corporate V8 that could be used in V8 versions of the GS, RX, RXL or 3 seat CUV, SC, and LS, as well as forced induction for use in the ISF, GSF, LSF, SCF and possibly also RXF.
- V6 and V8 hybrids based on the engines above.
- Standard eight speed automatic or direct sport shift transmissions in gas powered versions.
- DCT or other for F cars
- CVT for hybrids
There are numerous upsides to such a strategy:- A corporate V8 that could be used in V8 versions of the GS, RX, RXL or 3 seat CUV, SC, and LS, as well as forced induction for use in the ISF, GSF, LSF, SCF and possibly also RXF.
- V6 and V8 hybrids based on the engines above.
- Standard eight speed automatic or direct sport shift transmissions in gas powered versions.
- DCT or other for F cars
- CVT for hybrids
- Better cost allocation with so many models
- Initial powertrain R&D investment is spread across almost the entire Lexus line
- Faster, more responsive (to the market) engine and powertrain updates since you're using two main engines instead of 4+ as now
- Simplicity in production and manufacturing
- Straightforward, yet flexible development of next generation products with such a versatile platform that can support any number of powertrain options
I feel that it's also worth mentioning that more innovation and advancement by Lexus only means good things for Toyota products. Consider a landscape where technologies like Valvematic or the latest hybrid technology could easily be applied to the entire lineup in one or two years, simply because most share the same engines and platform characteristics. This would be a stark contrast to what we have now - partly because Lexus production capabilities are spread across several Toyota products and some of their own products aren't necessarily efficient in terms of manufacturing. A few years ago Lexus publically acknowledged these challenges and admitted that their products were going stale before the competition. I forget what exec was mentioned, but he did state that we would see greater year over year improvement and upgrading in the future. Well, that was a few years ago and short of the IS which has been refreshed twice, I don't see much of an improvement.- Initial powertrain R&D investment is spread across almost the entire Lexus line
- Faster, more responsive (to the market) engine and powertrain updates since you're using two main engines instead of 4+ as now
- Simplicity in production and manufacturing
- Straightforward, yet flexible development of next generation products with such a versatile platform that can support any number of powertrain options
One curveball to consider here is Audi. I see Audi as riding the line between how Mercedes and BMW do business versus the Lexus mentality that I outlined above. With VWAG as a parent company, Audi simply has a larger and richer network of resources because of Lamborghini and Porsche. Quick access to high performance engines and suspension tuning know-how have come in handy in recent years. In a way, you could certainly argue that Audi has the best of both worlds - exotic, innovative, top tier resources and an expansive parent company to share costs with.
I'd have never dreampt that I would author a post about how Lexus could learn a few things from Mercedes and BMW about manufacturing and production, especially when the tables were turned so upside down just a few years ago. With that said, times change and it's about time that Lexus looked at their own lineup - instead of Toyota's - for answers about how to build better cars.
Last edited by MPLexus301; 06-14-11 at 01:37 PM.
06-14-11, 02:45 PM
#2
i have always thought this is a great idea. i am always a fan of the es in terms of business for lexus. i think it's brilliant that they break up the segment and create their own entry level luxury. none of the other competitors really have that front. and then they used the platform to build the rx which is another tremendous success.
i think it makes a lot of sense to have 2 mid-size in the lineup (es and gs). one for economy purpose, to get customers who need the size and care about efficiency. and then one for the sporty performance side.
on the other hand i just hope lexus takes advantage of this and actually make the gs sportier. i still think the gs is too in the middle.
i think it makes a lot of sense to have 2 mid-size in the lineup (es and gs). one for economy purpose, to get customers who need the size and care about efficiency. and then one for the sporty performance side.
on the other hand i just hope lexus takes advantage of this and actually make the gs sportier. i still think the gs is too in the middle.
06-14-11, 03:01 PM
#3
Lexus Champion
If you look at the Camry, it has arguably the best powertrain in its class, the V6 is smooth, fast and reliable. On the flip side, the interior is among the worst. Therefore it seems Toyota spent more of the development costs on the powertrain, which makes sense since they have to use that V6 in Lexus products as well.
Frankly I'd say the powertrain in the ES and RX are among the top in their respective segments, regardless of if they're sourced from the Camry. As a whole I also think the RX is better than both the GLK and the X3, again despite being based on the Camry (price wise it does not compete against the more expensive X5 and ML, the GX does).
With the next generation of the Camry rumours have it that Toyota will be discontinuing the V6 model for trim levels below the XLE, which means a Camry V6 is essentially a luxury car (since you have to get the higher price low volume XLE model for the V6).
Having said all that though I would prefer Lexus move away from Toyota architecture, I'd like the next ES and RX to share their own platform. Lexus should do platform sharing within the Lexus brand, like Merc and BMW do, but not a lot with Toyota.
Frankly I'd say the powertrain in the ES and RX are among the top in their respective segments, regardless of if they're sourced from the Camry. As a whole I also think the RX is better than both the GLK and the X3, again despite being based on the Camry (price wise it does not compete against the more expensive X5 and ML, the GX does).
With the next generation of the Camry rumours have it that Toyota will be discontinuing the V6 model for trim levels below the XLE, which means a Camry V6 is essentially a luxury car (since you have to get the higher price low volume XLE model for the V6).
Having said all that though I would prefer Lexus move away from Toyota architecture, I'd like the next ES and RX to share their own platform. Lexus should do platform sharing within the Lexus brand, like Merc and BMW do, but not a lot with Toyota.
06-14-11, 03:11 PM
#4
you guys are over complicating what MC platform is... while it allows sharing of some parts, it is mostly about production efficiencies at factories.
MC platform is also Prius and Corolla and Camry and 20 other Toyota cars that you would think have nothing to do with each other. This is not like VW platform sharing where interior is 95% the same and vents are in same position.
My favorite part when explaining Toyota platforms is that Rav4, Corolla and MR2 came from same "platform". One was full awd, another fwd, 3rd rwd with mid/rear engine.
all 3 had different wheelbases, different suspension technologies let alone actual suspension, and completely different interior, exterior and under carriage.
yet all based on same platform.
so thats how it works at toyota world.
MC platform is also Prius and Corolla and Camry and 20 other Toyota cars that you would think have nothing to do with each other. This is not like VW platform sharing where interior is 95% the same and vents are in same position.
My favorite part when explaining Toyota platforms is that Rav4, Corolla and MR2 came from same "platform". One was full awd, another fwd, 3rd rwd with mid/rear engine.
all 3 had different wheelbases, different suspension technologies let alone actual suspension, and completely different interior, exterior and under carriage.
yet all based on same platform.
so thats how it works at toyota world.
06-14-11, 04:39 PM
#6
Lexus Fanatic
I think what will make in harder on luxury car makers in the future is that we are not adding tech like we used to. I can get every feature that my LS has from a loaded Ford focus. In fact the focus and even my wife's Murano have better ipod connectivity and a better NAV. The main difference in the cars now is refinement and that isnt going to sell cars like it used to imo.
06-14-11, 04:44 PM
#7
I think what will make in harder on luxury car makers in the future is that we are not adding tech like we used to. I can get every feature that my LS has from a loaded Ford focus. In fact the focus and even my wife's Murano have better ipod connectivity and a better NAV. The main difference in the cars now is refinement and that isnt going to sell cars like it used to imo.
:-)
Trending Topics
06-14-11, 04:47 PM
#8
Lexus Champion
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 3,370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't think Lexus needs to "***** out" it's lineup like Mercedes and BMW does. I think they are both quite convoluted and misdirected. I don't think Lexus needs coupes in every size shape and form factor. Yes, they could do with a proper IS coupe, the SC needs to come back and they most definitely need a roadster.... but IMO having both and SC and a GS coupe are redundant. And an LS coupe... mmm I dunno. Their SUV lineup is perfect as it is (in terms of quantity). The RX is the right size, what I think needs to happen is that the GX needs to be more 7 seat Range Rover Sport than 2/3 7 LX/Land Cruiser, and the LX needs to have a V8 diesel model available at a lower price point than the LX570 (make the LC disappear in the US market.).
The IS/GS already share a platform, any SC likely will. That's pretty much half their car lineup on the same platform.
Agreed.
The IS/GS already share a platform, any SC likely will. That's pretty much half their car lineup on the same platform.
you guys are over complicating what MC platform is... while it allows sharing of some parts, it is mostly about production efficiencies at factories.
MC platform is also Prius and Corolla and Camry and 20 other Toyota cars that you would think have nothing to do with each other. This is not like VW platform sharing where interior is 95% the same and vents are in same position.
My favorite part when explaining Toyota platforms is that Rav4, Corolla and MR2 came from same "platform". One was full awd, another fwd, 3rd rwd with mid/rear engine.
all 3 had different wheelbases, different suspension technologies let alone actual suspension, and completely different interior, exterior and under carriage.
yet all based on same platform.
so thats how it works at toyota world.
MC platform is also Prius and Corolla and Camry and 20 other Toyota cars that you would think have nothing to do with each other. This is not like VW platform sharing where interior is 95% the same and vents are in same position.
My favorite part when explaining Toyota platforms is that Rav4, Corolla and MR2 came from same "platform". One was full awd, another fwd, 3rd rwd with mid/rear engine.
all 3 had different wheelbases, different suspension technologies let alone actual suspension, and completely different interior, exterior and under carriage.
yet all based on same platform.
so thats how it works at toyota world.
06-14-11, 05:11 PM
#9
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 4,511
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I see your argument. However, having been in both, the Camry and the ES are two different vehicles. I will say that I do not think that the V6 in the Camry should be as potent as the one in the ES. But then I do not think that these FWD grocery getting sedans need 270 HP. 240 Hp should suffice. However, that is just my opinion.
06-14-11, 08:00 PM
#10
Guest
Posts: n/a
Great read Michael. I see what you are saying and think there are some good points and its a passionate read. To me there are a couple of big items to be mentioned
1. Lexus is VERY profitable for Toyota, making up 50% if not more of the profit though it sells only 400-500k vehicles a year compared to the millions of Toyotas sold. Lexus is actually by itself higher valued than many larger brands like Nissan etc. Even with its faults, it is a cash cow.
2. Lexus was very reluctant to offer more. The Toyota production method is about eliminating waste as we know and streamlining things. Thus until recently Lexus were in a few colors inside and out with a few options. This not only keeps costs down, it keeps quality up. Today they continue to embrace offering more.
There is nothing wrong with the Camry and nothing wrong with any car based on it. Sadly its became some internet trolling thing to mention by detractors like the Camry is a bad car. Its not its brilliant in its simple goals. We both have driven the new 3RX and it is quite stunning how a car sharing platforms with a Camry can be so amazingly different. You cannot tell its Camry based at all. I will not fall into a line of thinking that a platform for the sake of a platform is great. I also am not a fan of 20 cars sharing a platform to save costs b/c the bottom line is corners will be cut. The FM platform is fapped about b/c its RWD and its a great platform but it makes the Z heavy and makes the luxury car M56 ride like a truck. Yeah it cuts costs and clearly many people don't care but it also has negatives.
I don't want Toyota to become like VW/AudiSeat/Skoda. No thanks.
As for luxury cars its all in the details. An educated customer will do the research. I8abmr says a Focus has all the features of a LS. For one this isn't true and two the LS and Focus cannot be compared b/c the execution, build quality, options, features, etc are not on the same page.
People need to get out of their heads that an ipod and navigation does not make a ****ing car. A car is about the engine, fit and finish, the brakes, the leather, the wood, the ride, the handling etc and the plus side is the extra living room features, the NAV, the stereo, the electronics. Acura forever tries to pawn off being the luxury brand b/c of navigation, ignoring the actual CAR. Where its built, the materials used, world firsts etc.
More than anything as the line of luxury car/non luxury cars blur what is more apparent than ever is who is a true knowledgable car guy and one who just listens to the ads on T.V..
The GS is built in Tahara, one of the most award winning auto plants. This is important to me and a selling feature. If something is happy with navigation in a car that will be outdated in 3 months, they might as well buy a Tom Tom.
What happened to discussing the actual car?
1. Lexus is VERY profitable for Toyota, making up 50% if not more of the profit though it sells only 400-500k vehicles a year compared to the millions of Toyotas sold. Lexus is actually by itself higher valued than many larger brands like Nissan etc. Even with its faults, it is a cash cow.
2. Lexus was very reluctant to offer more. The Toyota production method is about eliminating waste as we know and streamlining things. Thus until recently Lexus were in a few colors inside and out with a few options. This not only keeps costs down, it keeps quality up. Today they continue to embrace offering more.
There is nothing wrong with the Camry and nothing wrong with any car based on it. Sadly its became some internet trolling thing to mention by detractors like the Camry is a bad car. Its not its brilliant in its simple goals. We both have driven the new 3RX and it is quite stunning how a car sharing platforms with a Camry can be so amazingly different. You cannot tell its Camry based at all. I will not fall into a line of thinking that a platform for the sake of a platform is great. I also am not a fan of 20 cars sharing a platform to save costs b/c the bottom line is corners will be cut. The FM platform is fapped about b/c its RWD and its a great platform but it makes the Z heavy and makes the luxury car M56 ride like a truck. Yeah it cuts costs and clearly many people don't care but it also has negatives.
I don't want Toyota to become like VW/AudiSeat/Skoda. No thanks.
As for luxury cars its all in the details. An educated customer will do the research. I8abmr says a Focus has all the features of a LS. For one this isn't true and two the LS and Focus cannot be compared b/c the execution, build quality, options, features, etc are not on the same page.
People need to get out of their heads that an ipod and navigation does not make a ****ing car. A car is about the engine, fit and finish, the brakes, the leather, the wood, the ride, the handling etc and the plus side is the extra living room features, the NAV, the stereo, the electronics. Acura forever tries to pawn off being the luxury brand b/c of navigation, ignoring the actual CAR. Where its built, the materials used, world firsts etc.
More than anything as the line of luxury car/non luxury cars blur what is more apparent than ever is who is a true knowledgable car guy and one who just listens to the ads on T.V..
The GS is built in Tahara, one of the most award winning auto plants. This is important to me and a selling feature. If something is happy with navigation in a car that will be outdated in 3 months, they might as well buy a Tom Tom.
What happened to discussing the actual car?
Last edited by LexFather; 06-14-11 at 08:06 PM.
06-14-11, 08:51 PM
#11
Lexus Champion
Here are some thoughts that came to mind as I was reading through this thread:
1. I think what is needed is greater differentiation between Toyota and Lexus, not necessarily creating a more widely-used platform just for Lexus.
2. Mercedes-Benz has entered into a wide-ranging agreement with lowly, mass-market Renault-Nissan. Think of it as co-habitation without the full, formal marriage (as what happened between MB and Chrysler). Why? It is to reduce development costs, of course. Rumoured to come out of this agreement are shared engines -- can you imagine a luxury Mercedes-Benz sharing a relatively-unrefined engine (by comparison) with lowly Renault or Nissan? There may be platform sharing also. Imagine a luxury MB sharing a platform with a lowly Nissan? Can you picture a Mercedes-Benz Sentra? Heaven forbid! The IS/GS sharing the same wonderfully-refined 2GR V6 engine block with the lowly Camry and RAV4 no longer seems that strange, does it?
3. BMW shares engines (and platforms now) with its big brother Rolls-Royce. RR without its own bespoke product and technology? Heaven forbid! Of course it is done to reduce development costs.
4. Audi, being a premium (but otherwise middle) lineup within the VW Group, can share a lot of technology, both up and down. What seems to be forgotten, however, is that Audi shares most of its platforms with lowly VW. VW has become a master at platform-engineering and platform-sharing to the extent that one platform can have a variation for a transverse engine (a typical front-engine, front-wheel drive car) AND a variation for a longitudinal engine (typically for front-engine, rear-wheel drive cars, but also used in FWD/AWD Audis and Subarus). Its Q line of SUVs are based on VW product: Q7 is based on Touareg; Q5 is based on Audi A4, which shares a platform with VW Passat; Q3 is based on VW Tiguan. What is also forgotten is that Audi shares engines with VW.
5. Audi's relationship with VW is perhaps the most similar with the Lexus-Toyota relationship. We conveniently forget that Audi has been very successful at dressing up lowly VWs.
6. Which brings me back to my original point: Perhaps what is needed is greater differentiation between Lexus and Toyota, NOT necessarily a Lexus-only platform. Perhaps what else is needed is to conveniently forget that Lexus shares much with Toyota, just like Audi shares much with VW (and even lower Seat and Skoda by extrapolation). We have already forgotten that Lexus' more-expensive products share technology and platforms with other Toyotas (that we do not get here in North America).
1. I think what is needed is greater differentiation between Toyota and Lexus, not necessarily creating a more widely-used platform just for Lexus.
2. Mercedes-Benz has entered into a wide-ranging agreement with lowly, mass-market Renault-Nissan. Think of it as co-habitation without the full, formal marriage (as what happened between MB and Chrysler). Why? It is to reduce development costs, of course. Rumoured to come out of this agreement are shared engines -- can you imagine a luxury Mercedes-Benz sharing a relatively-unrefined engine (by comparison) with lowly Renault or Nissan? There may be platform sharing also. Imagine a luxury MB sharing a platform with a lowly Nissan? Can you picture a Mercedes-Benz Sentra? Heaven forbid! The IS/GS sharing the same wonderfully-refined 2GR V6 engine block with the lowly Camry and RAV4 no longer seems that strange, does it?
3. BMW shares engines (and platforms now) with its big brother Rolls-Royce. RR without its own bespoke product and technology? Heaven forbid! Of course it is done to reduce development costs.
4. Audi, being a premium (but otherwise middle) lineup within the VW Group, can share a lot of technology, both up and down. What seems to be forgotten, however, is that Audi shares most of its platforms with lowly VW. VW has become a master at platform-engineering and platform-sharing to the extent that one platform can have a variation for a transverse engine (a typical front-engine, front-wheel drive car) AND a variation for a longitudinal engine (typically for front-engine, rear-wheel drive cars, but also used in FWD/AWD Audis and Subarus). Its Q line of SUVs are based on VW product: Q7 is based on Touareg; Q5 is based on Audi A4, which shares a platform with VW Passat; Q3 is based on VW Tiguan. What is also forgotten is that Audi shares engines with VW.
5. Audi's relationship with VW is perhaps the most similar with the Lexus-Toyota relationship. We conveniently forget that Audi has been very successful at dressing up lowly VWs.
6. Which brings me back to my original point: Perhaps what is needed is greater differentiation between Lexus and Toyota, NOT necessarily a Lexus-only platform. Perhaps what else is needed is to conveniently forget that Lexus shares much with Toyota, just like Audi shares much with VW (and even lower Seat and Skoda by extrapolation). We have already forgotten that Lexus' more-expensive products share technology and platforms with other Toyotas (that we do not get here in North America).
06-15-11, 01:34 AM
#12
Lexus Fanatic
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: A better place
Posts: 7,285
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with the spirit and intent of this thread, not so much the specific points.
Yes, Lexus needs to be more separated from Toyota in terms of sharing, and more sharing needs to occur within Lexus, and you MPLexus301 should know that WILL occur in the future. It's already started to occur.
The RX uses a unique double wishbone rear suspension design that the Camry does not have for example. Also keep in mind what spywolf said. Toyota's MC platform is very flexible and very modular. Also Toyota's definition of a "platform" is slightly more flexible than other manufacturer's definitions of what a platform is. Toyota is the industry leader in flexible manufacturing, so it makes sense their platforms would be quite flexible. I am willing to bet the next-gen ES gets the same or similar double wishbone rear suspension that the RX currently has, further differentiating the ES from the Camry while exemplifying parts sharing within Lexus.
Then we have the LFA, which shares almost no parts at all with any other Toyota or Lexus models, save for 1 or 2 parts I believe. The LFA technology and some of the parts will soon trickle down and be shared with future Lexus models. This definitely *will* happen, and that will be sharing within Lexus, and not sharing with Toyota models.
Yes, Lexus needs to be more separated from Toyota in terms of sharing, and more sharing needs to occur within Lexus, and you MPLexus301 should know that WILL occur in the future. It's already started to occur.
The RX uses a unique double wishbone rear suspension design that the Camry does not have for example. Also keep in mind what spywolf said. Toyota's MC platform is very flexible and very modular. Also Toyota's definition of a "platform" is slightly more flexible than other manufacturer's definitions of what a platform is. Toyota is the industry leader in flexible manufacturing, so it makes sense their platforms would be quite flexible. I am willing to bet the next-gen ES gets the same or similar double wishbone rear suspension that the RX currently has, further differentiating the ES from the Camry while exemplifying parts sharing within Lexus.
Then we have the LFA, which shares almost no parts at all with any other Toyota or Lexus models, save for 1 or 2 parts I believe. The LFA technology and some of the parts will soon trickle down and be shared with future Lexus models. This definitely *will* happen, and that will be sharing within Lexus, and not sharing with Toyota models.
06-15-11, 06:49 AM
#13
Interesting post with all good points 
(I like how you expanded about what you meant from our convo in the other thread)
The intricate product sharing with Toyota products had to stop at some time and I think this would be a good time to do so. Sure, you can keep the ES, but the RX needs to change in the next generation.
One thing I noticed with the Lexus line was that technology has always sort of been "trickling" down the diff't lines, always starting with the LS. It's just like that with BMW/MB/Audi. Sure, the S Class is a tech tour-de-force, but there have been many instances where the C/E got some tech and it has "trickled up." Same thing with BMW. The N54/55 used in the 740i now starting being used in the 335. Then slowly they go thru the whole lineup.
I like this "one chassis - lots of products" idea for Lexus. They need a new RWD platform, but I'm not so sure that having the LS/GS/IS all derive from the same chassis will be a good idea. I say this because Mercedes/BMW/Audi have the 3 core sedans (small, medium, large) and all of them have diff't chassises. The small sedan never shares it with the medium, etc. For the current 5er, BMW used a smaller 7er chassis, and the press has ripped it apart for being too heavy, and loosing its stereotypical BMW handling goodness that the E60 5er had. However, Lexus then building upon the 3 separate platforms seems like a good idea. IS chassis can be used for a X3/Q5 competitor, GS one can be used for the new RX/RXL. This is what Audi/BMW/Mercedes do. The X3 is based off the 3er. X5 based off the 5er. Q5 based off A4.
On the topic of engines, I'm also not so sure just updating the 2GR would be a good idea. I would really like them to go FI, but Toyota has been very reluctant to do so.
It's interesting how now we're looking at Lexus learning from the big 3 germans, when a decade or so ago, they needed to learn a thing or two about mass production. The Big 3 Germans have been growing so fast and technology is changing so much and they've been keeping up. I just hope Lexus does too.
(I like how you expanded about what you meant from our convo in the other thread)The intricate product sharing with Toyota products had to stop at some time and I think this would be a good time to do so. Sure, you can keep the ES, but the RX needs to change in the next generation.
One thing I noticed with the Lexus line was that technology has always sort of been "trickling" down the diff't lines, always starting with the LS. It's just like that with BMW/MB/Audi. Sure, the S Class is a tech tour-de-force, but there have been many instances where the C/E got some tech and it has "trickled up." Same thing with BMW. The N54/55 used in the 740i now starting being used in the 335. Then slowly they go thru the whole lineup.
I like this "one chassis - lots of products" idea for Lexus. They need a new RWD platform, but I'm not so sure that having the LS/GS/IS all derive from the same chassis will be a good idea. I say this because Mercedes/BMW/Audi have the 3 core sedans (small, medium, large) and all of them have diff't chassises. The small sedan never shares it with the medium, etc. For the current 5er, BMW used a smaller 7er chassis, and the press has ripped it apart for being too heavy, and loosing its stereotypical BMW handling goodness that the E60 5er had. However, Lexus then building upon the 3 separate platforms seems like a good idea. IS chassis can be used for a X3/Q5 competitor, GS one can be used for the new RX/RXL. This is what Audi/BMW/Mercedes do. The X3 is based off the 3er. X5 based off the 5er. Q5 based off A4.
On the topic of engines, I'm also not so sure just updating the 2GR would be a good idea. I would really like them to go FI, but Toyota has been very reluctant to do so.
It's interesting how now we're looking at Lexus learning from the big 3 germans, when a decade or so ago, they needed to learn a thing or two about mass production. The Big 3 Germans have been growing so fast and technology is changing so much and they've been keeping up. I just hope Lexus does too.
Also, I want to be clear that I'm not picking on the Camry or how Lexus has dressed up and reengineered the Camry platform for use in the RX and ES. They have done an incredible job with the RX and if you didn't know that the RX and Camry share a platform, engine and transmission in the first place, you'd have no idea after driving them back to back. It's crazy how good the RX is, especially the 450h!
That said, my point is that the technology/features/engines/transmissions/hardware in luxury cars is advancing very quickly right now and it's hard to stay enough to stay on top year over year. BMW and Mercedes have the flexibility to put their latest and greatest technology into their entry level products because of how they engineer and share costs across the lineup. This is a very good thing for product because, as I stated above, you're getting S Class/7 Series content in a $30,000 package. For Lexus, the heart and soul of the RX and ES are based on the Camry - a car NOT under the same pressures and competitive set as it's Lexus counterparts. Lexus has done a very good job with what they have, I just wonder how much longer these Toyota-sourced components will be credible and capable in the luxury realm.
Last edited by MPLexus301; 06-15-11 at 06:57 AM.
06-16-11, 10:53 AM
#15
Lexus Champion
I sense a double standard here. It seems that it is fine for European premium makes to raid the corporate parts bin, when that parts bin was largely populated by a lower-tier sister division; yet it is not acceptable for Lexus to raid the Toyota parts bin. It is acceptable for Audi to share engines with Volkswagen and not call them VW engines; yet Lexus only uses Toyota engines. It is acceptable to call a VW Touareg a dressed-down Q7; yet the Camry is never called a dressed-down ES.