ISF350

Just show up today. First time I've ever seen a report to list Lexus as car "avoid" and fall short.
I actually test drove the IS 350 Fsport and I liked it. CR must have reviewed the 250 version as a mass.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Consumer Reports' annual auto report doesn't just recommend the best new cars to buy, based on its data. It also tells you the new cars it thinks you should avoid — no matter the deal or the bit of styling that appeals to you.

And it's perhaps a more interesting list than the menu of good cars. At least it can be a good place to start an argument.


Here are the cars to avoid, by category, with some of CR's comments on why they rejected them:

Subcompact cars

•Smart ForTwo (tiny, two-passenger cabin, a herky-jerky transmission, an under-powered engine ... a dumb choice)
•Scion iQ (rear seat is awful, the cabin is loud, acceleration is molasses-like)
•Chevrolet Spark (ride is stiff, the dinky 1.2-liter engine is slow, and handling is lackluster)


Compact cars

•Scion tC (lack of driving enjoyment, hard ride)
•Mitsubishi Lancer (under-powered engine, noisy interior)
•Dodge Dart (unrefined ... more expensive than most competitors)


Midsize sedans

•Chrysler 200/Dodge Avenger (corporate cousins ... plenty of them on dealers' lots at a discount. Don't be tempted.)


Large sedans

•Ford Taurus (ridiculously cramped for such a large car ... controls for its MyFord Touch infotainment system are complicated and distracting ... reliability has been sub-par)


Luxury sedans

•Lexus IS (falls short — very short)
•Lincoln MKS (doesn't cut it as a luxury sedan)
•BMW 7-Series (a ponderous, technology-laden vehicle with ... ungainly handling)


Wagons & minivans

•Honda Crosstour (ungainly handling ... unintuitive and complex touch-screen radio system)


Small SUVs

•Jeep Compass (2.4-liter engine is rough and sluggish ... cabin is cramped, cheaply trimmed)
•Jeep Patriot (compliant ride and mostly simple controls. But little else stands out.)
•Jeep Cherokee with 2.4-liter engine (half-baked ... under-powered and not very fuel-efficient, and the nine-speed automatic transmission is unrefined and unresponsive)
•Mitsubishi Outlander (handles clumsily, the ride is fairly stiff, and the interior feels cheap)


Midsize & large SUVs

•Ford Edge (unrefined powertrain ... ride is jittery and road noise invades the cabin. And the MyFord Touch system is convoluted to use)
•Nissan Armada (overall fuel economy of 13 mpg is abysmal, reliability is poor and ownership costs are the worst in the category)
•Dodge Journey (below-average reliability ... lack of agility ... transmission is reluctant to downshift)


Luxury SUVs

•Volvo XC90 (an old design that wasn't that competitive when new)
•Lincoln MKX (handling is clumsy, the My Lincoln Touch control system is frustrating, and it has been unreliable)
•Land Rover Range Rover Evoque (choppy ride, a noisy cabin, and disconcerting emergency handling)

LexFather

We talked about it in depth, this is old news and we feel really overblown. Owners for the most part are super happy with their IS and it still is super reliable. CR is entitled to their opinion

PhilipMSPT

iTrader: (5)

1/10th of their criteria is backseat space and comfort.

Oh well. There goes 10% of the grade...

ISF350

The old IS 250 and new IS 250 w/ that 200hp engine can't move that car much. The IS 250 can't compete w/ the 328i sedan. It's "short" in that regard but I prefer the IS for reliable and that is it.

edgeucated

iTrader: (4)

I would avoid the new IS too knowing that it has a carry over engine will probably receive a new powertrain at the facelift

doge

Everyone goes by CR's word on this forum. Unless Lexus makes it to the list than its

spwolf

there is no Lexus vehicle at top of any CR list of best cars that they select based on their reviews... So I am not sure you are correct in that. There is one thing to look at CR for reliability ratings and another for reviews of cars.

FrankReynoldsCPA

Wait.... They complain about rear seat space in subcompacts?

This is why i don't care much for CR or auto mags.
Drive the cars you're interested in, get user feedback on reliability.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using IB AutoGroup

Whitigir

I guess what they mean short was the feeling i had when test driving the IS 350.

It is half of the luxurious, and half of a sport ride. Throttle respond is the same thing, the car just feel luxurious with a sense of confident, but doesnt feel raw, and communicating with you as a sport car should. Compare to the agressive look of the IS. I guess that is where it is short of. Kinda agressive looking, but not agressive driving experience

RNM GS3

How they can have the IS and 7series on the Avoid list is idiotic. There are Many more luxury cars that i would puf on that list before those 2, starting with every single Lincoln and Acura model.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

CR - making boneheaded decisions based on lame criteria and bogus statistics. nothing new folks.

corradoMR2

To LexFather's point, this was discussed ad nauseum. As a twice IS 250 owner, I lost credibility for CR on evaluating cars a long time ago because their evaluation is purely on empirical evaluation methods that is applied the same way regardless of the class of car, instead of measuring things relatively and evaluating a car as an overall experience. You buy a car not necessarily just for rear seat room, trunk space, firm ride or not, but as an entire "feel" to the car. Their process works for appliances, TVs, vacuums, tablets, and so on but on cars, well, applying the CR process yields the Impala as the top-rated car. Enough said.

hlee12

very surprising. anybody has a full review? is it all about rear seat complaints?

rear seat room is important for most sedans, but not in the entry level luxury.

i've had 3 generations of 3 series and rear leg room sucks. i would've bought something else if i wanted a leg room.

yowps3

Why does everyone compare the IS250 to the 338i, which costs as much as the IS350?? BMW has a 180HP 320i

Also these nuts probably tested the AWD IS250
Seriously man that's the worst combo you can get.

geko29

IS250 starts at $36,100. In my area, "F-sport with additional options" is the only possible option/package, which brings it to $41,403
328i starts at $37,300. Adding Msport package brings it to $41,725

This is a price difference of $1,200 base, $320 similarly optioned ($770 if both have metallic paint) including destination. I'd say that's pretty comparable.

Base price of the IS350 is $39,615, and the 320i starts way down at $32,750. Tell me again why comparing the IS250 to the 328i is so bad?