Lexus debuts 2016 GS F
01-07-15, 08:43 AM
#136
Lexus Fanatic
GM has way many new technology and development. They always fund universities to research new techs. Powerful engine isn't the only thing GM possesses. Magnetic Ride Control? Color HUD? Electric vehicle? On-Star? continuous development in cylinder De-activation? List goes on...
Some of those are not own by GM, but I doubt most of the tech Lexus uses is own by Lexus.
Some of those are not own by GM, but I doubt most of the tech Lexus uses is own by Lexus.
01-07-15, 08:47 AM
#137
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Then buy a Dodge. Lexus has spent a lot of money developing aspects of their cars that GM and Chrysler have not, if what checks the boxes for you is the power...buy the power.
What they said was they were interested in building what their definition of a performance Lexus was. They didn't say they were going to copy what the competition was doing...in fact they said they were not going to do that.
They're telling you what they think that definition is, and it clearly includes NA engines with less focus on total power output. Obviously that doesn't appeal to you...but I'm not sure why your opinion is the one thats the most meaningful. Lexus has enough buyers and fans that they don't need to concentrate on capturing buyers from other manufacturers. While I agree they should have increased the output for the GS-F over the RC-F even if it was only slightly, I applaud them for doing it their way. Will it sell? We don't know. We know you won't be a buyer...how many times do we need to hear that?
What they said was they were interested in building what their definition of a performance Lexus was. They didn't say they were going to copy what the competition was doing...in fact they said they were not going to do that.
They're telling you what they think that definition is, and it clearly includes NA engines with less focus on total power output. Obviously that doesn't appeal to you...but I'm not sure why your opinion is the one thats the most meaningful. Lexus has enough buyers and fans that they don't need to concentrate on capturing buyers from other manufacturers. While I agree they should have increased the output for the GS-F over the RC-F even if it was only slightly, I applaud them for doing it their way. Will it sell? We don't know. We know you won't be a buyer...how many times do we need to hear that?
01-07-15, 08:55 AM
#138
Lexus Fanatic
Just because Lexus has spent money in areas GM and Chrysler have not doesn't mean that they haven't invested in developing in areas other than power.
01-07-15, 09:06 AM
#139
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Engine reliability may be Toyota's strong suit, but they are still catching up when it comes to technology. What technology that Toyota has and other carmakers don't? I can hardly think of any.
01-07-15, 09:07 AM
#140
Pole Position
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What they said was they were interested in building what their definition of a performance Lexus was. They didn't say they were going to copy what the competition was doing...in fact they said they were not going to do that.
They're telling you what they think that definition is, and it clearly includes NA engines with less focus on total power output. Obviously that doesn't appeal to you...but I'm not sure why your opinion is the one thats the most meaningful. Lexus has enough buyers and fans that they don't need to concentrate on capturing buyers from other manufacturers. While I agree they should have increased the output for the GS-F over the RC-F even if it was only slightly, I applaud them for doing it their way. Will it sell? We don't know. We know you won't be a buyer...how many times do we need to hear that?
This does actually remind me very much of Audis struggle with the S division the first years, when they simply put in the way too weak 2.3 liter 5 cyl turbo in every car with a stiffer chassi and namned it S2/4/6. But then something happened. Yes, the reliability was not that good for a while (S4/RS4 V6 turbo) , but the result speaks for it self I guess.
01-07-15, 09:13 AM
#141
Lexus Fanatic
Reliability, refinement, longevity (reliability and longevity are different), product quality...all things that a Lexus has that I've yet to see to anywhere near the same levels in a GM or Chrysler product (and I also have a very nice Chrysler product)
01-07-15, 09:18 AM
#142
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At cost of what? High priced product? FCA's luxury brand is Maserati, not Chrysler or Jeep. You probably want to compare refinement and quality of a Maserati to a Lexus. Sure. Toyota is one of a few brands leading in reliability. " and longevity?"
01-07-15, 09:28 AM
#143
Lexus Fanatic
I have a $50,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee. Its certainly comparable or more expensive than many Lexus vehicles. Maserati doesn't sell a vehicle cheaper than $70,000. 90% of Lexus sales are below $70,000.
In some ways on the surface the Jeep is even nicer than a Lexus at that same price point, the difference is reliability (clearly) and longevity. What I mean by longevity is how long the car maintains its solidity and "new" feel and appeal. In my experiences Lexus vehicles are very good at this, and even when they have 100k, 150k, 200k miles if they've been well maintained they feel and drive more or less like new. That is NOT the case with either of the Jeep products I've had, my previous 2011 Jeep was fairly loose when I traded it at 45k miles. When I test drove the 2014 I bought it was very clear. When I test drove a 2015 GS...it felt like my 2013 GS...
In some ways on the surface the Jeep is even nicer than a Lexus at that same price point, the difference is reliability (clearly) and longevity. What I mean by longevity is how long the car maintains its solidity and "new" feel and appeal. In my experiences Lexus vehicles are very good at this, and even when they have 100k, 150k, 200k miles if they've been well maintained they feel and drive more or less like new. That is NOT the case with either of the Jeep products I've had, my previous 2011 Jeep was fairly loose when I traded it at 45k miles. When I test drove the 2014 I bought it was very clear. When I test drove a 2015 GS...it felt like my 2013 GS...
01-07-15, 09:35 AM
#144
Lexus Champion
This is NOT an old engine. Everyone seems to have missed the fact that this is another dual cycle -- ultra-efficient Atkinson cycle at low RPMs and more-powerful Otto cycle at higher RPMs -- engine that no one, not the Germans, not GM, not Fiat-Chrysler, not Ford has, only Toyota.
Everyone is stuck on the idea that to get low fuel consumption with powerful engines, you turbocharge the heck out of a small-displacement engine (which does not give you low consumption / high efficiency in the real world, only in the lab). Toyota is the only automaker to build dual-cycle engines -- high-displacement engines for top-end power but with the more-efficient Atkinson cycle for low-end economy.
The NX 200t turbocharged 4-cyl runs the dual cycle and if you have read, everybody has said that engine has a LOT of potential to grow its power up from the rather average HP it now has.
Everyone is stuck on the idea that to get low fuel consumption with powerful engines, you turbocharge the heck out of a small-displacement engine (which does not give you low consumption / high efficiency in the real world, only in the lab). Toyota is the only automaker to build dual-cycle engines -- high-displacement engines for top-end power but with the more-efficient Atkinson cycle for low-end economy.
The NX 200t turbocharged 4-cyl runs the dual cycle and if you have read, everybody has said that engine has a LOT of potential to grow its power up from the rather average HP it now has.
01-07-15, 09:57 AM
#145
Lexus Champion
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: WA
Posts: 1,746
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have a $50,000 Jeep Grand Cherokee. Its certainly comparable or more expensive than many Lexus vehicles. Maserati doesn't sell a vehicle cheaper than $70,000. 90% of Lexus sales are below $70,000.
In some ways on the surface the Jeep is even nicer than a Lexus at that same price point, the difference is reliability (clearly) and longevity. What I mean by longevity is how long the car maintains its solidity and "new" feel and appeal. In my experiences Lexus vehicles are very good at this, and even when they have 100k, 150k, 200k miles if they've been well maintained they feel and drive more or less like new. That is NOT the case with either of the Jeep products I've had, my previous 2011 Jeep was fairly loose when I traded it at 45k miles. When I test drove the 2014 I bought it was very clear. When I test drove a 2015 GS...it felt like my 2013 GS...
In some ways on the surface the Jeep is even nicer than a Lexus at that same price point, the difference is reliability (clearly) and longevity. What I mean by longevity is how long the car maintains its solidity and "new" feel and appeal. In my experiences Lexus vehicles are very good at this, and even when they have 100k, 150k, 200k miles if they've been well maintained they feel and drive more or less like new. That is NOT the case with either of the Jeep products I've had, my previous 2011 Jeep was fairly loose when I traded it at 45k miles. When I test drove the 2014 I bought it was very clear. When I test drove a 2015 GS...it felt like my 2013 GS...
01-07-15, 09:58 AM
#146
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: NC
Posts: 437
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Put that power into context. The Germans and Cadillac (talk about a brand that copies the Germans) achieve it by turbocharging. Turbocharging is not inherently an advanced or even all that sophisticated a technology. You can turbocharge or even twin turbocharge the Lexus 5.0L V8 if you wanted to and get tons of power, and Lexus no doubt has in testing (remember that 600 HP LS-F prototype?). So I don't know why people keep treating forced induction engines as some sort of high end new technology that Lexus is behind the curve in.
Question is: is turbocharging/forced induction right for Lexus? Is the gasoline engine even worth continuing investing in if forced induction has become the most popular route for power/economy?
Is Toyota behind the curve in engine technology because they're not turbocharging? I don't think so. I think they're wrestling with the above questions. Toyota is putting their bet on hybrids and fuel cells, stuff that takes far longer to develop and come to fruition than mere turbocharging of conventional gas engines. They're racing the marathon while others are going for the sprint.
Now the F sub-brand itself also needs to mean something. Is it appropriate to simply copy BMW and MB like Cadillac has done, create a 4300 lb $90k+ sedan with a 550+HP forced induction engine? What would separate "F" from the other sub-brands in such a case, and in an absolutely tiny market segment no less?
Lexus has decided to use naturally aspirated engines as a means to differentiate the sound and feel of their cars from the competition, and this in a sense gives the F sub-brand its own character. An RC-F has an entirely different character than the M4 for example. The blue prints for this were set by the LFA, with its racy NA V10.
Similarly the market segment the GS-F is aimed at is not directly at the M5, E63, CTS-V etc..., and this is smart on Lexus' part. There is more potential in a new segment between the 550i and M5, at around $70k base. The GS-F has more potential for success in this area of the market than it does costing $90k+ and taking the M5 head on. It also gives buyers including yourself more choice. Do you want a 600hp FI sedan? Or will a 460 HP NA sedan for $30k cheaper suffice?
You now have that choice to make, and it's a much more substantial decision than the choice between one $90k FI sedan versus another $90k FI sedan.
Question is: is turbocharging/forced induction right for Lexus? Is the gasoline engine even worth continuing investing in if forced induction has become the most popular route for power/economy?
Is Toyota behind the curve in engine technology because they're not turbocharging? I don't think so. I think they're wrestling with the above questions. Toyota is putting their bet on hybrids and fuel cells, stuff that takes far longer to develop and come to fruition than mere turbocharging of conventional gas engines. They're racing the marathon while others are going for the sprint.
Now the F sub-brand itself also needs to mean something. Is it appropriate to simply copy BMW and MB like Cadillac has done, create a 4300 lb $90k+ sedan with a 550+HP forced induction engine? What would separate "F" from the other sub-brands in such a case, and in an absolutely tiny market segment no less?
Lexus has decided to use naturally aspirated engines as a means to differentiate the sound and feel of their cars from the competition, and this in a sense gives the F sub-brand its own character. An RC-F has an entirely different character than the M4 for example. The blue prints for this were set by the LFA, with its racy NA V10.
Similarly the market segment the GS-F is aimed at is not directly at the M5, E63, CTS-V etc..., and this is smart on Lexus' part. There is more potential in a new segment between the 550i and M5, at around $70k base. The GS-F has more potential for success in this area of the market than it does costing $90k+ and taking the M5 head on. It also gives buyers including yourself more choice. Do you want a 600hp FI sedan? Or will a 460 HP NA sedan for $30k cheaper suffice?
You now have that choice to make, and it's a much more substantial decision than the choice between one $90k FI sedan versus another $90k FI sedan.
And no the CTS-V had a SUPERCHARGER not a turbo and this was before the others (minus Audi) had forced induction.
But no one is complaining that the GS-F is natural aspirated. They are complaining about such a low hp figure. I guarantee only a select few would have *****ed and moaned over the GS-F had it had say 525 hp from the same 5.0. It would give the GS-F much higher credibility.
By the way why do you keep lashing out at the CTS-V? It isn't a 4300+ lb, $90k+ 550 hp vehicle. It is 4150 lbs, under $90k with 640 hp.
And with what you just said about the GS-F is that it really should just be named GS500 F-Sport. Why should Lexus build a direct M4 competitor but build a GS-F a half class down?
01-07-15, 09:59 AM
#147
See how the GSF stacks up here by the #'s (horsepower per pound and pounds per hp):
GSF 4034 lbs - 467hp = .11 hp/lb or 8.6 lbs/hp
Other Lexus F branded machines..
RCF 3958 lbs - 467hp = .11 hp/lb or 8.4 lbs/hp
2008 ISF 3780 lbs - 416hp = .11 hp/lb or 9.0 lbs/hp
2012 LFA 3263 lbs - 552hp = .16 hp/lb or 5.0 lbs/hp
GSF 4034 lbs - 467hp = .11 hp/lb or 8.6 lbs/hp
Other Lexus F branded machines..
RCF 3958 lbs - 467hp = .11 hp/lb or 8.4 lbs/hp
2008 ISF 3780 lbs - 416hp = .11 hp/lb or 9.0 lbs/hp
2012 LFA 3263 lbs - 552hp = .16 hp/lb or 5.0 lbs/hp
0.91 is a huge difference in power to weight ratio, 5.0 is a seriously high ratio, only the hyper cars have achieved that so far.
Last edited by BNR34; 01-07-15 at 10:11 AM.
01-07-15, 10:04 AM
#149
Lead Lap
I completely disagree with you and can GUARANTEE you all of Lexus regular petrol engines will be turbocharged in the next 5 years.
Making a reliable turbo engine is not simple at all.
We are not talking about aftermarket crap that can blow the motor.
Going turbo is a complete change in design and needs to be developed from the beginning.
The 4cyl turbo is not just an aberration, they took time to develop it and will transfer that R&d to the 6&8 cyl engines.
They are just behind the curve.....
Making a reliable turbo engine is not simple at all.
We are not talking about aftermarket crap that can blow the motor.
Going turbo is a complete change in design and needs to be developed from the beginning.
The 4cyl turbo is not just an aberration, they took time to develop it and will transfer that R&d to the 6&8 cyl engines.
They are just behind the curve.....
Regarding the GS-F, I prefer that they kept NA, I wish the power was bumped to 500hp for $75k base, I think that's the ultimate sweet spot in terms of power/price for this segment. If the GS-F becomes successful we might see other brands introduce scaled back lower power super sedans at this price point to compete with it.
I do agree with you on the pricing/hp output though.
01-07-15, 10:07 AM
#150
Lexus Fanatic
The GC Overland and Summit are definitely comparable to a Lexus.
In any event though I'm not talking about material quality, I'm talking about refinement, reliability and longevity.