Car and Driver Comparo: IS350 F Sport beats 335i M Sport!!!
That thing is brilliant on the GS.
06-03-13, 02:46 AM
#33
Lexus uses summer tires on the F-Sport RWD models.
06-03-13, 03:08 AM
#34
Pole Position
In the C&D comparo, the IS350 used worse performing tires compared to the 3 series and ATS explaining the poorer skidpad. However the superiority of the IS suspension and chassis claws back the advantage for the IS in the slalom, resulting in the best slalom speed despite the its disadvantage of having the worst performing tires.
06-03-13, 04:52 AM
#35
06-03-13, 12:19 PM
#36
Pole Position
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So too the bit about the engine families and their effects on engine weight.
Sounds like the ideal engine for a future IS might perhaps be an all new 2.0 V6 turbo based on an all new block designed to be 1.5 to 2.0L maximum in capacity - that'll ensure that there is less weight on the nose.
Sounds like the ideal engine for a future IS might perhaps be an all new 2.0 V6 turbo based on an all new block designed to be 1.5 to 2.0L maximum in capacity - that'll ensure that there is less weight on the nose.
Also 60 degree v6s as well as I4s have balance issues, but both can be mitigated with modern engine crafting and engine mounts. Below a certain displacement, usually around 2.5L, V6s just don't make sense anymore. Above a certain displacement, 2.4-2.5L, I4s don't make much sense anymore.
At the end of the day, it may be cheaper for and more efficient for Toyota to develop a single 2.0 for NA and FI useage, and use different amounts of boost for different applications. You can cover the low end economy cars, right through compact SUVs to luxury cars, as long as the engine can be mounted both ways.
06-03-13, 12:22 PM
#37
Pole Position
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Montreal, QC
Posts: 392
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
06-03-13, 01:08 PM
#38
There are certain issues with with V6s, comnpared to I4s often same dispalcement. A 2L v6 may have smoother power delivery due to overlapping power strokes, but V6s have more frictional losses, and more rotational inertia making them slower to spin up, and less fuel efficient.
Also 60 degree v6s as well as I4s have balance issues, but both can be mitigated with modern engine crafting and engine mounts. Below a certain displacement, usually around 2.5L, V6s just don't make sense anymore. Above a certain displacement, 2.4-2.5L, I4s don't make much sense anymore.
At the end of the day, it may be cheaper for and more efficient for Toyota to develop a single 2.0 for NA and FI useage, and use different amounts of boost for different applications. You can cover the low end economy cars, right through compact SUVs to luxury cars, as long as the engine can be mounted both ways.
Also 60 degree v6s as well as I4s have balance issues, but both can be mitigated with modern engine crafting and engine mounts. Below a certain displacement, usually around 2.5L, V6s just don't make sense anymore. Above a certain displacement, 2.4-2.5L, I4s don't make much sense anymore.
At the end of the day, it may be cheaper for and more efficient for Toyota to develop a single 2.0 for NA and FI useage, and use different amounts of boost for different applications. You can cover the low end economy cars, right through compact SUVs to luxury cars, as long as the engine can be mounted both ways.
Hopefully Lexus comes up with a 3.0 V6 turbo [on a dedicated smaller and lighter 3.0 block] to at least keep up with the 335i in the next generation.
It would be nice for Lexus to have a 2.5L V6 turbo [on a dedicated smaller lighter 2.5 block], to bridge the gap between such a 3.0 V6 turbo and their forthcoming entry level AR Series 2.0 in-line four turbo.
The in-line fours have their advantages like compact size, lighter weight, fewer moving parts, and less friction, but the V6's have their advantages too like superior smoothness, and greater surface area to volume ratio for larger valve diameters for superior breathing etc...
06-04-13, 05:48 AM
#39
The other rag mags need to get their quarter mile times and then we can get a better idea of an accurate time. As of this review the IS has taken two steps forward as far as handling and three steps back in acceleration. It looks like the combination of more weight, adding an 8 speed trans and changing the final gear ratio to 3.13:1 (from 4.08:1) has REALLY hurt the IS!
I ran a 13.5 pure stock and 1 to 2 tenths quicker with basic bolt-ons (intake/exhaust/tires). Sorry Gents, but Lexus dropped the ball AGAIN (GS) by not developing the engine with rest of the total redesign!
Koz
I ran a 13.5 pure stock and 1 to 2 tenths quicker with basic bolt-ons (intake/exhaust/tires). Sorry Gents, but Lexus dropped the ball AGAIN (GS) by not developing the engine with rest of the total redesign!
Koz
06-04-13, 08:30 AM
#40
The other rag mags need to get their quarter mile times and then we can get a better idea of an accurate time. As of this review the IS has taken two steps forward as far as handling and three steps back in acceleration. It looks like the combination of more weight, adding an 8 speed trans and changing the final gear ratio to 3.13:1 (from 4.08:1) has REALLY hurt the IS!
I ran a 13.5 pure stock and 1 to 2 tenths quicker with basic bolt-ons (intake/exhaust/tires). Sorry Gents, but Lexus dropped the ball AGAIN (GS) by not developing the engine with rest of the total redesign!
Koz
I ran a 13.5 pure stock and 1 to 2 tenths quicker with basic bolt-ons (intake/exhaust/tires). Sorry Gents, but Lexus dropped the ball AGAIN (GS) by not developing the engine with rest of the total redesign!
Koz
06-04-13, 10:45 AM
#41
I have to agree with the posts here that Lexus/Toyota dropped the ball by not introducing new engines. Plain and simple, if you want power (performance) these days, it has to be a turbocharged engine for the flat torque range. Having the "best" stats in the slalom doesn't tell the whole picture if acceleration, "drive feel," and other areas are lacking. 5.5/5.6 seconds to 60mph is slow nowadays for "sports cars" let alone the times to 100mph/130mph.
From my perspective, it's as if Lexus is always playing catch up. The LFA was 6-7 years too late (Carrera GT had a carbon fiber tub, high rev V10), ISF didn't really compete to the M3 until the 2011 model year, LS460 lacks some major tech from the S-Class, 7 series. And now, with the 2014 IS, they targeted a previous gen 3-series chassis as the benchmark, only to have the new 3 series move onwards. And that's not even considering the powertrains. Also, none of the Lexus models have the 360 degree/curb cameras, let alone the capacitive radio buttons like in the BMW's, and the Lexus NAV system/interface is a generation behind.
If toyota/lexus has turbocharged engines in the works that can actually compete with the germans, it will be released too late. As much as I like Toyota/Lexus, they have really fallen behind in performance as to what is marketed as "sports cars." The only reason to choose an 2014 IS is for 1 aspect - perceived reliability.
From my perspective, it's as if Lexus is always playing catch up. The LFA was 6-7 years too late (Carrera GT had a carbon fiber tub, high rev V10), ISF didn't really compete to the M3 until the 2011 model year, LS460 lacks some major tech from the S-Class, 7 series. And now, with the 2014 IS, they targeted a previous gen 3-series chassis as the benchmark, only to have the new 3 series move onwards. And that's not even considering the powertrains. Also, none of the Lexus models have the 360 degree/curb cameras, let alone the capacitive radio buttons like in the BMW's, and the Lexus NAV system/interface is a generation behind.
If toyota/lexus has turbocharged engines in the works that can actually compete with the germans, it will be released too late. As much as I like Toyota/Lexus, they have really fallen behind in performance as to what is marketed as "sports cars." The only reason to choose an 2014 IS is for 1 aspect - perceived reliability.
06-04-13, 11:42 AM
#42
06-04-13, 11:55 AM
#43
Pole Position
I have to agree with the posts here that Lexus/Toyota dropped the ball by not introducing new engines. Plain and simple, if you want power (performance) these days, it has to be a turbocharged engine for the flat torque range. Having the "best" stats in the slalom doesn't tell the whole picture if acceleration, "drive feel," and other areas are lacking. 5.5/5.6 seconds to 60mph is slow nowadays for "sports cars" let alone the times to 100mph/130mph.
From my perspective, it's as if Lexus is always playing catch up. The LFA was 6-7 years too late (Carrera GT had a carbon fiber tub, high rev V10), ISF didn't really compete to the M3 until the 2011 model year, LS460 lacks some major tech from the S-Class, 7 series. And now, with the 2014 IS, they targeted a previous gen 3-series chassis as the benchmark, only to have the new 3 series move onwards. And that's not even considering the powertrains. Also, none of the Lexus models have the 360 degree/curb cameras, let alone the capacitive radio buttons like in the BMW's, and the Lexus NAV system/interface is a generation behind.
If toyota/lexus has turbocharged engines in the works that can actually compete with the germans, it will be released too late. As much as I like Toyota/Lexus, they have really fallen behind in performance as to what is marketed as "sports cars." The only reason to choose an 2014 IS is for 1 aspect - perceived reliability.
From my perspective, it's as if Lexus is always playing catch up. The LFA was 6-7 years too late (Carrera GT had a carbon fiber tub, high rev V10), ISF didn't really compete to the M3 until the 2011 model year, LS460 lacks some major tech from the S-Class, 7 series. And now, with the 2014 IS, they targeted a previous gen 3-series chassis as the benchmark, only to have the new 3 series move onwards. And that's not even considering the powertrains. Also, none of the Lexus models have the 360 degree/curb cameras, let alone the capacitive radio buttons like in the BMW's, and the Lexus NAV system/interface is a generation behind.
If toyota/lexus has turbocharged engines in the works that can actually compete with the germans, it will be released too late. As much as I like Toyota/Lexus, they have really fallen behind in performance as to what is marketed as "sports cars." The only reason to choose an 2014 IS is for 1 aspect - perceived reliability.
The 2nd Gen 2006 IS350 was much faster than the then BMW 330i in a straightline yet the 330i was widely acknowledged to be the far superior driver's car.
Now that the 2014 3 series and IS have switched places with the IS being the better handling car and suddenly you give the win to the 3 series just because of straightline speed? Handling mysteriously doesn't matter any more?
What are we judging : muscle cars or driver's cars???
We have to be consistent with the goalposts : if handling/chassis responsiveness/steering feel was how BMW trumped its competitors in the past despite being down on power, then applying judging criteria consistently, the current F30 3 series has been trumped by the 2014 IS since it has lost according to the very qualities it used to win with. We can't suddenly move the goalposts just because it is a BMW. Ignoring the IS's superiority over the 3 series in suspension and chassis just smacks of a BMW fan stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that sometimes, a competitor can best BMW at its own game of "Ultimate Driving".
Last edited by natnut; 06-04-13 at 12:03 PM.
06-04-13, 12:30 PM
#44
The 2014 IS350 had better "steering feel", better ride and handling balance, was more fun in the corners than the BMW and you reduce it all to simple straight line acceleration? That's how you judge the BMW as having moved ahead of the IS???
The 2nd Gen 2006 IS350 was much faster than the then BMW 330i in a straightline yet the 330i was widely acknowledged to be the far superior driver's car.
Now that the 2014 3 series and IS have switched places with the IS being the better handling car and suddenly you give the win to the 3 series just because of straightline speed? Handling mysteriously doesn't matter any more?
What are we judging : muscle cars or driver's cars???
We have to be consistent with the goalposts : if handling/chassis responsiveness/steering feel was how BMW trumped its competitors in the past despite being down on power, then applying judging criteria consistently, the current F30 3 series has been trumped by the 2014 IS since it has lost according to the very qualities it used to win with. We can't suddenly move the goalposts just because it is a BMW. Ignoring the IS's superiority over the 3 series in suspension and chassis just smacks of a BMW fan stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that sometimes, a competitor can best BMW at its own game of "Ultimate Driving".
The 2nd Gen 2006 IS350 was much faster than the then BMW 330i in a straightline yet the 330i was widely acknowledged to be the far superior driver's car.
Now that the 2014 3 series and IS have switched places with the IS being the better handling car and suddenly you give the win to the 3 series just because of straightline speed? Handling mysteriously doesn't matter any more?
What are we judging : muscle cars or driver's cars???
We have to be consistent with the goalposts : if handling/chassis responsiveness/steering feel was how BMW trumped its competitors in the past despite being down on power, then applying judging criteria consistently, the current F30 3 series has been trumped by the 2014 IS since it has lost according to the very qualities it used to win with. We can't suddenly move the goalposts just because it is a BMW. Ignoring the IS's superiority over the 3 series in suspension and chassis just smacks of a BMW fan stubbornly refusing to acknowledge that sometimes, a competitor can best BMW at its own game of "Ultimate Driving".
Koz
06-04-13, 01:26 PM
#45
You missed something somewhere.
