Sharing platforms.
Do you think platform sharing cheapens a car or line of cars. What if the LS shared a stretched platform with say avalon or camry, do you think it would still be prestigest. Opinions anyone?
2. Poor unrealistic example given (a rwd LS based on fwd Avalon/Camry). Of course that would make for a crappy LS, that's why it's not being done.
Trending Topics
For prestige reasons, it helps IMO that the LS is on its own platform, not say Avalon on stretched Camry platform. For the smaller models, say IS on GS platform, that seems fine, especially as both models are targeting a similar focus of sporty luxury. Say the 7 were said to be on a stretched 5 platform would seem a bit less prestigious, but it seems that the 5 may be on a shrunken 7 platform...(in the end it gets to parsing words).
Doesn't really bother me if they shared platforms as long as they do it right.
Nobody seems to care of complain that the LX and LC share platforms nor does anyone ever mention the link between the FJ, 4runner and GX460
Nobody seems to care of complain that the LX and LC share platforms nor does anyone ever mention the link between the FJ, 4runner and GX460
Who cares if it gets the job done. Too many people are willing to buy the piece of crap because of its prestige and name brand vs something else that doesn't have the name brand recognition. Too me that is stupid. If the over all final product is good, it is good. If it works, it works. If today's LS460 was all the car it is today, but built off a stretched Camry platform I'd still buy it because of how the car performs. If people aren't willing to buy that same car just because.....they are stupid. But, like I always said, it's not my money so people can choose to buy or not buy whatever they want. It's all just my opinion.
My opinion is Lexus as a first-rate premium manufacturer would not make a LS out of a common Camry FWD stretched chassis, the discussion is pretty much pointless.
But I agree platform sharing is not a problem, every car must stand on its own merits.
But I agree platform sharing is not a problem, every car must stand on its own merits.
I agree that the platform itself is not as important as the individual vehicle's merits. And, one has to consider that it it were not for platform-sharing, many new vehicles would (likely) cost substantially more than they do now, simply for the automakers to recoup the extra expense in research and development.
But that still doesn't excuse the (often) needlessly cheap, cost-cutting short cuts that I often see in new vehicles, including, unfortunately, one of my favorite manufacturers...Subaru, as well as others. A perfect example.....one I saw just the other day when I reviewed the 2011 Honda Pilot, was the manual hood prop-rod and no underhood insulation in a potentially 40K+ vehicle.
But that still doesn't excuse the (often) needlessly cheap, cost-cutting short cuts that I often see in new vehicles, including, unfortunately, one of my favorite manufacturers...Subaru, as well as others. A perfect example.....one I saw just the other day when I reviewed the 2011 Honda Pilot, was the manual hood prop-rod and no underhood insulation in a potentially 40K+ vehicle.
Last edited by mmarshall; Apr 12, 2010 at 09:26 AM.
Platform sharing seems common nowadays especially with GM? Escalade-Yukon-and Tahoe are the same platform and the escalade esv-yukon xl-suburban share platforms. its more annoying with GM vehicles because they look so much alike.







