Originally Posted by Rhambler (Post 9739279)

2013 LWB, according to Google, wasn't much different listing at: $78,290.

2012 SWB was $67,630 according to Edmunds.

Originally Posted by SW15LS (Post 9739169)

I would agree with that assessment, base MSRP ~ $80k I think its a winner.

Originally Posted by TangoRed (Post 9739300)

This is exactly what I've been saying from the start! The midsections of the E39/E46 and E60/E90 aren't the same. Further, if the E60 hadn't used an aluminum front structure it would've been much heavier, increasing the gap between it and the E90.

Aluminum was used in the 2003-2010 5-series...aka the E60 (and the 2002-2009 E-class for that matter)...and this was before BMW decided chassis stiffness should be of paramount importance, which is why the F10 has a remarkably stiff structure. The weight does not indicate platform sharing, period. There's more to it than that, although it can be a contributing factor (as stated with the F10 an F01).

The IS is less than 200lbs heavier than the C-class and the GLC300 AWD is actually heavier than the NX200t AWD (as per Car and Driver, who weighs cars as-tested) yet the Lexus was dusted in both situations. The IS200t at least had the 8-speed auto.

Originally Posted by Rhambler (Post 9739023)

Let's talk price. I am actually very curious how Lexus prices this car. I went back and googled some information regarding the 2007 release and the price point versus the competitors at that time, while also looking at 2017 model year comparisons.

When the most recent version was released in 2007 it was, on average $8k cheaper than the competition when looking strictly at the LWB MSRP. So in fact, it did bargain price versus what was offered elsewhere. It was a staggering $11.4k less than the SWB versions (Mercedes not included).


For 2017, I again compared everything just to the LWB since that's all the competition has, but since they offer multiple engine choices, I compared both to the current 2017 LS 460 LWB price. For 2017, the V6 versions of the competition is $2.1k more on average than the current LS 460 (excluded the Mercedes). For 2017, the V8 versions of the competition is $15.4k more on average than the current LS 460.

So where does Lexus place this? While the Audi A8 is due for a new model in 2018, the older 2017 3.0 is almost just as fast as the current 4.6, but the 4.0 tt is loads faster than the existing and proposed version of the 3.5 tt. The 3.0 sits currently at $82.5k, or $3.6k more than the current LWB. The 4.0 sits at $91.5k, or $12.6k more than the current LWB.

The BMW typically underestimates its claimed times, but for comparison's sake, the existing 740i i6 is probably faster than the current LS 460, whereas the existing 750i is also probably faster than the proposed 3.5. This car starts at $81.5k and $94.6k respectively.



Does Lexus undercut again? Let's say for simple hypothetical purposes Lexus "thinks" the V6 is equivalent to the V8 versions. And again, for simple hypothetical purposes, lets assume it undercuts by $8k. This would mean that the price might be $86k MSRP assuming it's a straight $8k under the average of the big three's MSRP.

Is it worth an MSRP of $86k?

Frankly, I think that's too much. They would be smart to price it the same as the competition's six-cylinder flavors imo. They could then say, hey, you can get a V6 version of the LS that's slightly cheaper than the the A8 3.0 or 740i, but it performs much better.

This is the MSRP it needs imo, if all it offers is that V6tt: $79k-80k

Edit: and I think it would be a mistake on Lexus' part to price it to the competition's V8 versions regardless of performance.


https://cimg9.ibsrv.net/gimg/www.clu...cf5d051a04.jpg

Originally Posted by TangoRed (Post 9739394)

I'll stop discussing this in the LS thread (happy to continue over PM) but you clearly don't are misunderstanding what it means to be on the same platform. Weight is not the only indicator of platforms, that just wrong on so many levels. You should really read up on platform sharing.

Also I wasn't comparing to the NX platform with the IS, just mentioning that even then the acceleration figures are weak despite its weight (although it does have a 6-speed transmission). The NX has a sophisticated enough AWD system where it's 0-60 times shouldn't be terribly affected by its setup.

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill (Post 9739396)

I can see $85K minimum as the starting price.

Originally Posted by davyjordi (Post 9739400)

i think that's a bit too high for it to be successful.

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill (Post 9739402)

Why? Every high end Lexus has gone up in price with a new intro. The LX took a huge price jump. The new LS won't be any different. Lexus was you to pay more.

Originally Posted by davyjordi (Post 9739407)

because it would come in at a higher price than some of its german competitors and lexus is not in a position to price as such.

Originally Posted by gengar (Post 9738677)

So either Lexus' research suggested that buyers don't care about "needing" 8-cyl in flagships (which I doubt, but whatever) or, as I more likely suspect, Lexus ignored them.

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill (Post 9739410)

Lexus now more than ever is in the positon to charge what the Germans are charging. I was shocked when I saw the LC pricing, but it makes sense. LX makes sense. Its about time Lexus charges when their real competition charges.

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill (Post 9739398)

New LS is off the new GL-A (I think that is what it is called). It will serve all RWD Lexus configurations.

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill (Post 9739410)

Lexus now more than ever is in the positon to charge what the Germans are charging. I was shocked when I saw the LC pricing, but it makes sense. LX makes sense. Its about time Lexus charges when their real competition charges.