No offense, but if you're only looking at sales figures and saying that the LS has not made a name for itself because of sales figures you're missing the entire point. Much of what you have seen come out of Mercedes, BMW, Audi, etc over the past 20 years is directly because of the LS. When the LS came out it was such an incredibly well built car and offered so much for the money it literally redefined the industry.

 

just a note- the LS hasn't outsold the S-class annually for a while now.

 

That the LS redefined the industry is true.
However, I'm talking about something different.
I was referring more to Rominl's Post #464 on Page 31:
I'm talking more about the name, the loyalty, and the brand following - where a model can get away with blue murder, with poor styling like the 1995-2002 E Class, and terrible four cylinder Kompressor engines, and terrible lethargic and harsh 90 degree V6's built from cost cutting V8 blocks, yet still sell well as all previous generations of E Classes have.

I believe that certain Lexus models already have a loyalty/following.
I believe that some Lexus models have greater loyalty/following than other models.

LS has made a name for itself, so much so that the 2000-07 3LS model wasn't the sharpest looking, but still lead the market!
When a model can get away with blue murder, and still sell well, that's when you know there is a loyalty following.

I was referring to how well the RX does relative to its competition.

Towards the end of their model cycle, both S Class and LS have diminutive sales.
Thus, towards the end of their model cycle, the loyalty for both S Class and LS has diminished/gone.
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

However, at the end of the RX's model cycle, RX still seems to lead the competition.
What kind of loyalty/following is this?
Here is RX against its closest rival, the M/GLE Class:
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html
http://www.goodcarbadcar.net/2011/01...s-figures.html

Like I say, I don't know for how long RX can keep up this loyalty/following towards the end of its model cycle.
The RX's success sometimes reminds me of how Canon outsells its entire competition added together!
And despite Canon outselling the entire competition added together, in the photographic industry, it is still well understood that Canon and Nikon are equal, but in different ways...
.

 

The first two LS's had 5 year model cycles.
The next LS had 7 years, which is the norm for most of these vehicles.

LS last led the class in 2007 with 35,000 units.

Lexus has big plans for the next generation of models, hence the 11 year model cycle for 4.5LS.

 

ok folks, let's keep this thread about the e-class and less about es, rx, ls, gs, s-class, etc.

 

The side tracking was just to explain how the E Class has a loyalty/following.
Such that previous generations of E Class had controversial styling, and mediocre engines, yet previous generations of E Class have still been sales leaders in their class.
One could put a mediocre 2 liter turbo with only 240 hp [150 kW] into an E Class, but it would still sell like hot cakes.

But because car design is such a compromise, the in-class rivals are essentially all equally good, but in different ways.

And that a fresh 2016 may lead in technology now, but a 2019 model will lead in technology later...

 

I think what you have to understand is that the "poor styling" is your opinion. I personally do not believe the 95-02 E Class had "poor styling", and I think the styling has aged very well. At the time it was actually pretty avant garde. The E Class sells well because its an appealing vehicle for its market segment, whether it appeals to you personally or not. Clearly it appeals to many people because it sells well.

 

Yes, styling is very subjective, but even in objective parameters like engines, and the E Class has had some very mediocre engines in the past, yet the E Class has still managed to sell very well thanks to the lack of specialised knowledge from the mass of average luxury car buyers, who end up buying the car by name, loyalty and following - rather than choosing based on the actual quality of the car itself.

For example, I don't know much about sewing machines, nor microscopes, so if I had to buy one of each, and I wasn't interested in doing much research, I'd just dive for something like "Singer" and "Olympus", because they are the leading brands in those respective industries.

 

For most people, certainly luxury buyers buying a car is a little more important to them than a sewing machine, brand plays a huge role but more from a perspective of prestige.

 

Yes, I guess you could say ordinary luxury car buyers are more likely to purchase based on the badge, or for the badge [prestige] etc.
While an enthusiast is more likely to purchase based on genuine quality.

There's a saying that "someone could sell ice to the Eskimos".
This is sort of what Rominl was on about - that the E Class & 5 Series have such a brand loyalty following, that they could sell ice to the Eskimos.
Of course an Eskimo doesn't need to waste money paying for ice, because there is free ice all around the Eskimo.

Seriously, Benz could fit the old 2.0L four cylinder Kompressor engine into the E Class, and it would still sell like hot cakes!
However, if Benz keeps that up for long enough, Benz will lose their brand loyalty following, and the E Class will permanently lose sales.
The E Class has been so successful over the decades because Benz has managed to provide a very good alround package, such that the odd slip up in driveline quality here and there, won't affect its class leading sales...

 

How is it a slip up when its competitors offer a 2.0T as their base engine as well? The 4 cylinder helps them drive quantity, meet collective emissions, and keep up with the Joneses (A6, CTS, GS, 5-Series). The only one bucking the trend is the currently the Jaguar XF with a base supercharged V6. Anyone concerened with power and prestige will walk right past the E300's to the E400's (eventually when they land) or an AMG. Even if they did lose a few E-Class sales, they have a decent sedan portfolio for guests to consider with the CLA, C, CLS, and S as well.

 

The current 2.0L Turbos are good, but I was referring to the old 2.0L Kompressors which were both underpowered and harsh.

 

Gotcha. Yeah I reread your post and caught the key words 'here and there' meaning the history of the E-Class rather than current

 

The problem with esoteric discussions about the e-class in all its variations is that you are somehow trying to use market metrics and consumer behavior to say you should be cross-shopping one model of vehicle against the other and somehow people can be shoe-horned into mass-market car buying numbers because they must be skimping on dollars and that may determine their choices. E-class buyers generally are not necessarily worried about money.

The e-class has been around seemingly forever. You can say what you want about styling and drive trains. But here's the thing with it. It defies anything that anyone says for some very specific reasons.

Styling is bad or good? Sure, but it's still a car that sells because of other things beside its three-pointed star.

If Lexus has an ES or RX with a choice of engines with 4 cylinders, 6 cylinders, and a V8 with awd or rwd options - I'd like to see it. The E-class and GLE offer all of that. Coupes? Convertibles? ES and RX? No. It's obviously a question of a mass market platform that's popular vs spending a lot of dollars for choice and flexibility.

 

I think the E-class(and Lexus ES, GS and LS sedans) sells to a lot of people who would've bought a Cadillac back in the 90's/early 00's. Cadillac has really gone out of vogue, but the E class offers a lot the the same characteristics of that 90's Cadillac in terms of comfort, easy to drive, smooth ride, inoffensive but unique styling(ie you know its a Benz), and technology/features. Yes the E class is more traditional Cadillac than what Cadillac is selling right now IMO.