When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
Not sure if your speaking from experience or what some one told you regarding your statements about the C63 handling, but I would have to disagree 100 percent on your c63 comment.
I have driven pretty much every single regular production AMG model (SLS included) with the exception of the SUV models. I’m not talking a test drive either My hobby is tracking and rural back road spirited driving. I own a 2014 C63 AMG with performance pack and a 2900lb 2014 Porsche Cayman S. Besides the rare Black series models which are very track focused with lots of additional aero, most of the regular production AMG’s feel quite heavy in the corners particularly the s63 sedan and coupé, the GLE/GLS63 SUV’s and even the E63’s are heavy with muscle car like handling. Yes the C63 can pretend to be a muscle car if you turn off all its stability and traction nannies and stab the throttle like it’s stolen. But the C63 is actually a very communicative vehicle that’s gives its driver a ton of confidence and inspiration to drive it harder than what most people can deem doing in a compact 4 door sedan or coupé.
It’s actually relatively light considering (3900lbs wet) it’s made completely of steel minus the aluminum bonnet. The car is very fast in the a straight line 0-60 in 3.7, but when the roads get twisty, that’s where a Hellcat or SRT8 would have to back off and the fun is just getting started with the very short and small stature C63. You sit really low in the car too. So your not riding on it, you feel closer to the road. I’m not going to give you a thesis, but basically the e90 or F80 M3’s only have a very slight edge on the W204 C63 when it comes to finesse. But the C63 more than makes up for that lost time on the straights where it slips by the competition due to its massive amounts of torque.
The only real“drivers car” besides the C63 that AMG makes is the AMG GT models and the newest MRA based E63-S 4matic. The C63 has good road manners and it will stay on your intended drive line if you want it to do exactly that. Because I have been driving front engine cars much longer than mid and rear engine cars, I personally find the predictability of the handing to be more obvious with the C63 than when compared to rear engine Porsche’s. The Porsche can definitely corner better, but your not exactly sure when the cars limits are being met with the 911 and Cayman. That’s not always a good things when a car doesn’t warn its pilot that’s it going to loose control until the last second. This type of vehicle-road communication can get you into a lot of trouble and end badly. I think it’s the way the C63 is portrayed on TV shows like top gear as the hooligans tire smoking little V8 car with no traction and or grip. And that’s not a accurate portrayal of how the vehicles can be driven.
I have posted one of my favorite videos of the M3 vs last gen c63 in Portugal with a very honest British journalist behind the wheel giving commentary of what makes the C63 one of a kind. P.S. please don’t say I’m bias, I own and have driven countless amount of cars around tracks from the lightest to the heaviest. The C63 is far from “meh” in the handling department.
Sorry for the lack of context. I didn't mean the C63 AMG was meh in handling overall - I mean it was meh in comparison to something like a M3/M4 or 911. This is from my personal experience on track days.
I love the tangential talk in the last couple of posts
Lexus Performance is not on par with pole position holders from bavaria. However does it really matter? Lexus launched the GS with handling in mind, and look at those abysmal sales aka failure of a project. Do you honestly think the coffers would be like lets invest in an all new iteration with new engines and new F performance line with the more power then anything out there just to have troubles moving it....
Nope launch a better ES with AWD and have that office party
When you say 4 major players, do you mean Mercedes Benz, BMW, Audi and Lexus?
Gotcha. But I think oldest is the wrong word. I think its better if you use last to update to lighter platforms. Because you were making it sound like because the Lexus platform is older, it won't compete well anymore. Older doesn't equal outdated or lack of competition though. As Highrev6 pointed out in his earlier post, the "older" New N Platform is still competitive to the vehicles on newer platforms.
What do you mean that Lexus cars are still "competitive" using older platforms?
Lexus isn't just using older platforms - they are also using older technology altogether.
Unfortunately Lexus gambled on hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell technology.
Hybrids do sell well in their domestic market in Japan.
HFCEV isn't making much progress at all.
That R&D money should have been spent on getting small capacity turbos and part aluminium platforms onto the market earlier.
For example, the class leading BMW 3 Series which sold a peak of 142,000+ units/year in both the old 2005-12 E90 and current 2012-19 F30; the IS doesn't come close, and last year the IS sold just 26k+.
BMW have had small capacity turbos since 2006.
It will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a V6 TT!
Ditto platforms.
The 3 Series has been using a "dedicated" compact car lightweight platform for a long time.
Even the C Class has been using the MRA platform with over 48% aluminium content since 2014.
Do you realize it will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a high content aluminium platform???
You know 4GS only sold 7,000+ units last year?
Just imagine what 4GS sales will total after December the 31st this year???
You're not worried, but I'm sure TMC is.
Toyota Motor Corporation needs to get the styling, and the functionality of their products right.
Form and function.
Nitpicking between whether to use the word "old", or whether to use the phrase "last to update" is being plain silly buddy.
On the other hand, things aren't as bad as situman makes out.
Just because the 4GS has low sales, and one rumour, the GS line won't necessarily be axed.
The Mercedes CLS only sold 6,000+ units last year, and both 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe BMW 6 Series combined only sold 3,000+ units last year - I can't see or hear of either models being axed.
Even both the Mercedes AMG GT 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe combined sold only 1,600+ units last year - yet I don't see or hear this model being axed either.
Why should the GS line be axed?
Sure the current model 4GS only peaked at 23,000+ units a year [at a time when E Class increased their record from 59k+ to 69k+], but previous generations of GS's like 2GS & 3GS have peaked over 31,000 and 33,000 units respectively.
What do you mean that Lexus cars are still "competitive" using older platforms?
Lexus isn't just using older platforms - they are also using older technology altogether.
Unfortunately Lexus gambled on hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell technology.
Hybrids do sell well in their domestic market in Japan.
HFCEV isn't making much progress at all.
That R&D money should have been spent on getting small capacity turbos and part aluminium platforms onto the market earlier.
For example, the class leading BMW 3 Series which sold a peak of 142,000+ units/year in both the old 2005-12 E90 and current 2012-19 F30; the IS doesn't come close, and last year the IS sold just 26k+.
BMW have had small capacity turbos since 2006.
It will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a V6 TT!
Ditto platforms.
The 3 Series has been using a "dedicated" compact car lightweight platform for a long time.
Even the C Class has been using the MRA platform with over 48% aluminium content since 2014.
Do you realize it will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a high content aluminium platform???
You know 4GS only sold 7,000+ units last year?
Just imagine what 4GS sales will total after December the 31st this year???
You're not worried, but I'm sure TMC is.
Toyota Motor Corporation needs to get the styling, and the functionality of their products right.
Form and function.
Nitpicking between whether to use the word "old", or whether to use the phrase "last to update" is being plain silly buddy.
On the other hand, things aren't as bad as situman makes out.
Just because the 4GS has low sales, and one rumour, the GS line won't necessarily be axed.
The Mercedes CLS only sold 6,000+ units last year, and both 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe BMW 6 Series combined only sold 3,000+ units last year - I can't see or hear of either models being axed. Even both the Mercedes AMG GT 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe combined sold only 1,600+ units last year - yet I don't see or hear this model being axed either.
Why should the GS line be axed?
Sure the current model 4GS only peaked at 23,000+ units a year [at a time when E Class increased their record from 59k+ to 69k+], but previous generations of GS's like 2GS & 3GS have peaked over 31,000 and 33,000 units respectively.
Did you just compare a midsize salon to a AMG GT sports coupe......what goal posts should we move next
Lexus needs a range of engines, other than hybrids, and be very aggressive with applying them. If a customer wants the 415hp engine from the LS, sure, charge them an extra $10k. Their most powerful non F engine tops out at 380hp when most midrange engines from Germany is higher than that, just doesnt work.
I love the tangential talk in the last couple of posts
Lexus Performance is not on par with pole position holders from bavaria. However does it really matter? Lexus launched the GS with handling in mind, and look at those abysmal sales aka failure of a project. Do you honestly think the coffers would be like lets invest in an all new iteration with new engines and new F performance line with the more power then anything out there just to have troubles moving it....
Nope launch a better ES with AWD and have that office party
Its depends on if Lexus Management is trying to build clout with the high performance car community. Or just wants to continue making billions and being labeled as luxury car company with medicore sporty cars. Like I mentioned in several of my previous post Toyota is spending money in other markets to promote this new Gazoo Racing spin-off for Toyota branded cars. In the States they push F, F Sport and TRD. In this auto industry you have to pay to play. A few years ago, AMG was considered a joke in regards to being a car brand with finesse. They were looked upon as the German muscle car brand. Now you see E63’s flying around VIR as quick as a Camaro ZL1 1LE. They didn’t stop because producing high performance models, they just got better at it. Their handling as improved 10 fold compared to 15 years ago. Besides that, we have to ask our selves why Toyota has been spied upon testing a Toyota Crown on the Nordschleife. OEM’s only go there when their serious about making a car handle very well at ridiculous high speeds. The rumored AWD ES will only increase its sells, in the Northeast, and Midwest snow belts. The same consumers who have been buying the ES will continue to buy the ES in droves. They won’t steal any consumers from the Germans, I can tell you no German or English car company executive is the least bit threaten by the rumor of a AWD ES. If anything the ES will cannibalize sells within its own Lexus lineup by stealing a few folks from the UX, NX.
Its depends on if Lexus Management is trying to build clout with the high performance car community. Or just wants to continue making billions and being labeled as luxury car company with medicore sporty cars. Like I mentioned in several of my previous post Toyota is spending money in other markets to promote this new Gazoo Racing spin-off for Toyota branded cars. In the States they push F, F Sport and TRD. In this auto industry you have to pay to play. A few years ago, AMG was considered a joke in regards to being a car brand with finesse. They were looked upon as the German muscle car brand. Now you see E63’s flying around VIR as quick as a Camaro ZL1 1LE. They didn’t stop because producing high performance models, they just got better at it. Their handling as improved 10 fold compared to 15 years ago. Besides that, we have to ask our selves why Toyota has been spied upon testing a Toyota Crown on the Nordschleife. OEM’s only go there when their serious about making a car handle very well at ridiculous high speeds. The rumored AWD ES will only increase its sells, in the Northeast, and Midwest snow belts. The same consumers who have been buying the ES will continue to buy the ES in droves. They won’t steal any consumers from the Germans, I can tell you no German or English car company executive is the least bit threaten by the rumor of a AWD ES. If anything the ES will cannibalize sells within its own Lexus lineup by stealing a few folks from the UX, NX.
The people in baveria are applauded for what we grill and ridicule lexus for...moving units. Lets talk $$s and sense....Yes Lexus plain is terrible in performance...however they are moving units like no other. BMW is a powerhouse, but then decided they were not capturing enough of the lower end market....entry of the FWD (sacrilegious to their corp culture) based platform in their lower end (these are not athletic). Same thing CLA and GLA.....
At the end of the day, Lexus doesnt have to care their vehicles are not canyon cutters, cause the bills are paid and the future investments are growing....who cares if a couple of keyboard warriors rightfully feel that we dont make canyon carvers...haters gonna hate right, but we still getting paid
The people in baveria are applauded for what we grill and ridicule lexus for...moving units.
I don't think anyone is criticizing Lexus, yet anyway. Besides, moving units is what allows Lexus to finance the wonderfully expensive RWD-based sedans we like.
I do see your point, though. You may remember, not long ago, the new BMW X1 was introduced, with a newly-FWD-based platform. At first the new Mini-derived platform was bemoaned, but before too long, it was a change that was largely ignored (or just "by the way, it's front-drive based now").
Car and Driver is somewhat known for being snobbish about cars that aren't fun to drive, in their opinion, and they gave BMW a pass even for this ostensibly cost-cutting move.
What do you mean that Lexus cars are still "competitive" using older platforms?
Lexus isn't just using older platforms - they are also using older technology altogether.
What older tech, context please?
Originally Posted by peteharvey
Unfortunately Lexus gambled on hybrids and hydrogen fuel cell technology.
Hybrids do sell well in their domestic market in Japan.
HFCEV isn't making much progress at all.
That R&D money should have been spent on getting small capacity turbos and part aluminium platforms onto the market earlier.
BEV’s,Fuel Cell and Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic Monocoque’s are the future for cars in the next 100 years. That’s why Toyota has been collaborating heavily with BMW for nearly 5 years sharing technology secrets regarding the two technologies. BMW knows how to produce affordable carbon monocoques and Toyota knows how to make affordable fuel cells.
Originally Posted by peteharvey
For example, the class leading BMW 3 Series which sold a peak of 142,000+ units/year in both the old 2005-12 E90 and current 2012-19 F30; the IS doesn't come close, and last year the IS sold just 26k+.
BMW have had small capacity turbos since 2006.
It will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a V6 TT!
Toyota’s and Lexus consumers are very demanding, Toyota consumers will call the corporate call center pissed because their 1999 Camry tranny died at 500,000 miles they expect these cars to last until they don’t want the car any more or because the tech is too old or they are simply bored with it. I don’t think the average BMW consumers hold BMW vehicles to the same regard. In fact I know, that’s why I sold my very well taken care of 2007 650i at 69k miles because a BMW mechanic told me BMW 4.4l V8’s are notorious for leaking oil from every crack and cranny at exactly 100k mark & that’s a $6k fix. Turbos last between 70k and 150k miles on average . There is no way around it. This is why Toyota hasn’t went turbo4 crazy with their lineup of cars. Even the new 5LS has a pair of custom Toyota designed and built turbocharger, I’m not sure how long the Toyota turbos will last, but hopefully they have figured out a way for it to go as least 250k miles.
Originally Posted by peteharvey
Ditto platforms.
The 3 Series has been using a "dedicated" compact car lightweight platform for a long time.
Even the C Class has been using the MRA platform with over 48% aluminium content since 2014.
Do you realize it will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a high content aluminium platform???
What is your obsession with aluminum? You don’t always to use aluminum in a monocoque to make the vehicle light. Aluminum has it’s upsides and downsides. Toyota is smart, aluminum is expensive, it’s lessons your profit margins, and you have to completely retool plants to use the aluminum. It’s also quite soft and a company has to really have the expertise and know how to know what they are doing when it comes to building a car to be able to pass NHTSA and IIHS crash test.
By the way that lightweight MRA modern aluminum architecture you praise about so much over at Mercedes only saves a measly 31 lbs when the 3.0l twin turbo C43 AMG 4matic was compared to Lexus old and outdated all steel IS350 AWD F Sport according to Motor Trend. (3846 vs 3831)
The C43 is a C400 w/ AMG pack and a ECU flash guised up to look kinda like a real AMG. If you want a V6 powered C-class, Mercedes is forcing you to go from the 2.0l turbo C300 straight into the 3.0l V6 C43.
And why we are talking about companies that invested in aluminum monocoque platforms early on, let’s shed a little light on why British car manufacturer Jaguars brand new practically all aluminum XE-S AWD 3787lbs was only 59 lbs lighter than the also compact Japanese “old” steel IS 350 AWD 3846. Which car and driver weighed them both using the same method and scale. Better yet, know one here has mention why Audi AG the technology pioneer is starting to abandon the expensive aluminum space frame technology & is abandoning aluminum usage almost completely in it's brand new A4/S4. The upcoming state of the art 2019 A8 has far less aluminum content and way more high strength steel than its predecessor used. Once again the stuff is expensive to develop, it lessens profit margins, and a car can be made just as well and nearly as light without using it. Also let me drop a cherry on top of this comment, the A4’s V6 variant aka S4 which just launched brand new last year is heavier than the IS350 AWD F Sport (3938 vs 3846 measued by C&D)which is supposedly old and outdated according to you. Quote from recent Autozine Publication “multi-material spaceframe chassis that consists of aluminum, magnesium and carbon-fiber reinforced plastics (see illustration below). The majority of the body-and-white, or 58% by weight, is still aluminum in various forms, i.e. stamped, extrusion and casting, but the places subjected to the most severe side impact, i.e. side rails, A and B-pillars, are now made of ultra-high strength steel, which is stronger than aluminum in equivalent size. Meanwhile, the wall separating between passenger cell and boot is made of CFRP, while the front suspension tower brace is made of magnesium. The whole structure is 24 percent stronger torsionally. On the downside, its weight is increased by 51kg, something Audi thought worthwhile as its priority is adding refinement. You can't help feeling disappointed that the new A8 is now 200 kg heavier than BMW 7-Series. Ironically, now the BMW employs even more exotic materials, especially carbon-fiber.”
Grant it, Audi AG certainly has much bigger profit margins with their A8/S8 models since the average variant retails between $100k and $140k. Therefore they can manage to use more aluminum from a corporate profitability perspective with this low volume model vs the high volume and cheaper to manufacturer A4/S4.
Originally Posted by peteharvey
You know 4GS only sold 7,000+ units last year?
Just imagine what 4GS sales will total after December the 31st this year???
You're not worried, but I'm sure TMC is.
Toyota Motor Corporation needs to get the styling, and the functionality of their products right.
Form and function.
Nitpicking between whether to use the word "old", or whether to use the phrase "last to update" is being plain silly buddy.
I need say no more about all OEM’s rushing to the band wagon to use aluminum on their vehicles.
Originally Posted by peteharvey
On the other hand, things aren't as bad as situman makes out.
Just because the 4GS has low sales, and one rumour, the GS line won't necessarily be axed.
The Mercedes CLS only sold 6,000+ units last year, and both 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe BMW 6 Series combined only sold 3,000+ units last year - I can't see or hear of either models being axed.
Even both the Mercedes AMG GT 2 and 4 door Gran Coupe combined sold only 1,600+ units last year - yet I don't see or hear this model being axed either.
If your referring to the AMG GT 4 door coupé that debuted at Geneva, that car doesn’t go on sale to 2019. That 1600+ is a combo of the proper aluminum sports car AMG GT’s, GT-S, GT-C, and GT-R’s.
Originally Posted by peteharvey
Why should the GS line be axed?
Sure the current model 4GS only peaked at 23,000+ units a year [at a time when E Class increased their record from 59k+ to 69k+], but previous generations of GS's like 2GS & 3GS have peaked over 31,000 and 33,000 units respectively.
This is basically the only point I really agreed with you on.
Atmospheric engines.
Heavyweight bodies.
My missus IS200t is heaviest in its class; I can tell when I test drive them.
Originally Posted by highrev6
BEV’s,Fuel Cell and Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic Monocoque’s are the future for cars in the next 100 years. That’s why Toyota has been collaborating heavily with BMW for nearly 5 years sharing technology secrets regarding the two technologies. BMW knows how to produce affordable carbon monocoques and Toyota knows how to make affordable fuel cells.
That's not the present - that's the future.
Sure TMC is presently developing graphene batteries, but that's looking too far into the crystal ball.
Originally Posted by highrev6
Toyota’s and Lexus consumers are very demanding, Toyota consumers will call the corporate call center pissed because their 1999 Camry tranny died at 500,000 miles they expect these cars to last until they don’t want the car any more or because the tech is too old or they are simply bored with it. I don’t think the average BMW consumers hold BMW vehicles to the same regard. In fact I know, that’s why I sold my very well taken care of 2007 650i at 69k miles because a BMW mechanic told me BMW 4.4l V8’s are notorious for leaking oil from every crack and cranny at exactly 100k mark & that’s a $6k fix. Turbos last between 70k and 150k miles on average . There is no way around it. This is why Toyota hasn’t went turbo4 crazy with their lineup of cars. Even the new 5LS has a pair of custom Toyota designed and built turbocharger, I’m not sure how long the Toyota turbos will last, but hopefully they have figured out a way for it to go as least 250k miles.
Come on, that's a very weak excuse for not having small capacity turbos in the 5GS till 2019, and 4IS till 2020.
My wife has the IS200t, but I can tell you, their Series 1 turbo needs a lot of refinement.
Around town, the Atkinson Cycle feels weak/lethargic at small throttle openings and low RPM compared to a Mercedes 2.0 Turbo.
Worse, at small throttle openings and low RPM speed, the Lexus 2.0 T has a drone in its tone, not found in Benz 2.0 T.
Originally Posted by highrev6
What is your obsession with aluminum? You don’t always to use aluminum in a monocoque to make the vehicle light. Aluminum has it’s upsides and downsides. Toyota is smart, aluminum is expensive, it’s lessons your profit margins, and you have to completely retool plants to use the aluminum. It’s also quite soft and a company has to really have the expertise and know how to know what they are doing when it comes to building a car to be able to pass NHTSA and IIHS crash test.
That's why I said that the current 2012-19 3 Series is very light, because it uses its own "dedicated" chassis, rather than "sharing" its chassis with the bigger 5 Series.
Globablly, hi content aluminium chassis is the next step in chassis technology.
Even TNGA GA-L now has a high content aluminium chassis with cast aluminium strut towers etc.
If Lexus is slow, and they can't come out with GA-L into GS and IS till 2019/2020, accept that; please don't make out that hi content aluminium chassis is of little use compared to existing tech, otherwise even TMC would not go to all the trouble of making GA-L and their cast aluminium strut towers etc.
Of course TMC is not happy with 3 Series peaking at 142,000+ units/year when IS is only peaking at 51,000+ units/year.
Of course TMC is not happy with E Class peaking at 69,000+/year & 5 Series at 56,000/year, when 4GS peaks at just 23,000+/year.
TMC is here to increase its sales.
We're here to help TMC increase its sales.
Low sales don't just happen by accident - it is caused by form and function.
Over time, form and function develops a reputation/heritage/prestige/name/branding.
If TMC needs form and function, then they need it.
Let's not pretend otherwise - it only clearly damaging their sales!
IS & GS sold just 26k & 7k respectively last year, and you tell me they're doing just fine?
Originally Posted by highrev6
By the way that lightweight MRA modern aluminum architecture you praise about so much over at Mercedes only saves a measly 31 lbs when the 3.0l twin turbo C43 AMG 4matic was compared to Lexus old and outdated all steel IS350 AWD F Sport according to Motor Trend. (3846 vs 3831)
The C43 is a C400 w/ AMG pack and a ECU flash guised up to look kinda like a real AMG. If you won’t a V6 powered C-class, Mercedes is forcing you to go from the 2.0l turbo C300 straight into the 3.0l V6 C43.
And why we are talking about companies that invested in aluminum monocoque platforms early on, let’s shed a little light on why British car manufacturer Jaguars brand new practically all aluminum XE-S AWD 3787lbs was only 59 lbs lighter than the also compact Japanese “old” steel IS 350 AWD 3846. Which car and driver weighed them both using the same method and scale. Better yet, know one here has mention why Audi AG the technology pioneer is starting to abandon the expensive aluminum space frame technology & is abandoning aluminum usage almost completely in it's brand new A4/S4. The upcoming state of the art 2019 A8 has far less aluminum content and way more high strength steel than its predecessor used. Once again the stuff is expensive to develop, it lessens profit margins, and a car can be made just as well and nearly as light without using it. Also let me drop a cherry on top of this comment, the A4’s V6 variant aka S4 which just launched brand new last year is heavier than the IS350 AWD F Sport (3938 vs 3846 measued by C&D)which is supposedly old and outdated according to you. Quote from recent Autozine Publication “multi-material spaceframe chassis that consists of aluminum, magnesium and carbon-fiber reinforced plastics (see illustration below). The majority of the body-and-white, or 58% by weight, is still aluminum in various forms, i.e. stamped, extrusion and casting, but the places subjected to the most severe side impact, i.e. side rails, A and B-pillars, are now made of ultra-high strength steel, which is stronger than aluminum in equivalent size. Meanwhile, the wall separating between passenger cell and boot is made of CFRP, while the front suspension tower brace is made of magnesium. The whole structure is 24 percent stronger torsionally. On the downside, its weight is increased by 51kg, something Audi thought worthwhile as its priority is adding refinement. You can't help feeling disappointed that the new A8 is now 200 kg heavier than BMW 7-Series. Ironically, now the BMW employs even more exotic materials, especially carbon-fiber.”
Grant it, Audi AG certainly has much bigger profit margins with their A8/S8 models since the average variant retails between $100k and $140k. Therefore they can manage to use more aluminum from a corporate profitability perspective with this low volume model vs the high volume and cheaper to manufacturer A4/S4.
I need say no more about all OEM’s rushing to the band wagon to use aluminum on their vehicles.
As I have said before, you can't compare those for a number of reasons.
Journalists pick off the specified weights, but the Germans measure weight to a different standard; they normally measure weight with half a fuel tank and a 70 kg driver!
Don't believe everything you read, when journalists write that the A8 is now 200 kg [441 lbs] heavier than a 7 Series.
It's a complex comparison, because the 7 Series uses more exotic materials.
7 Series is available in a little as 4 cylinders and RWD, while A8 is AWD.
You have to be careful with comparing IS350 F Sport AWD to S4 and C43 AMG.
Traditional turbo motors suffered from reliability issues.
Modern day turbo motors are reinforced and very heavy, such my missus' IS200t weighs nearly as much as the IS350 if I remember correctly.
IS350 F Sport AWD doesn't have top quality brakes and other trim etc to take on S4.
Furthermore, the 3.0 TT will be much heavier than Lexus ageing atmos 3.5, but then the Audi & C43 AMG will blow the IS350 AWD away.
You are better off comparing base model in 2WD C/3/A4/IS with base 2.0 T engines...
Originally Posted by highrev6
If your referring to the AMG GT 4 door coupé that debuted at Geneva, that car doesn’t go on sale to 2019. That 1600+ is a combo of the proper aluminum sports car AMG GT’s, GT-S, GT-C, and GT-R’s.
This is basically the only point I really agreed with you on.
Yes, I agree with you here, but that's another issue with Lexus lately.
Lately, the Germans offer sporty 4 Door Gran Coupe body styles, not just in sedans, but in SUV's too...
.
What do you mean that Lexus cars are still "competitive" using older platforms?
Lexus isn't just using older platforms - they are also using older technology altogether.
For example, the class leading BMW 3 Series which sold a peak of 142,000+ units/year in both the old 2005-12 E90 and current 2012-19 F30; the IS doesn't come close, and last year the IS sold just 26k+.
BMW have had small capacity turbos since 2006.
It will be at least 2020 before the IS gets a V6 TT!
What is this "older" technology you speak of? What "tech" BMW has that Lexus don't got?
I love how you used peak sales numbers to describe the BMW 3 Series sales but used only last years (most recent) sales numbers to describe the Lexus sales. You are manipulating numbers to make the BMW 3 Series look better and make the Lexus look worst. Bias much?
Secondly - Its incorrect to use the BMW 3 Series sales numbers to go against the Lexus IS sales numbers as a validation that the 3 Series is better car or is a newer car. Why do I say that? Following is my reasoning:
Let me start off by saying the 2014 BMW 3 Series, which is 3 years old already, sold 3 times more cars than the 2014 Lexus IS, which is brand new at the time. The 2014 Lexus IS, at that time, was an all new design, had more features standard, more tech (if optioned), cheaper and a better value. But yet - strangely - the 2014 BMW 3 Series sold three times more. Based on my business and marketing experience: the reason the 2014 BMW 3 Series sold more was not because it was a better car or a newer car (which it wasn't anyways in 2014) - it sold better people thought it was a better brand. There were people buying standard base BMW 3 Series with no options or minimally packaged BMW 3 Series instead of buying the Lexus IS which had more equipment standard and its newer. Bottom line: The BMW sales numbers are skewed up because majority of the time an average consumer would literally buy a non-optioned BMW with less features than standard-base Lexus IS that's newer with more features. I can guarantee if introduced the 3 Series and IS to people that don't know what BMW or Lexus is - they will say the 2014 Lexus IS a better buy than the 2014 BMW 3 Series. -That would be based on the fact that, at the time, the 2014 Lexus IS was newer, had more standard features, more options (if packaged), cheaper, better value and more reliable.
Originally Posted by highrev6
What older tech, context please?
BEV’s,Fuel Cell and Carbon Fiber Reinforced Plastic Monocoque’s are the future for cars in the next 100 years. That’s why Toyota has been collaborating heavily with BMW for nearly 5 years sharing technology secrets regarding the two technologies. BMW knows how to produce affordable carbon monocoques and Toyota knows how to make affordable fuel cells.
Toyota’s and Lexus consumers are very demanding, Toyota consumers will call the corporate call center pissed because their 1999 Camry tranny died at 500,000 miles they expect these cars to last until they don’t want the car any more or because the tech is too old or they are simply bored with it. I don’t think the average BMW consumers hold BMW vehicles to the same regard. In fact I know, that’s why I sold my very well taken care of 2007 650i at 69k miles because a BMW mechanic told me BMW 4.4l V8’s are notorious for leaking oil from every crack and cranny at exactly 100k mark & that’s a $6k fix. Turbos last between 70k and 150k miles on average . There is no way around it. This is why Toyota hasn’t went turbo4 crazy with their lineup of cars. Even the new 5LS has a pair of custom Toyota designed and built turbocharger, I’m not sure how long the Toyota turbos will last, but hopefully they have figured out a way for it to go as least 250k miles.
What is your obsession with aluminum? You don’t always to use aluminum in a monocoque to make the vehicle light. Aluminum has it’s upsides and downsides. Toyota is smart, aluminum is expensive, it’s lessons your profit margins, and you have to completely retool plants to use the aluminum. It’s also quite soft and a company has to really have the expertise and know how to know what they are doing when it comes to building a car to be able to pass NHTSA and IIHS crash test.
By the way that lightweight MRA modern aluminum architecture you praise about so much over at Mercedes only saves a measly 31 lbs when the 3.0l twin turbo C43 AMG 4matic was compared to Lexus old and outdated all steel IS350 AWD F Sport according to Motor Trend. (3846 vs 3831)
The C43 is a C400 w/ AMG pack and a ECU flash guised up to look kinda like a real AMG. If you want a V6 powered C-class, Mercedes is forcing you to go from the 2.0l turbo C300 straight into the 3.0l V6 C43.
And why we are talking about companies that invested in aluminum monocoque platforms early on, let’s shed a little light on why British car manufacturer Jaguars brand new practically all aluminum XE-S AWD 3787lbs was only 59 lbs lighter than the also compact Japanese “old” steel IS 350 AWD 3846. Which car and driver weighed them both using the same method and scale. Better yet, know one here has mention why Audi AG the technology pioneer is starting to abandon the expensive aluminum space frame technology & is abandoning aluminum usage almost completely in it's brand new A4/S4. The upcoming state of the art 2019 A8 has far less aluminum content and way more high strength steel than its predecessor used. Once again the stuff is expensive to develop, it lessens profit margins, and a car can be made just as well and nearly as light without using it. Also let me drop a cherry on top of this comment, the A4’s V6 variant aka S4 which just launched brand new last year is heavier than the IS350 AWD F Sport (3938 vs 3846 measued by C&D)which is supposedly old and outdated according to you. Quote from recent Autozine Publication “multi-material spaceframe chassis that consists of aluminum, magnesium and carbon-fiber reinforced plastics (see illustration below). The majority of the body-and-white, or 58% by weight, is still aluminum in various forms, i.e. stamped, extrusion and casting, but the places subjected to the most severe side impact, i.e. side rails, A and B-pillars, are now made of ultra-high strength steel, which is stronger than aluminum in equivalent size. Meanwhile, the wall separating between passenger cell and boot is made of CFRP, while the front suspension tower brace is made of magnesium. The whole structure is 24 percent stronger torsionally. On the downside, its weight is increased by 51kg, something Audi thought worthwhile as its priority is adding refinement. You can't help feeling disappointed that the new A8 is now 200 kg heavier than BMW 7-Series. Ironically, now the BMW employs even more exotic materials, especially carbon-fiber.”
Grant it, Audi AG certainly has much bigger profit margins with their A8/S8 models since the average variant retails between $100k and $140k. Therefore they can manage to use more aluminum from a corporate profitability perspective with this low volume model vs the high volume and cheaper to manufacturer A4/S4.
I need say no more about all OEM’s rushing to the band wagon to use aluminum on their vehicles.
If your referring to the AMG GT 4 door coupé that debuted at Geneva, that car doesn’t go on sale to 2019. That 1600+ is a combo of the proper aluminum sports car AMG GT’s, GT-S, GT-C, and GT-R’s.
This is basically the only point I really agreed with you on.
Atmospheric engines.
Heavyweight bodies.
My missus IS200t is heaviest in its class; I can tell when I test drive them.
Atmospheric engines? As in slow or under-powered?
Last I checked the Lexus IS200T (300 Turbo) is faster than its competition. Lexus IS300 Turbo is faster than the 320i, Q50 2.0T, A4 FWD 2.0T, and the Acura TLX Inline 4.
Heaviest in its class? Nope.
Infiniti Q50 2.0T: 3671 lbs
Lexus IS300: 3583 lbs
Acura TLX I4: 3508 lbs
Audi A4 FWD 2.0T: 3450 lbs
BMW 320i: 3370 lbs
Acura TLX V6: 3812 lbs
Infiniti Q50 3.0T: 3774 lbs
Lexus IS350: 3594 lbs
Audi A4 Quattro 2.0T: 3582 lbs - (Keeping in mind that the Audi A4 runs on the MLBevo platform, which is the newer and lighter platform. But yet - it only saves 12 lbs compared to the Lexus IS platform that you claim is so outdated.) This is what I meant earlier - newer platform doesn't mean its better nor it means something older is "outdated" and "weak".
BMW 330i: 3501 lbs
Mercedes Benz C300: 3417 lbs
Neither the Lexus IS300 Turbo or Lexus IS350 is the "heaviest" in its class relative to the competition. That title goes to the Infiniti Q50. If anything, the Lexus IS floats around the middle of the competition in weight.
What is this "older" technology you speak of? What "tech" BMW has that Lexus don't got? I love how you used peak sales numbers to describe the BMW 3 Series sales but used only last years (most recent) sales numbers to describe the Lexus sales. You are manipulating numbers to make the BMW 3 Series look better and make the Lexus look worst. Bias much?
Originally Posted by peteharvey
Of course TMC is not happy with 3 Series peaking at 142,000+ units/year when IS is only peaking at 51,000+ units/year.
Of course TMC is not happy with E Class peaking at 69,000+/year & 5 Series at 56,000/year, when 4GS peaks at just 23,000+/year.h half a fuel tank and a 70 kg driver!
You did not read correctly, and left out what I had typed.
Does that answer your query?
It is peak sales/year vs peak sales/year.
Look, obviously the IS isn't doing that great, and we all want it to do well.
However, we have to be prepared to put in the "form and function".
Originally Posted by BippuLexus
Secondly - Its incorrect to use the BMW 3 Series sales numbers to go against the Lexus IS sales numbers as a validation that the 3 Series is better car or is a newer car. Why do I say that? Following is my reasoning:
Let me start off by saying the 2014 BMW 3 Series, which is 3 years old already, sold 3 times more cars than the 2014 Lexus IS, which is brand new at the time. The 2014 Lexus IS, at that time, was an all new design, had more features standard, more tech (if optioned), cheaper and a better value. But yet - strangely - the 2014 BMW 3 Series sold three times more. Based on my business and marketing experience: the reason the 2014 BMW 3 Series sold more was not because it was a better car or a newer car (which it wasn't anyways in 2014) - it sold better people thought it was a better brand. There were people buying standard base BMW 3 Series with no options or minimally packaged BMW 3 Series instead of buying the Lexus IS which had more equipment standard and its newer. Bottom line: The BMW sales numbers are skewed up because majority of the time an average consumer would literally buy a non-optioned BMW with less features than standard-base Lexus IS that's newer with more features. I can guarantee if introduced the 3 Series and IS to people that don't know what BMW or Lexus is - they will say the 2014 Lexus IS a better buy than the 2014 BMW 3 Series. -That would be based on the fact that, at the time, the 2014 Lexus IS was newer, had more standard features, more options (if packaged), cheaper, better value and more reliable.
Since when did I ever say sales equates to a better car, or that a newer car is a better car?
You are now bringing up a different topic.
Better?
It's complex because a car is made up from many facets, and often each model has it's pros and cons.
What is good for Jack isn't necessarily good for Jill.
It depends on individual tastes wants and needs.
It's horses for courses and each to their own.
Technology?
Technology gives an advantage.
Technology is NOT the same as the final outcome.
Yes, Lexus has the technology.
Lexus has small capacity turbos, and Lexus has hi aluminium content chassis - however, it would be an advantage to come sooner rather than 2019 and 2020.
True, it has a better brand.
However brands do NOT fall out of the sky for NO apparent reason.
Brands are created.
Why do people think it is a better brand?
Because of its reputation for form and function!!!
Why does 3 Series have such a good reputation for form and function.
Because BMW has engineered the form and function of the 3 Series consistently well over the decades.
With styling that is not too sporty.
A chassis that is not too heavy.
With enormous straight line performance from a small capacity turbo etc.
Great ride and handling compromize.
Pity the reliability.
The car - the product - the form and function creates the brand - technology helps to achieve the function to create the reputation for brand name - hence the sales...
.
You did not read correctly, and left out what I had typed.
Does that answer your query?
It is peak sales/year vs peak sales/year.
Look, obviously the IS isn't doing that great, and we all want it to do well.
However, we have to be prepared to put in the "form and function".
Since when did I ever say sales equates to a better car, or that a newer car is a better car?
You are now bringing up a different topic.
Better?
It's complex because a car is made up from many facets, and often each model has it's pros and cons.
What is good for Jack isn't necessarily good for Jill.
It depends on individual tastes wants and needs.
It's horses for courses and each to their own.
Technology?
Technology gives an advantage.
Technology is NOT the same as the final outcome.
Yes, Lexus has the technology.
Lexus has small capacity turbos, and Lexus has hi aluminium content chassis - however, it would be an advantage to come sooner rather than 2019 and 2020.
Why do people think it is a better brand?
Because of its reputation for form and function.
Why does 3 Series have such a good reputation for form and function.
Because BMW has engineered the form and function of the 3 Series consistently well over the decades.
With styling that is not too sporty.
A chassis that is not too heavy.
With enormous straight line performance.
Great ride and handling compromize.
Pity the reliability...
.
You do realize that quote that used to your correct yourself didn't come from the post I quoted, right? I was specifically stating your bias-ness regarding your first post, not your second correctional post.
What? The Lexus IS isn't doing well? You gotta be joking. Its doing exactly what its suppose to be doing. The 2014 Lexus IS sold as much as the 2006 Lexus IS with the same engine. That's doing pretty damn well, in my opinion.
Can it do better or should do better? Yes. But to completely dismiss the Lexus IS because its not making 140K+ sales per year is ludicrous.
You didn't say - you implied.
Yeah. To each their own. That's why so many people rather buy a option-less 3 Series over a Lexus IS. That's fine. Its their money, their car. That wasn't my point though. My point is the BMW brand itself is carrying them in base-standard 3 Series sales that allows them up jack up the numbers. Have you see lease offer deals on a 3 Series? Its dirt cheap. Being how superficial Americans are with our image, majority of our population will jump at the gun for a cheap BMW - just to say we drive a BMW. Same thing how Ferrari owners and rich people dismissed the GT-R when it first came out in 2008. Now people respect it, ironic.
We are talking about the average consumer base here. I have an MBA in marketing and I do this crap every weekday for over 8 hours. Let me tell you something - the average consumer is not going to know that the 3 Series has been around for decades, they aren't going to know about the 3 Series light weight chassis or near 50/50 weight distribution, and etc... What they do know is what the paper tells them and what the media tells them. People think BMW is a better brand because of the perception its a better brand. I know so many people that has told me they rather drive a base-standard 3 Series over a Toyota Corolla but a loaded Corolla has more features than a standard 3 Series. Hell - even the Corolla has standard LED lights, where is it for the 3 Series? Then you have the consumers with wealth - the ones that would rather pay the extra 5-8K to have the BMW 3 Series loaded versus the Lexus IS loaded because its a BMW. Price - brand correlation is a real thing. And this is how BMW makes money. (Not to say they don't make good cars - the 335i/340i/M3/M4/M5/M235i/etc... are great cars. Just that in this example. The Lexus IS is better than the 320i/328i/330i.)
Marketing creates the brand. You can create something god-damn-awful but if you have a great marketer, you can sell it and people will buy it. Apple's marketing team is insanely good - they repackage outdated tech that Android had years ago as new tech, markets it and then claims its revolutionary. Results? Sells millions.
Atmospheric engines? As in slow or under-powered?
Last I checked the Lexus IS200T (300 Turbo) is faster than its competition. Lexus IS300 Turbo is faster than the 320i, Q50 2.0T, A4 FWD 2.0T, and the Acura TLX Inline 4.
Heaviest in its class? Nope.
Infiniti Q50 2.0T: 3671 lbs
Lexus IS300: 3583 lbs
Acura TLX I4: 3508 lbs
Audi A4 FWD 2.0T: 3450 lbs
BMW 320i: 3370 lbs
Acura TLX V6: 3812 lbs
Infiniti Q50 3.0T: 3774 lbs
Lexus IS350: 3594 lbs
Audi A4 Quattro 2.0T: 3582 lbs - (Keeping in mind that the Audi A4 runs on the MLBevo platform, which is the newer and lighter platform. But yet - it only saves 12 lbs compared to the Lexus IS platform that you claim is so outdated.) This is what I meant earlier - newer platform doesn't mean its better nor it means something older is "outdated" and "weak".
BMW 330i: 3501 lbs
Mercedes Benz C300: 3417 lbs
Neither the Lexus IS300 Turbo or Lexus IS350 is the "heaviest" in its class relative to the competition. That title goes to the Infiniti Q50. If anything, the Lexus IS floats around the middle of the competition in weight.
IS300t must also compete with proper C300 & 330i 2.0T.
That's what I mean by less performance, and less economy.
Plus, the "behavior" of the IS200t's at small throttle opening low RPM - it is very weak and lethargic compared to the Germans.
Also the IS200t's NVH at small throttle openings and low RPM - it has a drone where the Germans, esp the Benz 2.0T is much smoother.
Lexus' current 2.0T is one generation behind the Germans unfortunately, because Lexus came late to the party.
I know because we have one.
I'd also advise you to leave the TL/TLX out of such comparisons, because the TLX is the equivalent of the Lexus ES, ie Avalon, Camry and Accord etc.
04-04-18, 10:44 AM
