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.
Agreed, it has the same interior space as a new Mazda 6, or a 1998 Nissan Maxima, or about 9 cu. ft. less than a 2006 LS. It's tight. And that's fine if it were say a GS or had its pricetag. totally old-fashioned but I like having a full sized spare even though it will never get used. What got me on runflats is you have an issue, buy a new one, not serviceable (because the shop can never know if you drove on it flat or not). Who can afford that? I broke the rules and plugged mine until switching over to non RFT (on the 335i).
full sized spare I put on yesterday still has markings from the factory (I know it's > 6 y.o. more like 13). It's a relic
.
I look at it deeper with the spare. Suppose you take a cross country trip in the United States. It’s 5 pm Saturday night and on your trip your tire alerts you that it is in run flat mode. Seeing that you can only go a limited number of miles, where do you go to get your 20” rim on Sunday morning to continue on your way? Turns into a giant hassle to find a place to get a new tire, then that is hoping it’s in stock. No such issue with a full size spare
I look at it deeper with the spare. Suppose you take a cross country trip in the United States. It’s 5 pm Saturday night and on your trip your tire alerts you that it is in run flat mode. Seeing that you can only go a limited number of miles, where do you go to get your 20” rim on Sunday morning to continue on your way? Turns into a giant hassle to find a place to get a new tire, then that is hoping it’s in stock. No such issue with a full size spare
Agreed 100%. It’s something I think about with the Pacifica which has no spare and no runflats
And my point still stands, about going offtopic, now over tires. I'm not really interested in discussing spare or runflat tires, in what's supposed to be a thread about the slumping LS sales.
The last thread failed to point out, the fact that there is possibly misguided internal focus at Lexus on solely 2-door models and bread & butter vehicles. Basically the RC, LC, ES, and RX. The SUVs and
Everything else doesn't matter or gets delayed or reduced attention. Someone at Lexus isn't fond of their RWD product and are phoning it in, outside of "sports" offerings.
The (questionable) investment in the XF50 5th generation LS, gave away it received reduced priority as early as 2012. I agree with many people, that the design doesn't help at all.
People were overpromised with the LF-FC of 2015, not even knowing it was indeed a very deliberate bait & switch, in being based on an alternative design proposal.
The final result went too Porsche Panamera and Tesla Model S, yet they showed something more Maserati like, which they knew had been scrapped long ago.
It is just my opinion, but the car lost its elegance with that C/D pillar and looks compromised.
I can understand and relate with many of the people making criticisms about the design and lack of 8 cylinder engine.
As they are valid complaints. The RX never changed its formula nor has the base ES since about 2001 (mid-large FWD premium V6 car).
The idea to offer a TTV6 was always there, but the decision to cancel the V8 2UR option during development in 2015 was the dumbest thing they could have done and then assign its "LS 500" nameplate to that new V6.
You wonder why IS200 became IS 300 RWD? It was because of the incoming LS 500.
As someone already said, they are going to have figure out how to make this car lease better.
How much money did they really invest? The $97K is a whopping $33K over the base RC F. Then you the base RC. Just huge profits. I do notice the new RC F has Apple Car play.
investing in an essentially a product that even the RC-F core demographic have begun complaining about is what I call a terrible call. My point is Lexus doesnt mind selling or investing in a product that isnt selling well, so why would they cancel their flagship.
Making it a crossover, they probs can and already have in the pipeline new names for this stuff.
investing in an essentially a product that even the RC-F core demographic have begun complaining about is what I call a terrible call. My point is Lexus doesnt mind selling or investing in a product that isnt selling well, so why would they cancel their flagship.
Making it a crossover, they probs can and already have in the pipeline new names for this stuff.
I see what you are saying now. But is Toyota really investing in the RC F? Not really. Maybe low volume will be fine, for the LS, but the case for a next gen LS in sedan form is hard to fathom after sales disaster which appears to be the case of the current LS.
I see what you are saying now. But is Toyota really investing in the RC F? Not really. Maybe low volume will be fine, for the LS, but the case for a next gen LS in sedan form is hard to fathom after sales disaster which appears to be the case of the current LS.
Wheres the Trunk Money coming from to move the vehicle? R&D costs for that CF on the RCF etc?
I said this before. I could see Lexus cancelling the LS. Its a nice car, but its a mistake. Even if Lexus did it differently, it would flop too IMO. I think if they did a hatch LS it would of been a success, or transfer the LS into a cross over type model.
That would not be a good move for Lexus or the LS at all. They should not turn the LS into some hatch or another me too dumpy SUV, look at LX sales, they are lower then the LS, it was never a very big seller, still isn't.
If the LS500 was a improvement everywhere and had the same formula of the LS460 it would be selling much better, but it isn't, they changed way too much and it simply has not worked, it did really nothing to gain new buyers and LS460 buyers are holding on to their cars or going with something else.
As soon as I saw the LS500 in pics and in person I knew it was going to be a problem, it just did nothing for me, had no desire to get it now or in the future, same with the new A8, some reviewers tend to like it but I find it way too cold and a big disappointment interior wise, I knew it would not sell well too.
Dropping the V8 in the LS was a huge mistake, nobody was asking for a 6 cylinder to be the only engine in this class of car whether it is a quick or quicker then the last 8 cylinder or not. The styling just does not work, it does not look luxurious, does not even look sporty or sexy, it just looks odd and more like a stretched Nissan Altima. The interior design does not work either, that cold techy barren look just does not work, really doesn't work on the new A8 either which much worse, they don't really look like luxury car interiors anymore and people, especially older people find going through touchscreens/mouse controllers for many common functions way too annoying and needless. Rear seat room going down did not help, firmer ride does not help. Raising the price so much over the last one was another big mistake and the fact that the new ES looks just like the LS now does not help at all, especially when they are both 6 cylinders now.
The S class is clearly what buyers want and the new LS does not fit the bill as being a less expensive S class alternative for those who can't afford or don't want to pay 100K+ for a S class. While they are not huge sellers, the Genesis G90, Kia K9000, and likely the G80 are taking a chunk of sales from the LS and the GS.
And X7. And Q8. This is where the sedan buyers are spending.
Both of those SUV's start 10K or more under then the prices of the flagship sedans in their brands, they also top out much lower then the sedans. That has to be factored in.
Q8 starts at $67,400, A8 starts at $83,800. X7 starts at $73,900, 7 series starts at $83,650.
Both of those SUV's start 10K or more under then the prices of the flagship sedans in their brands, they also top out much lower then the sedans. That has to be factored in.
Q8 starts at $67,400, A8 starts at $83,800. X7 starts at $73,900, 7 series starts at $83,650.
Yeah, I don't get that. They can't be cheaper to produce, at least when it comes to materials.
Both of those SUV's start 10K or more under then the prices of the flagship sedans in their brands, they also top out much lower then the sedans. That has to be factored in.
Q8 starts at $67,400, A8 starts at $83,800. X7 starts at $73,900, 7 series starts at $83,650.
Yes, so this is where all the money is moving to. The flagship buyer once had no choice at BMW or Audi and it was just a 7 series or A8. Now they have the choice. The LX has always been available but it’s not the same in how the X7 or Q8 has replaced the large sedan buyer. The LS has so many factors working against it. Personally, we think the design was the right way to go, but it was more of a swing and miss at a hone run. Lexus would do very, very well in they had. $75K cross-over which would be the replacement for the LS buyer.
An X7 or a 740. What difference does it make to BMW? It’s the same money from the same buyer. Same with Q8 or A8. So taking the LS name, leverage the brand name of the LS and add a cross over would be a good idea.
I think LS design is very flagship worthy, I have zero problems overall. Sure beltline wavy lines a la Mazda 6 should have been done better or removed but over all it stands on its own. When in comes to what car lacks I would not necessarily say V8 (definitely not LC 5.0 V8) but refined driver's technology. That's the area where it seriously lacks to Germans. Just look at the 360 camera in LS and then in new 3 series, LS is a complete joke. Technically does it have a 360 camera? Yes. But is it any good or up to par with leading premium badges? No, it's good as Mazda only. Does it have matrix headlights? Yes it does. How's the resolution compared to leading premium models matrix headlights? Very poor. That goes for pretty much every technology inside the cabin and outside. I could be wrong but new LS doesn't even have slow traffic crawl unless it's part of the DRCC
The last thread failed to point out, the fact that there is possibly misguided internal focus at Lexus on solely 2-door models and bread & butter vehicles. Basically the RC, LC, ES, and RX. The SUVs and
Everything else doesn't matter or gets delayed or reduced attention. Someone at Lexus isn't fond of their RWD product and are phoning it in, outside of "sports" offerings.
I have read a bit on Akio Toyoda.
He has many Western friends, and he races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
I'm of the opinion that his friends are very jealous of him and Toyota Motor Corporation.
I wouldn't be surprised if they tease him by mocking TMC products.
Being gullible, to compensate, President Akio has publicly stipulated that TMC will no longer make boring cars, and that TMC products will have more "inspired" styling and more "inspired" dynamics.
I believe Toyota Motor Corp has to be themselves, and not pretend to be someone else.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
TMC must get back to their grass roots.
I believe Toyota Motor Corp has to be themselves, and not pretend to be someone else.
If it ain't broke, don't fix it.
TMC must get back to their grass roots.
Amen, companies that don't know who they are become irrelevant. Just look over at Acura, Infiniti and Cadillac. All three are irrelevant in the Luxury space except to their fanboys/girls.
04-07-19, 07:37 AM
