I think Lexus could successfully keep the same ES badge for both the FWD and AWD versions (each having different driving/ride characteristics) by calling the softer FWD version an ES, and the AWD version something like "ES SuperSport". Having had ESs since 1999 and RXs since 2001, I for one would love to have an AWD ES - with a sports package or not...and whatever they want to call it.

 

I'm sure that could be done, but the problem with doing it is that adding an AWD option to a RWD vehicle is simpler and requires fewer design changes than adding an AWD option to a FWD vehicle. A FWD car, like the current ES, because it doesn't require getting power to the rear wheels, doesn't need a large hump in the middle of the back seat floor. An AWD ES would require losing that back seat leg room with a taller hump in the middle of the floor.

Thus, my point is that, if having an AWD version of the ES would require more design changes and would result in the AWD version being, essentially, a different car from the FWD version, what is the point of calling the AWD version an ES. As I said in an earlier posts, many GS buyers look down on the ES and consider it to be an inferior car. Thus, I suspect that many GS buyers would not be inclined to buy an AWD ES. In that case, Lexus would be better off just maintaining the ES as a FWD car and keeping the GS. That would still allow buyers who really want an AWD car to buy the AWD GS, and those who want a FWD car could still buy the ES with the advantage of more back seat leg room.

 

[QUOTE=lesz;9949752]I'm sure that could be done, but the problem with doing it is that adding an AWD option to a RWD vehicle is simpler and requires fewer design changes than adding an AWD option to a FWD vehicle. A FWD car, like the current ES, because it doesn't require getting power to the rear wheels, doesn't need a large hump in the middle of the back seat floor. An AWD ES would require losing that back seat leg room with a taller hump in the middle of the floor.

Actually, from an engineering standpoint, adding AWD to a FWD platform is easier. It is just a power takeoff from the transmission, a drive shaft, and the rear axle system. For a RWD, the half shafts, universal joints, and other associated drive hardware must be fit into an already crowded area. There are some simple examples of a FWD platform with AWD, the most obvious are the Ford Fusion and Lincoln MKZ.

With modern computer control systems, an AWD vehicle can be made to perform much like a RWD it the designers wish. An example is the FWD Focus which for the RS is AWD and even has a "drift" mode where 90% of the power goes to the rear wheels.

The ES already has more rear seat room than an E300, so it is not out of the realm of possibility to have an AWD ES with a much upgraded interior to compete in this class. Not for the enthusiasts, but most E class buyers are not enthusiasts. Such an upgraded ES could be Lexus's version of an Audi A6.
Steve

 

Cant wait for the ES-F

 

Longer? The ES is already almost 193 inches long. How much longer does the ES need to get? A longer ES than the current one and I think I'll need to move to a German mid-size like the A4, S4, etc. These cars are getting too big these days. We don't need to keep up with Americans' weight. Longer cars are definitely going to affect handing and large Japanese cars USUALLY handle like boats.

Of course, people keep buying larger and larger square ft houses - I would have thought people would have moved on to more economical houses, but this is America after all, not Europe, Asia, Middle East, etc.

 

The special olympic version of a camry? I'd rather buy a camry and call it a day....or just call uber.

 

I personally think what we will see is what has been speculated in the GS forum. The GS won't be going away, but it will become a more niche lift back sort of sport 4 door coupe like the A7, CLS, 6 Series GC etc. That will leave the "traditional sedan duty" to the ES, and leave room for it to go upmarket. I personally don't think this is a bad approach, with a better interior, a rear biased AWD option a'la Audi I think people would buy a loaded $55-60k ES. As the ES is right now it can't compete in the midsize class.

I'd really like to see such an ES be longitudinally engined, rear biased AWD the way Audi does it. That would be achievable on the new global platform, but I don't think thats likely. An Acura style front biased AWD transverse layout is the best we can hope for, and I think that will do fine for the segment (I wouldn't be a buyer, but plenty will).

As to those wondering how they would adapt an AWD version of the ES, its very simple. Remember this will be an all new car on an all new platform, it will be engineered from the get-go to be both a FWD car and a AWD car, and that platform is designed so that it can be used both in FWD/transverse applications as well as RWD/longitudinal applications. It will be as simple as having a RWD version LS and an AWD version LS. The two versions of the ES will look identical, just as the LS does and the GS does and the IS, etc. You might have an extra inch or two in the driveline hump in the rear seat area, but nobody's going to notice that. AWD LS, GS & IS sedans have a noticeable bulge on the side of the transmission tunnel in the drivers footwell...its not a big deal.

 

I guess I don't mind an AWD but the ES and TLX are the only FWD cars in this $45-$50k market. I had a 2003 Acura TL and choose to go luxury this time (2014 ES UL). I do not like RWD but performance people do, I get it. I grew up in Alaska and I can drive FWD through any weather. RWD is a pain in the snow, etc. Anyway, I just hope they don't go completely RWD. I keep debating on an LS a few years down the road, but the RWD really turns me off (plus it's physically a bigger car.)

 

So if Lexus goes with the transverse/AWD layout on the new platform for the next ES, would it likely be the Toyoota Highlander's 2GR-FKS AWD powertrain?

 

The ES isn't ever going to go completely RWD.

And why be worried about the LS in the snow being RWD? Get AWD. My AWD LS Is awesome in the snow. Way better than my FWD ES sedans were.

 

My guess would be a more sport oriented version of that.

 

If they tighten the suspension further, I'm out for sure. I'll either purchase my currently leased 2016 ES 350, or I'll look for a car with a looser suspension. I live in an area with
a LOT of potholes, rough, poorly maintained roads, etc., so having a smooth ride is the #1 priority for me. If the ES is turned into another 'sports sedan', I'd have no reason to buy it.

I've actually been considering a Jeep Cherokee for my next vehicle.
Maybe look at the 2018 Camry, but possibly they'll tighten up that too.

Lexonians !

John L.

 

p.s. I hate cars that are 'low to the ground', I get so tired of scraping the front all the time when I pull out of parking lots going down hill.

I want a car that's high in the front, as it was back 'in the old days'. Like the Mercury Grand Marquee.......

 

In fact, the LS430 is high off the ground. I never scraped it.

I also think that the current ES is firm enough. I pray that Toyota doesn't make the '19 even sportier.

 

One of the differences you aren't getting with why your ES scrapes and your LS didn't as an example is the ES is FWD and has a larger front overhang. I scraped my ES cars a couple times, hardly ever scraped my LS cars or my GS. Its not ride height, its the shorter front overhang.

In offload speak, the ES has a much smaller approach angle.