2016 GS 200t vs. 350 - Opinions
06-06-18, 05:46 PM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
2016 GS 200t vs. 350 - Opinions
Hi All - I am considering a 2016 200t that is approx. $31K with about 25K miles.
Please offer your thoughts vs. the 350 Model.
Thanks in advance!
Please offer your thoughts vs. the 350 Model.
Thanks in advance!
06-06-18, 06:01 PM
#2
Lexus Test Driver
Meh.
That's the only thought I have when I think of the 200t engines. Woefully underpowered. Power band is like 3k - 5k RPM and thats it. Not my cup of tea but if all you are looking for is a comfortable cruiser with decent MPG, then go for it.
I would very gladly pony up for the 350 every time.
That's the only thought I have when I think of the 200t engines. Woefully underpowered. Power band is like 3k - 5k RPM and thats it. Not my cup of tea but if all you are looking for is a comfortable cruiser with decent MPG, then go for it.
I would very gladly pony up for the 350 every time.
The following 3 users liked this post by np20412:
06-06-18, 07:34 PM
#4
meh my option is if you're going for a luxury/premium car then MPG shouldn't matter. Hybrid ok, its better for the environment and has all the benefits of both. Underpowered car just for the MPG? get a cheaper car. Enough power for you? I hope its a lux package cause if you're wanting sporty you're gonna be wanting more.
at the end of the day its up to you and you need to drive it to decide how you feel about it.
at the end of the day its up to you and you need to drive it to decide how you feel about it.
06-07-18, 10:37 AM
#5
Lead Lap
There have been other forum member reviews of the GS 200t where they were more than happy with the power and the car overall: https://www.clublexus.com/forums/gs-...00t-on-cl.html
If you're looking to get into the GS, i'd say test drive both the 200t and the 350. To me, its just a matter of engine preference/gas mileage as most of the non-engine related things (exterior, interior, infotainment) are all the same.
Some people that have reviewed/cross shopped indicate that the V6 is more powerful, more refined and worth the extra cost over a fairly newer, a little slower, 4cylinder turbo drive train. If you can afford the 350 engine and don't mind the lesser gas mileage, I would go for the 350 (proven engine, great power band at highway speeds, no turbo lag).
If you're looking to get into the GS, i'd say test drive both the 200t and the 350. To me, its just a matter of engine preference/gas mileage as most of the non-engine related things (exterior, interior, infotainment) are all the same.
Some people that have reviewed/cross shopped indicate that the V6 is more powerful, more refined and worth the extra cost over a fairly newer, a little slower, 4cylinder turbo drive train. If you can afford the 350 engine and don't mind the lesser gas mileage, I would go for the 350 (proven engine, great power band at highway speeds, no turbo lag).
Last edited by AJLex19; 06-07-18 at 10:51 AM.
The following users liked this post:
JeffKeryk (06-09-18)
06-07-18, 12:33 PM
#6
Intermediate
A few numbers in secs (ref. https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2016 Lexus GS 350 F-Sport 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.3
2017 Lexus GS 200T 0-60 mph 6.6 Quarter mile 14.9
The GS 200T times probably would have been better if it was a F-Sport and that would be an apples-to-apples comparison. Nevertheless, a difference of 0.6-0.8 seconds is nothing given that a base GS 200T is $4400 less than a base GS350.
Just FYI, both the Accord 2.0T and Civic Type R are faster than the GS350. The overweight of GS is the cause. A few more numbers (https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2018 Honda Accord Touring 2.0T Sedan 0-60 mph 5.5 Quarter mile 14.1
2017 Honda Civic Type R 0-60 mph 4.9 Quarter mile 13.5
But the non-Type R Civic is slower than a GS 200T:
2017 Honda Civic Sport 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 7.0 Quarter mile 15.2
2017 Honda Civic Sport Touring 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 6.9 Quarter mile 15.4
So whenever the Civic is faster than the GS 200T, it is faster than the GS350 as well. And when the Civic is slower than the GS350, it is slower than the GS 200T as well. Bottomline: The GS350 and GS 200T are not that different in terms of being fast. In fact, both are slow for their price point!
Last edited by bb700092; 06-07-18 at 12:36 PM.
06-07-18, 01:17 PM
#7
well if you wanna talk speed relative to cost get a motorcycle... all you need is that 5 minutes in each car to tell which one you want. so go test drive both. if you're ok with the 200t and don't think the 350 is good enough get the 200t but I didn't like the 200t. the other reason to get the 350 is that its a well proven reliable engine. its been around for over 12 years now with minor tweaks.
Trending Topics
06-07-18, 01:45 PM
#8
Lexus Champion
I think the 2.0T feels better than I had expected, though I still prefer the 3.5. Here's one reviewer's take:
https://lexusenthusiast.com/2016/01/...-200t-f-sport/
Rated at 241 horsepower, the GS 200t has a 70 horsepower disadvantage compared to the GS 350. Not only that, the 2.0L engine weighs more than the 3.5L V6 — the GS 200t tips the scales at 3,805 lbs, where the GS 350 weighs in at 3,726 lbs.
Even so, the GS 200t never feels underpowered — compared to the GS 350, the low-end torque (258 lb-ft @ 1,650–4,400) boost from the turbocharger makes for a more engaging drive both in the city and on the highway. Acceleration is the key difference, and the GS 200t has a livelier personality, more sports than luxury. It’s rougher around the edges than the GS 350, but without compromising the Lexus sensibility.
Even so, the GS 200t never feels underpowered — compared to the GS 350, the low-end torque (258 lb-ft @ 1,650–4,400) boost from the turbocharger makes for a more engaging drive both in the city and on the highway. Acceleration is the key difference, and the GS 200t has a livelier personality, more sports than luxury. It’s rougher around the edges than the GS 350, but without compromising the Lexus sensibility.
With only $835 USD separating the rear-wheel drive F SPORT versions of the GS 350 and GS 200t, choosing the GS 350 and its horsepower advantage seems like an obvious choice. And yet, there’s enough difference between the two models that it becomes a personal choice — where some might like the more powerful V6 in the GS 350, the torque of the turbocharged engine is better suited my driving style and would be my personal recommendation.
The following users liked this post:
JeffKeryk (06-09-18)
06-07-18, 01:54 PM
#9
That sounds odd to me because in Sports(+) mode, the V6 shouldn't feel like it's lacking in in low-end torque or response.
Of course, for the maximal instant torquiness, the GS450h will deliver there.
Of course, for the maximal instant torquiness, the GS450h will deliver there.
The following users liked this post:
Tom450 (06-07-18)
06-07-18, 08:33 PM
#10
Even my local dealer says the GS200t is under powered, Go with the 350, you won't regret it. Are you basing your decision solely on engine type? If it's fuel economy your looking for I'd go with the ES300h before I went with the GS200t. (I actually went shopping to buy the ES300h and walked off the lot with the 350 F Sport, my salesman was shaking his head in disbelief!)
The following users liked this post:
JeffKeryk (06-09-18)
06-08-18, 03:08 PM
#12
Lexus Test Driver
In this forum, most members drive the 350 and very few drive the 200T. So you can expect the response to your question. Most members who are commenting on the 200T have experienced the 200T for barely 5 mins, if at all. Their knowledge is limited to the spec sheets found online. Below are some numbers from a third party website.
A few numbers in secs (ref. https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2016 Lexus GS 350 F-Sport 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.3
2017 Lexus GS 200T 0-60 mph 6.6 Quarter mile 14.9
The GS 200T times probably would have been better if it was a F-Sport and that would be an apples-to-apples comparison. Nevertheless, a difference of 0.6-0.8 seconds is nothing given that a base GS 200T is $4400 less than a base GS350.
Just FYI, both the Accord 2.0T and Civic Type R are faster than the GS350. The overweight of GS is the cause. A few more numbers (https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2018 Honda Accord Touring 2.0T Sedan 0-60 mph 5.5 Quarter mile 14.1
2017 Honda Civic Type R 0-60 mph 4.9 Quarter mile 13.5
But the non-Type R Civic is slower than a GS 200T:
2017 Honda Civic Sport 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 7.0 Quarter mile 15.2
2017 Honda Civic Sport Touring 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 6.9 Quarter mile 15.4
So whenever the Civic is faster than the GS 200T, it is faster than the GS350 as well. And when the Civic is slower than the GS350, it is slower than the GS 200T as well. Bottomline: The GS350 and GS 200T are not that different in terms of being fast. In fact, both are slow for their price point!
A few numbers in secs (ref. https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2016 Lexus GS 350 F-Sport 0-60 mph 5.8 Quarter mile 14.3
2017 Lexus GS 200T 0-60 mph 6.6 Quarter mile 14.9
The GS 200T times probably would have been better if it was a F-Sport and that would be an apples-to-apples comparison. Nevertheless, a difference of 0.6-0.8 seconds is nothing given that a base GS 200T is $4400 less than a base GS350.
Just FYI, both the Accord 2.0T and Civic Type R are faster than the GS350. The overweight of GS is the cause. A few more numbers (https://www.zeroto60times.com/vehicl...0-mph-times/):
2018 Honda Accord Touring 2.0T Sedan 0-60 mph 5.5 Quarter mile 14.1
2017 Honda Civic Type R 0-60 mph 4.9 Quarter mile 13.5
But the non-Type R Civic is slower than a GS 200T:
2017 Honda Civic Sport 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 7.0 Quarter mile 15.2
2017 Honda Civic Sport Touring 1.5T Hatchback 0-60 mph 6.9 Quarter mile 15.4
So whenever the Civic is faster than the GS 200T, it is faster than the GS350 as well. And when the Civic is slower than the GS350, it is slower than the GS 200T as well. Bottomline: The GS350 and GS 200T are not that different in terms of being fast. In fact, both are slow for their price point!
I can count on one hand the number of times in my 15 years of driving that I've had to floor it from 0 and get up to highway speed. Those times limited to a few exits on the Norther State Parkway in Long Island where the on ramp is exceedingly short.
On the other hand, there have been countless times where I like to go 30-80 as quickly as I can to get on the highway and into cruise mode past and ahead of a wave of incoming traffic that I'll otherwise have to merge into and then work my way thru. It's these moments that the 350 really shows you the difference over the 200t engine. The comparison is night and day when you are driving spirited through various gears and differing RPM ranges. I'm speaking from experience of having had an IS200t for 6 days as a loaner.
All comparisons to Civics and Accors are irrelevant as OP is shopping the 200t against the 350, not a Honda. It's very clear why the Honda weighs less.
Last edited by np20412; 06-08-18 at 03:17 PM.
06-08-18, 06:46 PM
#13
0-60 times are not really the most relevant when it comes to daily driving. They are just reported because they are eye catching and it's what people expect.
I can count on one hand the number of times in my 15 years of driving that I've had to floor it from 0 and get up to highway speed. Those times limited to a few exits on the Norther State Parkway in Long Island where the on ramp is exceedingly short.
On the other hand, there have been countless times where I like to go 30-80 as quickly as I can to get on the highway and into cruise mode past and ahead of a wave of incoming traffic that I'll otherwise have to merge into and then work my way thru. It's these moments that the 350 really shows you the difference over the 200t engine. The comparison is night and day when you are driving spirited through various gears and differing RPM ranges. I'm speaking from experience of having had an IS200t for 6 days as a loaner.
All comparisons to Civics and Accors are irrelevant as OP is shopping the 200t against the 350, not a Honda. It's very clear why the Honda weighs less.
I can count on one hand the number of times in my 15 years of driving that I've had to floor it from 0 and get up to highway speed. Those times limited to a few exits on the Norther State Parkway in Long Island where the on ramp is exceedingly short.
On the other hand, there have been countless times where I like to go 30-80 as quickly as I can to get on the highway and into cruise mode past and ahead of a wave of incoming traffic that I'll otherwise have to merge into and then work my way thru. It's these moments that the 350 really shows you the difference over the 200t engine. The comparison is night and day when you are driving spirited through various gears and differing RPM ranges. I'm speaking from experience of having had an IS200t for 6 days as a loaner.
All comparisons to Civics and Accors are irrelevant as OP is shopping the 200t against the 350, not a Honda. It's very clear why the Honda weighs less.
The following users liked this post:
GS350Boi (07-22-19)
06-08-18, 09:43 PM
#14
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Czech republic
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Warning, biased opinion ahead: this is Lexus. If you can't afford the fuel economy of a V6, can you afford the car at all? When looking at I4 turbo, there are many cheaper options to go for without the hassle of worrying about high cost of ownership.
I often wonder why people comparing V6 and I4t never seem to mention sound. 350 is miles away from 200t. Every time I press the throttle, it's not only about the power (as many other cars will be faster, AWD is a tank when looking at the scales) but also about the symphony under the hood which no I4 will give you {save S2000 thanks to 9000 rpm but for example new Civic Typer R is nowhere near, regardless how much faster the car is overall).
So I'd go for 350. I did, no wonder I suggest the same:-)
I often wonder why people comparing V6 and I4t never seem to mention sound. 350 is miles away from 200t. Every time I press the throttle, it's not only about the power (as many other cars will be faster, AWD is a tank when looking at the scales) but also about the symphony under the hood which no I4 will give you {save S2000 thanks to 9000 rpm but for example new Civic Typer R is nowhere near, regardless how much faster the car is overall).
So I'd go for 350. I did, no wonder I suggest the same:-)
06-09-18, 06:54 AM
#15
Turbos are becoming all the rage, but a 4 banger is still a 4 banger. It’s next to impossible to get an I4 to be smooth at anything and turbos make them unpredictable. .OP, IMHO If you have options to choose, always choose the engine that struggles the least while still being cost effective. There’s a bell curve for engines like everything else. If I had an option to get the LS engine in the GS, I would have held out for that, but if there was say a 600 HP V8 option, I’d still get the smaller V8. The 350 is at the lower side of the scale of small, but still really effective. The 200t is at the far left tip of the bell curve for this car. Way, way too small for the size of vehic, so turbo or not will deliver pretty much nothing and make a ton of noise in the process.