This thread is about the forthcoming 2013/2014 3IS.

Company performance in the recent past years will affect the all new 2013 3IS recently previewed, which has been under design and engineering for at least the last several years.
The concept and the budget for the all new 2013 3IS would have been drawn and allocated back in 2010?
Can someone confirm how many years the 3IS has been in development?
In 2012 last year, Toyota publicly announced that they were cost cutting and trimming on spending.
Toyota said it themselves.



Superb Toyota financial performance from 2012 last year and onwards that you talk about above, will tend to affect future Lexus models from 2014 and onwards like the future 5LS etc etc, which are presently being designed right now.
Here, you're talking about something that is related to, but different.
Because the 3IS design and budget would have been drafted and allocated many years ago; back in 2010 perhaps, or even 2009?
Right now, the forthcoming 3IS is in its final months of "fine tuning".
Actual mass production of the 3IS may possibly commence say 3 months before the opening sales date in June?

 

once again, you are making a fool out of yourself.

please stop? If not, please learn how car industry works and who spends most money on R&D every year.

Becuase you dont know what you are talking about, as simple as that.

 

I'm not saying who copied who, just putting up the two designs for a comparison. I prefer the IS.

They're not too similar anyway, the F30 angles down more sharply by the A-pillar and the roofline disappears faster at the C-pillar.

 

Unless some other combo catches my eye, my 2014 is350 Fsport it's going to be either;

USB w/black
Gray w/red (if available)
Tungsten w/red (if available)

It'll depend on how they look in person.

 

It's not about who spends the most on R&D, but who publicly announces cost cutting and reduction in spending, and most importantly - how that affects cost cutting carry-over design, like a carry-over 2850 mm wheelbase, carry-over engines, and a lack of an 8 speed gearbox.

When one looks back over the years, one can tell that the 4GS has been more affected by financial constraints than the all new 3IS, which is younger by about 18 months, and being designed during more prosperous times, is blessed with a longer wheelbase, and 8 speed gearboxes...

 

Everything about a vehicle doesn't have to be changed when a new model is debuted. Why would they increase the wheelbase if they're able to offer the size, ride and handling they want? Increasing the wheelbase compromises handling.

I don't see how when comparing a 4GS to a 3GS you can say the design of the 4GS is hampered by financial constraints. When you look at the ride, handling, and quality differences between the two, like I said its hard to believe they are the same model.

 

The hampering by financial constraints is only a hypothetical guess.
Why does the new 3IS have an 8 speed auto, when the 4GS doesn't?
Why didn't the 4GS wheelbase grow by 70mm like the all new 3IS?
One car has a wheelbase 40 mm longer than the other; what is the purpose of that.
Surely it is due to ongoing improvements with time.

I bet you any money the all new 5GS due ahead will have a wheelbase longer than 2850 mm??
How much would you like to bet?

 

Wtf are you talking about? Development of cars is R&D cost. Toyota spends most money in the world on R&D costs. Which means they spend the most money on car development. Get it?

What does the carry over wheelbase mean? What? It means that they didnt want to enlarge the car. Nothing else, it is new platform, new suspension, new interior, new exterior. Decision on what engines to use or what transmissions to use, it marketing decision not development decision. 8 speed transmission was made for LS long time ago.

You simply dont have a clue about what you are talking about. Prosperous times what? Toyota had reduced profits when recession hit in 2009, like any other manufacturer... then recalls then Tsunami. However that does not mean that Toyota is in trouble or that it has problems with cash which you thought. In fact reason that Toyota is most valuable car company in the world is not due to capital value (lol, wtf?) but because their managment is able to respond to crisis very fast. For instance, they spent money to cut their output in 2009 and 2010, so in 2012 when everyone is losing billions in Europe, they are making money in Europe. Hence Toyota is on track to make $10-$12 billion in FY2012, all the while having the largest car and technology development fund in the world.

Reason that companies like Toyota take out loans when they have 48 billion in cash in the bank, is that it is cheaper to take no interest loan than spend your cash.

You reasoning is on the level of 12 year old kid. Thats not how car industry works.

So once again, open up another thread if you want more info on car industry.

But when it comes to Toyota and Lexus, they are opposite of having problems. So you cant be further away. I am sure you are smart guy but you are making a lot of assumptions based on one sentence you read somewhere. And all that I am saying is common knowledge that can be easily found on internet via google news search for instance.

 

Which is obviously incorrect. All you have to do is look at Toyota's balance sheet to know thats not correct.

Could be that the R&D phase of mating it to the 3.5L wasn't completed yet when the 4GS went into production. I know they had some vibration issues with the 8 speed in the LS in cars with AWD...

Remember the 2006 GS came out with a carryover powerplant and was upgraded in 2007 to the 3.5L. By your logic, that was a hugely more prosperous time for Lexus...why did the GS come out with a carryover engine? Shouldnt have been any financial constraints.

Because each vehicle has different goals they wanted to reach in redesign. The IS had an issue with rear legroom compared to its competitors, which is why they lengthened the wheelbase.

The GS really had so such complaint, and in fact the complaints about the new BMW 5 series were the opposite, that they had stretched it to far in the name of comfort and handling suffered.

Since the GS handily beats the 5 series in the handling department in comparison tests I'd say the redesign is a success.

A longer wheelbase is not always an improvement.

It depends on what the car's competitors do. If the trend is towards longer wheelbases, and the consumer says the car needs more rear legroom...they'll increase the wheelbase.

If as you suggest wheelbases HAVE to increase every time a car is redesigned...whats going to happen 3 generations from now? Every car will be like a limo!

 

No one knows the budget for the 3IS and Lexus does not have an exact methodology for each car. Some have 6,8, CVTs. Some are fwd, RWD, awd... Etc etc

What we do know is the latest Lexus models are built with a high level of execution. The 3Gs has been praised as beat in class. The revised LS interior is a step up. The engines might be older but they are still very class competitive.

The IS is the only car I can think of with two distinct gauge clusters based on options and surely the LFA type one isn't cheap. Further more the IS is based on the GS and its an all new platform. It's also not *****d out to 20 different cars. It's pretty vehicle specific which costs more.

Looking at the new Lexus models and Touota models the money is being well spent.

 

The IS desperately needed a wheelbase extension because of complaints with rear seat room. The GS did not.

 

Hopefully they'll have a bunch of different colors/ trims at "Toyota city" when I go Japan next month!

 

This is an 3IS thread.
So I talk about how Toyota's 2009 net loss of US$4.2 billion caused the company to openly declare cost cutting.
Commonsense tells that this type of financial performance and cost cutting affects the final design of the cars.
The current cars today, are affected by the financial performance of the recent past, especially 2009.
2009 would have affected the 4GS more.
While 2010, when Toyota bounced back into profit, would have affected the 3IS more.

In Post #878, you changed the topic, and talked about Toyota's latest 2012 profits:
I agree with you on Toyota's 2012 profits, but I pointed out that 2012 profits will affect the future generation 5LS, and other future models presently under development more.
The forthcoming 3IS will have been more influenced by profits in 2010, or around there.


In Post #887, you change the topic again.
Now, not about 2012 profits anymore, but about R&D:
Once again, I agree with you, Toyota probably does have the biggest R&D budget.
However, that doesn't automatically mean that Toyota is invincible to cost cutting when financial downturns occur like in 2009 when Toyota made a net loss of US$4.2 billion.
2009 was a time when the 4GS was being developed, while the 3IS development would have been more around 2010.

There is a difference between being neutral, and giving credit where credit is deserved, and talking about losses when there are losses, rather than just being far right biased.
There is no such thing as an invincible company.
To say that Toyota and Lexus was not affected by the economy in 2009 when the 4GS and 3IS were being developed, is just plain nonsense.


Toyota didn't just have reduced profits in 2009; they actually netted an US$4.2 billion dollar loss.

Toyota's fixed assets, their liquid cash, their net profits, and their R&D is certainly good; no one is saying that it is bad.
However, financial downturns like that experienced in 2009 when Toyota lost $4.2 billion - with commonsense - does affect our cars today.


Wheelbases:
3IS 2800 mm
4GS 2850 mm [+50 mm]
4LS 2970 mm [+120 mm]
4LS-L 3090 mm [+120 mm]

3 Series 2809 mm
5 Series 2968 mm [+159 mm]
7 Series 3070 mm [+102 mm]

Look at the wheelbases.
Please use your commonsense.
Be neutral and honest.
Give credit where credit is due, rather than just extreme bias.
The 4GS legroom is less than its three German peers, and less than the Camry as well.
If the 3IS can get 70 mm, the 4GS could have gotten more too.
Ask yourself, what do you think the 5GS's wheelbase will be? The same, or longer?
The 3IS is good enough for an 8 speed gearbox, but the more expensive 4GS is not?

You make up too many excuses to support your die-hard bias....

 

Blueprint is right.
We may never know how much Toyota invests in R&D.
It is possibly a trade secret too?

However, commonsense tells us, just like in the real estate business, that when there is a downturn and a company amasses $4.2 billion dollars in losses, that cost cutting does occur for real.
Commonsense tells us that.


Too many biased die-hard excuses.
We must use our commonsense.
2009 was a year when Toyota amassed $4.2 billion in losses.
Toyota openly announced cost cutting.

Okay.
The 1999-06 2GS used an aging 3.0 in-line six.
The 2005-12 3GS used an all new 60 degree V6; it is 3.0 internationally - in the US, it started out at 3.0, then in 2007 expanded to 3.5.
Thus, the 3GS never used any carry-over engine, but it used a totally new series of 60 degree V6's with direct injection.

Likewise, the 2000-06 1IS used the aging, but detuned 2.0 and 3.0 in-line sixes.
The 2006-13 2IS used the brand new series of V6's in 2.5, 3.0 and 3.5 liter capacities.



Too many biased die-hard excuses.
We must use our commonsense.
What will you give me when the 5GS wheelbase increases?

Wheelbases aren't just used for legroom.
The 5 Series has a 2968 mm wheelbase, but there isn't 118 mm more legroom than the 4GS.
Wheelbases are also used to position the engine well behind the front axle, to reduce weight over the front steering wheels.
The major drawback of long wheelbases, is the loss of rigidity in the body structure....

 

Very well said....