TRDFantasy

It will be interesting indeed, especially as the IS350 and GS350 will still likely get better 2008 EPA figures . With that said, the curb weight of the CTS does not help it at all.

The curb weight you listed for the GS is for the GS430, which has a V8. That's not exactly a fair comparison. The GS350 RWD in fact weighs roughly 3700lbs, so the weight difference between the two cars is around 300lbs, not 250lbs (apples to apples, RWD V6 to RWD V6). The CTS is slightly larger in exterior dimensions, but what about interior dimensions?

Interior dimensions for the GS:
Headroom, Front (in / mm) 37.8 / 960
Headroom, Rear (in / mm) 37.0 / 940
Legroom, Front (in / mm) 43.5 / 1,105
Legroom, Rear (in / mm) 36.4 / 925
Shoulder Room, Front (in / mm) 56.3 / 1,430
Shoulder Room, Rear (in / mm) 55.1 / 1,400

Interior dimensions for the CTS:
Headroom, Front (in) 38.8
Headroom, Rear (in ) 37.2
Legroom, Front (in) 42.4
Legroom, Rear (in) 35.9
Shoulder Room, Front (in) 56.7
Shoulder Room, Rear (in) 54.7

Looking at these numbers, we roughly have a tie in terms of interior space.

In summary, one can say that the GS has a more efficient platform both in terms of interior space and curb weight.

Plus, it's unlikely the GS and CTS will be cross-shopped.

I'm not a fan of the exterior or interior styling, but I will give credit to the CTS. It looks like it has a solid sporty chassis, good handling and pretty good engine performance, as well as some nice features and options. Looking at all the reviews so far, it does seem like the CTS lacks refinement, and a bit of craftsmanship and sophistication in the interior. This does seem like it might be one of the best GM interiors ever, but it's certainly not a class-leading interior. I was actually surprised to read noise and vibration comments about the 3.6L DI engine. Some of the CTS flaws are understandable given it's an entry-level luxury sedan. This is an extremely competitive segment, and the new CTS has caught up to the competition, but has not surpassed it.

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

The IS is irrelevant, being much smaller. But yes, I wouldn't be surprised if the GS still has a couple of mpg better.

You're right, my bad, I pulled the wrong number, GS350RWD is 3704 on Lexus' site.

I guess you're saying because the CTS is bigger on the outside it should be bigger on the inside? But wait, the GS trunk is 12.7cu.ft. and the CTS trunk is 14cu.ft.

My point wasn't about competing with the GS, it was just for comparison to show the CTS isn't more of a behemoth than other cars in its class.

LexFather

Yeah, its like the ES/TL/G35, much bigger in its class than the A4/C/IS/3.


Still its not much bigger than the GS and 300lbs more.

As long as we continue to make them heavier, it doesn't matter if we add direct injection etc.

.33 drag belongs on a van, not a luxury sedan.

Threxx

For clarification the new 08 CTS is only 160 pounds heavier than the GS when comparing base equipped 6-cylinder RWD vehicles.

The curb weight you guys are looking at is for the CTS with additional equipment including their full panoramic roof, which adds a little over 100 pounds to the curb weight over the regular roof/sunroof combo.

The CTS is a car priced to compete with the IS/G/A4/3/TL etc but sized to compete with the next tier up (GS/5/A6/RL/etc).

They actually built the new CTS on an improved and slightly shortened (though same width) STS chassis, if that gives you any idea of their intentions.

You can consider it a budget alternative to the mid-tier cars listed above, or a plus-sized alternative to the entry-tier cars listed above.

Right now I'm not sure as to whether or not that was a good move on GM's part.

EZZ

Give me a CTS-V for $50k and it will crush all competitors with 500hp! That is the car I would get in that range...LS7

Does anyone know if the GS-F is a go or just rumor at this point.

TRDFantasy

I agree. For instance, the new Highlander's co-efficient of drag is 0.34.

RX_330

Is it a typo?

Maserati Gran Turismo
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...hotopanel..1.*

-J-P-L-

Yeah, it sounds bad, but expect a lot of cars to dip up to 30% lower in their MPG ratings. People will be suprised to see a LOT of sub 20 MPG ratings.

Threxx

You guys do understand that drag coefficients are still relative to the frontal area of the vehicle right? So a CTS with a .33 and a highlander with a .34 are still far from the same total drag.

Furthermore, in some ways, drag is caused on purpose to allow for more high speed stability in driving. So less drag isn't by default 'better'.

Though you see this moreso on exotic cars and race cars that will often reach speeds over 100 MPH and need to take turns at those speeds...

Mr. Jones

Where did you read that?

E350 weighs 3725lbs
E550 weighs 3870lbs

GS350 weighs 3700lbs
GS430 weighs 3745lbs

excuses, excuses. Unless you are blind its obvious the CTS's high drag cd is the result of its styling. And its front end massive.

CTS's topspeed is in 5th gear, sixth gear is pointlessly tall. Though that trick has been used at GM for years to inflate EPA highway estimates.

Mr. Jones

pretty bad miss for GM. The excessive curb weight negates any performance gains from the engine.

which now redlines at 7000rpm, apparently to keep it quiet requires large amounts of sound deadening
That's my guess for the stupidly high curb weight for the CTS. Either that or C&D made an error

Mr. Jones

if a 500hp CTS can be had for $50k, I'll go buy one. I'm sure GM is going to sell a luxury car w/more power than a Vette for less.

Threxx

GM dealer spec sheet release with base weights and added weights of major options. I'll post it if I come across it again.



You do understand the difference between size (what I said) and weight (what YOU said), right?
The curb weight of the basic CTS is supposedly 3860 pounds. It's also a slightly larger vehicle than the GS. Makes sense to me.


Excuses? I'm simply explaining something that most quasi car enthusiasts don't fully understand. They see a Cd rating on a spec sheet and think that it can be viewed as "lower is always better" and "lower is always less total drag". Neither is true.

Your extreme bias against this car is evident in your wording. "trick" and "inflate"
How about it's a tall gear ratio that GM offers to keep highway cruising quieter and improve fuel mileage? GM has the exact same thing with a Vette - a car with a top speed just under 200 mph. Was that a trick too or should they have really used that extra gear to shorten the distances between all of the other ratios? I know that's what Lexus does, but that's not what is by default the correct choice. I often times wished my GS400 didn't cruise at 3k RPM - and had a taller final gear ratio. Did it top out in 5th gear? Hell if I know... why would I want to do such a thing in a GS (or CTS (non-V) anyway?)

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

What do you have to say about the LS600hL at over 5200lbs or maybe 1000lbs more than the LS460L?

EZZ

Why not....the last time I checked the current CTS-V is around $50k The MSRP for the new CTS has only risen marginally option for option so you better go buy one when it gets out