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.
2013 LWB, according to Google, wasn't much different listing at: $78,290.
2012 SWB was $67,630 according to Edmunds.
Thanks, but the 2012 price is for SWB. Being generous, if we add $5K to the SWB, the 2012 LWB retailed around $73K, about $5K less than a comparable 2013 LWB for the same engine. By that logic alone, the 2018 LS could be expected to retail at $83K. One has to now factor in the V6 instead of the V8, and the added safety features in the "base" model that are currently option packages. So, the ballpark will be 80-83K. We have to wait 10 months to find out
I would agree with that assessment, base MSRP ~ $80k I think its a winner.
Agree. That's asking for a lot of course but I think the value play will be quite strong here at that price, especially if a V8 isn't a requirement. Oh, and decent lease deals.
This is exactly what I've been saying from the start! The midsections of the E39/E46 and E60/E90 aren't the same. Further, if the E60 hadn't used an aluminum front structure it would've been much heavier, increasing the gap between it and the E90.
Aluminum was used in the 2003-2010 5-series...aka the E60 (and the 2002-2009 E-class for that matter)...and this was before BMW decided chassis stiffness should be of paramount importance, which is why the F10 has a remarkably stiff structure. The weight does not indicate platform sharing, period. There's more to it than that, although it can be a contributing factor (as stated with the F10 an F01).
The IS is less than 200lbs heavier than the C-class and the GLC300 AWD is actually heavier than the NX200t AWD (as per Car and Driver, who weighs cars as-tested) yet the Lexus was dusted in both situations. The IS200t at least had the 8-speed auto.
Their mid-sections will be similar, hence similar weight; it is the 7 Series which is drastically different.
If the 2003-10 E60 5 Series had NOT used an aluminium front section, it would have been heavier, but still only to the tune of about 210 lbs like the 1996-03 E39 5 Series vs 1998-05 E46 3 Series; current 2010-17 F10 5 Series is nearly 400 lbs heavier than current 2012-19 F30 3 Series; indicating that something is very very unrelated.
Small differences in weight indicate similar underpinnings, while large differences in weight indicate very different underpinnings.
We can NOT fairly compare IS to lighter C Class, and say that the GLC CUV is actually heavier than the Lexus NX CUV.
Why?
Because the GLC CUV shares platforms with the rear wheel drive C Class, but the Lexus NX CUV does NOT share platforms with IS.
The NX CUV shares platforms with the front wheel drive Toyota RAV-4 and Corolla.
Thus, the Lexus NX CUV normally drives its front wheels, while the rear wheels will only engage if there is wheelspin, ie loss of traction.
Thus, apart from weight and gearbox, we also have to consider traction as to why the C & GLC Class "dust" the Lexus duo in your own words...
I'll stop discussing this in the LS thread (happy to continue over PM) but you clearly don't are misunderstanding what it means to be on the same platform. Weight is not the only indicator of platforms, that just wrong on so many levels. Yes, weight is a symptom of platform sharing but is definitely not a definite indicator, which can be proven quite easily. You should really read up on platform sharing.
Also I wasn't comparing to the NX platform with the IS, just mentioning that even then the acceleration figures are weak despite its weight (although it does have a 6-speed transmission). The NX has a sophisticated enough AWD system where it's 0-60 times (as C&D performs their tests) shouldn't be terribly affected by its setup. This was a comment in regards to the 2.0t missing my personal expectations.
Let's talk price. I am actually very curious how Lexus prices this car. I went back and googled some information regarding the 2007 release and the price point versus the competitors at that time, while also looking at 2017 model year comparisons.
When the most recent version was released in 2007 it was, on average $8k cheaper than the competition when looking strictly at the LWB MSRP. So in fact, it did bargain price versus what was offered elsewhere. It was a staggering $11.4k less than the SWB versions (Mercedes not included).
For 2017, I again compared everything just to the LWB since that's all the competition has, but since they offer multiple engine choices, I compared both to the current 2017 LS 460 LWB price. For 2017, the V6 versions of the competition is $2.1k more on average than the current LS 460 (excluded the Mercedes). For 2017, the V8 versions of the competition is $15.4k more on average than the current LS 460.
So where does Lexus place this? While the Audi A8 is due for a new model in 2018, the older 2017 3.0 is almost just as fast as the current 4.6, but the 4.0 tt is loads faster than the existing and proposed version of the 3.5 tt. The 3.0 sits currently at $82.5k, or $3.6k more than the current LWB. The 4.0 sits at $91.5k, or $12.6k more than the current LWB.
The BMW typically underestimates its claimed times, but for comparison's sake, the existing 740i i6 is probably faster than the current LS 460, whereas the existing 750i is also probably faster than the proposed 3.5. This car starts at $81.5k and $94.6k respectively.
Does Lexus undercut again? Let's say for simple hypothetical purposes Lexus "thinks" the V6 is equivalent to the V8 versions. And again, for simple hypothetical purposes, lets assume it undercuts by $8k. This would mean that the price might be $86k MSRP assuming it's a straight $8k under the average of the big three's MSRP.
Is it worth an MSRP of $86k?
Frankly, I think that's too much. They would be smart to price it the same as the competition's six-cylinder flavors imo. They could then say, hey, you can get a V6 version of the LS that's slightly cheaper than the the A8 3.0 or 740i, but it performs much better.
This is the MSRP it needs imo, if all it offers is that V6tt: $79k-80k
Edit: and I think it would be a mistake on Lexus' part to price it to the competition's V8 versions regardless of performance.
I'll stop discussing this in the LS thread (happy to continue over PM) but you clearly don't are misunderstanding what it means to be on the same platform. Weight is not the only indicator of platforms, that just wrong on so many levels. You should really read up on platform sharing.
Also I wasn't comparing to the NX platform with the IS, just mentioning that even then the acceleration figures are weak despite its weight (although it does have a 6-speed transmission). The NX has a sophisticated enough AWD system where it's 0-60 times shouldn't be terribly affected by its setup.
New LS is off the new GL-A (I think that is what it is called). It will serve all RWD Lexus configurations.
i think that's a bit too high for it to be successful.
Why? Every high end Lexus has gone up in price with a new intro. The LX took a huge price jump. The new LS won't be any different. Lexus was you to pay more.
Why? Every high end Lexus has gone up in price with a new intro. The LX took a huge price jump. The new LS won't be any different. Lexus was you to pay more.
because it would come in at a higher price than some of its german competitors and lexus is not in a position to price as such.
because it would come in at a higher price than some of its german competitors and lexus is not in a position to price as such.
Lexus now more than ever is in the positon to charge what the Germans are charging. I was shocked when I saw the LC pricing, but it makes sense. LX makes sense. Its about time Lexus charges when their real competition charges.
So either Lexus' research suggested that buyers don't care about "needing" 8-cyl in flagships (which I doubt, but whatever) or, as I more likely suspect, Lexus ignored them.
Lexus now more than ever is in the positon to charge what the Germans are charging. I was shocked when I saw the LC pricing, but it makes sense. LX makes sense. Its about time Lexus charges when their real competition charges.
they can try, although i don't think they will sell when someone can get an A8 for less money.
New LS is off the new GL-A (I think that is what it is called). It will serve all RWD Lexus configurations.
It's actually G-AL, but I was talking about the BMW discussion. Modular architecture is really awesome, I'm loving all the adjustability of platforms these days. I find it interesting that Lexus doesn't seem particularly keen to introduce carbon fiber in G-AL, given their expertise. Must've been too expensive.
Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
Lexus now more than ever is in the positon to charge what the Germans are charging. I was shocked when I saw the LC pricing, but it makes sense. LX makes sense. Its about time Lexus charges when their real competition charges.
I would love to see this, although I'm sure their investors don't want to see Cadillac syndrome to occur. You know, when the market decides your car is overpriced then you're forced to roll out aggressive discounts. I say full steam ahead with higher prices for this car though. I would love to see the vote of confidence.
The LC and 5LS actually use Lexus' new "GA-L" platform; for Global Architecture - Luxury.
When discussing platforms, be careful of the basic underlying design and it's effects on the vehicles, rather than the nomenclature & fine details.
Minor variations in suspension mounting points will not normally result in a chassis that's nearly 400 lbs heavier.
If the basic underlying design is similar, then the weight will be similar, and weight is what ultimately affects the vehicle...
.
01-16-17, 02:33 PM
