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.
really? on a curving entrance/exit ramp i'd have 'fun' in the GS whereas in the ES i'd go sedately.
rwd ftw.
You're an enthusiast, most people aren't. 95% of GS's purchased get driven just like any other car. For instance, I drove by a beautiful LC yesterday, in the drivers seat was a little old man sitting right up against the wheel with his hands at 10 and 2.
And the other side of that, driving the GS more aggressively doesn't damage it. Its a vehicle made for that purpose.
Unless you value the better platform and more sophisticated suspension and then their negatives are well worth the tradeoff. I would never buy another ES, but I would buy another GS. Just a much better car, proper premium car. CR is comparing the two the way you compare refrigerators.
If you don't care about any of that, then the ES is great.
Unless you value the better platform and more sophisticated suspension and then their negatives are well worth the tradeoff. I would never buy another ES, but I would buy another GS. Just a much better car, proper premium car. CR is comparing the two the way you compare refrigerators.
If you don't care about any of that, then the ES is great.
Yup...Camry in a suit. If a sterile driving experience is what you are after, its a great car.
CR is comparing the two the way you compare refrigerators.
I'm not qualified to speak to which of these two cars is better, but exactly this. That's what CR does. And I don't say that at a criticism -- I subscribe to the magazine.
CR has softenend a little in recent years, but in the past you knew what you were getting in a CR review: features, capacities and reliability per dollar spent. I test drove an Acura TL and RL and thought the RL was vastly superior in materials, luxury feel and the handling balance of torque vectoring AWD. CR didn't care about any of that. All they saw was the same size of car with the same set of electronic toys at a disadvantage of $15,000. I'm sure they regarded the ES/GS comparison the same way. It's not a wrong viewpoint, it's just theirs, and it's useful information if you understand that's where they come from.
I'm not qualified to speak to which of these two cars is better, but exactly this. That's what CR does. And I don't say that at a criticism -- I subscribe to the magazine.
CR has softenend a little in recent years, but in the past you knew what you were getting in a CR review: features, capacities and reliability per dollar spent. I test drove an Acura TL and RL and thought the RL was vastly superior in materials, luxury feel and the handling balance of torque vectoring AWD. CR didn't care about any of that. All they saw was the same size of car with the same set of electronic toys at a disadvantage of $15,000. I'm sure they regarded the ES/GS comparison the same way. It's not a wrong viewpoint, it's just theirs, and it's useful information if you understand that's where they come from.
Yep, great for looking for a dishwasher, not so great when looking at a car.
CR is excellent in comparing vehicles to one another generally. Also, I find them to be a great resource for safety and reliability data. However, when it comes to performance testing and expert opinion, Motor Trend and Car and Driver are better. What bugs me about them is they rarely mention reliability beyond their own testing experiences. They turn a blind eye to historical reliability data.
When deciding between a GS and ES in 2011 for my wife, we used all these resources. We settled on the ES mostly due to it's better 0-60, MPG, and its use of regular fuel. My wife doesn't care about handling. She loves the roomier cabin of the ES.
Basing a car off its 0-60 times is ridiculous the more I think about it. I can just see it: someone on the computer trying to determine what car they want. They see one does it at 5.8 seconds and the other is 6.1. The one that's 5.8 is a piece of crap BMW that is an endless money pit and the 6.1 is an ES. They go with the BMW even though you will NEVER notice a difference in real world driving between the two.
I guarantee anyone could do a 0-60 with two different cars, like in the example above, and they can't tell a 3/10 of a second difference. Just something that magazine writers use to form their opinions about what car is "better".
However, when it comes to performance testing and expert opinion, Motor Trend and Car and Driver are better
Well, that's at least partly because MT and C&D test more for all-out max-performance, even if it abuses the drivetrain. CR generally doesn't.....they are easier on the vehicle in performance-tests, although they do sometimes load up their vehicles and truck-beds to the rated passenger/cargo capacity to test them at full-rated-load.
Sorry, I don't remember my source from 10 years ago. I admit I got it wrong as I found a site just now that puts them equal, both at 6.2 seconds for the base sedans (the AWD GS got the 5.8 second run). I imagine the ES would do better running premium (not that I would). BTW, it looks like the ES beat the GS in 2014 and 2015.
CR is excellent in comparing vehicles to one another generally. Also, I find them to be a great resource for safety and reliability data. However, when it comes to performance testing and expert opinion, Motor Trend and Car and Driver are better. What bugs me about them is they rarely mention reliability beyond their own testing experiences. They turn a blind eye to historical reliability data.
When deciding between a GS and ES in 2011 for my wife, we used all these resources. We settled on the ES mostly due to it's better 0-60, MPG, and its use of regular fuel. My wife doesn't care about handling. She loves the roomier cabin of the ES.
CR is just part of the whole research process. There are other places as well
But overall, the Lexus is akin to bringing sake to a cabernet competition. Sure, it's technically wine, but it doesn't really match up, lacking the requisite flavor, color, and vivacity.
I find it interesting how much weight is put behind 0-60 times. I think most people are happy as long as their vehicle can keep up with traffic. Observed yesterday while sitting at a light. A Tesla Model 3 took off like a bat out of hell when the light changed. I'm sure he was happy he got the 2 blocks up to sit sit in traffic waiting for the next light to change....CR tends to test how 'most' people would drive a vehicle, whereas as stated above, MT & C&D are more performance oriented. As a disclaimer, I get all 3 magazines, so I find it interesting to compare when they all test the same vehicle.
I find it interesting how much weight is put behind 0-60 times. I think most people are happy as long as their vehicle can keep up with traffic. Observed yesterday while sitting at a light. A Tesla Model 3 took off like a bat out of hell when the light changed. I'm sure he was happy he got the 2 blocks up to sit sit in traffic waiting for the next light to change....CR tends to test how 'most' people would drive a vehicle, whereas as stated above, MT & C&D are more performance oriented. As a disclaimer, I get all 3 magazines, so I find it interesting to compare when they all test the same vehicle.
Honestly, if I press the throttle 10%, the Tesla will still leave the line faster than anything else there. In sedate driving, it'll do 0-60 in less than 6s. That's kinda the new reality coming with the transition.
10-21-21, 11:03 AM
