cb109

Hello, I'm cross-shopping the 2010-2012 Lexus ES350 vs 2014-2016 Kia Cadenza and hope to get some insights from the Lexus community. Perhaps some of you have made similar comparisons or might even have experience with both vehicles. It is not typical to compare different model years, but they are roughly similar in price this way. Any comments contrasting these specific generations are welcome.

Reasons I like the Cadenza:
- safety features like blind-spot monitoring
- newer model year / lower mileage for similar price
- value of more tech features for the price
- rear heated seats
- seemingly decent infotainment/navigation system
- rarity

Reasons I like the ES350:
- reputation for reliability
- refinement

Things I'm looking for:
- reliability and hassle-free ownership
- long lifetime

For reliability, lately virtually every vehicle review, reliability site, forums/owners, and even some mechanics, have been glowing about Kia's and Hyundai's quality and reliability in recent years. Some even suggest it has surpassed Toyota and Honda. But that does seem to be based on predicted reliability. So imagine the shock of seeing Kia rank terribly as measured by engine and transmission issues for trade-ins: Kia - Dashboard Light

The Cadenza does not have a ranking page, due to being too recent and insufficient data. Maybe the Optima is similar, but that's not good news: Kia Optima Reliability - Dashboard Light

Meanwhile the ES350 is excellent: Lexus ES Reliability - Dashboard Light

I don't take this as conclusive (2002 Impala is rated poorly Chevrolet Impala Reliability - Dashboard Light , but it's been great for us--we never traded it in), nevertheless it does cause some concern.

We tend to keep vehicles until end of life (1988 Taurus for 16 years, 2002 Impala nearly 17 years and now needs to be replaced). Here in Canada the "cause of death" of our previous cars has been compromised structural integrity due to rust. Otherwise they would have been kept even longer.

So, given these criteria,

• Which would you recommend between, say, a 2011 ES350 and a 2014 Cadenza, and why?
• Which would you expect to be more reliable?
• What might be each one's life expectancy?

Thanks in advance for your input!

ESh

I would never consider Kia or Hyundai over Lexus.

jagtoes

Based on what your "wants" are you should get the KIA. From your post I believe you won't be satisfied with the ES as it doesn't have the safety features you are looking for. Because of that you won't be happy buying a car without them considering you have the opportunity to do that with your next car purchase. Also reliability studies are based on owners who follow the maintenance schedule to the letter. There aren't to many people who do this . The question to also ask yourself is how long (miles/years) do you expect to own it.

igzy

I would say try them out both and choose the one that appeals to you better.

For most owners the car appeal always wins over reliability, quality and other factors.

A friend of mine was shopping for a new SUV and his decision was between Lexus RX and BMW X5. He chose the X5 due to the image he believed he was getting with it. He doesn't care that he has to go to the dealer a few times a month for various quality issues on it...

cb109

Which is why Toyota came up with Lexus, Hyundai finally relented to create Genesis, and why Kia will likely come up with its own premium branding eventually. Many comment that the Cadenza's biggest weakness is its Kia logo.

If you have more concrete reasons for your position, I'd be interested to hear them. But the badge in itself isn't important to me. Lexus is known for its consistency in quality, but in most cases the quality seems to depend more on the specific vehicle model than on the manufacturer.

There's no question that the Cadenza offers the better value in terms of features for price, which is what makes it so interesting for its target audience. However, "needed" reliability trumps "wanted" features. That's an easy choice. I was initially leaning towards the Cadenza, but the mixed signals regarding the Cadenza's reliability is what got me reconsidering the ES350. Also, fewer features mean fewer things to go wrong... The dashboard-light reliability is based on trade-ins and only looks at engine or transmission issues, which means 1) it captures a broad set of circumstances, not just those who pampered their vehicles, and 2) it does not identify other types of problems such as electrical, software, etc.

There is no intention to sell whichever vehicle we choose. I'd hope for about a decade of life. We don't put much mileage. Chassis rust is the main killer. Our current 2002 vehicle has only 199,225 km (123,793 miles) averaging 11,719 km/year (7282 miles/year) over just under 17 years.

You're right, we'll have to test drive both. Who knows what deal maker/breaker that will uncover. I'm also hoping to leverage the experience of those who have dealt with one or both of these vehicles to make a better decision.

In our case, the priority is function over form. Reliability and no-hassle ownership are major considerations and that's a bit of an unknown for the Cadenza. If its reliability is good, the feature set is certainly appealing.
On the other hand, the image of a luxury brand is a con in my view since it would stand out a bit too much on our street. There's only one Lexus (a beautiful CT200h), and there was a BMW 3 series, now replaced with an X1. Mostly the street is full of Toyotas and GMs. The understated looks of the ES350 work in its favor in my view. Lexus knew what they were doing.

-----

Any specific comments about these (2014-2016 Cadenza and 2010-2012 ES350) generations?

Any buying advice of what to look for? Such as:

• Nav: Useful, worth getting? Outdated or updateable maps? Common issues? I believe Cadenza works with Android Auto and Apple CarPlay, so that's a plus. Nav seems kind of rare in the ES350, and not sure how useful it is with its age.
• Model year: the 2011+ ES350 has the appeal of recommending regular (87+ octane) fuel rather than premium (91+ octane). I know of the long-standing debate on the use of regular fuel with older model years, but it's unclear to me what the long-term consequences are, and what the differences are between the different vehicles (ES350, Camry, Avalon, etc) or model years (ES350 2010 vs 2011) that have different recommendations with the same engine. Following the official guidelines means less worry. This makes the 2011+ models interesting since lower gas prices and fuel economy are more appealing than slightly higher performance. Similarly, the 2013+ ES350 models have more rear legroom, being based on the Avalon. But if the rumors are true about the stiffer ride, that's something to avoid for us, both due to preference and due to rough roads and potholes.

1eyedjak

I just bought a used 2010 ES350. I dont know what other features you could need that are not already on the ES350 as far as gadgets go. 2 weeks in and I am still finding new features on my car..

I am not familiar with the KIA but if I were looking at it, and I was looking at some KIA and HYUNDAI couple years ago, I would wonder about all the electronics. I know I was looking at some new nav units for my RAV4 couple years ago..and they had all these units from china they all claim to do everything but most of them didnt work very well. I tend to trust the gear in the Lexus but I just wonder what all is in these Korean cars and how reliable is it. id check into issues with that. motor , tranny those are all probably good. id just worry so much tech in the car that might fail.

the ES i have all works fantastic. I literally dont know what else would be missing except maybe heated rear seats ..my ES does not have that in rear.

jagtoes

Kia's competitor to the luxury market is the K900 . It's going after the upscale types like Genesis and Lexus LS models.

cb109

Yes, exactly. I read on forums of Cadenzas getting the nav units or parking sensors replaced multiple times under warranty. I realize forums will be biased toward negative experiences, but I could really do without such worries.

Features Cadenzas tend to have that ES tend not to, at least for those specific model years:
- blind spot monitoring
- rear cross traffic alert
- lane departure warning

You already mentioned the rear heated seats. The infotainment system on the Cadenza seemed well reviewed and responsive compared to competitors. And there's Android Auto / Apple Carplay, which Toyota/Lexus are still lagging on or just now introducing in 2019...

Interestingly the Avalon sometimes has those safety features. Even high-end trims of the Camry. But the Avalon seems priced too close to the ES to be worth considering, and there are fewer of them available.

To be frank, the value proposition of the Cadenza had it as my first choice initially, but reliability uncertainty has me now leaning towards an older ES simply for the peace of mind. But the added age and mileage on an older ES might negate that?

It would be interesting to hear from anyone who has first-hand experience contrasting these vehicles.

And congrats on your purchase.

chuyrobles

Most of the ratings out there are for initial quality and/or initial driving reviews - when the car is new. Add 200K miles and a Hyundai/Kia have no chance keeping up with a Toyota/Lexus. Ask any mechanic with 20+ years in the business. So, if you plan on getting rid of the car after 100K, sure, do it for the low initial cost. After that the Hyundai/Kia will start costing more to maintain/repair.

heidihidin

A 2016 Kia is a much better choice than a 2010 Lexus (if truly same price) unless maybe it is an LS
a 3 years old Kia will last atleast 3 more years hassle free for sure as on a 9 year old close to 100k ES you will need coolant, plugs, maybe water pump, maybe alternator, maybe suspension very soon.

cb109

The similar price would be between say a 2014 Cadenza and a 2011 ES. Give or take a year for either one. A sudden need for a bunch of maintenance, even on a reliable car, wouldn't be much fun.

The lower initial cost would/could actually be an older ES. The Cadenza started selling here only in 2014, so there are no models older than that.

You have a point about initial quality. That's what the dashboard-light website points out with their long-term powertrain reliability ratings. The poor rating for Kia is surprising because, aside from initial quality awards, some long-time mechanics started years ago saying that in their experience Toyota was no longer the reliability leader. They claimed that Kia/Hyundai had caught up or surpassed it even though previously they would have sworn by Toyota. It's confusing, and I'm not a mechanic to be able to assess this myself.

Another thought is that perhaps the better option depends on the condition and price of the specific deals I find. Maybe my question isn't answerable if both vehicles are generally good. Or it might not be answerable since the Cadenza hasn't been around long enough to have any concrete idea of its long-term reliability.

igzy

If you look up JD Power dependability study from 2017 it will give you a very good idea on how they perform after 3 years in use (2017 study is for the 2014 model). That study is a pretty good indicator of the long term durability. In that same study you will find that ES has been the winner in its segment for years, and Cadenza much worse than Camry (they are in the same class)...

cb109

Interesting and confusing. Scores don't seem to make sense. They give marks out of 10 but the overall mark is certainly not evenly weighted over the categories.

Overall / Mechanical / Exterior and Interior / Features and Controls

The Cadenza is strangely placed in the "Large Car" class, ranking 4th with the Avalon at #1.
https://www.jdpower.com/Cars/Ratings...2017/Large-Car

#1 Avalon: 10/10/9/8 https://www.jdpower.com/Cars/2014/To...ted-V6/Ratings
#2 Lacrosse 10/9/10/8
#3 Taurus 9/9/9/9
#4 Cadenza: 9/9/10/9 https://www.jdpower.com/Cars/2014/Ki...-4D-V6/Ratings

How could the Avalon rank higher than the Cadenza based on these scores? Even if you weight the Mechanical category more, the Cadenza should still be 2nd not 4th, since the Lacrosse and Taurus each do worse than the Cadenza in one category.

Also, in the Performance category, the Cadenza (10) does far better than the Avalon (7).

It might not make sense comparing between classes, since the scores are relative to cars within each class, but for a rough idea, I also took a look the 2011 and 2014 Lexus ES. The ES consistently scores 10 for Mechanical, but the other scores are the same or worse, including Performance category. Although, again, this is against others in the "Compact" Premium Car class, so it may be meaningless to contrast with the Cadenza.

https://www.jdpower.com/Cars/2011/Le...-ES350/Ratings
https://www.jdpower.com/Cars/2014/Le...350-V6/Ratings

If judging by JD Power's ratings, I'd go with the Cadenza as it ranks very well in Dependability, beats the Avalon in Performance, and presents a better value. But the results are based on feedback from "verified owners", so it's unclear how reliable or consistent this information would be. It would be nice if they at least gave the sample size of the studies for each vehicle. dashboard-light.com seems more consistent (powertrain reliability based on inspections at trade-in) and more indicative of long-term reliability (vehicles older than 3 years).

Btw, @igzy are you in Ontario, Canada? If so, how has your ES350 fared in terms of underbody rust? Given Canadian winters and road conditions, this is nearly always the vehicle killer for us.

igzy

Yeah, they only give you the general score by category but not the true #s (that's for paying users). Some details are available in this release:
https://www.jdpower.com/business/pre...dability-study

As you can see there ES won in the premium segment, whereas Cadenza came 3rd in its category. Numerically, I can tell you that Cadenza scored 30% worse than ES.

Rust wise, my 12-yo is fairing OK even though I got it second hand from Quebec. The only rust showing is on the trunk lid around the plastic insert where the licence plate goes. I suspect that salt grains get stuck between the plastic trim and metal and rub the paint through. I intend to clean that up in the summer. Other spot was the exhaust flex pipe that rusted through, I replaced it last summer...

cb109

Which details? The links I shared seem to include more info.

I can't discuss what I can't see, but what I do see doesn't make sense to me. Also, comparing across segments is unlikely to make sense, unfortunately.

What about underbody rust to the chassis? That's my biggest concern for vehicle longevity.

Initially I was eyeing the Cadenza for its value. Then, my interest switched to the ES for its reliability and parts availability (how easy is finding parts for the Cadenza?). Now I'm questioning the wisdom of buying an older car in a northern climate, where 15-20 years seems like the typical maximum (safely) usable lifespan. For a given budget, consider dividing the purchase price by the remaining years of life. Hard to know what that is, but with a similarly priced ES likely being ~3 years older, what's the likelihood of "breaking even" or coming out ahead?

The total cost of ownership favors Kia ($110 / $440) vs Lexus ($220 / $590) in maintenance and repair costs (year 3 2014 models / year 10 2007 models), according to: https://www.consumerreports.org/car-...car-ownership/ Again, there's the question of the credibility of this information.