TRDFantasy

I agree ... this is all rather strange. Reading the "lows" for the GS ... too much sensory deprivation ... almost too subtle for the "talking primates" buying cars . I'm sorry, but that comment right there practically generalizes and ridicules car buyers as primitive, stupid cavemen ... to Car and Driver ... for insulting not only their readers, but car drivers in general.

Now, it's quite obvious that Car & Driver disagrees with atmosphere and the design philosophy for Lexus/Toyota cars. Car & Driver consistenly favours cars that are low price, high performance, and feel "aggressive". Car & Driver rarely places importance on ride comfort, fuel economy, how smooth or quiet the car is, or the car's atmosphere. When I read a car mag comparison, I expect a much more well rounded and more in depth review, covering every aspect of the car, not just sport or performance. This is especially considering the fact that car mag journalists and editors are "professionals", yet some of their reviews seem to have no reasoning or logic, at least when making overall comparisons. I would really love to see Car and Driver advertise they are about sport and performance specifically. I personally feel Car and Driver does not have an objective basis on which to review luxury cars, or highly refined cars, since you rarely see that play any significance in thier reviews or comparisons.

On that note ... now, I've sat in both the GS and the RL ... and examined both in fair detail. Granted, I haven't driven either of them, but even without driving the cars, this comparison seems awfully fishy to me ... as several other C & D comparisons have in the past. Now, I don't even pay too much attention to mag comparisons and reviews, but it's still mind boggling as to exactly HOW the RL got 2nd place?

Personally, I would not give the RL higher ergonomics than the GS, as the comparison did. To me, the GS interior and ergonomics seemed to be very intuitive, and everything seemed well thought out. On the RL, the centre dash and the console with the myriad of buttons is not exactly something I would call ergonomic. I also personally found the GS seats to be more comfortable than the RL, but that may be subjective. In regards to fit and finish as well, I disagree with giving the RL a higher score than the GS. Granted, the RL does have a great fit and finish .... but I wasn't particularly impressed or intrigued by it. With the GS, although the interior may seem more barren or simple, I still felt that the fit and finish were impeccable, and I really love how the centre area seems to flow or almost morph out of the dash ... where as the RL console seems "tacked on", like the M45, which I tend to dislike. On touch and feel, the GS interior felt to be of slighly higher quality than the RL, at least to me.

Exterior styling is subjective, but I still find it funny that the RL tied the GS in styling.

The biggest mystery to me is how the RL got a higher score on "performance" than the GS. Yes the RL may be heavier than the GS, but in return in has AWD, which the GS does not. The GS handles at least as well as the RL, and I reckon better to be honest. More importantly, the GS has considerably more performance than the RL, no matter how you slice it. There is just no way the RL's V6 is in any way more powerful than the Lexus V8. If Car and Driver made this comparison based on feel, or some vague, obscure judgement, here's another to C & D.

In short, this article changes nothing for me. It was clear the M45 would win this, and I did not doubt that. Ironically, I was not surprised to see the RL beating the GS, as this seems to be a C & D pattern. My only surprise was the BMW 5 scoring so low.

flipside909

No doubt the M45's reviews are well deserved. But a 2nd place finish for the RL? Shady.

Incendiary

Ah, the usual suspects, complaining about C&D after Lexus "loses" a comparo, especially to Acura.

I know y'all won't quit bashing Acura, but will y'all quit bashing C&D if and when the other autorags place the cars in this same order?

And to those talking about how decibel levels, etc. weren't taken into account, keep in mind that these magazines are not catered towards people who are interested in cars as quiet and elegant transportation. Fuel economy, etc.? Honestly, who gives a crap? Consumer Reports ranks all of that. Edmunds does the same thing. However, these latter organizations, unlike C&D, R&T, etc., care relatively little about "driving enthusiasts," which most of you purport to be. I admit that I wouldn't want a luxury "sports sedan" (a term that I use with great reluctance, considering the computerized intrusions that most of these cars have, and the dearth of true manual transmissions in this class) cabin to sound like an F-16 on takeoff while I'm running 110 on the highway, and I agree that I wouldn't want to have to stop at Exxon three times just to get home from the dealership, but these are and should be minor issues relative to driving feel and experience. In fact, ranking factors in importance from 0-100, 100 being the most important, my personal opinion is that handling/road feel should be 60, power/acceleration 30, and "luxury" accoutrements 10. I suspect many of the "enthusiast" mags feel similarly, if not to the same proportions.

Anyway, whatever. "Acura sucks, Lexus REWLZ, C&D loves Honda, everyone's out to get Lexus, Infiniti won because it was sporty, Infiniti still isn't a Lexus, everyone but Lexus has horrible resale and horrible reliability..." And life at CL continues as it always has.

jwaters

Let's put things in perspective here. Since when is 5.7 seconds to 60mph a dissapointment? I'm sorry you feel the new GS doesn't live up to the performance standards set at that time by the 2nd generation GS. You do however realize that you are comparing performance stats from two different cars tested on different days, right? The testing conditions (weather, altitude, etc.) play a big role in acceleration performance. In any case, the '06 Lexus GS430 was the 2nd fastest car in the comparo, period. Lexus will be releasing faster/higher powered variants of the GS in approx. 18-24 months. For the rest of us (i.e. the majority of Lexus GS buyers), the GS is plenty fast. If speed were everything the Acura would have placed near last anyway. Maybe owning a blindingly fast sedan is of utmost importance to some buyers (and I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that)....if so, there are cars like the Chyrsler SRT-8 & CTS-V that fill that niche.

GS3rdwow

Does anyone feel that the new GS3 is underpowered versus its competitors? The direction they are taking with the L-Finesse design seems to concern with just that - the style. There is no mention of performance upgrades with that L-Finesse. Perhaps I misunderstood about the entirety of that. However, it would be nice if there was performance upgrades to the GS similar to its competitors priced similarly between competing models. The infiniti M houses 280hp but also lacks in certain areas that the GS picks up on. I guess there is a tradeoff between bothween both cars. Dont get me wrong guys, I actually love the entire GS for its entirety feel the design language and appeal of the GS - superior in quality, appeal, and beauty. Between the GS and the M, I would take the GS hands down because of how aggresive and bold the car looks. But I also feel that a litle more step up is needed in power and performance. With this new GS3, before any specs were released concerning its horepower, torque, etc, I anticipated something between 260-280, particularly for a starting price of 43K. Perhaps I looked at this sort of wrong and did not concern other facts. Just wanted to give my 2 cents on power and performance as well, or LP-Finesse, I should say... ( LuxuryPower-Finesse)

KevinGS

Oops! Ignore this...

flipside909

There's a valid arguement here. C&D's numbers never really cohere with their assessments which is why everyone questions how they assess their rankings which is why everyone can only sit back and wonder. Sure C&D favors a certain style of vehicle, but that's their assessment and style.. Is that what all non-lexus owners that come here complain about when then read stuff in a specific genre forum? It's only obvious you're in a Lexus forum...expect the bias, don't be suprised it's getting old and there's nothing new about it. I find it funny those who love C&D and only believe in what they write, it's not the definitive in automotive journalism. It's almost ignorant in a way. Get over it.

spwolf

I think main mistake of CD review was to give out points - because they make no sense at all. Take the points out of the question, and then just why you like the car better and voila...

I am only one seeing that here?

Point based, CD is telling us that fit and finish in RL are as better than in GS as GS's V8 engine is more powerful than RL's V6? I mean, wtf? Points make no sense.

If they had said, RL is great because it has only 4x4 system, that makes it feel nimble, and it has a lot of standard equipment, which still makes it 5k cheaper than GS and GS has VDIM than cant be turned on - then I would get it easily... Point wise, it makes no sense...

flipside909

Contradictory stats/conclusion. Exactly!

rheiy

Lots of interesting comments by everyone. Personally, I could care less where C&D, RT, or any other car mag ranks or will rank the GS. The writers provide information on performance and handling numbers that is useful when trying to size up each car’s potential. However, when it comes to styling and ergonomics, it’s all subjective. What’s good for me may not be good for someone else. All the cars in the group are excellent pieces of machinery with each one offering something that will appeal to someone. For those who like M45 – buy one, those who like BMW – buy one, those who like Lexus – buy one. Its your hard earned money and you should base your decision on what you like and not on where the car ranked in a comparo.
BTW, I'm a Lexus fan and waiting for the more powerful version of the GS4 because that is what's good for me.

ARRII

With all due respect. If you really want to talk about the origin of true sport sedans you have to give credit to the Nissan Maxima (1991 to date) who really paved the way for the GS. The M, I believe is Infiniti's spin-off of the Maxima concept. I'm huge Lexus fan like everyone here, but lets give credit where credit is due.

Gojirra99

I agree, whether it's Edmunds or Car & Driver, or any of the other car mags, their rankings are mostly worthless, since all of them are flawed in one way or another in their methodology, & the only useful info are the stats. they generate in the tests which can provide some guidelines. Ultimately it's the test drives done by an individual buyer that are of ultimate importance in their choice of which car is best for them.

flipside909

What 1Sick was trying to convey, the GS400 was the first in it's class or their countrymates (if you will) a performance RWD Luxury sedan to hit the sub 6 second 0-60 mark. At that time in 1998, Infiniti nor Acura had a competitor for that specific class.

Sure the Maxima in 1991 was labeled the 4DSC (4 Door Sports Car), but it's a whole different genre for a whole different class (FWD Midsize class).

doug_999

Unfortunately C&D had to put this crap into place when their readers could not comprehend when a car would score more points and yet C&D would rate it lower. See C&D's old ranking allowed them to ignore point totals - which is the way it should be since the sum of the parts does not make the machine. But now they total the points, just like all the other magazines and personally I think they adjust them so that their true feelings come through.

That said, their true feelings match mine (sorry Flipside) - When C&D likes a car, guess what? I do too! Turns out what appeals to them also appeals to me - thus me and about a million other people read the magazine. However, I am disappointed they did not put the 545 and E500 in there. As a prospective buyer in this category, the extra $5K the 545 is going to cost me over the GS430 does not turn me away from the car.

kreilly

I believe that C&D corrects its performance stats to standard atmospheric conditions, so the numbers should be pretty comparable. But you're right, the only way to get a perfect comparison is to test the cars together. I think it's reasonable to say the cars are about evenly matched. My point was that there has been no noticable improvement since 2002 (or 1998 for that matter).

I will admit, I'm a bit of a horsepower junkie. And I was not implying that the GS is in any way slow. It's just that over the years, all of the competition has gotten faster. Yes, it was the second fastest in this test but for my $55k I want to be more than just a little faster than grandpa in the $30k Avalon (ran a 14.7 Qtr bt Motor Trend). And if you had included the V-8s from BMW & MB (yes they are a little more expensive but probably not too much of a stretch for someone already willing to spend $55k) the GS fares less well.

I guess I just wanted to be as excited about the new GS as I was when I read the first C&D review of the 1998 GS400 7.5 years ago. It raised the bar in terms of performance & refinement versus just about anything. Does anyone remember the ads that touted the "fastest automatic sedan in the world?" It's not reasonable to expect that title back, but I guess I wanted a little something more.

I will wait another year or two in hopes of a new V-8. But I wonder how many won't & will end up in M45s instead. I know that engine upgrades generate publicity, but I wonder if it's worth lost sales in the interim. I think there's little doubt these days that horsepower sells.