Lexus Survey on IS/ES Engines
01-09-11, 06:03 AM
#31
Lexus needs to step up to the plate and match what Ford and GM are doing with the Mustang and Camaro (aka V6= 300hp and V8=400+hp for their base and mid-level models).
If the domestic companies can now offer more bang for the buck with their engine choices while maintaining a fairly similar price range of their previous models (new Mustang GT vs Old Mustang GT), I don't see why Lexus can't do a similar approach. Base model IS having 300hp, mid-range IS having 380-400hp, and next-gen IS-F pushing 450-500hp.
If the domestic companies can now offer more bang for the buck with their engine choices while maintaining a fairly similar price range of their previous models (new Mustang GT vs Old Mustang GT), I don't see why Lexus can't do a similar approach. Base model IS having 300hp, mid-range IS having 380-400hp, and next-gen IS-F pushing 450-500hp.
01-09-11, 06:45 AM
#32
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lexus needs to step up to the plate and match what Ford and GM are doing with the Mustang and Camaro (aka V6= 300hp and V8=400+hp for their base and mid-level models).
If the domestic companies can now offer more bang for the buck with their engine choices while maintaining a fairly similar price range of their previous models (new Mustang GT vs Old Mustang GT), I don't see why Lexus can't do a similar approach. Base model IS having 300hp, mid-range IS having 380-400hp, and next-gen IS-F pushing 450-500hp.
If the domestic companies can now offer more bang for the buck with their engine choices while maintaining a fairly similar price range of their previous models (new Mustang GT vs Old Mustang GT), I don't see why Lexus can't do a similar approach. Base model IS having 300hp, mid-range IS having 380-400hp, and next-gen IS-F pushing 450-500hp.
And even given that, we do compete HP wise. The ISF has 400hp similar to the V8 camaro and mustang. The IS350 has 306hp similar to the V6 mustang and camaro.
They're not going to make a mid Level IS with 400hp, thats ridiculous. The ISF doesn't even compete with the cars you mentioned either. It competes with the C63, M3, RS4, etc...
If Ford were to make a car to compete with the lexus, it would be a small Lincoln sedan, and GM has a car already, it's called the CTS under their luxury name, which is cadillac.
Add something meaningful to this thread instead of comparing close hangers and christmas lights. Because those 2 things have more in common then what you mentioned.
01-09-11, 07:02 AM
#33
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
3.0-4.0 4cyl? Why make a 4cyl that big? It's pointless. You want a 5k redline?
An NA 3.x V8 would require super high compression to make the power your looking for, which would leave more room to pre-ignition. These things need to run on 87 octane in case someone F's up man. And they need to be reliable at all temps and altitudes.
I love how people in this thread just throw out completely illogical ideas. We don't need 4 different engines in the IS. It's not necessary. All you need, is a small engine and a larger engine, then a V8 performed with 450-500hp. The IS250 has less HP then many 4cyl's now. So to drop it down to a 4cyl and make it turbo would be great!! The car would probably have 250hp at least and be a blast to drive. Much better then what it is now. All of these people talking smack about dropping it to a 4cyl are retarded. A 2.0-2.4 4cyl turbo would be GREAT. Go drive an Evo then get back in your sled of a 250 and tell me what was more fun to drive.
OR, I'd even rather see a high revving 4cyl engine that made like 220hp. Even that would be more fun then the current is250. It's horrible now. It doesn't rev that high and makes embarrassing power for a 6cyl. The fact it's a 6cyl is a complete waste because it feels like no other modern 6cyl I've ever driven.
01-09-11, 07:33 AM
#34
The Lexus is NOT a competitor of the camaro and mustang, wtf are you talking about? Our cars are in a luxury brand, with many more options. The camaro doesn't even come with nav as an option. Your referring to a car that would have to made by toyota and be a 2 door rwd sports car with back seats. Our cars compete with the G37, Tsx, A4, 3 series and C class.
And even given that, we do compete HP wise. The ISF has 400hp similar to the V8 camaro and mustang. The IS350 has 306hp similar to the V6 mustang and camaro.
They're not going to make a mid Level IS with 400hp, thats ridiculous. The ISF doesn't even compete with the cars you mentioned either. It competes with the C63, M3, RS4, etc...
If Ford were to make a car to compete with the lexus, it would be a small Lincoln sedan, and GM has a car already, it's called the CTS under their luxury name, which is cadillac.
Add something meaningful to this thread instead of comparing close hangers and christmas lights. Because those 2 things have more in common then what you mentioned.
And even given that, we do compete HP wise. The ISF has 400hp similar to the V8 camaro and mustang. The IS350 has 306hp similar to the V6 mustang and camaro.
They're not going to make a mid Level IS with 400hp, thats ridiculous. The ISF doesn't even compete with the cars you mentioned either. It competes with the C63, M3, RS4, etc...
If Ford were to make a car to compete with the lexus, it would be a small Lincoln sedan, and GM has a car already, it's called the CTS under their luxury name, which is cadillac.
Add something meaningful to this thread instead of comparing close hangers and christmas lights. Because those 2 things have more in common then what you mentioned.
You're missing the point of what I was trying to get at. Though the new Mustang GT is NOT a DIRECT competitor to Lexus, to performance enthusiasts, it can be considered an INDIRECT competitor. Look at all the car magazine reviews directly comparing the new Mustang GT to the BMW M3/Lexus IS-F. Performance wise, they are apples to apples. You're paying an extra 30 thousand for the additional luxury amenities and refinements.
The original 2005-2010 Mustang GT with its 300HP V8 (2010 model with 315HP V8) sold for $28k (off the top of my head). A performance enthusiast can opt for the Lexus IS350 which cost an extra $10k but provided the luxuries and amenities that someone like me was looking for that could no way been fulfilled by the Mustang. To someone like me, it was worth the extra 10 grand to get the performance and luxuries I wanted in my vehicle(without the additional Lexus options).
Now fast forward to the 2011 models. For an additional $2k in price (new MSRP of $30k), Ford boosts the Mustang HP rating from 300HP -> 400+HP. Somehow, companies like Ford were able to find cost-efficient ways to provide the consumer with 400+HP cars for under 30k compared to the year before. Now compare the benefits gained by spending an extra $8k for the 2011 IS350 (since the MSRP price of the '11 GT jumped to 30k). I still get the luxuries and amenities that I was looking for but am now deficient 100HP compared to the INDIRECT performance competitor. The bang for the buck for the overall package with the '11 IS350 has been significantly reduced with the current crop of INDIRECT competition.
This is what lead to my comment regarding how Lexus needs to step up to the plate and find cost-effective ways to meeting the bang for the buck performance-to-price ratio that was raised by the indirect competitors while maintaining a $10-15k additional cost we are willing to pay for the added luxuries we love in a Lexus(without the added options). Currently, a 30 thousand dollar price gap separates the new Mustang Gt vs the BMW M3 and IS-F to have the luxury amenities and having similar performance. Are you really getting $30k of luxury and amenities to justify the price difference. The stakes have been raised for what the consumer can get for their money with the new Mustang Gt/Camaro.
I'm a Lexus enthusiast but I know if the competition can raise the stakes performance wise (100HP) for an additional $2k, there should be no reason Toyota/Lexus can't develop a new generation motor for, let's say, an addition $5k for 100HP extra compared to the current IS350. Hope that clears up what I was mentioning...
Last edited by redspencer; 01-09-11 at 07:56 AM.
01-09-11, 08:37 AM
#35
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LI, NY
Posts: 981
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I hear your point, but most people looking at Mustangs and camaros are looking for a 2 door RWD sport/muscle car. They may consider a 370z, g37, challenger, etc... They're not looking at IS350's. I get YOUR logic and what YOUR interested in, but I doubt Lexus is considering it because people usually look at similar cars at similar price levels. Maybe for you the extra 10k is worth it, but alot of people cant and dont want to afford another 33% for a car. In other words, most people shipping for a 30k car arent looking at 40k cars. The IS, A4, C class, 3 series, G37/G25, CTS and Tsx/TL are what they're considering. It's a luxury sporty sedan. I just dont think it's fair to offer advice to Lexus based on a fraction of what others are considering. The majority of the public is going to compare apples to apples.
01-09-11, 09:20 AM
#36
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Mustang GT and IS350 couldn't be further apart. The Mustang GT is a go fast, tune-friendly sports car. The IS350 is a luxury sports sedan.
I've never met anybody who was trying to decide between an IS350 or Mustang GT. Never.
Seriously redspencer, you just made up this concept of "indirect competition." It's about as arbitrary and frivolous as me saying that an indirect competitor of the BMW 335i is the Subaru WRX Sti. Oh, they have similar straight line performance so they must be indirect competitors, but the WRX STi offers better performance bang for the buck. Are you kidding me?
The IS350 competes with the 335i, g37, c350, A4.
If I want a car that can offer 400 HP for around the price of an IS350, it exists, it's called the Mustang 5.0. I don't want that car. Not interested.
Among the direct competitors the only cars that interest me are the 335i and the g37.
I've never met anybody who was trying to decide between an IS350 or Mustang GT. Never.
Seriously redspencer, you just made up this concept of "indirect competition." It's about as arbitrary and frivolous as me saying that an indirect competitor of the BMW 335i is the Subaru WRX Sti. Oh, they have similar straight line performance so they must be indirect competitors, but the WRX STi offers better performance bang for the buck. Are you kidding me?
The IS350 competes with the 335i, g37, c350, A4.
If I want a car that can offer 400 HP for around the price of an IS350, it exists, it's called the Mustang 5.0. I don't want that car. Not interested.
Among the direct competitors the only cars that interest me are the 335i and the g37.
01-09-11, 09:26 AM
#37
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: CA
Posts: 717
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And also, as for the topic at hand, the new IS 0 to 60 in 6.9 seconds is clearly referring to the base model IS (IS250) which would be a tremendous performance upgrade. The current IS250 gets 0 to 60 in 7.9 seconds.
The is350 gets 0 to 60 in 4.9 and i don't anticipate that figure changing too much with the power increase to 330 - 340 HP. Lexus will follow BMW closely when determining performance for the successor to the IS350. Lexus doesn't give a rat's *** about how great of a "performance bang for the buck" the Mustang 5.0 is because it doesn't compete with Ford.
The is350 gets 0 to 60 in 4.9 and i don't anticipate that figure changing too much with the power increase to 330 - 340 HP. Lexus will follow BMW closely when determining performance for the successor to the IS350. Lexus doesn't give a rat's *** about how great of a "performance bang for the buck" the Mustang 5.0 is because it doesn't compete with Ford.
01-09-11, 11:06 AM
#38
Seriously redspencer, you just made up this concept of "indirect competition." It's about as arbitrary and frivolous as me saying that an indirect competitor of the BMW 335i is the Subaru WRX Sti. Oh, they have similar straight line performance so they must be indirect competitors, but the WRX STi offers better performance bang for the buck. Are you kidding me?
http://www.businessdictionary.com/de...mpetition.html
"Competition among the suppliers of different types of products that satisfy the same needs. For example, a pizza shop competes indirectly with a fried chicken shop, but directly with another pizza shop."
One of many professional reviews and COMPARISON of the BMW M3 vs the 2011 Ford Mustang GT:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/index.html
This qualifies as INDIRECT COMPETITION for a consumer looking for a brand new car that can match the BMW M3 "Performance-wise" on the road course. If this satisfies the consumer's need, it would be an acceptable substitute and therefore take away a potential sale from BMW.
Do you understand what indirect competition means now and its relevance?
Last edited by redspencer; 01-09-11 at 11:55 AM.
01-09-11, 11:24 AM
#39
Driver
iTrader: (2)
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: NC
Posts: 149
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately I am afraid this is what we're going to see everywhere. Top Gear recently made the point that the Bugatti Veyron may never be topped because the era of the gasoline supercar is over. While the IS is clearly not a Veyron, I think that prediction will hold true everywhere. Rather than charge people for the enviromental/social impact of fuel consumption, governments and international treaties will effectively start banning "non-efficient" cars. Anyway, enough about that.
While I applaud thinking of ways to build a better mousetrap. I think it's baffling that they'd consider going to a 4 cyl when they have a 300hp engine that gets 30mpg (mine does when I'm not driving like a maniac) on the highway. While fuel economy is increasingly important to people, I think they line where they deploy that would be the HS line that (nobody has purchased i can find) rather than in their sportiest model.
I think it would be interesting to see what they could do with a diesel engine, if just for the torque. Selling luxury buyers on a diesel is a tough road to hoe, especially in the US, but if anybody could, it's Toyota/Lexus
While I applaud thinking of ways to build a better mousetrap. I think it's baffling that they'd consider going to a 4 cyl when they have a 300hp engine that gets 30mpg (mine does when I'm not driving like a maniac) on the highway. While fuel economy is increasingly important to people, I think they line where they deploy that would be the HS line that (nobody has purchased i can find) rather than in their sportiest model.
I think it would be interesting to see what they could do with a diesel engine, if just for the torque. Selling luxury buyers on a diesel is a tough road to hoe, especially in the US, but if anybody could, it's Toyota/Lexus
01-09-11, 11:57 AM
#41
Rookie
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: ny
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unfortunately I am afraid this is what we're going to see everywhere. Top Gear recently made the point that the Bugatti Veyron may never be topped because the era of the gasoline supercar is over. While the IS is clearly not a Veyron, I think that prediction will hold true everywhere. Rather than charge people for the enviromental/social impact of fuel consumption, governments and international treaties will effectively start banning "non-efficient" cars. Anyway, enough about that.
While I applaud thinking of ways to build a better mousetrap. I think it's baffling that they'd consider going to a 4 cyl when they have a 300hp engine that gets 30mpg (mine does when I'm not driving like a maniac) on the highway. While fuel economy is increasingly important to people, I think they line where they deploy that would be the HS line that (nobody has purchased i can find) rather than in their sportiest model.
I think it would be interesting to see what they could do with a diesel engine, if just for the torque. Selling luxury buyers on a diesel is a tough road to hoe, especially in the US, but if anybody could, it's Toyota/Lexus
While I applaud thinking of ways to build a better mousetrap. I think it's baffling that they'd consider going to a 4 cyl when they have a 300hp engine that gets 30mpg (mine does when I'm not driving like a maniac) on the highway. While fuel economy is increasingly important to people, I think they line where they deploy that would be the HS line that (nobody has purchased i can find) rather than in their sportiest model.
I think it would be interesting to see what they could do with a diesel engine, if just for the torque. Selling luxury buyers on a diesel is a tough road to hoe, especially in the US, but if anybody could, it's Toyota/Lexus
01-09-11, 01:46 PM
#42
3.0-4.0 4cyl? Why make a 4cyl that big? It's pointless. You want a 5k redline?
An NA 3.x V8 would require super high compression to make the power your looking for, which would leave more room to pre-ignition. These things need to run on 87 octane in case someone F's up man. And they need to be reliable at all temps and altitudes.
I love how people in this thread just throw out completely illogical ideas. We don't need 4 different engines in the IS. It's not necessary. All you need, is a small engine and a larger engine, then a V8 performed with 450-500hp. The IS250 has less HP then many 4cyl's now. So to drop it down to a 4cyl and make it turbo would be great!! The car would probably have 250hp at least and be a blast to drive. Much better then what it is now. All of these people talking smack about dropping it to a 4cyl are retarded. A 2.0-2.4 4cyl turbo would be GREAT. Go drive an Evo then get back in your sled of a 250 and tell me what was more fun to drive.
OR, I'd even rather see a high revving 4cyl engine that made like 220hp. Even that would be more fun then the current is250. It's horrible now. It doesn't rev that high and makes embarrassing power for a 6cyl. The fact it's a 6cyl is a complete waste because it feels like no other modern 6cyl I've ever driven.
An NA 3.x V8 would require super high compression to make the power your looking for, which would leave more room to pre-ignition. These things need to run on 87 octane in case someone F's up man. And they need to be reliable at all temps and altitudes.
I love how people in this thread just throw out completely illogical ideas. We don't need 4 different engines in the IS. It's not necessary. All you need, is a small engine and a larger engine, then a V8 performed with 450-500hp. The IS250 has less HP then many 4cyl's now. So to drop it down to a 4cyl and make it turbo would be great!! The car would probably have 250hp at least and be a blast to drive. Much better then what it is now. All of these people talking smack about dropping it to a 4cyl are retarded. A 2.0-2.4 4cyl turbo would be GREAT. Go drive an Evo then get back in your sled of a 250 and tell me what was more fun to drive.
OR, I'd even rather see a high revving 4cyl engine that made like 220hp. Even that would be more fun then the current is250. It's horrible now. It doesn't rev that high and makes embarrassing power for a 6cyl. The fact it's a 6cyl is a complete waste because it feels like no other modern 6cyl I've ever driven.
How about not calling names?
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
PoleSuby
ES - 1st to 4th Gen (1990-2006)
7
10-24-17 06:07 PM
