UncleSpud

Also on the list is the Mercedes CLA. Mercedes can't manufacture and sell these cars fast enough. Owning a FWD Benz wouldn't be on my bucket list, but you can't argue with that kind of success.

Glashub

Although the reviews below refer to the 350 pay attention to the counter point about the interior. I suspect CR would think the Q50 or a Hyundai would be the definition of a luxury interior i.e. swooping lines, comfortable passengers, etc. whereas the IS is extremely driver focused. It places the drivers experience over the luxury experience, I guess.

The New York Times has the IS in the Top 10 by both auto journalists.

"8. LEXUS IS 350 ($40,375 base, $49,615 as tested) As Lexus begins to wake from a design slumber, the new IS is dressed and ready to party. The Predator-mouth grille leaves some viewers squeamish, but that’s about the only quibble: The car is limber and fleet with its 306-horsepower V-6, and it builds a mischievous rapport with its pilot. The modern cabin — distinctive, deluxe and refreshingly different from the Germans — may be my favorite of any sport sedan in this set."

http://www.nytimes.com/slideshow/201...-slides-5.html

The LA Times had the IS as one of the top 10 cars -

"Lexus IS 350: Toyota's luxury division puts out solid, well-appointed cars that are typically boring. The new $36,845 Lexus IS 350 breaks that pattern. Remove the logo and you might mistake this aggressive sports sedan for something from Germany. From the side, the IS is sleek, with a long hood. In front, lines of the grille flow across the hood, presenting a sense of movement with a hint of menace. The elegant interior boasts the precision fit and finish you expect from Japanese automakers. The IS 350 pairs a 3.5-liter V-6 with an eight-speed automatic transmission to provide sports-car acceleration. The car is stiff, connected to the road with nimble steering."

http://www.latimes.com/business/auto...#ixzz2p3miGXGD

keyframe13

I saw comparison with BMW 328 and Cadillac ATS http://www.edmunds.com/bmw/3-series/...ison-test.html

And i hate to see some fan boys talking bad about CR just because they bash the IS250.. They are so right on that one that i cannot agree more.. Not only that but just about any reviewers like edmunds, motor trend and others share the same opinion about is250. It simply not a competitive car.

I guess that what's you get if you carry a freaking crappy engine since 2005..almost 10 years with no improvement when all your competitors are offering both performance and better gas mileage, the IS250 has none of them. A pretty car and that's about it.

cpham4

CR says the car is small? It's 3 inches bigger than the previous version.

it's slow? Really? Maybe they should review the BMW 320i? 180hp, now that is slow! Or will they give BMW 320i high reviews for being gas efficient? It does get 24/36 which beats 21/30 big time, but again, different hp's. I came from a 350z and I don't think the 250 is that sluggish. In the right power band, it's pretty quick.

Maybe CR drove a base model? Because I've driven a base and the interior does not look like what the price tag of the car is for. Lots of plastic everywhere.

keyframe13

I doubt they test the base model at $44k. I'll say was full option at that price. P.s. the same plastic is with all the options

Glashub

^^^^

I'm confused -- the engine tech you call crappy was good enough for you in 2010 right? BTW, the 2014 engines have the patented Toyota hybrid DI/port system. Yours doesn't.

smokyis350

iTrader: (21)

I agree. The 250 is just extremely underpowered for it's weight. For someone who is paying nearly 40k for a car, I expect something a tad bit faster. I know most of you guys wouldn't be racing your car but I still care for a quick acceleration time in stop and go situations or merging onto freeway.

The 250 beats the 350 on MPG by 2 MPG (30, 28MPG) according to the Lexus website. And the price difference is just around $3500 between the 2. It's just hard to pass up a 350 for a couple thousand bucks, IMHO.

cpham4

Not true. Base model does not receive leather on the sides of the center console where you may or may not bump your knee into. It's fully plastic. I know the fsport has leather, maybe it's not the case with the regular models.

keyframe13

Yo're probably confused because we're discussing the car here and not the reason i buy it. But if that's confused you I acctually looking to get rid of this car after only few months of owning. Was a decision i had to take as was not a single IS250 in the area while I was shopping. So not a fortunate compromise. This doesn;t make this care any faster of good on gas. I just love the look. Clear now?

antonove

I wouldn't say the 250 is uncompetitive for the price range it's in when you compare it to something like a 320i. Yes the BMW bases at over $4000 less but its a completely stripped car. You have to add features like Xenon lights, heated seats, keyless, sunroof, power seats, XM etc whereas the Lexus has those features standard. The 250 definitely is a bit underpowered but it's not completely blown away by its competition like the reviews say it is.

LexFather

Writer owns this….

Slust

Edmunds is just as bad as CR when it comes to reviews. They are definitely on BMW's stick and not in a good way. Most of the reviews in this segment say "This car sucks, see BMW." The really sad part is, this isn't the time to go with BMW and their identity crisis. Sure their engines are great but the numb handling and over inflated price is not. At least with CR they don't focus on cars so if I need a good toaster oven I can refer to their expertise. Edmunds really has no excuse other than they sell their opinion.

I think most here will agree the 250 is due for a performance boost but to say it lacks punch at all is flat out ignorance. The problem with the 250 is you need to push it to get that punch ...but it's most definitely there if you actually drive the car.

The "small cabin and uncomfortable to get into" as well as the "horrible cabin and seats" comments definitely do NOT match up with Road & Track, Motor Trend and Car and Driver reviews. They all loved the seats and some called it best in class. As with any car there were some gripes, mostly the mouse thing (deserved I think), but they all loved the Lexus interior. For me, those review sites and their word counts for a lot more than either CR or Edmunds. Give me the opinion of guys who live and breathe cars over toaster reviewers and BMW fanboys.



Despite my critical comments of CR and Edmunds I will say this, I do not think the IS250 is a $43k car. I spent $34k on my 2010 IS250. That was a very fair price and a great car in that pricing segment. I'm not sure if the IS250 just went up in price or if these guys can't negotiate at all - especially since their picture of the IS250 was NONF-Sport but $43k is nuts. So for $43k I wouldn't buy it, but to say its one of the worst cars of 2013 ...is way beyond overly harsh. Sure the big boys I mentioned above weren't as impressed with the 250 as they were with the 350 but I don't think they would call it one of the worst cars of the year. Give the 250 40-60 more HP and not only is it hanging with other sport sedans in that pricing segment, it will be beating them. A non-fully loaded BMW 328i is easily $47k - talking M-Sport package, rear view camera and HK audio. That's it and it is almost $50k and it is definitely not a $47-50k car. It's nice but not that nice.

tea

i just think it's funny that when a reviewer, any reviewer, bashes on your car, they are biased,don't know what they are talking about, and a BMW fan. Then comes along a raving review on your car, and that person is the greatest reviewer in the world. ALL cars have their pros and cons, even Lexus. IMO, I totally agree on this review regarding the interior. Not a fan at all. The 250 might not be fast, but it is fast ENOUGH for daily driving

corradoMR2

Nothing to do with bias. Case in point. In 2012, the newly designed Honda Civic was not recommended by CR because of cheap interior plastic, mediocre ride/handling, and elevated noise levels. I'm not an ambassador for Honda by all means, but as I live and breathe (and having owned 20) cars all my life, I know the good buys from the less good ones and I therefore lost credibility for CR's rating there and then. One of the most dependable vehicles in the compact class alongside the Corolla, and it's not recommended? With the IS 250's worst car rating, this worsens their credibility as an automotive reviewing authority when the overwhelming majority of professional automotive journalists praise those same points claimed to be poor (interior quality/design/space, handling, comfort, etc). Extrapolating their review to the 350, it should only score marginally better overall (if at all) due to added points for acceleration but negative points for worse fuel economy and weight (will they find the handling worse?) That will be the nail in the coffin for CR (for me anyway).

corradoMR2

LOL, an '88-'89 Excel. Well based on the colored bumpers and upgraded wheel covers, at least it looks like he has a GL (mid-line) or GLS (top-line) model and not the base "L". Having a rear defroster as standard equipment makes it a good buy, but God forbid, the L is surely not recommended because it's missing this feature and the rear of the front headrests and seats are the cheaper vinyl instead of fabric.