marshmallo

Clearly the LS460 is a piece of junk... Worst in its class.
I'll never buy this car because of these rankings.

Of these cars I'd still take the LS460 first and then the S
class second.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

i gave up on the idea that the 3 main car mags even know how to truly do a luxury sedan test for what a lux sedan is suppose to do

XeroK00L

Page scans thanks to Bill @ AutoSpies.

Faheta

The category that hurts the LS is the "chassis" department. LS460L trail by 10 points from the 4th spot in that department. If Lexus gives the LS460L buyers a "real" Sports package option (245 wide tire won't do it apparently. Even the IS350 has 255 series. Even the S-class base wheel setup has 255 series). I've made numerous comments in the past the Lexus lacks a Sports Package option that is on par with the European cars. I can understand C&D perspective since I own 2 BMWs.

So here are the lows from that magazine: "Soft in roll, squishy tires, small trunk, long stopping distances". Wider tires and firmer springs (come on Lexus, this can't be difficult) may not fix the "small trunk" problem, but that will definitely help with the other 3. This might even help put the LS460L in 3rd place above the 750Li?

I have my fingers crossed for the GS460 (500?).

encore888

Wow.

1SICKLEX is right, this was really short. Compared to the past review/comparos, this was very brief indeed.

Basically, they liked the LS 460 L's design, quietness, interior, etc. but they didn't like its driving dynamics. There really was no other quibble, other than a statement in the XJS section about the dazzling array of buttons on the LS.

They also stated that C&D's preference is driving dynamics. That much is true, but since when are luxury flagships noted for their driving dynamics as the top priority? Past C&D comparos seemed more balanced.

Also this article was written by a different writer than the one for the past comparo where the LS 430 won...that writer also wrote the 1989 article where the LS 400 was tested.

Ultimately though, it was tame, not an attack like they had for the GS 450h. It was very nice, and complimentary in fact...the driving dynamics need to be improved, that much is clear.

But it didn't seem to me like a very clear review at all. Far from thorough, it just scratched the surface.

While this article's title and ranked results will be manna to some Lexus bashers and others, reading it left me with very little negative aftertaste. It seemed like they thought the car was pretty good...but who turns off VDIM anyways? I know I wouldn't normally.

GFerg

^^ Yep, pretty much exactly what I was thinking.



The subtitle gave it away as this test was weighed heavily on the sporty characteristics of these large luxury sedans.

Vladi

Points in mag comparisons don't mean anything, it is just a gimmick and most of the time it is BS.

How can other cars be at the same level for rear seat comfort as LS w/ Exec Rear Seats just doesn't make any sense. Unless they go with the logic of more legroom the better which has very little to do with comfort cause all these cars have enough legroom.
I was driven in A8L which has a lot of legroom but it feels so empty back there and very lonely (the best way I can describe it). I hated it! And it didn't even have reclining nor cooling seats.

C&D is just another stereotype car magazine with mission statement: "Put it on a track!"
They should have acknowledged that extra weight, longer acceleration time and longer braking distance together with poorer fuel economy came due to Executive Rear Seating Package. If they had Touring Package it would have been a lot different and it would meet their handling and performance criteria although it would not have reclining and cooling seats but that doesn't matter in flagship luxury sedan according to them.

Poor magazine, poor article

P.S. US Lexus should offer Touring Package with Executive Rear Seating like they do in some Asian markets and like they showcased the car on various autoshows across North America

nobuddy

Thanks very much for posting the article. An interesting read indeed. I don't think it bashed the LS at all, and the criteria for the comparison were laid out quite well. Had this been Car and Rider magazine, the LS would have done much better

I have now driven the LS twice, one LWB and one SWB and I have to concur with Car and Driver's dynamics assessment of the LS vs. the other cars (I've driven them all). I also have to agree that the LS is right in there with the others when it comes to low noise, isolation and smoothness.

Despite the fifth place finish, I think this was quite a positive review of the LS.

.02

nb

I6turbo

iTrader: (1)

I have read every issue of C&D since about 1980 or so. Until recent years I thought it was probably the best of the mainstream/big 4 magazines (followed by R&T, Automobile, and then the rag Motor Trend). However, in the past couple years I've lost a lot of respect for C&D writings and became uninterested in what they have to say about cars. I still respect a couple of the editor's opinions and like to read John Philips' and Patrick Beddard's articles, but that's about it -- I don't feel that I learn anything reliable from most of the articles -- they're just fluff written for entertainment, or they're from a perspective that I can't appreciate. I recently decided to drop my subscription when it runs out in a few months. The last straw was when when their technical director wrote an article about fuel mileage and appeared to believe that a 3-series BMW actually gets 27 MPG while accelerating at wide open throttle in 1st gear. I wrote a letter to them (which of course they never published) calling them out on such BS, and for employing a "Technical" director who apparently didn't know any better than that.

All that being said, based upon a short drive of the LS460L, I think I prefer my LS430 (particularly with the wheel/tire/suspension modifications) to the LS460. Therefore, I can imagine that the C&D article isn't THAT far off. If you notice in the article, the LS:

-- BEATS the Benz in the "Vehicle" portion of the test (wins 2nd place behind the Audi)

-- TIES the BMW for 2nd in the "Powertrain" portion

-- gets stomped in the "Chassis" portion where the puny tires and grandpa suspension setup positions the car exactly opposite what the writer was probably looking for.

-- scores very low in the "Experience" portion where the fun-to-drive and wow-factor figure in. As I've said for months since seeing the first spy photos, the new design looks too much like "generic Japanese sedan" and was a little bit disappointing to me.

Both of these latter categries are VERY subjective, and the car probably was not what the writer was looking for, particularly in a short test like this which is much more impacted by a sporting feel on the road, versus a long-term test where comfort is more likely to win out.

As others have said, Lexus may have to build a "sport" version of this car in order to compare favorably in the categories where it scored so low in this test.

marshmallo

Thanks for the scan. Very informative... For a fifth place
finish the review was very positive.

On the other hand, I wonder why some people are so eager
to take these 4000+ lb WHALES to the track. That's
not the purpose of a flagship...

I do agree they need to work on the brakes though...

ojah

I find it hard to reconcile the verdict on the LS460 with the fact that the LS430 trumped all these cars in a previous test (granted, the S550 was not around then) and that the LS460 is supposed to be an advance on the LS430. Is the underlying message that the LS430 is way better than the LS460?

MPLexus301

iTrader: (3)

Like Vladi had noted, I think that it would have been only appropriate if they used a Touring model for this comparison. The last comparo that they did with the LS430 seemed to be more realistic and based on the credentials that people buy these cars for- smooth ride, interior quality, engine/transmission, features, and technology. Nobody buys a full size sedan to thrash it around like a sports car.

That being said, if they were going into this test looking for performance, they should have done Lexus the justice of using the best suited model- Touring. This article is so short that it's hard to draw anything from it other than what we have already seen. It almost seems like a "once over" and not a fully in depth comparison.

LexFather

Again, I was saddened that the article was way to brief. I didn't learn ANYTHING I didn't already know, the BMW is the sportiest, the XJ has old world charm, the LS is the best built and unsportiest, the Benz is the techno guy, the A8 is the sleeper.

I came in knowing that and left totally with useless data.

IMO, the whole "sporty" thing is now carrying over to ALL magazines, everyone wants to be EVO or CAR now. The LS won the last comparison b/c they were looking for the best luxury sedan. The LS lost this one b/c they were looking for the best sporty 4,500 lbs car???

I do find all 5 are spectacular cars and all 5 are winners and a privledge to own. C&D has just gone to crap with the write ups.

Its like when they had one writer totally dismiss and crap on the new Acura TSX and next thing you know, it was a 10 best winner (scratches head).

XeroK00L

For god's sake these cars are FULL-SIZE LUXURY FLAGSHIP SEDANS. Who the hell take them to tracks and drive them at their limits? C&D verdict tells the real truth--the LS460 is "THE MOST INDULGENT LUXURY CAR IN THE SEGMENT". What more do you want than being indulged and pampered in a true luxury car like this? If you want to drive the car like a sports car, then buy a freaking sports car! Duh. REAL potential buyers of these cars do not buy them for sports, period. C&D rates cars by their sporting attributes only to sell more magazines. Like nobuddy said, had this been a review from a "Car & Rider" magazine the LS460 would've run away easily.

Gojirra99

Maybe he got fired by C & D for picking the least sporty car tested as the best premium luxury sedan last time & his replacement dare not do it again