What Does the New Toyota Crown Mean for the Next-Generation Lexus GS?

Posted by Kevin on June 28th, 2018

Toyota has just released a next-generation Crown sedan exclusively for the Japanese market, making it the second such model I’ve posted about this week. However, unlike the Toyota Century, this new sedan might actually make an impact on the Lexus lineup.

There has been much discussion on the future of the Lexus GS, and that makes the Toyota Crown very important indeed. The two models have shared platforms and engines since 1993, this new Crown has been extensively redeveloped. It now uses a modified version of the GA-L platform from the new Lexus LS sedan & LC coupe, and the same hybrid powertrain also offered on both Lexus flagships. For all intents and purposes, this Toyota is already a Lexus underneath the sheet metal.

Not to discount the additional development required, but the Crown offers a basic shell that could be used for a next-generation Lexus GS. Exterior and interior styling would have to change, but then that plays exactly into the brand’s strengths. It should be noted that Lexus no longer needs a second mid-size sedan, but the GS could be refactored into a four-door coupe and be elevated to a more prestigious (and lucrative) segment.

It may all be in the timing, as Lexus has brought out three new cars (LC, LS, ES) into a market that prefers SUVs and crossovers. There’s been an understandable shift in priority for the brand, with the focus now shifting to the UX and the fast-tracked production version of the LF-1 Limitless crossover. But the pendulum will swing back at some point, and with the Toyota Crown, Lexus can easily have a new GS just waiting in the wings.

Lexus GS: Fourth Generation
Popular Stories

Sorry. No data so far.

Comments
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
S
mikeavelli
Is it for me or many of us? No. That said we are the minority here. The majority look at the badge first.
Problem is the Mark X IS a niche market vehicle that absolutely needs to be a RWD sports sedan to survive. That's what it is. Just like the 86 will not be a 86 if it had AWD. The sole fact that such a niche product even exists in 2017 is quite shocking to me. It used to be a viable option for people aiming at a certain tax bracket. But vehicle taxes in Japan are more streamlined (although still very complicated) today that it's not longer a valid reason to buy the Mark X.

I'm more towards Mark X converging with the next IS than believing this FWD BS. It makes sense, requires less engineering, and keeps the legacy. Why bother making a FWD vehicle from scratch (although not really) when you can just do some visual modifications to the IS? No matter how flexible TNGA is, engineering a new vehicle takes way more resources than simply modifying an existing design.

krew
Really, this looks like the solution moving forward. Shrink the ES, stretch the IS, introduce a new city car/CT in a couple years. CT/IS/ES/LS. Clear and concise, regardless of opinion on FWD vs. RWD.
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
krew
ssun30
I didn't say they should shrink the ES. It's the exact opposite. ES needs to grow to compete with other full size executive sedans. The XV60 is too small by today's standards, and I certainly don't feel it's sufficient after having a ride in the E-class L.
Sorry, didn't mean to insinuate you did! :D

I agree with you about the IS, but feel like the ES is too big in overall length to take over the mid-size sedan segment from the GS.
Carmaker1
ssun30
Wow, that will be turn down a lot of Mark X loyalists, might as well axe that vehicle. Mark X lives because of the enthusiasts and going FWD is suicidal.

Also from what you said the biggest TNGA-K vehicle will be the ES with no plans for new Avalon? (makes sense since the Highlander will just eat it for breakfast)
This info comes from Japan and I had first read about last year, but was too distracted about the new LS at the time to post on it. It may seem like BS, but not so far-fetched. Toyota is trying to massively cut costs on domestic products, which the new TNGA approach heavily assists with. Nissan nearly hit bankruptcy, because of JDM offerings costing them so much and providing little ROI. Toyota being much more affluent, just wants to increase profitability.

I never stated that about the Avalon, in fact the very utmost opposite.;) I have posted the development programme code, SOP date, internal design freeze period by quarter, and spy shots of that car, due for MY2019. The next Highlander begins production in November 2019.

The Mark X is a great car as it is though, especially a special edition I've seen.
Carmaker1
ssun30
Wow, that will be turn down a lot of Mark X loyalists, might as well axe that vehicle. Mark X lives because of the enthusiasts and going FWD is suicidal.

Also from what you said the biggest TNGA-K vehicle will be the ES with no plans for new Avalon? (makes sense since the Highlander will just eat it for breakfast)
This info comes from Japan and I had first read about last year, but was too distracted about the new LS at the time to post on it. It may seem like BS, but not so far-fetched. Toyota is trying to massively cut costs on domestic products, which the new TNGA approach heavily assists with. Nissan nearly hit bankruptcy, because of JDM offerings costing them so much and providing little ROI. Toyota being much more affluent, just wants to increase profitability.

I never stated that about the Avalon, in fact the very utmost opposite.;) I have posted the development programme code, SOP date, internal design freeze period by quarter, and spy shots of that car, due for MY2019. The next Highlander begins production in November 2019.

The Mark X is a great car as it is though, especially a special edition I've seen.
Carmaker1
ssun30
Wow, that will be turn down a lot of Mark X loyalists, might as well axe that vehicle. Mark X lives because of the enthusiasts and going FWD is suicidal.

Also from what you said the biggest TNGA-K vehicle will be the ES with no plans for new Avalon? (makes sense since the Highlander will just eat it for breakfast)
This info comes from Japan and I had first read about last year, but was too distracted about the new LS at the time to post on it. It may seem like BS, but not so far-fetched. Toyota is trying to massively cut costs on domestic products, which the new TNGA approach heavily assists with. Nissan nearly hit bankruptcy, because of JDM offerings costing them so much and providing little ROI. Toyota being much more affluent, just wants to increase profitability.

I never stated that about the Avalon, in fact the very utmost opposite.;) I have posted the development programme code, SOP date, internal design freeze period by quarter, and spy shots of that car, due for MY2019. The next Highlander begins production in November 2019.

The Mark X is a great car as it is though, especially a special edition I've seen.
Carmaker1
ssun30
Wow, that will be turn down a lot of Mark X loyalists, might as well axe that vehicle. Mark X lives because of the enthusiasts and going FWD is suicidal.

Also from what you said the biggest TNGA-K vehicle will be the ES with no plans for new Avalon? (makes sense since the Highlander will just eat it for breakfast)
This info comes from Japan and I had first read about last year, but was too distracted about the new LS at the time to post on it. It may seem like BS, but not so far-fetched. Toyota is trying to massively cut costs on domestic products, which the new TNGA approach heavily assists with. Nissan nearly hit bankruptcy, because of JDM offerings costing them so much and providing little ROI. Toyota being much more affluent, just wants to increase profitability.

I never stated that about the Avalon, in fact the very utmost opposite.;) I have posted the development programme code, SOP date, internal design freeze period by quarter, and spy shots of that car, due for MY2019. The next Highlander begins production in November 2019.

The Mark X is a great car as it is though, especially a special edition I've seen.

C