Lexus June 2018 Sales Report

Posted by Kevin on July 3rd, 2018

USA

Lexus USA has reported 23,750 total sales for June 2018, a 6.2% daily sales rate decrease over last year — here’s the model-by-model breakdown:

MONTH Year to Date (*DSR)
2018 2017 DSR % CHG* 2018 2017 DSR % CHG*
CT 0 615 -100 4 3,926 -99.9
IS 2,017 2,103 -7.6 11,296 12,328 -9.6
RC 328 499 -36.7 1,749 3,099 -44.3
ES 3,592 4,666 -25.9 19,901 21,800 -9.9
GS 602 646 -10.3 3,688 3,553 2.5
LS 789 300 153.3 4,369 1,855 132.5
LC 161 423 -63 1,016 845 19
LFA 0 0 0 2 0 0
Total Cars
7,489
9,252
-22.1
42,025
47,406
-12.5
NX 4,862 4,597 1.8 28,672 26,023 8.7
RX 8,854 8,408 1.4 50,051 46,737 5.7
GX 2149 1740 18.9 11,670 10,897 5.7
LX 396 398 -4.2 2,582 2,697 -5.5
Total Trucks 16,261
 15,143
 3.4
 92,975
 86,354
 6.3
Total Sales
23,750
24,395
-6.2
135,000
133,760
-0.4

Please note, all percentages are calculated by the Daily Sales Rate (DSR), which takes into account the number of days in the month that dealerships could sell cars. June 2018 had 27 selling days, June 2017 had 26 selling days.

Some highlights from the month:

  • Lexus LUVs posted a 7.4 percent increase, a best-ever June
  • NX Hybrid up 270 percent, the sixth consecutive best-ever month
  • NX combined sales up 5.8 percent in June, a best-ever June and first half
  • RX saw gain of 5.3 percent in June
  • GX increased 23.5 percent, a best-ever June in 13 years
  • LS up 135.5 percent in the first half

“Lexus closed out the first half of the year up led by best-ever LUV sales,” said David Christ, group vice president and general manager, Lexus division. “RX is up seven percent year-to-date and remains the top-selling luxury vehicle in the industry while the NX delivered ten percent year-over-year growth.

“In addition to these great results, we successfully launched our flagship sedan, the all-new LS 500, and the all-new RXL. We’re looking forward to continued success in the third quarter, which will get a boost from our all-new ES sedan that goes on sale in September.”

Sales ReportsUSA
Popular Stories

Sorry. No data so far.

Comments
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
S
Honestly I don't know if compromised cabin size really affects the sales of LS in USA. After all some on this forum say LS buyers in USA mainly drive the cars themselves, which is something I as an Asian could not understand due to cultural differences (seriously, if you buy a car of this size and level of luxury, why not have a chauffeur driving for you?). The LS has 4 inches less rear legroom than the S-Class despite having similar size and wheelbase. I certainly hate the fact that Lexus went for form over function with 5LS's design; sacrificing so much space is just unacceptable. If the LS flops in China after July, then the reason will certainly be insufficient cabin size.

As for FMR, it is definitely a right thing to do. With the FMR layout the 5LS has one of the best handling chassis in the class. The LS500 is FMR because it uses a short V6 engine so the actual impact of FMR is not that pronounced. I would say designing the engine bay to accommodate Inline-6 and V12 engines (which is what the MB and BMW did) sacrifices more cabin space than a V6 FMR. If there is an upcoming V8 LS, it will not be FMR.

The difference between regular FR and FMR is actually pretty big. The turn-in characteristics is way better without the engine hanging above the front axle. In fact, FMR is the most sporty driving layout due to its predictability. The best handling layout on paper is obviously RMR, but modern manufacturers tune RMR vehicles to have a significant amount of understeer to make them safe to drive.
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...
peterharvey
I wouldn't worry too much about the Maserati Quattroporte.
I only brought it up because President Akio races his Maserati at the Nurburgring.
Many years ago, Akio was quoted as saying that he believed that European marques like Maserati have heritage due to their sports background, hence probably why Akio created the no more boring cars formula, with what he describes as wanting more inspired styling and more inspired dynamics.

The 5LS actually has much more in common with the Maserati Quattroporte and Jaguar XJ LWB, than it has in common with the Porsche Panamera.
The Panamera is 1/2 a size smaller than the other three.
Whereas the 5LS, XJ Long Wheelbase & Quattroporte are very similar in wheelbase and length.

Of the latter three, the Quattroporte has the most prominent front mid-engine, with the most cabin length compromize.
The 5LS and Jag XJ LWB have a very similar degree of front mid-engine mount.
Despite the dynamic front mid-engine mount, I think that the 5LS's cabin length and legroom is pretty good for a full size sedan.
The foot room is poor, and maybe the head room and shoulder room is a bit marginal.
The 5LS has only a shallowish 440 L trunk, while the Quattroporte has a 530 L trunk; for comparison, a Camry has a 520 L trunk in metric.
Overall, I'm not too bothered by the 5LS's size, nor the effect of interior size on sales.
If one is worried about interior size, then a conventional front engine RWD with a spacious cabin like the old 4LS is the best route.

I'm actually more worried about the 5LS's styling, as some posters describe as reminding them of a Nissan Infiniti from the rear quarter.

Nevermind the Quattroportes, Jag XJ's nor full size Infiniti Q45's [that was axed a while ago].
Over the past 30 years, one of the great feats of the past four generations of Lexus LS's was their ability on debut to outsell the pants off the Mercedes S Class...

P