Next-Generation Lexus IS Sedan to get Twin-Turbo V6 F SPORT?

Posted by Kevin on July 4th, 2018

The Australian website Driving Enthusiast is claiming the next-generation Lexus IS sedan will be available with the 3.5L twin-turbo V6 engine from the LS flagship:

The rumoured 2020 Lexus IS 400 isn’t set to be a full-cream performance model by F division, but more of a sub-performance version by its F Sport sector. It’s believed it will feature a range of performance-inspired features, such as large wheels hiding big brakes, sports suspension, and the usual F Sport treatment for the interior.

As for that engine. Lexus introduced its first turbocharged petrol engine, codenamed ‘V35A-FTS’, with the LS 500. The 3.5-litre twin-turbo unit essentially comes in to replace the naturally aspirated 3.5-litre V6.

Let’s just be upfront — this news is coming from an unsubstantiated source, there’s nothing to back up these facts. However, the V35A-FTS twin-turbo V6 makes perfect sense in the next-generation IS sedan.

That said, 416 horsepower seems excessive in the standard model, and Lexus has yet offer serious performance upgrades with their F SPORT models. If the rumor is correct and the TTV6 is not meant for the next-generation IS F, then what powers that car?

(We could stack rumors on top of each other, and suggest a detuned version of the much-hyped twin-turbo 600-horsepower V8 for the IS F. Also, the image above was a rendering of the next-gen GS F and unrelated to the IS at all.)

Lexus IS: Third Generation
Popular Stories

Sorry. No data so far.

Comments
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
Joaquin Ruhi
I've always been a small-car guy and opted to keep my 2nd-gen IS as opposed to replacing it with the longer 3rd-gen. Nonetheless, I see the Chinese writing on the wall. In the West, the Lexus IS is no longer the rear-legroom runt of its class, a position taken over by the Cadillac ATS and the Jaguar XE. But ATS and XE either already offer stretched "L' versions in China or will do so shortly. Lexus IS, on the other hand, doggedly sticks to a single shorter wheelbase.

The (TN)GA-L RWD architecture has, thus far, been released in 3 wheelbase lengths:
2870mm (113") for Lexus LC
2920mm (115") for Toyota Crown Concept / upcoming 15th-gen Crown
3125 mm (123") for 5th-gen Lexus LS

Conventional wisdom would've suggested a continuation of the Toyota Crown / Lexus GS platform relationship dating back to the original Toyota Aristo. With the GS now out of the picture, though, will the 4IS step up to the Crown platform-mate role? I certainly think so. Coincidentally (or not?), the Lexus LC sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase than Crown15, just like 3IS sits on a 50mm shorter wheelbase version of the New N platform than 4GS. Yet, between the 7ES and 5LS growth spurts and the premium the Chinese market places on rear legroom, I don't think a 4IS on the shorter LC wheelbase would make sense or be particularly competitive.
Nice analysis here. A recurring theme with TNGA Lexus is a reduction of space efficiency in exchange for styling and driving dynamics. Making the LS500 with FMR layout is a wonderful decision and they should do that for the IS as well. It seems that enlarging the IS to Mark X size will add little to no cabin space.

Another recurring theme is sizing their base model to match LWB variants of their German competitors so they don't need a stretch in China (although it's debatable for the LS). But I doubt they need to do the same on the IS. A common misconception about China's obsession with LWB is that everyone cares about legroom, but the real number they care is overall length. The C-Class L/3-series L/A4L/ATS-L actually target two different demographics: young middle-class with limited wealth and small business owners who want an affordable company car. It's the latter group that really need that extra leg room, but Lexus has that covered with the ES200. Therefore the IS only needs to target young people who only need the rear to be "not cramped". The LC wheel base should be sufficient to have usable space in the rear, they could do a lot to make this work.

Actually, with a length of 4800mm and a wheel base of 2870mm, this hypothetical new IS will be as large as previous generations of Aristo/GS. It will not be a small car.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.
S
ssun30
Would they keep using 8AR-FTS for new TNGA vehicles launched after 2019? Surely it will live on some legacy models, but I doubt the IS will be using it. An IS300 would not go low enough in China (IS260 is a more appropriate entry-level model), nor high enough in US (competition will move to the 200kW/280hp class which is better covered by the 2.5T).



I feel the hybrid system between the 300h and 500h is the 450h. The FKS-based 2.5 hybrid with high output battery (for the time being let's call it 350h) that could appear on the Highlander should be considered a variant of the 300h. The 450h could be a turbo hybrid utilizing either 2.0T or 2.5T ICE. Offering a 350h and 450h is consistent with their twin hybrid strategy. A more affordable RX350h is something they certainly need in Europe.

Going back to the IS, I doubt EU will care about the 300h losing 13hp if price is reduced (and actual power at the wheels should be comparable due to efficiency improvements). Then a 450h in the 225-250kW class could be the flagship non-F model, should they not choose to do an F-lite/F strategy.


Like the 8AR-FTS, the 2GR-FKS will be near EOL in 2019 and should only be used on legacy models. Launching yet another IS350 with 310hp is asking for embarrassment.
- 2.5t is replacement for 3.5 V6... it is not going to happen in US where people prefer V6. 2.5t is likely more expensive to produce too.
- 2.0t as base, sure... they will use that engine for quite a while... just improve it and it will likely be much better fit for TNGA than old platform.
- 300h will not lose 13hp in EU... it will simply have different tuning for RWD with more hp, look below.
- IS300h had 181hp from engine, NX300h has 155hp from engine, Camry has 176hp from engine. So 5+ hp extra from exhaust, etc, then 5hp extra in battery power will bring us to more than IS300h. But this is not enough for Highlander and RX. What they could possibly do is use non-atkinson version of engine, like old GS450h for instance, from Camry - so 205hp + 45hp from battery output and thats 250hp... pretty reasonable for Highlander! It can still go into atkinson cycle like Camry engine, just not all the time. It will still be very efficient compared to 450h engine.

Neither 8AR nor 2GR will reach AOL in next 5 years or so.

Lots of manufacturers like Volvo are saying how these are their last generation engines btw.

S