Rendered: The Next-Generation Lexus IS Sedan

Posted by Kevin on October 5th, 2018

Renderings of the next-generation Lexus IS are a favorite of the Japanese automotive press — this attempt by (a currently unknown) magazine was posted yesterday by a Lexus fan on Instagram:

Lexus IS Rear Next-Generation

The differences between this photochop and the existing model are minimal — the only changes are with the front and rear bumpers, making this rendering seem more like a mid-cycle refresh. That said, the design of the current IS sedan has never been a weakness, and maintaining some consistency across generations would not be a bad move.

The magazine mentions a 2021 release along with some preliminary dimensions:

Lexus IS Dimensions Next-Generation

Compared to the current model, the next-generation IS length and wheelbase would grow by 4cm, with all other measurements staying the same. Also mentioned is a 2.5L engine with 181 horsepower, which makes absolutely no sense and I’m choosing to ignore.

FeaturesLexus IS: Third GenerationPhotochops
Popular Stories

Sorry. No data so far.

Comments
S
Carmaker1
2020 most likely.



An IS 450 makes perfect sense to me. IS 350 should NOT be the range topper anymore. Either a detuned V35A-FTS or a 3.0L Dynamic Force TTV6. ISF V8? Nah. It will be V35A-FTS or similar with added improvements.



Well, thank you. I appreciate that my man. Here is an early look at a proposal by designer C. Lee from 2016 for it, at Design Centre Atsugi in 2016. Things have wrapped up now, with major changes along the way. This was during ideation sketching.

View attachment 2845 View attachment 2846 View attachment 2847 View attachment 2848 View attachment 2849



I think:

IS 300 RWD Dynamic Force Turbo 4 Cylinder RWD
IS 300 I4 T AWD
IS 300h RWD/AWD THS
IS 350 RWD 2GR-FKS (LS 350 318hp)
IS 350 AWD
IS 450 RWD Twin-Turbo 3.0L V6
IS 450 AWD TTV6
IS F RWD High Output V35A-FTS 3.5L V6?

IC Coupe (replaces RC?)
IC Cabrio

IS SportCross in 300 and 450 grades.

When it comes to engines, we have this powertrain official presentation from TMC... I doubt there will be other new engines aside from this.

I keep quoting this pic, but I think everyone needs to see it over and over again:

[​IMG]

So lets assume:

- IS450 - 3.5ltt - this is only one thats easy.
- IS300 - massaged 2.0t AR engine existing.

- IS300h or IS350h or IS450h? There is engine missing between 300h and 450h in the pic above. What is it and how does it fit? There is confirmed info that next gen Highlander will have 4cly hybrid. This cant be just standard 300h with 208-215hp - Highlander is too big for that in the USA. So it has to be some more powerful engine but it will still be 4cly. This will then likely go into IS and of course RX.

- IS350 - standard V6 for TNGA, base engine for USA.
and/or
- IS350 - new 2.5t that replaces V6 engine in other markets? 2.5t has been rumored for a while. I dont see US market preferring it over V6 though.
S
spwolf
So lets assume:
- IS300 - massaged 2.0t AR engine existing.
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).

spwolf
- IS300h or IS350h or IS450h? There is engine missing between 300h and 450h in the pic above. What is it and how does it fit? There is confirmed info that next gen Highlander will have 4cly hybrid. This cant be just standard 300h with 208-215hp - Highlander is too big for that in the USA. So it has to be some more powerful engine but it will still be 4cly. This will then likely go into IS and of course RX.
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.

spwolf
- IS350 - standard V6 for TNGA, base engine for USA.
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.
S
spwolf
So lets assume:
- IS300 - massaged 2.0t AR engine existing.
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).

spwolf
- IS300h or IS350h or IS450h? There is engine missing between 300h and 450h in the pic above. What is it and how does it fit? There is confirmed info that next gen Highlander will have 4cly hybrid. This cant be just standard 300h with 208-215hp - Highlander is too big for that in the USA. So it has to be some more powerful engine but it will still be 4cly. This will then likely go into IS and of course RX.
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.

spwolf
- IS350 - standard V6 for TNGA, base engine for USA.
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.
S
spwolf
So lets assume:
- IS300 - massaged 2.0t AR engine existing.
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).

spwolf
- IS300h or IS350h or IS450h? There is engine missing between 300h and 450h in the pic above. What is it and how does it fit? There is confirmed info that next gen Highlander will have 4cly hybrid. This cant be just standard 300h with 208-215hp - Highlander is too big for that in the USA. So it has to be some more powerful engine but it will still be 4cly. This will then likely go into IS and of course RX.
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.

spwolf
- IS350 - standard V6 for TNGA, base engine for USA.
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.
S
spwolf
So lets assume:
- IS300 - massaged 2.0t AR engine existing.
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).

spwolf
- IS300h or IS350h or IS450h? There is engine missing between 300h and 450h in the pic above. What is it and how does it fit? There is confirmed info that next gen Highlander will have 4cly hybrid. This cant be just standard 300h with 208-215hp - Highlander is too big for that in the USA. So it has to be some more powerful engine but it will still be 4cly. This will then likely go into IS and of course RX.
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.

spwolf
- IS350 - standard V6 for TNGA, base engine for USA.
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.
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
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.
Yep, but keep in mind that with ES they specifically added rear legroom :). Engine looks like it is positioned to take least possible amount of wheelbase.
S
ssun30
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.
Yep, but keep in mind that with ES they specifically added rear legroom :). Engine looks like it is positioned to take least possible amount of wheelbase.
S
ssun30
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.
Yep, but keep in mind that with ES they specifically added rear legroom :). Engine looks like it is positioned to take least possible amount of wheelbase.
S
ssun30
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.
Yep, but keep in mind that with ES they specifically added rear legroom :). Engine looks like it is positioned to take least possible amount of wheelbase.
L
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
L
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
L
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
L
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
S
Levi
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
The cost of quad cams on a V4 engine kills it. Same for B4. Subaru and Porsche only do B4 for legacy reasons.
S
Levi
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
The cost of quad cams on a V4 engine kills it. Same for B4. Subaru and Porsche only do B4 for legacy reasons.
S
Levi
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
The cost of quad cams on a V4 engine kills it. Same for B4. Subaru and Porsche only do B4 for legacy reasons.
S
Levi
If car makers made V4 engines, cars would have longer useful wheel base, short front overhang, better dynamics thanks to RWD or better AWD systems than transverse, and more refined engine than I4 or V6, and better layout hybridization without space loss. But with ICE on their deathbed (or not?), because of BEVs, it is probably to late to change.
The cost of quad cams on a V4 engine kills it. Same for B4. Subaru and Porsche only do B4 for legacy reasons.
mikeavelli
Also with the ES growing HUGE in length, 196 inches, I fully expect the next IS to grow significantly as well.

There has to be a next IS F.

And bring a wagon too or a 5 door. lol
mikeavelli
Also with the ES growing HUGE in length, 196 inches, I fully expect the next IS to grow significantly as well.

There has to be a next IS F.

And bring a wagon too or a 5 door. lol
mikeavelli
Also with the ES growing HUGE in length, 196 inches, I fully expect the next IS to grow significantly as well.

There has to be a next IS F.

And bring a wagon too or a 5 door. lol
mikeavelli
Also with the ES growing HUGE in length, 196 inches, I fully expect the next IS to grow significantly as well.

There has to be a next IS F.

And bring a wagon too or a 5 door. lol
M
With conservative Lexus, I could see the TTV6 being the IS-F engine.

M