And why take away the spindle-grille, you just got it right, looked great on my previous LC 500 and my previous 6-cyl RX 450h f-sport. 🤔 And, now the six cyl is gone as well… Can´t you see whatˋs happening to other brands? Do Lexus want to go down the recent path of Porsche, for example?
- Thread starter ssun30
- Start date
I'm not sure where to put this, but in the several years I've been on this site (and the years before when I was just lurking), I feel that a common trend has been shifting goal posts and trying to find solace/swallowing the rumors coming out. Unfortunately, we've been at the point where there's not much to look forward to, and any exciting development gets snatched away from Lexus.
After the IS-F came out, I was excited to see what would happen with the GS and then RC. When both came out with the revised 5.0 V8, I was happy they existed despite slowly being left behind by competitors in terms of performance.
When rumors of a next generation GS were swirling but then canceled, I was hopeful that the IS would get a new platform (because that was still a relatively strong seller). What did come out was the Mirai, an even more niche product that would only cater towards very small markets.
Crazy thing is...is that the IS is still on the New N platform dating back over a decade now and the 500 F Sport Performance was a decent consolation (far from the rumored GS-F with a possible 4.0 TT V8) though.
The LC was supposed to spawn into a LC F (and that really caught my attention)...but we now know what will happen to that project. And now F is expected to exist as a software mode, far from what F originally stood here (how are software changes the highest expression of Lexus performance???):
Also, now the LS (after being left to wither) and RC are bowing out (and the LC is likely to follow). The portfolio of unibody RWD products is non-existent, and the lack of any new platforms or commitment to GA-L makes me believe there's no future for RWD products in Lexus. It seems like there's so much resistance against RWD unibody products at Lexus, but then there's also talks about adding GR, Crown, and Century as branches of Toyota (with the Crown and Century recycling the same GA-K platform). How come those products have been given the green light, whereas Lexus products that were deep into the development timeline canceled (especially products that will likely sell more than these niche coupes/sports cars)?
I can't be the only young adult that was super excited to jump into Lexus. Would it be too much to ask for to get a new IS on a new platform with new engines??
After the IS-F came out, I was excited to see what would happen with the GS and then RC. When both came out with the revised 5.0 V8, I was happy they existed despite slowly being left behind by competitors in terms of performance.
When rumors of a next generation GS were swirling but then canceled, I was hopeful that the IS would get a new platform (because that was still a relatively strong seller). What did come out was the Mirai, an even more niche product that would only cater towards very small markets.
Crazy thing is...is that the IS is still on the New N platform dating back over a decade now and the 500 F Sport Performance was a decent consolation (far from the rumored GS-F with a possible 4.0 TT V8) though.
The LC was supposed to spawn into a LC F (and that really caught my attention)...but we now know what will happen to that project. And now F is expected to exist as a software mode, far from what F originally stood here (how are software changes the highest expression of Lexus performance???):
Also, now the LS (after being left to wither) and RC are bowing out (and the LC is likely to follow). The portfolio of unibody RWD products is non-existent, and the lack of any new platforms or commitment to GA-L makes me believe there's no future for RWD products in Lexus. It seems like there's so much resistance against RWD unibody products at Lexus, but then there's also talks about adding GR, Crown, and Century as branches of Toyota (with the Crown and Century recycling the same GA-K platform). How come those products have been given the green light, whereas Lexus products that were deep into the development timeline canceled (especially products that will likely sell more than these niche coupes/sports cars)?
I can't be the only young adult that was super excited to jump into Lexus. Would it be too much to ask for to get a new IS on a new platform with new engines??
Looking back at my original post, it really highlights how powertrain development is the central point to all business plans and strategies of a car company. You can talk about the F brand all you want, but at the end of the day, if there's no engine, there's no car.
In the past decade, we saw Toyota going from proactive development for market competitiveness, to reactive development for regulations compliance. They admitted this themselves: the chief engineer of Land Cruiser Prado J250 said they only launch new powertrains and platforms when emissions and safety regulations could no longer be met with existing products. This means they will inevitably fall behind and sometimes even have periods where products are completely banned due to non-compliance (happened to 1NX in China, 3IS and RC in Europe).
Go back 2 decades when Toyota first released the "xR" series of engines. They were the first company on the market to offer direct-port dual injection technology (2GR-FSE), combined Otto-Atkinson cycle operation (2GR-FXE), water-cooled EGR system, electronic VVT (1UR-FSE), continuous VVL (2ZR-FAE) etc. The Dynamic Force family also used to be quite advanced for its time, but is also approaching its 8th year without a technology refresh (the ESTEC refresh of the GR/UR/AR series happened in their 8th year). Now the entire TMC lineup have really outdated powertrains that are in danger of failing emissions again. They are also way too late to re-invest in forced induction. The 8AR-FTS was the first FI engine they developed since 3S-GTE, and its Dynamic Force successor is actually less advanced. When they finally decided to build a high-stress, high output FI engine (V35), they got disastrous reliability.
With this kind of company culture, it's impossible to have a competitive performance lineup where staying at the cutting edge is key. If we were to believe BestCar's rumors, they were constantly changing the goal post for the 4.0L V8TT engine: first 600PS, then 650PS, then decided to create a high-torque variant for LF-1, then found out they couldn't pass Euro 6d causing a 2 year delay, then moved the target up again to 700+PS, then had to reduce the target to 650PS because Euro 7 is knocking on the door. They were always benchmarking against what's available at the time, not future-proofing it. It should be such a simple concept: if you design a product to just compete with existing products today, you already lost because competitors are designing their next generation at the same time.
In the past decade, we saw Toyota going from proactive development for market competitiveness, to reactive development for regulations compliance. They admitted this themselves: the chief engineer of Land Cruiser Prado J250 said they only launch new powertrains and platforms when emissions and safety regulations could no longer be met with existing products. This means they will inevitably fall behind and sometimes even have periods where products are completely banned due to non-compliance (happened to 1NX in China, 3IS and RC in Europe).
Go back 2 decades when Toyota first released the "xR" series of engines. They were the first company on the market to offer direct-port dual injection technology (2GR-FSE), combined Otto-Atkinson cycle operation (2GR-FXE), water-cooled EGR system, electronic VVT (1UR-FSE), continuous VVL (2ZR-FAE) etc. The Dynamic Force family also used to be quite advanced for its time, but is also approaching its 8th year without a technology refresh (the ESTEC refresh of the GR/UR/AR series happened in their 8th year). Now the entire TMC lineup have really outdated powertrains that are in danger of failing emissions again. They are also way too late to re-invest in forced induction. The 8AR-FTS was the first FI engine they developed since 3S-GTE, and its Dynamic Force successor is actually less advanced. When they finally decided to build a high-stress, high output FI engine (V35), they got disastrous reliability.
With this kind of company culture, it's impossible to have a competitive performance lineup where staying at the cutting edge is key. If we were to believe BestCar's rumors, they were constantly changing the goal post for the 4.0L V8TT engine: first 600PS, then 650PS, then decided to create a high-torque variant for LF-1, then found out they couldn't pass Euro 6d causing a 2 year delay, then moved the target up again to 700+PS, then had to reduce the target to 650PS because Euro 7 is knocking on the door. They were always benchmarking against what's available at the time, not future-proofing it. It should be such a simple concept: if you design a product to just compete with existing products today, you already lost because competitors are designing their next generation at the same time.
I remember when the 3UR 5.7 V8 came out in 2007. The Tundra absolutely crushed the big three's half-ton trucks. It had considerably higher hp/torque ratings, higher tow ratings, and massive brakes. Even when the 5.7 ended production, it was still competitive with the half-ton V8s from other manufactures.
The V35 and T24 were barely competitive when introduced. The GM 2.7T puts out more hp/torque than the T24. The Hurricane I6 gets considerably better fuel milage than the V35. RAM RHO with 35" tires and 540hp is even a bit better than a V35 Tundra on 35s. Other manufactures are already offering better engines than the V35.
I have high hopes for the G20E, and hopefully that will spur on the development of new V6 or I6 engines.
The V35 and T24 were barely competitive when introduced. The GM 2.7T puts out more hp/torque than the T24. The Hurricane I6 gets considerably better fuel milage than the V35. RAM RHO with 35" tires and 540hp is even a bit better than a V35 Tundra on 35s. Other manufactures are already offering better engines than the V35.
I have high hopes for the G20E, and hopefully that will spur on the development of new V6 or I6 engines.
Last edited:
We can complain about TMC's longitudinal platform/powertrain strategy all day long. But at the end of the day for vast majority of their sales, they REALLY optimized the transverse hybrid/plug-in hybrid formula. A competitor can build a car with exact same specs and get nowhere close to their performance and/or efficiency. It's either that, or Mazda did a really terrible job. The CX-60 PHEV and Harrier PHEV share the same battery, have almost identical motor output and power-to-weight ratio, yet the "sport oriented" longitudinal FR platform got absolutely smoked by the pedestrian transverse platform on the straight line.
First gen GS 450h was ahead of its time, but they did not build on its success. They should have made the FT-HS. They didn’t.
1) Its hybrid system is too complicated (essentially a 2-stage hybrid that evolved into the 4-stage hybrid on LS/LC500h). It has its benefits but was never practical at large scale. With the benefit of hindsight, the multi-stage power-split hybrid is a flawed concept and wasted R&D, and Toyota should have switched to the simpler P2 parallel concept earlier (despite the latter offering less efficiency and performance benefit).
2) Energy storage technology back then could not achieve the performance goal they set. They only had NiMH batteries or supercapacitors. The former won't provide enough power and the latter won't store enough energy. The FT-HS was never meant to be mass-producible.
CX PHEV fastest acceleration mode is Offroad not Sport