Motor

Expert
Messages
1,129
Reactions
1,511

 

Levi

Expert
Messages
1,600
Reactions
1,917
Despite the elongated nose, the IS500 still has a 55/45 weight distribution, which is good for its class. The m340i for example, has a tested 54/46 distribution. It is about the same balance. Even the M cars are more like 53/47 in tests. The new Subaru BRZ/GT86 is 55/45. A lot of times the whole 50/50 weight distribution gets thrown around when rarely cars are around 50/50. The Audis are 60/40 so they have all of the engine weight pinned to the radiator much like other FWD based cars.
Absolutely. There are alot of factors that play a role, Lexus RWD cars do not worse than BMW. BMW too now has much longer front overhangs than before. the 50/50 quotes are misleading, also because I4 RWD will obviously have better static weight distribution than I6 AWD. While on the subject, Maserati did a good job with 51/49 for the twin-turbo V8, also because it has a longer wheel to dash ratio.

anyway, just my opinion on IS, can't have everything.
 

mikeavelli

Moderator
Messages
5,192
Reactions
10,895
Despite the elongated nose, the IS500 still has a 55/45 weight distribution, which is good for its class. The m340i for example, has a tested 54/46 distribution. It is about the same balance. Even the M cars are more like 53/47 in tests. The new Subaru BRZ/GT86 is 55/45. A lot of times the whole 50/50 weight distribution gets thrown around when rarely cars are around 50/50. The Audis are 60/40 so they have all of the engine weight pinned to the radiator much like other FWD based cars.

To add to this, the biggest difference and this has a huge deal, this IS 500 was built with the V-8 in mind from the start whereas the IS F was a skunk works project where the V-8 was forced in.
Early 2008-2010 IS’s are not that great of a drive. Fast yes but handles meh with a rough suspension. This was fixed a bit later. The 500 drives as fast without the course ride and doesn’t feel like it’s going to plow ahead.
 

Gor134

Fan
Messages
72
Reactions
131
> To add to this, the biggest difference and this has a huge deal, this IS 500 was built with the V-8 in mind from the start whereas the IS F was a skunk works project where the V-8 was forced in.

How is the IS500 any different in terms of the V8 not being forced in or built with it in mind? The front overhang was extended by an inch or two I believe reading so the V8 could fit.. don't see how this is any different.
 

mikeavelli

Moderator
Messages
5,192
Reactions
10,895
> To add to this, the biggest difference and this has a huge deal, this IS 500 was built with the V-8 in mind from the start whereas the IS F was a skunk works project where the V-8 was forced in.

How is the IS500 any different in terms of the V8 not being forced in or built with it in mind? The front overhang was extended by an inch or two I believe reading so the V8 could fit.. don't see how this is any different.

Completely different. The 2IS was never meant for an IS F. It wasn’t a planned product. So the V-8 was stuffed in. The LFA was to be the first F product but management liked the IS F so Much it got approved.

The 3IS.5 was planned from the beginning to have a V-8. It has minimal
Changes to the body.
 

Motor

Expert
Messages
1,129
Reactions
1,511

The first IS 500 crash?
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
537
Reactions
898
Pretty terrible review. He is probably owner of that ISF so it has undertones of bias all over it. 12% increase in power is not "a bit more power". It is a significant increase in power. Also, the engines are completely different other than the bottom end block. Everything was either re-designed or updated including the internals. That is why the ISF 2UR V8 parts are not swappable with parts from the 2nd gen 2UR. I also believe the 3IS chassis is significantly more well-sorted out than the 2IS chassis (Yaguchi san himself said he did not feel 2IS chassis was suitable enough, but being a skunkwork's car he had to start with the base platform).

Also, there is no mention of the transmission where the IS500 transmission is improved by a significant margin in terms of speed and tuning with a more modern and powerful ECU over that of the ISF antiquated first version that was tuned back in mid-2000s.
 
Last edited:

Sulu

Admirer
Messages
562
Reactions
803
Pretty terrible review. He is probably owner of that ISF so it has undertones of bias all over it. 12% increase in power is not "a bit more power". It is a significant increase in power. Also, the engines are completely different other than the bottom end block. Everything was either re-designed or updated including the internals. That is why the ISF 2UR V8 parts are not swappable with parts from the 2nd gen 2UR. I also believe the 3IS chassis is significantly more well-sorted out than the 2IS chassis (Yaguchi san himself said he did not feel 2IS chassis was suitable enough, but being a skunkwork's car he had to start with the base platform).

Also, there is no mention of the transmission where the IS500 transmission is improved by a significant margin in terms of speed and tuning with a more modern and powerful ECU over that of the ISF first version that was tuned back in mid-2000s.
It seems to me that the reviewer believes that, being an enthusiast makes him an automotive expert. It seems to be another case of the reviewer knowing just enough to be dangerous. He is missing the forest for the trees -- obsessed with some many little details (material of suspension components, for example) and thinks that is enough to explain the "engineering" of the car, while ignoring the larger aspects of the car as a whole.
 

ssun30

Expert
Messages
2,229
Reactions
5,207
It was a mistake by Toyota to reuse old names for their ESTEC engines. The difference between 2UR-GSE and 2UR-GSE ESTEC is a generational jump. Same for 2GR-FSE -> 2GR-FKS/2GR-FXE -> 8GR-FXS/1NR-FE -> 1NR-FKE. The very sophisticated 6AR-FSE/8AR-FTS are new designs completely unrelated to the very simple 1AR/2AR-FE. I guess Toyota's reasoning was most of its buyers don't understand engine codenames anyway. But for that reason they got the bad reputation for 'reusing decade old engines' in the media. But we know they are the kind of company who don't care about media perception.
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
537
Reactions
898
It was a mistake by Toyota to reuse old names for their ESTEC engines. The difference between 2UR-GSE and 2UR-GSE ESTEC is a generational jump. Same for 2GR-FSE -> 2GR-FKS/2GR-FXE -> 8GR-FXS/1NR-FE -> 1NR-FKE. The very sophisticated 6AR-FSE/8AR-FTS are new designs completely unrelated to the very simple 1AR/2AR-FE. I guess Toyota's reasoning was most of its buyers don't understand engine codenames anyway. But for that reason they got the bad reputation for 'reusing decade old engines' in the media. But we know they are the kind of company who don't care about media perception.

That is true. I have been baffled always as to why they stuck with the same engine code? Your explanation makes sense. They are so different that there is nothing interchangeable. The 2nd gen 2UR was built around a high-revving engine model so the internals were designed as such to make it more free-revving with little internal inertia. The higher compression forged pistons were to raise the redline and for higher compression. The throttle body also is significantly bigger etc. They claims the ISF "feels faster than the heavier IS500". So, that means 4% increase in weight trumps an increase in 12% power? I realize the gearing is taller all of the recent 2UR cars due to bigger wheels/tire circumference, but there is no way anyone should not feel a significant bump in HP.

Then remember the computing power for all of control systems in the engine and transmission is also a substantial difference between ISF and ISF500. Being a Senior Software Architect, I remember the computers I used at work circa 2005 - 2006 (Pentium 4) as a junior and they were ancient compared to what I use for work now (Intel Quad Core).
 
Last edited:

Gecko

Administrator
Messages
3,753
Reactions
8,497
Nice work. I do prefer the shorter snout of the 350, but.... must... have.... V8!
 

Gor134

Fan
Messages
72
Reactions
131
This will likely stop IS300/350 owners from doing "IS500 conversion" cause they'd need to get new front fenders and bumper as well to fit the longer hood!
 

Levi

Expert
Messages
1,600
Reactions
1,917
This will likely stop IS300/350 owners from doing "IS500 conversion" cause they'd need to get new front fenders and bumper as well to fit the longer hood!
only length is different. styling is exactly the same. who in their right mind lengthen the front overhang?
 

MichaelL

Fan
Messages
89
Reactions
149
only length is different. styling is exactly the same. who in their right mind lengthen the front overhang?
Well to be fair they probably didn’t have a choice when fitting a V8 in the engine bay… had to make it fit somehow.