Lexus Announces IS 200t with 2.0L Turbo Engine

[Tragic Bronson]

in Europe, most people buy manual BMWs because it is $2500 cheaper than automatic, and they are buying base fleet version of the vehicle. I just checked on largest german car sales site, and out of 1500 new 5 series listed, only 63 are manuals and then only 5-6 are not base models.

That's still a lot of buyers...

 

[CIF]

Expected, nice to finally see it be official. Looks like they're doing a phased roll out for the 2.0T engine, with other models getting it at different times than the IS is.

 

[Och]

A four cylinder is a four cylinder, and most of those turbo fours are actually far LESS refined than a comparable NA four cylinder. For instance the NA 2.0 engine in my Mazda 3 is a lot smoother than the turbo 4 in my daughters X1 or my friends C300. I can rev it in neutral all the way til the fuel cut off and there is absolutely ZERO vibrations through body/steering wheel, and even at idle it is extremely smooth. Turbo fours idle at lot worse (and only get worse and worse with age and wear), and its difficult to tune them. That being said, as smooth and refined the Mazda engine may be, it is still unmistakable a four cylinder, and the same goes for all these turbo 4s that are taking over the market. I'd much rather take a more refined, better sounding V6/I6 any day of the week, even if it has less power.

 

[mmcartalk]

A four cylinder is a four cylinder, and most of those turbo fours are actually far LESS refined than a comparable NA four cylinder. For instance the NA 2.0 engine in my Mazda 3 is a lot smoother than the turbo 4 in my daughters X1 or my friends C300. I can rev it in neutral all the way til the fuel cut off and there is absolutely ZERO vibrations through body/steering wheel, and even at idle it is extremely smooth. Turbo fours idle at lot worse (and only get worse and worse with age and wear), and its difficult to tune them. That being said, as smooth and refined the Mazda engine may be, it is still unmistakable a four cylinder, and the same goes for all these turbo 4s that are taking over the market. I'd much rather take a more refined, better sounding V6/I6 any day of the week, even if it has less power.

You're correct that, with only four up-and-down banging pistons, only so much can be done to quell vibration and enhance refinement, but good engineering tricks like a heavy flywheel, soft absorbent engine mounts, balance-shafts, thick effective underhood insulation pads, and precise control of fuel-air mixture/timing/combustion certainly help.

 

[minipixels]

Canada no more for MY '16, but I feel it will still be offered in the US thanks to a more favourable climate. TBD though...

That sucks...I better hold on to my IS350 rwd then!

 

[IS-SV]

You're correct that, with only four up-and-down banging pistons, only so much can be done to quell vibration and enhance refinement, but good engineering tricks like a heavy flywheel, soft absorbent engine mounts, balance-shafts, thick effective underhood insulation pads, and precise control of fuel-air mixture/timing/combustion certainly help.

Yes, and square or undersquare cylinder configs are smoothest too. A turbo quiets exhaust sound too. Also a well tuned turbo smooths torque curve, helpful versus a low power normally aspirated 4 banger.

None of the mainstream Honda, Mazda, Hyundai, Toyota, GM 4 banger applications are suitable in a premium car. BMW turbo 4's are known for being unrefined by premium car standards, but they also have the highest horsepower and fuel efficiency among the turbo 4's offered by premium brands. Mazda Skyactiv 2.0 liter engines are undersquare configs that are noisy and coarse at high revs, certainly unsuitable in a premium car. Revving a car in neutral is not an effective way to measure smoothness because there is no load. And most modern engines will not go to redline in neutral, fuel cutoff in neutral and/or Park is usually around 4000 or so.

I fully expect Lexus can do a turbo 4 as smooth as the best being Mercedes and Audi for use in premium cars. Lexus currently makes a 60 degree V6 that's as smooth as a straight 6, and a straight six on paper should be smoother.

 

[Och]

You're correct that, with only four up-and-down banging pistons, only so much can be done to quell vibration and enhance refinement, but good engineering tricks like a heavy flywheel, soft absorbent engine mounts, balance-shafts, thick effective underhood insulation pads, and precise control of fuel-air mixture/timing/combustion certainly help.

It much more difficult to precisely adjust that air/fuel mixture with a turbo engine, especially if cams are tuned with valve overlap for high power output. In racing engines they even raise idle speed just so these engines don't stall.

 

[Och]

Yes, and square or undersquare cylinder configs are smoothest too. A turbo quiets exhaust sound too. Also a well tuned turbo smooths torque curve, helpful versus a low power normally aspirated 4 banger.

None of the mainstream Honda, Mazda, Hyundai, Toyota, GM 4 banger applications are suitable in a premium car. BMW turbo 4's are known for being unrefined by premium car standards, but they also have the highest horsepower and fuel efficiency among the turbo 4's offered by premium brands. Mazda Skyactiv 2.0 liter engines are undersquare configs that are noisy and coarse at high revs, certainly unsuitable in a premium car. Revving a car in neutral is not an effective way to measure smoothness because there is no load. And most modern engines will not go to redline in neutral, fuel cutoff in neutral and/or Park is usually around 4000 or so.

I fully expect Lexus can do a turbo 4 as smooth as the best being Mercedes and Audi for use in premium cars. Lexus currently makes a 60 degree V6 that's as smooth as a straight 6, and a straight six on paper should be smoother.

I've had my 2.0 Skyactiv Mazda for almost 2 years, and 2.0 turbo X1 for 9 month, and driven my friends C300 on few occasions. I can assure you that the Mazda engine is easily smoother and way more refined than both BMW and MB engines, at any RPM range, idle, under load or free revving.

I haven't driven the Lexus 2.0t, but I don't have much faith in it. It debuted in the NX200t, which isn't much more than a souped up RAV4. It will do fine for overweight soccer moms, but not for enthusiasts.

 

[IS-SV]

I've had my 2.0 Skyactiv Mazda for almost 2 years, and 2.0 turbo X1 for 9 month, and driven my friends C300 on few occasions. I can assure you that the Mazda engine is easily smoother and way more refined than both BMW and MB engines, at any RPM range, idle, under load or free revving.

I haven't driven the Lexus 2.0t, but I don't have much faith in it. It debuted in the NX200t, which isn't much more than a souped up RAV4. It will do fine for overweight soccer moms, but not for enthusiasts.

I owned a 2.0L SkyActiv Mazda CX-5 for over 2 years and 30K miles and put over 20K miles on a Mercedes Turbo4, and have driven several MB turbo4's. I can assure you that the Mercedes turbo 4 is far quieter and far smoother to redline by, night and day difference
Mazda is very under square config., no surprise and NVH at high revs would be unacceptable in premium car. I have not driven Lexus version.

 

[Joaquin Ruhi]

Just wanted to share with you my commentary, analysis and number-crunching over on my.IS on the new IS 200t:
http://my.is/forums/f41/2016-lexus-sedans-europe-551945/

Admittedly, I went off on some weird tangents, such as speculating on which European countries might not offer the IS 200t; guessing the shade of red on the car in the press photos, and discovering that the IS 200t is actually 35 kg (77 lbs) heavier than the IS 250!

Oh, and a big, heartfelt thank you to corradoMR2, whose educated guesswork and calculations on the IS 200t's U.S. EPA fuel economy numbers over on Club Lexus I liked enough to quote as well.

 

[IS-SV]

I've had my 2.0 Skyactiv Mazda for almost 2 years, and 2.0 turbo X1 for 9 month, and driven my friends C300 on few occasions. I can assure you that the Mazda engine is easily smoother and way more refined than both BMW and MB engines, at any RPM range, idle, under load or free revving.

.

As I mentioned earlier after owning a Mazda Skyactiv 2.0L engine for over 2 years/30K miles, NVH of this engine would be unacceptable in a premium car application. It's too loud and coarse at higher revs during acceleration. MB, Audi, and now Lexus do (turbo)4 cylinder engines better.

I was reading recent August C&D road test of new CX-3 with 2.0L Skyactiv tuned for this application and it confirms what I said earlier. They said, "the 2.0 can also sound rather coarse when prodded". No thanks, not suitable for IS.

 

[oem_is300]

Please bring it in a manual!

Totally agree. Although its probably not huge, I believe there is a market out there for the manual transmission. Packaged with the turbo engine in an F-sport model would be great as a 'tuning platform.'

Lexus tried a manual in the original IS300, and couldn't keep it in production more than a year or two because of poor sales....there just weren't many takers. Of course, the IS, as a product line, has become a lot more popular today than back then, so a manual option just might work in some areas where there isn't lot of dense traffic.

If I remember correctly, 2001 (the first year) was the only year a manual wasn't offered in the IS300. They offered the 5-speed from 2002-2005 when they phased it out for the 2nd generation IS. It wasn't a widely chosen option, but it did remain in production throughout the generation.

 

[IS-SV]

If I remember correctly, 2001 (the first year) was the only year a manual wasn't offered in the IS300. They offered the 5-speed from 2002-2005 when they phased it out for the 2nd generation IS. It wasn't a widely chosen option, but it did remain in production throughout the generation.

I've seen early gen2 IS250's with manuals too, although not common.

 

[oem_is300]

I've seen early gen2 IS250's with manuals too, although not common.

Ah, you're right, I had forgotten about those. It was the 6-speed manual from the Tacoma I believe and was only available on the RWD IS250s.

 

[Och]

As I mentioned earlier after owning a Mazda Skyactiv 2.0L engine for over 2 years/30K miles, NVH of this engine would be unacceptable in a premium car application. It's too loud and coarse at higher revs during acceleration. MB, Audi, and now Lexus do (turbo)4 cylinder engines better.

I was reading recent August C&D road test of new CX-3 with 2.0L Skyactiv tuned for this application and it confirms what I said earlier. They said, "the 2.0 can also sound rather coarse when prodded". No thanks, not suitable for IS.

These engines in SUVs might be tuned differently - in my mazda 3 sedan the skyactiv engine was gutless but buttery smooth without any sign of being coarse at any RPMs. Can't same the same about my daughters X1 engine - it sounds like its lugging when cruising (which is 95% of driving time) at low RPMs before turbo gets to properly kick in, and has a decent amount of vibration at idle.

But honestly it doesn't matter. One four cylinder could be a notch better than another - but even the best four cylinder will sound and feel like garbage next to any modern V6 or better yet I6. They are ok for college students that want entry lever premium cars or people that dont care about cars in general, but not for experienced crowd that has a well developed taste for cars.

 

[IS-SV]

These engines in SUVs might be tuned differently - in my mazda 3 sedan the skyactiv engine was gutless but buttery smooth without any sign of being coarse at any RPMs. Can't same the same about my daughters X1 engine - it sounds like its lugging when cruising (which is 95% of driving time) at low RPMs before turbo gets to properly kick in, and has a decent amount of vibration at idle.

But honestly it doesn't matter. One four cylinder could be a notch better than another - but even the best four cylinder will sound and feel like garbage next to any modern V6 or better yet I6. They are ok for college students that want entry lever premium cars or people that dont care about cars in general, but not for experienced crowd that has a well developed taste for cars.

BMW turbo4's are known for coarseness that many of us find to be unacceptable in a premium sedan. I guess you can just add that to (your) reported list of BMW traits including failed injectors, etc.

Mazda 2.0L Skyactiv engines all have the same under square config for efficiency, not favoring smoothness. Even the fancier new Mazda6 sedan has the same reported coarseness and high noise level at higher revs under load, unfortunately, therefore not acceptable by Lexus standards. Yes agreed Mazda tunes each variation for application, therefore CX-3 has lower output (this only affects torque and hp ratings) .

People like us who graduated from college years ago in "the experienced crowd that has a well developed taste for cars" can tell the difference, therefore I agree most mainstream brand 4's sound like garbage (or a maybe garbage disposal or coffee grinder, lol). Mercedes, Lexus and Audi have done (turbo)4's better for base engines in premium cars with NVH attributes including smooth idle, decent sound quality, low measured noise levels to redline, smoothness to redline, good torque curve, high output, nice power and good fuel efficiency.

 

[mmcartalk]

On the Lexus 2.0T........most of you guys probably already know this, but, for those of you who don't, if all you want to do is sample the engine itself to get an idea of what it's like (before it is actually introduced in the IS), you can do that now by test-driving an NX200t. I'd recommend sampling the FWD version, as the AWD version adds more weight and drag in a vehicle that is already bulkier and heavier than an IS.

 

[IS-SV]

On the Lexus 2.0T........most of you guys probably already know this, but for those who don't, if all you want to do is sample the engine itself to get an idea of what it's like (before it is actually introduced in the IS), you can do that now by test-driving an NX200t. I'd recommend sampling the FWD version, as the AWD version adds weight and drag.

Yes, I've already sampled Mercedes and Audi versions extensively, and if you look in threads we already have actual driver report from a respected and very knowledgeable member (c.mr2) on NX already. We've been around the block as they say (and not some short test drive).

Awd versus rwd not big factor.

 

[mmcartalk]

Yes, I've already sampled Mercedes and Audi versions extensively, and if you look in threads we already have actual driver report from a respected and very knowledgeable member (c.mr2) on NX already. We've been around the block as they say (and not some short test drive).

Awd versus rwd not big factor.

In my own NX review, it was longer than a simple short test drive, though, of course, not like corrado's ownership. I did that review from several specific PM requests....not just on my own.

I don't entirely agree on the AWD vs. 2WD factor....on a number of vehicles, the extra weight/drag is quite noticeable, particularly in relatively small-engined AWD vehicles like the Lexus IS250AWD and in some now-discontinued Suzuki vehicles where you could disconnect the AWD with a switch for added economy and power. With larger engines, though, the difference is less noticeable.

 

[IS-SV]

In my own NX review, it was longer than a simple short test drive, though, of course, not like corrado's ownership. I did that review from several specific PM requests....not just on my own.

I don't entirely agree on the AWD vs. 2WD factor....on a number of vehicles, the extra weight/drag is quite noticeable, particularly in relatively small-engined AWD vehicles like the Lexus IS250AWD.

Yes and barely measurable (less than 1/2 second on 0-60 times because btw they modify gearing accordingly to compensate), only sommewhat applicable because discussion focused on refinement and NVH. Did you test acceleration?

And related to NVH/refinement of 2.0t, what were your observations?