Lexus Announces IS 200t with 2.0L Turbo Engine

[mmcartalk]

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

Usually, with well-engineered AWD (which is the case with most car-based AWD these days), I myself can't tell any significant NVH differences between FWD and AWD, despite the extra driveshafts, constant-velocity/CV joints, and gears/differentials of AWD adding to the motion underneath. And, off course, on some of the very newest AWD systems, electronic torque-vectoring has replaced some earlier mechanical functions, like with LSD's.

 

[IS-SV]

Usually, with well-engineered AWD (which is the case with most car-based AWD these days), I myself can't tell any significant NVH differences between FWD and AWD, despite the extra driveshafts, constant-velocity/CV joints, and gears/differentials of AWD adding to the motion. And, off course, on some of the very newest AWD systems, electronic torque-vectoring has replaced some earlier mechanical functions, like with LSD's.

Yes, agreed in modern Awd setups today.

We are talking about engine 2.0t engine in NX (see above discussion as it relates to turbo4 in premium cars). Your observations?

 

[mmcartalk]

Yes, agreed in modern Awd setups today.

We are talking about engine 2.0t engine in NX (see above discussion as it relates to turbo4 in premium cars). Your observations?

OK, I guess the best way to state it, then, is that I've liked the VW/Audi 2.0T for years, especially hooked to the DSG/S-Tronic dual-clutch gearbox, but that other rival 2.0Ts from Lincoln, Cadillac, Lexus (NX) and other Audi rivals are clearly catching up with the benefit of their state-of-the-art engineering. Still, with the possible exception of the classic VW/Audi 2.0T, given the choice, I'd usually take a N/A V6. Of course, I don't think we're going to have a real choice much longer....turbo in-line 4s, due to the upcoming CAFE laws (and whatever CARB decides to do in CA) are steadly taking over where V6s once nested. The Lincoln MKC (which I otherwise think quite highly of) doesn't offer a V6 at all. Neither does its rival Lexus NX. I would also think even more highly of the Buick Verano than I do (which is a lot) if it offered a small V6. So, what we went, and what we are going to get, may (?) be two different things. However, having said that, the current crop of turbo-4s is (admittedly) proving to be nicer than I expected. I can see why the engineers are turning to them, though they are also probably going to require more expensive synthetic oil. I guess, though, if one is going to sink a minimum of 30-40K (or more) into a new vehicle, one should not quibble about the price of keeping it lubed properly.

 

[IS-SV]

OK, I guess the best way to state it, then, is that I've liked the VW/Audi 2.0T for years, especially hooked to the DSG/S-Tronic dual-clutch gearbox, but that other rival 2.0Ts from Lincoln, Cadillac, Lexus (NX) and other Audi rivals are clearly catching up with the benefit of their state-of-the-art engineering. Still, with the possible exception of the classic VW/Audi 2.0T, given the choice, I'd usually take a N/A V6. Of course, I don't think we're going to have a real choice much longer....turbo in-line 4s, due to the upcoming CAFE laws (and whatever CARB decides to do in CA) are steadly taking over where V6s once nested. The Lincoln MKC (which I otherwise think quite highly of) doesn't offer a V6 at all. Neither does its rival Lexus NX. I would also think even more highly of the Buick Verano than I do (which is a lot) if it offered a small V6. So, what we went, and what we are going to get, may (?) be two different things. However, having said that, the current crop of turbo-4s is (admittedly) proving to be nicer than I expected. I can see why the engineers are turning to them, though they are also probably going to require more expensive synthetic oil. I guess, though, if one is going to sink a minimum of 30-40K (or more) into a new vehicle, one should not quibble about the price of keeping it lubed properly.

Yes we know all that, and for those that might not it's info easily found on Internet.

But based on discussion of premium turbo4's above, what were your observations (idle smoothness, sound, smoothness at high revs, torque, quietness, NVH, etc) related to 2.0Lturbo in NX (specifically). You drove it, some of us haven't yet.

 

[mmcartalk]

Yes we know all that, and for those that might not it's info easily found on Internet.

But based on discussion of premium turbo4's above, what were your observations (idle smoothness, sound, smoothness at high revs, torque, quietness, NVH, etc) related to 2.0Lturbo in NX (specifically). You drove it, some of us haven't yet.

In general, though the power level was fine, I didn't think the NX's 2.0T was quite as refined as the VW/Audi 2.0T, though, to my ear and senses, there were some differences in refinement depending on which drive mode (ECO/NORMAL, etc...) it was in. If you want the details, here is the full-review I did on it some months ago....originally at another forum. I edited it for this forum when I posted it in May, but left the same details in.

https://lexusenthusiast.com/forums/threads/mm-full-review-2015-lexus-nx-200t.520/

 

[IS-SV]

Not as refined as VW/Audi is what I read, that's disappointing to hear. Mercedes has no problem matching or exceeding refinement/NVH of that benchmark engine in Audis. I guess I need to drive NX to confirm. Thanks.

 

[mmcartalk]

Not as refined as VW/Audi is what I read, that's disappointing to hear. Mercedes has no problem matching or exceeding refinement/NVH of that benchmark engine in Audis. I guess I need to drive NX to confirm. Thanks.

Make sure, when you test-drive it, you extensively try it in all of the drive-modes. To my senses, I found that the computer noticeably alters the engine's drive-characteristics (and to a lesser extent, NVH) in the different modes, though the difference is not huge.

 

[IS-SV]

Make sure, when you test-drive it, you extensively try it in all of the drive-modes. I found that the computer noticeably alters the engine's characteristics in the different modes.

Yes, thanks, that will impact throttle response and shift patterns mostly (from a drivetrain standpoint).

For now I'm going with C.MR2's assessment because of his extensive/actual NX miles driven and years of premium car ownership experience, at least until I drive it.

 

[mmcartalk]

Yes, thanks, that will impact throttle response and shift patterns mostly (from a drivetrain standpoint).

For now I'm going with C.MR2's assessment because of his extensive/actual NX miles driven and years of premium car ownership experience, at least until I drive it.

Well, soon you'll have your own assessment. Have fun.

 

[Och]

The one other thing that I though I'd mention.

My daughters X1 has 15k on it, since late last November. Many highway trips CT to NY, trip to Canada, trip to Florida, etc - almost exclusively highway miles. The average economy on it is 21.1mpg in all these miles according to the onboard computer. And she drives very calmly, obeying speed limits, etc.

My Mazda had about 20K on the clock after 2 years. Almost all of it is city driving, and I drove it very aggressively, flooring it every chance I get. Average fuel economy 26mpg with all that beating.

So these turbo 4 cylinders are not as efficient as manufacturers would like us to believe. A small NA V6 can probably easily match them, even without DI and other fancy but unreliable tech.

 

[IS-SV]

The one other thing that I though I'd mention.

My daughters X1 has 15k on it, since late last November. Many highway trips CT to NY, trip to Canada, trip to Florida, etc - almost exclusively highway miles. The average economy on it is 21.1mpg in all these miles according to the onboard computer. And she drives very calmly, obeying speed limits, etc.

My Mazda had about 20K on the clock after 2 years. Almost all of it is city driving, and I drove it very aggressively, flooring it every chance I get. Average fuel economy 26mpg with all that beating.

So these turbo 4 cylinders are not as efficient as manufacturers would like us to believe. A small NA V6 can probably easily match them, even without DI and other fancy but unreliable tech.

Another BMW report, thanks. That's mediocre highway mileage at 21.1.

Turbo4 in Mercedes C250 gets consistent 30 mpg at 75-80 mph, realizing aerodynamics for a sport sedan are different than small SUV of course. Mercedes now has about 38K miles on it.

Note: Lexus IS350 (306hp) gets about 10% to 15% lower mileage.

I drove Mazda CX-5 2.0L Skyactiv forjust over 2 years and 30K miles. It got 26 mpg city/suburb and 30 mpg freeway (75-80 mph), pretty good mileage for Awd SUV.

 

[Och]

Another BMW report, thanks. That's mediocre highway mileage at 21.1.

Turbo4 in Mercedes C250 gets consistent 30 mpg at 75-80 mph, realizing aerodynamics for a sport sedan are different than small SUV of course. Mercedes now has about 38K miles on it. Note: Lexus IS350 (306hp) gets about 10% to 15% lower mileage.

I drove Mazda CX-5 2.0L Skyactiv forjust over 2 years and 30K miles. It got 26 mpg city/suburb and 30 mpg freeway (75-80 mph), pretty good mileage for Awd SUV.

The C250 afaik was only available for a couple of years and then soon replaced by the current C300. The turbo engine in C250 is also not anywhere as responsive as the BMW engine, with noticeable lag. The new model is much better.

While the BMW engine may be less refined and not get good fuel economy, it can really suprise with quickness, especially from the get go. It feels quick even when compared to my m235 and x5 5.0

 

[IS-SV]

The C250 afaik was only available for a couple of years and then soon replaced by the current C300. The turbo engine in C250 is also not anywhere as responsive as the BMW engine, with noticeable lag. The new model is much better.

While the BMW engine may be less refined and not get good fuel economy, it can really suprise with quickness, especially from the get go. It feels quick even when compared to my m235 and x5 5.0

C250 available since 2010 in international markets (5 years and still in coupe as of today), tranny adapts for quicker downshifts to get into boost faster for aggressive drivers. I've driven new C300 turbo4 extensively too, again super smooth.

Agreed BMW turbo4 is highest powered even if not most refined, I said all that weeks ago.