Lexus GS- Under Appreciated or not Good Enough

[mikeavelli]

One key aspect of 5 series sales success over GS is styling advantage in my opinion. To my eyes the 5 series is best-looking car in that class. (Of course styling doesn't explain E-classes success at all.)

Agreed. The 5 series looks fantastic and has aged well. Clearly influenced everything from the GS to the Accord.

 

[Och]

One key aspect of 5 series sales success over GS is styling advantage in my opinion. To my eyes the 5 series is best-looking car in that class. (Of course styling doesn't explain E-classes success at all.)

The 5 series looks great, but not in the popular 528 trim. The single exhaust ruins the whole car for me.

 

[IS-SV]

The 5 series looks great, but not in the popular 528 trim. The single exhaust ruins the whole car for me.

Yes, and not my favorite asspect of the car, but the lines, roofline and proportions of the body are top notch. To me it's important to have a sleek roofline that flows well, but that's just my personal preference.

 

[CIF]

One key aspect of 5 series sales success over GS is styling advantage in my opinion. To my eyes the 5 series is best-looking car in that class. (Of course styling doesn't explain E-classes success at all.)

Styling is very subjective, so unless something dramatically stands out in a positive way styling-wise in a segment, styling cannot be objectively used as a big reason for sales success. Especially in the midsize prestige luxury sedan class, there are no dramatically styled entrants. It's well-known and obvious that a few main reasons for sales success of BMW and Benz in the class include highly subsidized low-priced leases, as well as the reputation and prestige of the brand/name, and the associated societal status that holds (amongst other reasons).

 

[IS-SV]

Styling is very subjective, so unless something dramatically stands out in a positive way styling-wise in a segment, styling cannot be objectively used as a big reason for sales success. Especially in the midsize prestige luxury sedan class, there are no dramatically styled entrants. It's well-known and obvious that a few main reasons for sales success of BMW and Benz in the class include highly subsidized low-priced leases, as well as the reputation and prestige of the brand/name, and the associated societal status that holds (amongst other reasons).

I agree with all of above, but I view good styling (being subjective for sure) as a significant factor in sales success. So I place higher importance on good styling to drive sales, (not necessarily dramatic styling). Without good styling, even the best cars have an uphill battle generating sales profitably. My feeling Mercedes, BMW and Tesla for example see the importance of good styling (along the lines of how I view it) and it shows in their higher volume products. Exception being E, where even Mercedes realizes how ugly it's E class is and has tried temporary fixes before total restyle.

 

[CIF]

I agree with all of above, but I view good styling (being subjective for sure) as a significant factor in sales success. So I place higher importance on good styling to drive sales, (not necessarily dramatic styling). Without good styling, even the best cars have an uphill battle generating sales profitably. My feeling Mercedes, BMW and Tesla for example see the importance of good styling (along the lines of how I view it) and it shows in their higher volume products. Exception being E, where even Mercedes realizes how ugly it's E class is and has tried temporary fixes before total restyle.

Yes I acknowledge those points as well, and agree. Personally I find the current 5 Series quite mundane, and I still find the previous generation more memorable styling-wise, but again it's all subjective. The new E Class does nothing for me, and respectfully, the Tesla S sells well for much different, unique reasons. It being a styling beauty of course does help.

 

[IS-SV]

Yes I acknowledge those points as well, and agree. Personally I find the current 5 Series quite mundane, and I still find the previous generation more memorable styling-wise, but again it's all subjective. The new E Class does nothing for me, and respectfully, the Tesla S sells well for much different, unique reasons. It being a styling beauty of course does help.

I think TeslaS is one of my favorite examples because it's new technology and also stylish.

Ponder if Tesla decided to make the model S look less attractive like RL/RLX, my opinion is that the negative impact on sales would be quite significant even with the tech...

 

[mmcartalk]

Styling is very subjective, so unless something dramatically stands out in a positive way styling-wise in a segment, styling cannot be objectively used as a big reason for sales success. Especially in the midsize prestige luxury sedan class, there are no dramatically styled entrants.

Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep, in particular, mastered the art of being able to sell vehicles that were questionable and rental-grade in quality/reliability under the skin, simply because people liked the skin itself (in other words, how they looked). Of course, most of their newest vehicles are also much better under the skin as well.

Back to the GS...the GS (perhaps reflecting its price) does seem better and more refined under the skin than either its ES or IS stable-mates, though one could not necessarily compare it with an LS.

 

[mmcartalk]

I think TeslaS is one of my favorite examples because it's new technology and also stylish.

Ponder if Tesla decided to make the model S look less attractive like RL/RLX, my opinion is that the negative impact on sales would be quite significant even with the tech...

With the Tesla, though, besides styling, you also have a factor that is not present with most other cars.....the ability, under ideal driving conditions, to go 200 miles or more on a full charge. That alone is probably drawing a number of sales, despite the high price. Some people just don't want to spend all night (literally) waiting for a 110V recharge after only 80-100 miles or so.....might as well get some range for it, though I believe Tesla also has much quicker recharging outlets.

 

[IS-SV]

With the Tesla, though, besides styling, you also have a factor that is not present with most other cars.....the ability, under ideal driving conditions, to go 200 miles or more on a full charge. That alone is probably drawing a number of sales, despite the high price. Some people just don't want to spend all night (literally) waiting for a 110V recharge after only 80-100 miles or so.....might as well get some range for it, though I believe Tesla also has much quicker recharging outlets.

Yes, we know all that (being in the tech capital of the world and actually knowing engineers at Tesla too). Yes, even if ugly the capabilities of the car would still generate some sales.

The point is had the Tesla been poorly styled (like RL/RLX for example), they would have sold at slower rate too. Tesla's senior staff knows the importance of combining the best technology with very good styling. It would of been a mistake to not have first rate styling.

 

[IS-SV]

Yes, Lexus needs to continue to selectively expand engine lineup for GS to improve market appeal. The 2.0Lturbo was a good addition for base engine but something is needed between current 3.5L and F V8.

 

[mmcartalk]

The point is had the Tesla been poorly styled (like RL/RLX for example), they would have sold at slower rate too.

Except for the parrot-beak grilles, I don't think styling was the problem with the RL and RLX. Some people just considered them overpriced for their physical size. And the RLX lost its (former) standard SH-AWD.

Tesla's senior staff knows the importance of combining the best technology with very good styling. It would of been a mistake to not have first rate styling.

True, but what equals (if not exceeds) both the styling and tech on the Model S is its superb fit and finish, some of the best that I've seen even for a near-triple-digit price. .

 

[mmcartalk]

Yes, Lexus needs to continue to selectively expand engine lineup for GS to improve market appeal. The 2.0Lturbo was a good addition for base engine but something is needed between current 3.5L and F V8.

.......Such as a 3.5L turbo?

 

[IS-SV]

.......Such as a 3.5L turbo?

Yes that would be nice, with output in the 350 hp range....

Of course this would be optional/extra charge. But the predominate volume engine will most likely be the 2.0L turbo.

 

[CIF]

I think TeslaS is one of my favorite examples because it's new technology and also stylish.

Ponder if Tesla decided to make the model S look less attractive like RL/RLX, my opinion is that the negative impact on sales would be quite significant even with the tech...

I think the best way I can elaborate my point is that when a vehicle is inherently a good product, then handsome styling benefits it, and ugly styling may or may not be detrimental to it. If a vehicle is inherently mediocre or highly niche, then I think handsome or ugly styling plays a bigger impact. There are exceptions, but I would say this generally applies to most vehicles in my opinion.

Chrysler/Dodge/Jeep, in particular, mastered the art of being able to sell vehicles that were questionable and rental-grade in quality/reliability under the skin, simply because people liked the skin itself (in other words, how they looked). Of course, most of their newest vehicles are also much better under the skin as well.

Back to the GS...the GS (perhaps reflecting its price) does seem better and more refined under the skin than either its ES or IS stable-mates, though one could not necessarily compare it with an LS.

Chrysler had a variety of poor-selling models years ago, and still does to an extent. For a long time Chrysler sales were highly dependent on the Jeep brand and Ram trucks. Things are improving now, with much more stylish and modern-looking products.

The entire Jeep brand is a big exception, so I won't go into that. Ram trucks have always sold in large numbers. All the American brand full-size pickups sell in large numbers. It's a given. Aside from Ram and Jeep, there aren't a large number of top seller models for Chrysler. The refreshed Challenger and Charger seem to be doing well though, but I would also classify those as exceptions.

 

[IS-SV]

I think the best way I can elaborate my point is that when a vehicle is inherently a good product, then handsome styling benefits it, and ugly styling may or may not be detrimental to it. If a vehicle is inherently mediocre or highly niche, then I think handsome or ugly styling plays a bigger impact. There are exceptions, but I would say this generally applies to most vehicles in my opinion.

.

I agree, which is why I used Tesla to illustrate that. The last thing they wanted to produce is just another ugly electric car even if vastly superior.

Ugly styling is not worth the risk on volume premium products, the top tier premium automakers seem to be well aware.

My feeling in the premium car business good styling is necessary, other (cheaper) markets are more forgiving.

 

[mmcartalk]

Chrysler had a variety of poor-selling models years ago, and still does to an extent. For a long time Chrysler sales were highly dependent on the Jeep brand and Ram trucks. Things are improving now, with much more stylish and modern-looking products.

They are also rapidly improving in several areas under the skin as well, though, on some models, reliability issues still aren't completely gone.....buying one can still be a crap-shoot. But, still, as I see it, the odds of rolling a seven in that crap shoot are a lot better now.

The entire Jeep brand is a big exception, so I won't go into that. Ram trucks have always sold in large numbers. All the American brand full-size pickups sell in large numbers. It's a given. Aside from Ram and Jeep, there aren't a large number of top seller models for Chrysler. The refreshed Challenger and Charger seem to be doing well though, but I would also classify those as exceptions.

The Challenger and Charger also both have (according to Consumer Reports) extremely high owner-satisfaction ratings, especially with the Hemis, despite sometimes questionable reliability.

 

[CIF]

The Challenger and Charger are unique, mainly due to the nostalgia and similarity to classic muscle cars, more than any other modern vehicles on the market arguably.

 

[IS-SV]

Thankfully owning a GS doesn't involve crapshoot reliability with a pushrod engine.

 

[mmcartalk]

The Challenger and Charger are unique, mainly due to the nostalgia and similarity to classic muscle cars, more than any other modern vehicles on the market arguably.

In the nostalgia for classic muscle-cars and today's retro-designs, I'd also include the Mustang, Camaro, and, to some extent, the Chevy SS, though the SS admittedly has low production numbers. I would have said the Pontiac GTO, except that it's been out of production for some 7-8 years now, and, with Pontiac's demise, obviously won't be coming back.

(BTW, a little off-topic maybe, but if Chrysler ever does a retro Road Runner, unreliable or not, my checkbook's ready. With Plymouth gone, it would have to be under the Chrysler name, as Dodge is already tied up with the Charger. I grew up with the original Road Runners, it was my favorite American muscle-car, and I was a s**ker for the bird-graphic decals, Shaker-scoops, and Beep-Beep horn. The original Road Runners, despite durable drivetrains with the TorqueFlite automatic, like most Chrysler products of the era, had atrocious build-quality almost everywhere else outside of the powertrain...that, of course, despite Chrysler still lagging in that department, would be far-improved in today's models)