545 / 540 / GS 400

Stupid on what grounds?

How familiar are you with it?

DAS
--
For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
---

"Ignasi Palou-Rivera" > wrote in message
...
[.........]
>>> Smart
>>
>> Whatzat?
>>
> That's the small "urban" car owned by Mercedes, somewhat popular in
> Europe: http://www.smart.com
>
> (I prefer to call it Stupid, because it is.)
>
......................

"Dori A Schmetterling" > wrote in message >...
> You're obviously aggrieved about something, but I should like to ask what
> you mean.
>
> BMW is essentially a jumped-up motorcycle manufacturer from 1948 that was
> almost bought up by Mecedes-Benz when it was on the brink of bankruptcy in
> the fifties... :-)
>
> Ok, engine and aircraft manufacture goes back to 1916, but Toyota isn't that
> much younger, going back to about 1935/7. So Lexus is a brand name. So
> what?

I would agree with you on the minor difference in the relative ages of
BMW and Toyota. However, I believe Himes was referring to the
generation of performance-minded cars put out by BMW - you know, the
"Ultimate Drving Machine" idea. OTOH I am at a loss to detect any
such lineage or "tradition" with Toyota. I think even Datsun (Nissan)
has had a much more sporting history in production cars than Toyota.

So the Lexus brand comes off a bit shallow especially given the nature
of Lexus cars to be overly insulated and dull to drive. Believe me I
know, there is a Lexus with a dead battery sitting in my father's
parking spot in the garage.

Someone mentioned the IS300 and I agree that is the closest one to a
sporting drive but Lexus has neglected to improve upon it and it has
been "overtaken" by other Japanese makes. So there isn't much
sports-minded support behind the GS 400. I think it's just a larger
ES300 with a bigger engine and stiffer chassis. You never know where
Toyota will take it. Of course, a few years ago we would never have
expected Bangled designs either.


Michael



>
> DAS
> --
> For direct contact replace nospam with schmetterling
> ---
>
> "himes" > wrote in message
> om...
>
> > pointless, absurd, comparison. bmw has a history going back
> > generations.
> [............]

"Michael Low" > wrote
> "Dori A Schmetterling" > wrote
> Someone mentioned the IS300 and I agree that is the closest one to a
> sporting drive but Lexus has neglected to improve upon it and it has
> been "overtaken" by other Japanese makes. So there isn't much
> sports-minded support behind the GS 400. I think it's just a larger
> ES300 with a bigger engine and stiffer chassis. You never know where
> Toyota will take it. Of course, a few years ago we would never have
> expected Bangled designs either.

An ES300 is basically a Camry - FWD. A GS300/400 is a RWD car.
Don't know how you can compare the two...

Floyd

Michael Low wrote:
> I would agree with you on the minor difference in the relative ages
of
> BMW and Toyota. However, I believe Himes was referring to the
> generation of performance-minded cars put out by BMW - you know, the
> "Ultimate Drving Machine" idea. OTOH I am at a loss to detect any
> such lineage or "tradition" with Toyota. I think even Datsun
(Nissan)
> has had a much more sporting history in production cars than Toyota.
>
Well, Toyota did come out with its 2000GT way back around 1967 (a
convertible version was used in You Only Live Twice), it was the
prelude for the Datsun 240Z. Toyota "TRD" has been around for a long
time and I recall it was a response to Datsun's "Competition
Department" aka Datsun Comp

> So the Lexus brand comes off a bit shallow especially given the
nature
> of Lexus cars to be overly insulated and dull to drive. Believe me I
> know, there is a Lexus with a dead battery sitting in my father's
> parking spot in the garage.
>
Agree, even "L-Tuned" or "TRD'ed", Lexus/Toyota cars don't come close
to how a BMW drives.

> Someone mentioned the IS300 and I agree that is the closest one to a
> sporting drive but Lexus has neglected to improve upon it and it has
> been "overtaken" by other Japanese makes. So there isn't much
> sports-minded support behind the GS 400. I think it's just a larger
> ES300 with a bigger engine and stiffer chassis. You never know where
> Toyota will take it. Of course, a few years ago we would never have
> expected Bangled designs either.
>
>
No, GS400 is not a larger ES300. Unlike the front drive ES300 (e.g.,
Toyota Camry platform), its actually a rear drive car with V8 and based
on the larger Avalon platform. With its 300hp V8 engine, the GS400 is
Lexus supposed answer to E39 BMW 540i. However, as stated above, even
"L-Tuned", it doesn't come close to the way BMW's rides, handles or
drive. MAYBE, Lexus will come out with something more competitive in
2006, but that's a big MAYBE....

"bfd" > wrote in message roups.com>...
> Michael Low wrote:
> > I would agree with you on the minor difference in the relative ages
> of
> > BMW and Toyota. However, I believe Himes was referring to the
> > generation of performance-minded cars put out by BMW - you know, the
> > "Ultimate Drving Machine" idea. OTOH I am at a loss to detect any
> > such lineage or "tradition" with Toyota. I think even Datsun
> (Nissan)
> > has had a much more sporting history in production cars than Toyota.
> >
> Well, Toyota did come out with its 2000GT way back around 1967 (a
> convertible version was used in You Only Live Twice), it was the
> prelude for the Datsun 240Z. Toyota "TRD" has been around for a long
> time and I recall it was a response to Datsun's "Competition
> Department" aka Datsun Comp


I don't think anyone can honestly say the 2000GT is part of the Lexus
tradition. IMO, making sports sedans as standard offerings requires a
level of sporting commitment substantially higher than just having the
odd sports coupe. This is why I think Nissan is much more worthy,
more so than even Honda.


>
> > So the Lexus brand comes off a bit shallow especially given the
> nature
> > of Lexus cars to be overly insulated and dull to drive. Believe me I
> > know, there is a Lexus with a dead battery sitting in my father's
> > parking spot in the garage.
> >
> Agree, even "L-Tuned" or "TRD'ed", Lexus/Toyota cars don't come close
> to how a BMW drives.
>
> > Someone mentioned the IS300 and I agree that is the closest one to a
> > sporting drive but Lexus has neglected to improve upon it and it has
> > been "overtaken" by other Japanese makes. So there isn't much
> > sports-minded support behind the GS 400. I think it's just a larger
> > ES300 with a bigger engine and stiffer chassis. You never know where
> > Toyota will take it. Of course, a few years ago we would never have
> > expected Bangled designs either.
> >
> >
> No, GS400 is not a larger ES300. Unlike the front drive ES300 (e.g.,
> Toyota Camry platform),


Yes, thank you and Floyd for reminding me. I'm afraid the '03 GS 430
did not leave much of an impression on me when I looked at it.


its actually a rear drive car with V8 and based
> on the larger Avalon platform. With its 300hp V8 engine, the GS400 is
> Lexus supposed answer to E39 BMW 540i. However, as stated above, even
> "L-Tuned", it doesn't come close to the way BMW's rides, handles or
> drive. MAYBE, Lexus will come out with something more competitive in
> 2006, but that's a big MAYBE....


I think Lexus just wants to sell executive-level sedans to people who
want refinement with sporting pretensions. If you are seriously
interested in driving you can forget Lexus.


Michael

"bfd" > wrote in message
...
>
> "GRL" > wrote in message
> ...
> > As always, Lexus makes cars that are plush, very well appointed, and
> > extremely reliable, but not very exciting to drive. BMW makes cars that
> are
> > a kick to drive, but have more maintenance hassles.
> >
> Agree, the current lineup of lexus are down right boring and not too fun
to
> drive. BMW kills them in that respect.
>
> > If Lexus would hire a few ex-BMW chassis designers and turn them loose
and
> > start offering manual gear boxes they would eat BMW's market share. This
> is
> > not on their radar, though.
> >
> Don't be too sure of this, BMW is in their range:
>
> http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=100820

Lexus has a very good thing going in the luxury division, and with everyone
and their brother looking to be a BMW I think the Lexus share in the pure
luxury division will grow. I cannot think of a single reason to abandon that
for a segment (BMW type sport sedans) that will be more hotly contested year
after year.

There is a majority of drivers and buyers who don't want BMW's. I find it
strange so many manufacturers are chasing the BMW archetype. There are only
so many people who want cars that ride a bit rougher, make a bit more noise
and compress the driver passenger space in exchange for superior handling
and dynamics.

Ramone Cila wrote:
> "bfd" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > "GRL" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > As always, Lexus makes cars that are plush, very well appointed,
and
> > > extremely reliable, but not very exciting to drive. BMW makes
cars that
> > are
> > > a kick to drive, but have more maintenance hassles.
> > >
> > Agree, the current lineup of lexus are down right boring and not
too fun
> to
> > drive. BMW kills them in that respect.
> >
> > > If Lexus would hire a few ex-BMW chassis designers and turn them
loose
> and
> > > start offering manual gear boxes they would eat BMW's market
share. This
> > is
> > > not on their radar, though.
> > >
> > Don't be too sure of this, BMW is in their range:
> >
> > http://www.autoweek.com/news.cms?newsId=100820
>
> Lexus has a very good thing going in the luxury division, and with
everyone
> and their brother looking to be a BMW I think the Lexus share in the
pure
> luxury division will grow. I cannot think of a single reason to
abandon that
> for a segment (BMW type sport sedans) that will be more hotly
contested year
> after year.
>
> There is a majority of drivers and buyers who don't want BMW's. I
find it
> strange so many manufacturers are chasing the BMW archetype. There
are only
> so many people who want cars that ride a bit rougher, make a bit more
noise
> and compress the driver passenger space in exchange for superior
handling
> and dynamics.

Based on the autoweek article above, it appears Lexus/Toyota may be
seeing an opening left by BMW with its controversial styling and overly
complex electronics. Let's face it, even BMW's idrive/nav system is
inferior to the Toyota/Honda touch screen version.

IF Lexus can make a car "drive" like a BMW, is the IS300 a good
example?, then they might have something. Again, its a big "maybe" as
to whether Lexus or any other mfr are willing to commit the resources
necessary to do so.

"Dori A Schmetterling" > writes:

> "Ignasi Palou-Rivera" > wrote in message
> ...
> [.........]
>>>> Smart
>>>
>>> Whatzat?
>>>
>> That's the small "urban" car owned by Mercedes, somewhat popular in
>> Europe: http://www.smart.com
>>
>> (I prefer to call it Stupid, because it is.)
>>
> .....................
> Stupid on what grounds?
>
> How familiar are you with it?

Stupid, because its advantages are minimal over a proper small
car. You need an actual parling space to park it and a full lane to go
through, not like a motorcycle. I fondly remember a Smart parked in a
non-space with a parking ticket, as it should be because it was
partially blocking a pedestrian crosswalk.

I don't have any direct experience in the driving one sense. But I've
lived in a very congested city with quite a few of them, and I was
never capable to see any advantage over say a Nissan Micra or a VW
Lupo.

--
Ignasi.
'90 325is
(using SPAM trap e-mail address)

(Michael Low) writes:
> "Dori A Schmetterling" > wrote in message >...
>> You're obviously aggrieved about something, but I should like to ask what
>> you mean.
>>
>> BMW is essentially a jumped-up motorcycle manufacturer from 1948 that was
>> almost bought up by Mecedes-Benz when it was on the brink of bankruptcy in
>> the fifties... :-)
>>
>> Ok, engine and aircraft manufacture goes back to 1916, but Toyota isn't that
>> much younger, going back to about 1935/7. So Lexus is a brand name. So
>> what?
>
> I would agree with you on the minor difference in the relative ages of
> BMW and Toyota. However, I believe Himes was referring to the
> generation of performance-minded cars put out by BMW - you know, the
> "Ultimate Drving Machine" idea. OTOH I am at a loss to detect any
> such lineage or "tradition" with Toyota. I think even Datsun (Nissan)
> has had a much more sporting history in production cars than Toyota.
>

You must not be much of a rally fan then. Toyota Team Europe (TTE) has
a decently long and sussessful competition history. Sheesh, they even
have an F1 team these days.

--
Ignasi.
'90 325is
(using SPAM trap e-mail address)

Ignasi Palou-Rivera > wrote in message >...
> (Michael Low) writes:
> > "Dori A Schmetterling" > wrote in message >...
> >> You're obviously aggrieved about something, but I should like to ask what
> >> you mean.
> >>
> >> BMW is essentially a jumped-up motorcycle manufacturer from 1948 that was
> >> almost bought up by Mecedes-Benz when it was on the brink of bankruptcy in
> >> the fifties... :-)
> >>
> >> Ok, engine and aircraft manufacture goes back to 1916, but Toyota isn't that
> >> much younger, going back to about 1935/7. So Lexus is a brand name. So
> >> what?
> >
> > I would agree with you on the minor difference in the relative ages of
> > BMW and Toyota. However, I believe Himes was referring to the
> > generation of performance-minded cars put out by BMW - you know, the
> > "Ultimate Drving Machine" idea. OTOH I am at a loss to detect any
> > such lineage or "tradition" with Toyota. I think even Datsun (Nissan)
> > has had a much more sporting history in production cars than Toyota.
> >
>
> You must not be much of a rally fan then. Toyota Team Europe (TTE) has
> a decently long and sussessful competition history. Sheesh, they even
> have an F1 team these days.


We're getting off-topic as regards why I pointed my original comments.
Have a look.

I was referring to Himes' comment about the absence of (sporting)
history from the point of view of the GS 4xx series not having been a
part of a long-standing company focus in sports sedans.

I never said Toyota does not have an interest in sports cars or
racing. There's a big difference between the two concepts.

Sponsoring an F1 team also doesn't mean your sedans are suddenly as
good as other makers'. Some things take time to perfect and the best
way to do that is to have geniune long-term interest that does not
sway with whims of marketing or sales. I think a relevant question to
ask is whether Toyota is more performance engineering-oriented or more
marketing-oriented.

Michael