Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Welcome to the Edmunds forums! We are changing the way you sign into our forums. Click here to learn more.

Toyota on the mend?



  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Highlander: ota-highlander.html

    I prefer the big Santa Fe over this, but this is nicer than the Pathfinder's femme styling.

    I wonder if that 3rd row is still too small. Watch the video, his legs are splayed up, the cushion's too low.

    Navi screen looks bigger and is set close to the driver, I like that.

    No MPG claims yet.

    Interior looks improved.

    Arrives next year? I hope they mean next model year.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    Other than that weird face, it's better looking than the old/current one, which looks bloated and dumpy.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The current one's facelift was a bit odd, they made the lights bulge out, front and rear. This is more cohesive, but not exactly pretty.

    I'm their target market, with 2 kids and a car pool, and I'd want a bigger 3rd row, so that's a miss.

    Then again both my kids are tall. My daughter couldn't fit in the 2nd row of an X1!
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    "Not exactly pretty" - isn't that the name of the current Toyolex design language? :shades:

    The X1 seems to be aimed at childless young couples where the woman wears the pants ...and from what I can see, some new resident groups seem to love them too.
  • berriberri Posts: 8,536
    Arrives next year? I hope they mean next model year.

    I'm pretty sure I read something somewhere (now that's specific memory isn't it!) that led me to believe at least, that it isn't coming to market until January. If that's the case, why not label it a 2015? Since the current Highlander undercuts much of it's competition in price, they seem to be selling quite well right now.
  • berriberri Posts: 8,536
    "Not exactly pretty" - isn't that the name of the current Toyolex design language?

    I like that Toyolex monicker. What are you calling Honda design: Hondork?
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    Honda is "meh". Nisfiniti is "uugh".

    I think Toyolex and Nisfiniti have both channeled the spirit of Virgil Exner ca. 1961.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    edited April 2013
    Why is it you only target the Asian brands?

    By your own admission you got an E-class as soon as you saw its new mug.

    The 3 GT is almost as ugly as the 5 GT and X6.

    Panamera is still the ugliest sedan on the planet, though.

    VWs aren't ugly but they're so boring by comparison Toyotas are downright exciting. Jetta, Golf, Passat, zzZZZZZZZZZZZZZ.

    This isn't exactly an era of beautiful designs. Exceptions? Audi and Kia.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    edited April 2013
    It's all relative. There's a lot of ugly out there, but some is uglier than others.

    I'd take the weird flared nostril E over the alien maw Toyolex equivalent or the chipmunk cheek strangely renamed Infinitis.

    Camry, Corolla, Venza, zzzz.

    Kia can be handsome in a way, but beautiful? Surely you jest. Few modern cars are "beautiful", and none of them are Korean. Put down the Kool-Aid.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I liked the W211, the W212 isn't as cohesive. The old one had the Avalon-style split lights I never liked and the new face made it worse - it just joined the current fad of stylized lights.

    R-class never quite looked right and the GLK is too bolt upright. The rest of the lineup looks better, to be fair.

    Scion FR-S is good looking, and supposedly Toyota was responsible for that.

    Sienna is by far the best looking van, all things being relative, as you say.

    I didn't mean to say Kias are beautiful, just that they're not ugly, like so many new designs are. Consistently so, they all look OK or better.

    As for mainsteam, Civic > Jetta, Accord > Passat, though Honda hit some home runs in the ugly dept lately (Crosstour, Odyssey). Their volume models are OK now. Plus, Tiguan and Routan aren't exactly handsome.

    Most brands have their hits and misses. Audi and Kia just don't have any misses.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587

    Shows the wider back seat, still low to the ground, though.

    Would look a lot better with a body color grills, that's too much chrome for me.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    The lights are an angular version of the quad lights MB has used on the E since 1995. The car has many heritage themed details, like the instrument cluster, HVAC, door panel details, rear fender accent line, etc. I agree the new face is worse, nearly 20 years of quad light history, (or closer to 40 if we count the W123), and then randomly abandon it. Dumb.

    FR-S is nice. Avalon is OK from the side and back. Camrolla both look old. Sienna is inoffensive. I think the Passat is handsome if dull, but it isn't ugly. I like the new Accord too.

    I think Audis look nice, but kind of dull too - models are just size variants apart from the A7 and coupes.

    Kia Forte is pretty blandiose. Optima is fairly sharp, Soul might be a better looking Scion, Rio doesn't offend, Sedona is 9700 years old.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The face lift E puts round themed lights on a square themed body.

    Plus it seems every new car has LED disease, the Lexus IS being a good example of (way) overdone lights. It's their least attractive car.

    I actually think the ES and (gulp) RX look fine with the new front end theme. A peek at sales and consumers sure do agree.

    Avalon has that huge mouth, they turned the Fusion's grille upside down. Some minor tweaks and it would look better.

    My AWD bias shows, I guess I like quattro. Gimme an S5 cabrio. The kids actually fit in that back seat. Or any Avant.

    As for Kia...

    Rio 5 door is the best looking in the A segment.

    Forte is among the better ones in the B segment.

    Soul is the nicest in the Box class.

    Optima is arguably the best looking sedan in the C segment.

    The Sportage looks pretty cool, too, even if you can't see out of the darn thing.

    That's not a bad lineup if you think about it.

    I think they stopped making the Sedona, but I'm sure there are unsold ones at dealers.

    Considering how many ugly cars are out there nowadays, I'm impressed when an automaker doesn't have any failing grades.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    The E facelift is puzzling, seeing as the W212 will only be around for a couple more years. Seems like a lot of money to spend, but the competition is fierce. Blowout pricing again in a couple years when the W212 replacement is coming.

    ES is probably most attractive Lexus right now. I saw someone call the blackout grille on the upcoming IS a "Hitler stache", I had a big laugh from that. Too much styling in the new one, while the old one is really old and dull. Extremes. The average RX buyer would probably buy it if it resembled an AMC Matador coupe. All about the badge and name.

    If you want an Avant, hope you want to live in Europe or a second world corruption hole - all you'll get is the faux butch Allroad.

    Sedona is still on the website, that's current to me. Must be a pile of them sitting somewhere. I don't know if I can call a mommymobile CUV "cool", but the Optima looks nice if properly equipped, and I somehow want to almost like the Soul - although if I want a Korean commuter box, it's Elantra GT.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I liked it better when the IS and ES overlapped in price, and one targeted sporty while the other targeted luxury. That would give the IS design team more freedom.

    The original IS handled better than the outgoing one (base, not -F).

    Allroad still looks good. Audi sure can do wagons.

    I'm surprised the Sedona is still there. I saw a newer van in Grand Cayman, though it was a Hyundai. Looked about the same size, boxier, but seemed more like a competitor to the new Ford vans.

    Sedona looks like a super model sitting next to an Odyssey, anyway.

    Optima and Elantra GT both offer a nice panoramic moonroof, too.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    Maybe I am getting old, but looking at IS or ES, I would actually pick the latter - based on looks alone, ergonomics are probably better too (IS is tight inside). Will be interesting to see how the new IS drives, as its looks are nothing to cherish. Nicest thing I can say about the outside is that the headlights finally aren't disproportionately large.

    Hyundai does have larger vans for other markets, I think I might have spotted one in Europe, kind of commercial looking things - but there, the bigger the vehicle, the less likely it is to be Asian.

    Sedona is dumpy, Odyssey is weird. Pick your poison. Sienna is just zzz, which might beat either. Thank the W211 for pano, it really got the ball rolling.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I like the GS more and was hoping the IS would be a smaller, more nimble GS.

    The other rumor was they'd base it on the GT86 platform, but nope. Just wishful thinking.

    The styling is a swing and a miss, at least the lights. Nothing a face lift couldn't fix, though.

    Would be nice to get an IS-F with unique styling.

    As it is, the CT is cheaper and looks better, plus it's a hatch. The ES looks a lot better, and supposedly isn't the iso-boat it used to be, who knows.

    I think the IS is sandwiched between two cars that will cannibalize it, especially with the off-putting lights. It won't make an impact in that segment, which is just way too competitive.

    I like the ATS and the A4 for styling. The Q50 a distant 3rd.

    Will share March sales in the next post, Lexus did great.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Here's Toyota's spin (they use DSR to make the numbers look better):

    Toyota division sales dropped 0.5% while the market was up 3%.

    Q1 was good, though, up 9% overall.

    Lexus did great, up 15.1%. I heard BMW had a great month, too, closing the gap with M-B.

    Avalon and ES both rocked, more than doubling sales. Impressive since some would say they compete with each other, a little.

    No detailed break down in that link, I prefer to see charts and then pick things that pop out. Sienna had a good month, too.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    edited April 2013
    GS is decent, but nicer inside than outside, IMO. New IS taillights need a facelift already. CT is a little dorky, but at a good price point - kind of the Lexus CLA without the curves. ES is probably the best value, unless GS is in a blowout lease (which could be coming with those sputtering numbers).

    With A4, C, and 3er all stepping up strong, the ATS making people look over their shoulder, and the new Infiniti, IS is jumping into a fight.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Yeah, I think Cadillac swung for the fences with the ATS. Lexus offers...carryover power trains? Really? That lame base V6 with the carbon build up issues?

    Drop it like it's hot, as Snoop would say, and at least make the 3.5l standard.

    BMW 3er sales dropped so we know that segment is uber-competitive.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,277
    edited April 2013
    Wasn't the Carbon buildup related to DI? I believe Toyota has re-vamped the 2.5 in 2009 to eliminate the issue.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Did they?

    The 3.5l has port and direct injection, so the fuel washes away any carbon as you drive along.
  • anythngbutgmanythngbutgm Posts: 4,277
    I used to follow the IS more closely but I could have swore I read a release in 2009 (maybe 2010) that Lexus had re-worked the smaller engine to do just that. I could be wrong tho, but I don't recall the larger 6 ever having those sort of problems so I can't imagine the update was related to it...

    I need to research...
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    The 2.5l is a V6, while the ATS and others use a 4 banger (N/A and turbo).

    You'd never know, though, it doesn't feel quick.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    Or make a good 4, as seems to be trendy in the segment right now.

    That little 6 might have some NVH positives, but doesn't seem to be remarkable otherwise, and is probably thirsty.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    I wonder if the new IS will weigh less? And not just in the press kit claims.
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    I bet it will. Finally, weight loss is a trend. Even if it's 10lbs, that's progress.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Especially since new models have more features (ex: backup cams).
  • fintailfintail Posts: 44,907
    Better engineering saves weight. Other systems are more efficient. I bet ICE weighs less now than 10 years ago.

    Speaking of backup cams, my new car has one, and I like it. I am a precise parker, and it lets me take advantage of that last inch.
  • ateixeiraateixeira Posts: 72,587
    Remember you used to be against those? :P

    I added one to my Sienna. Of course it's huge and the rear window doesn't let you see under 4' off the ground, so I think that type of vehicle should have it mandatory.

    Of course it's tied to a Magellan GPS which I'm not happy with. I really wish Garmin would offer a backup cam option, I'd swap it out in a heart beat.
Sign In or Register to comment.