The LFA is competitive performance wise, but doesn't really break any new ground as far as I know. It's pretty expensive, too. Exclusivity is it's main asset. Other than the IS-F introduced a few years ago, when was the last time Toyota Corp produced a performance product? The LFA program started before the turn of the century and is just producing a consumer ready product now in 2011. What interests me the most about it is, how did the developmental program survive for so long? I would love for someone reputable to write that story. I could at least afford that. Sometimes the story about how something came to be can be the real story.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
That is kind of amusing. In 2006 Toyota bragged how the new bigger 2007 Tundra was going to sell 250k per year. Last year they barely topped 93k trucks. December 2010 they sold 10,000 and January 2011 they sell 6000 and that is burning up the sales charts. The start of the year looks like Tundra will be lucky to hit the 2009 sales of 79k units. Not great in a vehicle market with the top selling vehicle is a PU Truck. Even Chrysler sold twice as many full sized Ram trucks than Tundra. I drove the old Tundra and the new one when it came out. Not in the least bit impressed. Having driven both of them a lot, Tacoma only wishes it was in a league with the Nissan Frontier. Still got drum brakes on a truck they expect people to tow heavy trailers with. Not me, only a fool. Even my 1999 Ranger had disks in the rear.
The digital instruments on the LFA break new ground. I think I read they are more accurate than analog gauges because analog tachometers are not quick enough to read revs accurately.
Performance has never been Toyota's niche, but you could buy a 4WD Tacoma V6 with a 6 speed manual just about any model year you want. Supra and MR2 were far from boring. Celica had the high revving redline, but that was Honda's niche so it didn't sustain sales. RAV4 and Sienna are not sporty, but both are the quickest vehicles in their respective class. Heck, so is the Camry.
Sometimes the story about how something came to be can be the real story.
We agree there. The LFA is a halo car, it's proof of concept. The team that worked on it learned from that experience and produced a sedan that matched the M3 on the Lightning Lap.
Frames made to Toyota specs, with maybe a bit of scrimping on the zinc coatings??? Dana did pay up on Tacoma frames. Tundra frame issues not against Dana.
Toyota Tundra Frame Supplier Dana Off The Hook, No Rust Fix Yet
UPDATE: As of May 2010, Toyota has extended the warranty on 2000-2003 Tundra frames. Please see Toyota Tundra Frame Replacement Program for more details.
While this is not the news that the owners of Tundras with frame rust were hoping for, Toyota seems to be moving in positive direction in regards to frame rust complaints on first-gen Tundras. Before, Toyota seemed to blame frame supplier Dana for this issue. Now, it seems that Toyota has determined Dana is not responsible for frame rust problems on the first-gen Tundra.
This is an interesting distinction that, when combined with other facts, could indicate Toyota will take action but it’s still very early.
They wiggle and squirm and the issues of cheapening keep haunting Toyota.
I am sure they DID NOT strip anything off. They set the parameters for how much rust proofing should be used. I am sure that is not a random number. I would guess it is designed with a specific lifespan in mind. Toyota got caught with too little for the 9 year window that has been opened onto their frames. All steel rusts. The more zinc the longer it lasts. I have chain link fence that is 30 years old with no rust at all. Of course you add salty roads and that coating has to do more work to protect the steel. Toyota skimped and got caught, pure and simple. When all the recalls came at once Toyota was looking for scapegoats. Be it poor drivers or OEM vendors. All a deflection on the problems they brought on themselves cutting corners. I don't think they have learned anything. Same old corporate agenda. How much will it cost if we do nothing?
PS VW/Audi had horrible rust problems in the 1970s. Now they are a leader in that field. They have the longest rust warranty in the industry.
I hate to tell you this but other than movies, the Supra is ancient history. They stopped selling them here prior to the LFA project starting up. The IS-F had a huge improvement, but still was bested by the most primal of pony cars, the GT 500. The IS-F is now right where a 400+ hp car should be.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Agreed, I'd take a current 3-Series over the current IS any day of the week. Only way I'd consider an IS is if Lexus really does the redesign right! They need to add more room to the thing to. Its just too darn cramped and uncomfortable in it. Even though the 3-Series is small, it at least gives you some room to move around if need be.
What is amazing to me is the IS-F V8 is dirtier than the Lexus V8 engines from 6 years ago. What's up with that? I thought ToyLex was a green car leader. Lexus is going backward on emissions. My 2007 Sequoia is cleaner than the 2011 LS460.
I was watching a video about the LFA's features. To keep the hood open you need to take a rod and attach it to the body of the car plus the hood. It is not connected to anything. Plenty of cars have been trashed because they have a hood prop rod that is only connected at the bottom and has to be positioned to hold up the hood. Corolla drivers all over the world are smirking. Hey, LFA 'you got dis?'
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
Just spent 10 minutes checking out the Cdn site for the Scion XB. The line is being introduced to Cda this year.
I gave up after running into an unbelievable number of errors in the spec and brag sheets. Stuff like wrong fuel mileage figures in one place, and inverted but correct figures elsewhere. Same with tran choices...says the manual has an oil cooler and the auto has a gated shifter. Fuel cap specs says 53 litres, but then says 14 gallons. (which is the US gallonage figure you get from from 53 litres).
And tons of other mistakes..it gave me the impression it was a rush job, and thrown together by people who didn't know the car at all. Or couldn't read or do even simplistic basic math.
I have also heard conflicting reports about the 4 sp auto. Here on Edmunds I have read about numerous tran troubles and Toyota not taking responsibility, but in other places here I have read that the 4 sp is one of the best trans Toyota has ever built. They might have been talking about the Camry, but it confused me because they were also talking about the xB at the same time. They did say the sp Camry tran has been troublesome, and I have read that elsewhere also.
When I read about how badly Toyota has treated Matrix std trans owners (it was a bad trans, even tho rare to find a bad manual it {the 5 speed} had a non lubed bearing, and the 6 speed std had faulty clutches that blew at 30k miles).
I must say, that I have been very reluctant to buy much into all the bad press of Toyota lately, but that very thread on Matrix std trans was the straw that caved my confidence in them. I have personal experience in our family with bad paint, faulty aluminum wheels on FJ's, and other niggling things that you just didn't run into with Toyota 10 to 15 years ago. And when I see the botched info site full of mistakes on the Scion, it doesn't inspire much confidence.
My family and many friends have a literal bunch of Toyotas, and I used to myself. (an 03) and numerous T's going back all the way to a 72 Corolla 1200.
But I recently learned that my brother and his son will not be replacing their 4 Toyotas with a new Toyota. And my bros used to buy new every 2 years. So I do believe that not everyone is throwing caution to the wind with them any longer.
It would appear from first hand experiences that they are far from being "on the mend". At least though, they haven't burned anywhere near the number of people to a crisp like both GM and Ford has, with their despicable calculated$ risk of years past. There's lots of dirt to be spread around out there.
I tend to agree. And you get to keep more of what you make in conservative states. It's not how much you make, but what you actually bring home. No state income , right to work, city income tax etc, etc here in Fla. My RE taxes are 7 hundred and change per year here vs my house up north 2500. No vehicle inspection (a tax of your time and money) here. Plenty more examples.
They set the parameters for how much rust proofing should be used.
Agreed, but why would they specify different amounts for the Tacoma and Tundra frames, from the same supplier, no less?
It just doesn't add up.
I think they worked out a settlement with Dana to cover the Tacoma frames, and they agreed to cover the rest.
Any how, Google "Toyota rust" and then "Ford rust" and you'll see the similarly sized domestic brand has far more problems in that area. Ford gets 3.62 million hits to Toyota's 1.46, so this is being blown way out of proportion.
When you take into consideration, Ford sells about 10 times as many full sized PU trucks as Toyota, those hit figures are not looking good for Toyota. And the newest complaint I could find was rust on a 1988 F150. I would expect a 23 year old PU driven on salty roads to show some serious rust.
Do you have any cases where Ford was compelled to change out the whole frame as Toyota has been forced to do on the early Tundra trucks?
07 Sequoia uses 22.8 barrels of oil per year and emits 12.4 tons of carbon dioxide.
The new LS460 is much lower - 18 barrels, 9.8 tons. How is that dirtier? That's 27% fewer carbon emissions.
The new Sequoia is also cleaner. Even the bigger engine gets 13/18 vs. your 13/17, with identical carbon emissions, but remember that's the big 5.7l V8.
Apples to apples, 4.6l vs. 4.6l, the new V8 is much more efficient, 14/19 vs. 13/17, uses 1.4 fewer barrels of oil per year, emitting 11.6 tons of CO2 vs. 12.4 on yours.
No question, without a doubt, the new engines are cleaner.
Note that is despite Ford limiting the recall to 22 states, yet they are blaming that rust issue on the A/C condenser water, which would apply to all 50 states.
Better go back and check Fuel economy website. When you look at emissions for CA, all vehicles sold are now 50 state compliant, the LS460 has an air pollution score of 6, my 2007 Sequoia an air pollution score of 7. That means the 4 year old Sequoia is cleaner burning than the brand new LS460.
EPA gives different scores for the 2011s, just as they did for the 2007s.
The EPA does not like to believe that CARB shoves them around like a kid. Try to find a car in your state that is not 50 state compliant. That went away decades ago. Like it or not CA rules the air.
Let's put it this way. VW only sells 50 state compliant vehicles including their diesels. Toyota may offer dirty cars out side the CARB states. So a 2011 LS460 sold in CA is not as clean as my 2007 Sequoia. And don't try to register one of your dirty out of state ToyLex in CA. It will not pass smog and get no license.
If you are a California resident and acquire a new car, truck or motorcycle from another state, it must be certified to meet California smog laws in order to be registered here. This includes certain diesel powered vehicles. DMV cannot accept an application to register a vehicle in California that does not qualify for registration (Health and Safety Codes [H&SC] §§43150 – 43156.)
Huh? I told my daughter I would buy her a GT 500 convertible if she went to a state school for college. We would be ahead financially in 2 years over the school she is going to. It's an upgraded Mustang.
2024 Ford F-150 STX, 2023 Ford Explorer ST, 91 Mustang GT vert
A reporter seeks to interview a current car shopper about Toyota. Have the headlines of the past year affected your interest in the brand? Please send your daytime contact info to pr@edmunds.com by Wednesday, February 9, 2010 with your comments. Thanks, Jeannine Fallon Corporate Communications Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
But it has apparently received a massive update. The others haven't.
And I am pretty sure the 3er and C are barely younger anyway. 06 for the 3er - same as the IS, 08 for the C but it was on the road a full year earlier in more developed markets.
Comments
Exclusivity is it's main asset.
Other than the IS-F introduced a few years ago, when was the last time Toyota Corp produced a performance product?
The LFA program started before the turn of the century and is just producing a consumer ready product now in 2011.
What interests me the most about it is, how did the developmental program survive for so long?
I would love for someone reputable to write that story.
I could at least afford that.
Sometimes the story about how something came to be can be the real story.
you guys crack me up, when a gm vehicle has dismal sales its uncompetitive...toyota tundra flops, and its selling to the personal use market lmao :P
This is how New Yorkers treat their Lexuses - they are beaters for winter use.
There were plenty of Benzes parked on two foot high piles of frozen snow too though. Heck of a parallel parking job.
A 4Runner wouldn't blink either.
Then there was this beauty that appeared slam full of old newspapers:
Performance has never been Toyota's niche, but you could buy a 4WD Tacoma V6 with a 6 speed manual just about any model year you want. Supra and MR2 were far from boring. Celica had the high revving redline, but that was Honda's niche so it didn't sustain sales. RAV4 and Sienna are not sporty, but both are the quickest vehicles in their respective class. Heck, so is the Camry.
Sometimes the story about how something came to be can be the real story.
We agree there. The LFA is a halo car, it's proof of concept. The team that worked on it learned from that experience and produced a sedan that matched the M3 on the Lightning Lap.
Let's not underestimate the importance of that.
Frames made to Toyota specs, with maybe a bit of scrimping on the zinc coatings??? Dana did pay up on Tacoma frames. Tundra frame issues not against Dana.
Toyota Tundra Frame Supplier Dana Off The Hook, No Rust Fix Yet
UPDATE: As of May 2010, Toyota has extended the warranty on 2000-2003 Tundra frames. Please see Toyota Tundra Frame Replacement Program for more details.
While this is not the news that the owners of Tundras with frame rust were hoping for, Toyota seems to be moving in positive direction in regards to frame rust complaints on first-gen Tundras. Before, Toyota seemed to blame frame supplier Dana for this issue. Now, it seems that Toyota has determined Dana is not responsible for frame rust problems on the first-gen Tundra.
This is an interesting distinction that, when combined with other facts, could indicate Toyota will take action but it’s still very early.
They wiggle and squirm and the issues of cheapening keep haunting Toyota.
PS
VW/Audi had horrible rust problems in the 1970s. Now they are a leader in that field. They have the longest rust warranty in the industry.
We need to blame the owner if we can find a way. They didn't change the oil enough or they put extra floor mats under the accelerator!
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
They stopped selling them here prior to the LFA project starting up.
The IS-F had a huge improvement, but still was bested by the most primal of pony cars, the GT 500.
The IS-F is now right where a 400+ hp car should be.
To keep the hood open you need to take a rod and attach it to the body of the car plus the hood. It is not connected to anything.
Plenty of cars have been trashed because they have a hood prop rod that is only connected at the bottom and has to be positioned to hold up the hood.
Corolla drivers all over the world are smirking.
Hey, LFA 'you got dis?'
I gave up after running into an unbelievable number of errors in the spec and brag sheets. Stuff like wrong fuel mileage figures in one place, and inverted but correct figures elsewhere. Same with tran choices...says the manual has an oil cooler and the auto has a gated shifter.
Fuel cap specs says 53 litres, but then says 14 gallons. (which is the US gallonage figure you get from from 53 litres).
And tons of other mistakes..it gave me the impression it was a rush job, and thrown together by people who didn't know the car at all. Or couldn't read or do even simplistic basic math.
I have also heard conflicting reports about the 4 sp auto. Here on Edmunds I have read about numerous tran troubles and Toyota not taking responsibility, but in other places here I have read that the 4 sp is one of the best trans Toyota has ever built. They might have been talking about the Camry, but it confused me because they were also talking about the xB at the same time. They did say the sp Camry tran has been troublesome, and I have read that elsewhere also.
When I read about how badly Toyota has treated Matrix std trans owners (it was a bad trans, even tho rare to find a bad manual it {the 5 speed} had a non lubed bearing, and the 6 speed std had faulty clutches that blew at 30k miles).
I must say, that I have been very reluctant to buy much into all the bad press of Toyota lately, but that very thread on Matrix std trans was the straw that caved my confidence in them. I have personal experience in our family with bad paint, faulty aluminum wheels on FJ's, and other niggling things that you just didn't run into with Toyota 10 to 15 years ago. And when I see the botched info site full of mistakes on the Scion, it doesn't inspire much confidence.
My family and many friends have a literal bunch of Toyotas, and I used to myself. (an 03) and numerous T's going back all the way to a 72 Corolla 1200.
But I recently learned that my brother and his son will not be replacing their 4 Toyotas with a new Toyota. And my bros used to buy new every 2 years. So I do believe that not everyone is throwing caution to the wind with them any longer.
It would appear from first hand experiences that they are far from being "on the mend". At least though, they haven't burned anywhere near the number of people to a crisp like both GM and Ford has, with their despicable calculated$ risk of years past.
There's lots of dirt to be spread around out there.
Not fair - you're comparing a multi-purpose sedan to a single-purpose track beast.
One of these cars can be driven daily.
Agreed, but why would they specify different amounts for the Tacoma and Tundra frames, from the same supplier, no less?
It just doesn't add up.
I think they worked out a settlement with Dana to cover the Tacoma frames, and they agreed to cover the rest.
Any how, Google "Toyota rust" and then "Ford rust" and you'll see the similarly sized domestic brand has far more problems in that area. Ford gets 3.62 million hits to Toyota's 1.46, so this is being blown way out of proportion.
Do you have any cases where Ford was compelled to change out the whole frame as Toyota has been forced to do on the early Tundra trucks?
Source? You guys continue to make claims based on (un)wishful thinking
Not according to the EPA:
http://www.fueleconomy.gov/feg/sbs.htm
07 Sequoia uses 22.8 barrels of oil per year and emits 12.4 tons of carbon dioxide.
The new LS460 is much lower - 18 barrels, 9.8 tons. How is that dirtier? That's 27% fewer carbon emissions.
The new Sequoia is also cleaner. Even the bigger engine gets 13/18 vs. your 13/17, with identical carbon emissions, but remember that's the big 5.7l V8.
Apples to apples, 4.6l vs. 4.6l, the new V8 is much more efficient, 14/19 vs. 13/17, uses 1.4 fewer barrels of oil per year, emitting 11.6 tons of CO2 vs. 12.4 on yours.
No question, without a doubt, the new engines are cleaner.
What made you think it wasn't?
Another half million recalls, and that's the 2nd recall for Windstar rust:
http://www.autoblog.com/2011/01/27/ford-windstar-recalled-again-this-time-for-su- - spension-issues/
Note that is despite Ford limiting the recall to 22 states, yet they are blaming that rust issue on the A/C condenser water, which would apply to all 50 states.
Better go back and check Fuel economy website. When you look at emissions for CA, all vehicles sold are now 50 state compliant, the LS460 has an air pollution score of 6, my 2007 Sequoia an air pollution score of 7. That means the 4 year old Sequoia is cleaner burning than the brand new LS460.
Also, you wrote:
When you look at emissions for CA
Why look at a small minority of states? Let's look at the majority of the country:
Lexus scores a 5, and the 07 Tundra would score a 3. The 2011 Tundra also scores a 5 with the 4.6l V8. The vast majority are cleaner.
For you to make that claim you need a bunch of asterisks.
I don't think that's true.
EPA gives different scores for the 2011s, just as they did for the 2007s.
OK, so I searched, and you are definitely mistaken about that:
From fitzmall.com, a local Toyota dealer...
FACTORY INSTALLED OPTIONS
(FE ) 50-STATE EMISSIONS
(PC-1 ) SPECIAL COLOR
(CF ) CARPETED FLOOR/CARGO MAT/DOOR SILL PROTECTOR (PPO)
(5A ) INTERIOR CARGO COVER (PPO)
They are clearly still selling non-CARB Sequioas.
To be fair we should say the scores went from [3 and 7] to [5 and 6], and on average they have indeed improved.
The EPA does not like to believe that CARB shoves them around like a kid. Try to find a car in your state that is not 50 state compliant. That went away decades ago. Like it or not CA rules the air.
If you are a California resident and acquire a new car, truck or motorcycle from another state, it must be certified to meet California smog laws in order to be registered here. This includes certain diesel powered vehicles. DMV cannot accept an application to register a vehicle in California that does not qualify for registration (Health and Safety Codes [H&SC] §§43150 – 43156.)
Feeling a bit egocentric today? The world does not revolve around California.
If you're saying that all Toyotas meet CARB standards now, then that means Toyotas are even cleaner than if they didn't.
In 2007 they scored 3 (most) or 7 (CA and NE states).
So now you're saying all 2011 earn a 6.
That means the average score is much higher.
We would be ahead financially in 2 years over the school she is going to.
It's an upgraded Mustang.
Thanks,
Jeannine Fallon
Corporate Communications
Edmunds.com
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
And the IS-F is an upgraded IS entry-luxury sedan, rear doors and all.
http://www.caranddriver.com/features/10q4/lightning_lap_2011-feature/sortable_ti- mes_3a_complete_lightning_lap_times_2006_to_2011_page_8
The only sedan that was quicker was the CTS-V. So the IS-F tied the M3 for the 2nd quickest sedan, and beat everybody else. Not bad.
Kudos to Cadillac, too.
January 2010 99,302
January 2011 113,763
No doubt influenced by the strong yen vs. dollar.
And I am pretty sure the 3er and C are barely younger anyway. 06 for the 3er - same as the IS, 08 for the C but it was on the road a full year earlier in more developed markets.
Put it this way - I bet the IS is replaced before the German sedans are.