High End Luxury Cars

lexusguy · January 2006

To me, having both the R and the GL seems somewhat redundant. The Rs are AWD, or at least available that way, are they not? Whats the major selling point for the GL then?

tagman · January 2006

My take on this is that there is still a significant SUV market, and will be for a long time. At one time the minivan was "the" vehicle (never for me, BTW), and it lost its stardom over the course of time, but there is still a major market. The same is happening to the SUV. My guess is that the new "star" is likely the "crossover", but the SUV will still have market share. On a side note, while the crossover market will grow and evolve, I still believe that the R, in its current configuration at least, will not do all that well. It's just too ugly.

Having established that I believe there will be an ongoing SUV market, the Range Rover represents the "king" of the crop, in my opinion, but offers no third row seat, and the reliability statistic (if meaningful anymore) is in the toilet.

The GL is poised to be the top dog of SUV's, especially for third row seat models. Lexus will be the only serious competitor. The LR3 will be half the price and half the vehicle. Back to the Lexus then. The Lexus will need to do something about the third row seats. The current configuration is an engineering disaster . . . the way they flip up and cover the rear windows, or just sit in the cargo area.

The R and GL will not compete with one another. There will be buyers for minivans, crossovers, and SUV's. Again, the R doesn't do it in my opinion, but the upcoming GL is going to be a hit, also in my opinion. It will first be released with a large ICE V8, and later likely a diesel. As a guy with wife and kids, the GL is something I would be willing to personally take a good close look at.

BTW, I also predict the new Lexus LS will take market share from BMW, since it seems so obvious by the styling that Lexus is chasing BMW. I believe that the differences between Lexus and Mercedes are becoming more distinctive and that works in Mercedes' favor.

TagMan

designman · January 2006

BTW, I also predict the new Lexus LS will take market share from BMW, since it seems so obvious by the styling that Lexus is chasing BMW.

Among all the classes that Lexus and BMW compete in, the LS/7 disparity is perhaps the greatest (OK, so the GS/5-series disparity is also great). There is NO way an LS has anything a 7-series buyer wants. The latter is a breed of its own. Lexus gets its buyers from Lincoln, old-time DeVille buyers, disgruntled Mercedes owners, those who would like a Mercedes but want to save some cash, and of course the high-end CR zealots. 7-series buyers dont become Lexicans. For the most part, BMW buyers dont become Lexicans.

BMW styling has hit rock bottom and theyre selling better than ever. I doubt whether a good-looking LS is going to change the tide. If the new LS sells gangbusters, I think they'll come from everywhere but BMW.

merc1 · January 2006

Well the GL has an extra seat, whatever thats worth. Yeah they both are standard AWD, but the GL is large SUV and the R is the "crossover" thingy.

I'm probably the only person around here that actually likes the R-Class, especially with the 19 inch wheels or the AMG package. I like the ML more than the GL, just going by pictures of the GL. The GL isn't distinctive enough to me for a Benz, at least the ML is an evolution of the previous model's look.

Can't explain it, but I want a R63 AMG. I can see it being done up by West Coast Customs or some similar outfit.

M

tagman · January 2006

Look at the straight side angle profiles of the 7 and the new LS, side by side. Don't say any more until you actually do this. It is absolutely profound. Since the 7 was already in existence before the new LS, there can only be one thing that this means.

I'll even go a stretch further and say that the Lexus IS is a shot at the 3 series, although I don't think it is near the car.

Bottom line = Lexus is going after BMW, like it or not!!!!

TagMan

merc1 · January 2006

Interesting, your enthusiasm for the GL. What I don't get is why MBUSA hasn't mentioned bringing over the GL500 (would be a GL550 here). The new Slade has 403hp and various Land Rovers have 390-400hp so just a GL450 (335hp) seems a little weak to me. Imagine that that 335hp in a SUV as being weak. Clearly a GL550 (382hp) is needed imo.

Anyway I think the R-Class stumbled because of the price, though I can certainly see some not liking the look of it too. However the base prices are sorta of high, but then the options are staggering, too much so IMO. Then again the R is attempting new segment in price, if not concept.

If Mercedes wants the R-Class to move, thew would make the following changes for the 2007 model. The R350 would get more standard equipment. The R450 (new V8 335hp) would be priced below the current R500 (say around 54K), with a few more standard features. Then the R550 would basically come loaded for a little more than the current R500 (say around 62K). Those would be my suggestions. Ditto for the ML for 2007.

Of course there will be diesel version of the R and ML, and supposedly a hybrid version of the ML for 2008.

M

tagman · January 2006

Yeah, dress up the R and it's better, no doubt. But I just can't help think that it's the interior that is good , and the exterior, especially the rear, is not very attractive. I don't believe in this vehicle yet.

The GL is very similar in appearance to the ML, but more muscle and stretch. Have you seen any good INTERIOR photos of the GL?

hpowders · January 2006

They can chase BMW all they want with their styling. That's as far as it will go.
We've been down this road before with the supposed "5 killer" GS-one of the biggest jokes in the automotive industry over the last year.
The somnambulistic LS going after BMW? Puleeze!

Lexus just doesn't seem to get what an exciting driving experience is all about.
You can expect more electronic meddling in the LS such as that ridiculous lane departure warning system that the M has-the only difference being in the LS you probably won't be able to disengage it.

Hey folks-if you need a lane departure warning system, you probably shouldn't be driving in the first place.

merc1 · January 2006

The GL's interior:

While "nice" I find it lacking compared to Benz cars and other SUVs in the price range, IMO. Land Rover has nothing to worry about interior wise thats for sure. IMO for the money MB is going to charge for this thing they should have come up with a bespoke interior, not just a plusher ML.

These interiors on the M/R/GL just aren't up to Benz car interior standards IMO. Especially the CLS and new S-Class. I have had some knock-down arguments with some Benz fanatics on GCZ who say these Bama-built Benzes have interiors just as good as any other Benz. I say no way, in neither design or material quality/assembly does it match an E, let alone the CLS or new S. Even the cheaper SLK has a tighter interior to me.

Though nice looking, it looks like any other SUV until you see the star. Good thing Mercedes listened to the groans all over the world and decided to keep the real "G" in production (with a pending facelift no less) instead of trying to replace it with this model. I'll get to see it in person next weekend so maybe my position will change a little.

M

syswei · January 2006

I agree with tagman, I find the rear to be rather bad looking. In fact I think the Pacifica on the whole looks much better than the R.

brightness04 · January 2006

"Twist," "spin," "game" and "mumbo jumbo" seem to be the favorite words in your post. How about some substance? and stay away from meaningless personal attacks? What you are obviously missing is that both GS and IS were not Lexus core-competence, and both models competed (and still compete) with extremely successful existing Lexus models. You don't exactly expect MB to sell 50k copies of any specific AMG model, nor should anyone have expected the first generation GS or IS to sell 50k+ units in any model year; the production lines were not even set up to produce that many.

One minute the AMG models mean nothing in the total sales picture (your words from a few weeks ago) now they're supposed to set the sales charts on fire,

Where did I suggest AMG models are supposed to set the sales charts on fire?? AMG models are MB's extension away from its luxury roots into performance motorsports since the acquisition of AMG mod shop a few years ago. Never did I suggest AMG models should account for the bulk of MB sales, despite their accounting nearly half of MB model line up. Why is it so hard for you to understand that GS and IS were similarly one step removed from Lexus' core competence? My mentioning of AMG's small sales numbers was merely an illustration of the absurdity of your argument that half of Lexus car models did not count for much in the sales . . . nor does more than of MB's in its line up . . . absurdly simple.

merc1 · January 2006

What you are obviously missing is that both GS and IS were not Lexus core-competence, and both models competed (and still compete) with extremely successful existing Lexus models. You don't exactly expect MB to sell 50k copies of any specific AMG model, nor should anyone have expected the first generation GS or IS to sell 50k+ units in any model year; the production lines were not even set up to produce that many.

What I didn't miss was this even longer spin and excuse. One minute Lexus is to set the world on fire with sales and then when they don't do it, we get this bull about production being capped and what not. Never mind the Lexus stated that they'd like to sell more of the first generation IS when the sales bottomed out at 12K a year. You mean to tell me Lexus is that dumb to limit production to 12K a year when they were trying to tackle a competitor that sells 100K a year. Yeah sure, continue to spin and come up with excuses all you like, but the truth remains that the first generatoin IS was a flop. Period.

Why is it so hard for you to understand that GS and IS were similarly one step removed from Lexus' core competence?

Why do you keep coming up with this bs excuse? If they designed the car and sold it then they should have tried their best. Not my fault or BMW's that they didn't and the car flopped. This is the biggest, fatest excuse I have yet seen for the first generation IS and GS. Not their "core competence"? What a crock. None on this fits in with the never ending, all-conquering sales sermon preached here over the years about Lexus.

Excuses, and more excuses, with twists to make them half-way interesting.

Let me even think about trying to use that "core competence" bs in trying to excuse the R-Class' poor sales and watch the board light up.

One minute Toyota is the world's greatest in efficient production and has huge capacity, but when one of their products doesn't fly it was because of production constraints. Man, if that isn't double-faced I don't know what is.

Yet when the Prius became a major hit Toyota hiked production not once, but twice without a problem.

You're going to sit there and post that a high profit Lexus model wouldn't get the same treatment if it had the sales to warrant a production increase? Yeah ok.

The simple fact is that Toyota more so than anyone else could have increased production on the first generation GS and especially IS (since it was a Toyota in the first place) without a problem if the car would have sold better in the first place.

M

brightness04 · January 2006

So there we have it. BMW isn't in the luxury car business.

How about addressing the issue instead of strawman tactics?
Does BMW still have the car sales crown among luxury brands in the US if 325i, which is not exactly a luxury car, is taken out? Otherwise, we may as well conclude that Buick is the top luxury car seller . . . it moves more cars and it's a luxury brand . . . never mind that majority of cars that it moves are not luxury cars. Reducio Absurdom.

brightness04 · January 2006

More absurd spin. Was 14k units for CLS the first model year or when it bottomed out after half a decade being in production without change? The first model year of Gen1 IS was much higher than 12k.

What's so hard to understand about "core competence"? Nobody is expecting MB to outsell BMW on sport-sedans in short order despite the acquisition of AMG division; nor any one expecting BMW to outsell MB on luxo boats. I would strongly suggest you tone down on the ad hominim attacks.

As for R-class, I'm actually inclined to excuse MB for lacking experience with what really should be a minivan market, a market segment that has been in existence for much longer in the US than in Europe. It's the same sort of mistake as the Previa and Gen1 Sienna when Toyota was new to the game . . . although MB should have been more humble about taking advantage of its Chrysler division's know-how in this particular market segment.

merc1 · January 2006

More absurd spin. Was 14k units for CLS the first model year or when it bottomed out after half a decade being in production without change? The first model year of Gen1 IS was much higher than 12k.

You were the one the compared the two cars so it was your absurdity to begin with. I said a few pages ago that it didn't make sense to compare the CLS with the IS or GS.

What's so hard to understand about "core competence"? Nobody is expecting MB to outsell BMW on sport-sedans in short order despite the acquisition of AMG division; nor any one expecting BMW to outsell MB on luxo boats.

Tell it to the Lexus fans who regularly predict this and expect it to happen, in the case of Lexus vs the WORLD. Only when it doesn't happen we get the "production capacity" excuse or when a Lexus like the GS doesn't live up to the BMW-beating hype we get how well it sells.

As for R-class, I'm actually inclined to excuse MB for lacking experience with what really should be a minivan market, a market segment that has been in existence for much longer in the US than in Europe.

Ok, we'll see how long that holds.

M

brightness04 · January 2006

Yet when the Prius became a major hit Toyota hiked production not once, but twice without a problem.

For what it's worth, Gen1 Prius was never produced in large numbers. It was the first step to test out the market and get feet wet just like Gen1 IS. What you remembered as production increases were Gen2 Prius. Probably the same for Gen2 IS in the not too distant future ;-)

designman · January 2006

Look at the straight side angle profiles of the 7 and the new LS, side by side. Don't say any more until you actually do this.

The new LS looks more like the 5 in profile NOT the 7! The LS and 7 arent even remotely close with styling.

I'll even go a stretch further and say that the Lexus IS is a shot at the 3 series

In Lexus sales dreams it is, but not in styling. Tell me you are kidding.

;-)

designman · January 2006

Merc SUV talk and pics on a Saturday night?
It must be January cabin fever. Suddenly Im having visions of Jack in The Shining
He-e-e-e-res JOHNNY!

;-)

merc1 · January 2006

Yeah it was truly a new vehicle and segment, but I ain't ever going to buy that Toyota couldn't have increased production on even the Gen1 Prius, IF it had taken off like the current generation has. Toyota is, even by other car companies own admission, the leader in efficient production.

M

tagman · January 2006

Thanks for the pics. So far, I like what I see, and I'll tell you that I am actually glad to see that it is mainstream enough, yet it still speaks Mercedes to me. I personally don't need to find the star to know it's a Mercedes. I think it looks solid and the interior, while not plush, looks quality. When you see it, I'll bet it has "stature" and "presence", and that it will look and feel "substantial". Remember, this thing will be close to the size of a Suburban (without looking quite like it), so it's bound to have some impact. I am anxious to hear much more about it. Thanks again.
TagMan

merc1 · January 2006

Merc… SUV talk and pics on a Saturday night?
It must be January cabin fever.

No it was last night's drunken activities.

Plus the night is still young. I really intended to answer an email, but couldn't help but peek in here.

M

merc1 · January 2006

When you see it, I'll bet it has "stature" and "presence", and that it will look and feel "substantial".

I hope so. I plan to be standing next to it one week from today!

Here is the full article on the GL: GL-CLass

M

brightness04 · January 2006

You may want to look up on what it means to be efficient in modern manufacturing. Toyota's claim to fame is just-in-time production method. That also means not lining up more suppliers than one has to. It is actually a lot easier for an "inefficient" manufacturer like GM with gobs of excess capacity to incrase production on the fly than for an "efficient" manufacturer to expand production.

Given this manufacturing technical reality, Toyota's strategy of testing waters with Gen1 product, and attempt to take over with Gen2 or Gen3 (it took Gen3 for Toyota to be a dominant player in the Minivan market) is a very sound approach.

tagman · January 2006

The new LS looks more like the 5 in profile ...

Lexus is definately after BMW this time around. The first LS was a shot at what is now the PREVIOUS Mercedes S-Class and PREVIOUS E-Class styling, very boxy and similar design lines.

Lexus, with it's new LS and other models, is not after Mercedes as before. LEXUS IS NOW GOING AFTER BMW, and I'll say it again and again. LEXUS IS NOW GOING AFTER BMW. That's my take on it at this point.

As I mentioned earlier, I also think that this is good for Mercedes, as it will maintain a distinguishing difference for Mercedes that will work in Mercedes' favor ultimately.

TagMan

merc1 · January 2006

I know what it means, but none of that will ever convince me that Toyota couldn't have increased production on a hot product, if it became a hot product. Just in time production or not.

I agree it is much easier for a company like GM to just crank up production, but by the same token it isn't impossible for Toyota to do it either. If they have a hit on their hands even Toyota will increase production, that is the bottom line. Toyota could have and would have increased production on the first GS and IS models if they demand was there.

The first generation Prius and hybrids in general require a lot more infastructure to produce so I can see where the numbers might not have worked on the first generation car. However on the first generation IS and GS, ain't buying it for a min. They are regular cars, especially the first generation IS.

Just in time means that if the demand was there Toyota would have supplied it just like they do with any of their other products.

M

dewey · January 2006

The Lexus IS edition #1 was a dud and the prior generations of the Lexus GS were duds.

Your focus on supply is what makes your JIT theory absoulutely worthless in explaining why the IS and GS were sales duds. Their failure was due to to demand not supply!

merc1 · January 2006

Oh look at me. I'm sitting here thinking the 1998-2005 GS was a second generation car and it was in fact the third edition of the GS. NO excuse other than demand as to why it didn't sell well after 2000. Toyota had been producing the GS since 1993! Surely by then there wasn't a production line capacity issue when the car was redesigned with a V8 for 1998, surely Toyota had production strategies down pat by then.

M

brightness04 · January 2006

You were the one the compared the two cars so it was your absurdity to begin with.

There's nothing wrong with comparing the production curve of any two car models. Just don't compare the first model year of one car with the winding down year of another, like what you were trying to do . . . that would be intellectually dishonest because we both know that cars sell much better in the early parts of its procution cycle.

Tell it to the Lexus fans who regularly predict this and expect it to happen, in the case of Lexus vs the WORLD.

Well, Lexus/Toyota has a pretty decent record of taking over what market segment it takes on in Gen2 or Gen3, cleaning clock with the previously dominant player. Look at the markets for family sedan, luxury sedan, luxury SUV, large sedan, minivan . . . every single one of them used to be dominated by someone else, Lexus/Toyota came from the status of nobody and grew to the dominant player. When was the last time MB newly conqured any market segment? 1970/80's displacing Cadillac?

dewey · January 2006

Exactly! I have never heard anyone use a JIT argument in order to justify a failure in demand.

brightness04 · January 2006

The Lexus IS edition #1 was a dud and the prior generations of the Lexus GS were duds.

Only if you compare IS alone to 3/C, or GS alone to 5/E. The reality is that IS and GS are merely ways to sell more ES in the grand scheme of things! ES/IS clobbers 3/C in the $30+k segment entry luxury market; ES/GS clobbers 5/E in the mid-size luxury car market.

brightness04 · January 2006

IS and GS production targets were set low because Lexus already has a winner in the mid-size luxury car selling for about $35k, the ES! IS and GS are just sales expansions from a very healthy dominance in the mainstream ES. If you compare 330i alone to IS, and 540i alone to GS (okay, perhaps 530i to GS300, but certainly not the bulk of 5 series 525i, which really competes against ES300/330 for people who want a mid-size luxury car), the IS and GS sales were not bad at all until the very tail end of a production run, which as we know all models suffer.

brightness04 · January 2006

There is no failure in demand. The demand for what would be the Lexus equivalent of 325i, 525i are already picked up by ES300/330. IS and GS are just targetting would-be buyers of 330, 540i etc..

dewey · January 2006

ES/IS clobbers 3/C in the $30+k segment entry luxury market; ES/GS clobbers 5/E in the mid-size luxury car market.

:confuse: :confuse: :confuse:

That argument makes no sense whatsoever. The Lexus ES and IS are two different platforms that compete with different types of vehicles altogether.

What makes even less sense is your comparison of a Lexus ES with a BMW 5 series or a MB E . That is an argument not even worth responding to :lemon:

I am out of here. Good night.

tagman · January 2006

Look forward to hearing your feedback after the show. I'm guessing you might take a short flight from Chicago to Detroit? Anyway, thanks for the link. I enjoyed it.

brightness04 · January 2006

What exactly would be BMW's competition to ES? if it's not 325i and 525i?? For MB, C240, C280, E320, E350? What exactly would be BMW and MB's competitive offerings if not those lower-end mainstream models of 3/5/C/E ??

merc1 · January 2006

There's nothing wrong with comparing the production curve of any two car models. Just don't compare the first model year of one car with the winding down year of another, like what you were trying to do . . . that would be intellectually dishonest because we both know that cars sell much better in the early parts of its procution cycle.

Again, you brought up the comparo between the CLS and IS/GS. However there is something wrong with this comparo because you said that the IS and GS were successful if we're going by the 14K units the CLS sold. This is just that, dishonest because the CLS costs way more than a GS and nearly double the first generation IS. Secondly IN THEIR SEGMENTS the IS and GS didn't do squat in sales compared to their main competitors, BMW and Mercedes. The CLS doesn't really have an direct competitors.

It is just that, dishonest for you to leave out the other factors in the sales of these three totally different vehicles.

When was the last time MB newly conqured any market segment? 1970/80's displacing Cadillac?

Well considering Mercedes the oldest carmaker around and new segments don't come along that often I'd say they've done pretty well to inpsire the creation of whole brands of synthetic cars with a copycat flagship to go along with it. Mercedes has proven itself time and time again over the years. Question is what segment has Lexus conqured? Lexus is the biggest wannabe in the automotive world, now switching their envy from Mercedes to BMW. I don't see anyone lining up to build a GS,LS,IS or ES. I do see Lexus trying to build a 3-Series, 5-Series, S-Class (in the past come 2007). I do see Jaguar, Porsche, and VW linig up to build a CLS competitor, not a GS competitor or a LS competitor. All Lexus has conqured is quality and reliability surveys (important enough) and the SUV/high-end-sedan segment IF you want simply look at sales. Other than that they are are the ultimate following machine because the IS,GS,ES haven't conqured squat.

Like it or not Mercedes-Benz is still the trailblazer here. The CLS and R-Class success or not are new segments, one of which has a bunch of the competitors lining up to produce their version (CLS) and the other the jury is still out on.

M

merc1 · January 2006

I'm guessing you might take a short flight from Chicago to Detroit?

Oh no, the 4-hour drive is much more fun.

M

merc1 · January 2006

That argument makes no sense whatsoever. The Lexus ES and IS are two different platforms that compete with different types of vehicles altogether.

What makes even less sense is your comparison of a Lexus ES with a BMW 5 series or a MB E . That is an argument not even worth responding to

I am out of here. Good night.

Exactly! Nothing but spinning gone out of control. I guess now I can lump CLK sales in with the C-Class and the CLS in the E-Class in order to jazz up the sales rhetoric. Funny how this lumping of the IS and ES helps out the previously non-existent sales of the IS just a few months ago. Lexus spinning and twisting at its best!

M

oac · January 2006

Must be a slow weekend... All these talk about IS, GS, Prius, etc... on a HELM board ??

Despite the failures of the Gen1 IS, Gen1&2 GS to light a fire in their respective market sectors, Lexus increased market share YoY, until it became the #1 luxury auto maker in the NA market. Imagine if the IS and GS were important sector leaders, the margin of Lexus' success would have been enormous indeed. The truth is no company will have success in ALL its markets... So beating on the IS/GS pre 2005 is just a waste of time... This is history.

Saw the new R-class wagon today in person. What an ugly POS, sorry ! My daughter called it a *whale* and I couldn't agree more. And wrt a GL class, in the days of low demand for SUV ... timing couldn't be worse for MB thinking it can buy market share with land yatch SUVs in 2006 ? Who is in charge in Stuttgart these days ?

ljflx · January 2006

"Well considering Mercedes the oldest carmaker around and new segments don't come along that often I'd say they've done pretty well"

I certainly don't want to get embroiled in this but MB and the Germans as a whole literally missed the biggest new segment in automotive history - SUV's. In fact because of this many here want to point out that only cars should be considered in a sales race even though we are still in a 50-50 market position. It shows you how silly discussions can get when people want to eliminate 50% of a market to prove their points.

"Saw the new R-class wagon today in person."

OAC - it's awful. Did you think funeral car when you saw it? I've seen one on the road so far and it looked liked it should be the lead car in a funeral procession.

tagman · January 2006

Also depends on your winter weather, doesn't it?

Hey, M1, you mentioned that Jaguar (and others) are lined up to offer their versions of the CLS. What exactly are you referring to that Jaguar is doing in response to the CLS? I'm drawing a blank here.
TagMan

brightness04 · January 2006

Both previous generation IS and GS sold all their productions in the first year with hardly any discount, and much more than 14k units. Where do you get off praising CLS sales yet panning IS and GS sales, considering that you have no idea how CLS will do in the 5th year of production.

Yada yada on glorious history 100 years ago; too bad it doesn't sell cars to those who can actually afford to buy them. Why other manufacturers try to build a CLS competitor but not an LS competitor? Isn't the answer obvious? Other manufacturers think they can beat MB at its own game but no chance at beating Lexus. Duh! It's relatively cheap and easy to "invent a new segment" but really hard to make impeccable cars that people really want and sell them at competitive prices; that's a game few excell at, and Lexus happens to be one of the masters.

brightness04 · January 2006

That's exactly what I thought when I saw my first a few months ago: the R class looks like the offspring of a Dodge Caravan, previous generation Rav4 and a funeral hearse having had a three-some!

brightness04 · January 2006

I guess now I can lump CLK sales in with the C-Class and the CLS in the E-Class in order to jazz up the sales rhetoric.

Please do. As indeed they should. Why should CLK be considered a separate model from C, and CLS from E, when 325ci is part of 3-series sales??

lexusguy · January 2006

Er.. the '98-05 car was generation 2. The first GS had a short '93-'97 run, with no updates of any kind. Gen 2 ran '98-'00, and with a very small refresh, they let the car sit for another 5 years.

Most of the reason for the flops of the Gen 1 SC and Gen 2 GS were the fact that Lexus simply ignored them. If BMW were selling a 550i that looked identical to the '97 version, or a 650Ci that looked like the 8 series from the mid '90s, Im sure their sales would stink too.

Of course there were other problems, for one the whole "L-tuned" thing never really materialized.

The failures of the SC, IS, and GS were very much Lexus' fault though. Just like Acura and Infiniti, they've made their share of mistakes in the past.

brightness04 · January 2006

In case you did not know, GS400 had a long waiting period in its first model year; so did IS300. They both were hot cars in their first years. Lexus simply did not update the two in subsequent years, partly because it focused effort on RX, ES and LS, its three core products, plus a whole new world of hybrids.

tagman · January 2006

Get logical for a minute here. As I mentioned earlier this evening, the minivan was the darling star at one time, as was then the SUV and now the crossover. Are you suggesting that when the minivan market diminished that the manufacturers should stop making a great minivan? Ridiculous to suggest that just because the SUV market is slowing that the market is dead somehow. What it does mean, though, is that the contenders had better be very good to get the sale. The GL is poised to do very well. It will be the one to beat. There will always be sales of Suburbans, although less than before, and the GL will be the ULTRA alternative.

The ugly R has NOTHING to do with the GL. Any suggestion that it does is idiocy.

Listen to me clearly here. The SUV will NEVER die! There will ALWAYS be an adequate market for SUV's.

TagMan

lexusguy · January 2006

Why didnt they? Why was the update for the '01 GS soooo timid that you literally cant tell one apart from a '00? They slightly changed the shape of the headlights, and added a bit of chrome trim around the gauges. That was it. The '01 RX was also nearly identical to the '00, but in that case, major changes werent really necessary. The GS needed a lot more than it received. The IS was basically an experiment that didnt work out. It would be like trying to sell a Scion tC as the new Lexus coupe. I dont think so.

brightness04 · January 2006

MB is trying to straddle all three market segment (crossover, minivan and SUV) with the triples sharing the same platform. My guess is that it will miss all three: ML for being too heavy to be a "fuel-mizing" crossover, R for being too small to be a minivan, and GL for too complicated/too-soft/too-expensive to actually go off road or tow. All three will suffer from reliabilty problems just like the old ML; I already saw an R class stranded by the side of the road last October/November. The first year GL sales might be okay due to the sheer new factor (witness Cayenne), but once the bugs are out of the box and in the open (again witness Cayenne in its second year). Then again, the honeymoon might be even shorter like the stablemate R-Class..

ps. The space inefficiency of the new M and R are also hard to believe. 72 cu.ft for a largish mid-size SUV and 82 cu.ft for a 203" minivan? What year is this? Chrysler minivans since 1994 are much more space efficient than this.

brightness04 · January 2006

IMHO, Lexus was running out of staff with all the core product updates with RX, ES, LS plus new products like GX and hybrids. The Gen1 IS was literally a stop-gap measure; Lexus was probably surprised by the rapid rise of BMW (set against the back drop of MB's decline all the more dramatic) just like everyone else.

High End Luxury Cars

Comments

Helpful Tools

Most popular vehicles