First Drive: 2006 Lexus IS 350

[ifcar]

That was an entry level comparo, not a near lux one

The A4, 325i, G35, and X-Type are entry-lux by your definition (unless it changed again), while the TL and 9-3 are near-lux by your definition.

Was that comparo labeled as a near lux compare? No, it wasn't, the one I am talking about was.

They only called it "Sport Sedans", which is basically what they call all of their not-luxury-not-mainstream comparos.

I don't think a pre-2001 definition is quite as relevent as what they are using now anyway. If they are going to put a TL up against a G35 and 3-Series (twice) I assume they consider them in the same class.

[TBR]

http://www.caranddriver.com/article.asp?se...article_id=3897

[TBR]

I suppose the certain FWD sedans could be put into the entry level category, such as the 9-3 and TL. A more accurate definition of near lux would be midsize cars that focus more on luxury than sport  

[ifcar]

February 2000. Real current definition, Raza.

[TBR]

It isn't from the '50s, one car in that comparo hasn't been through anything more than a mild facelift since then.  

[ifcar]

I suppose the certain FWD sedans could be put into the entry level category, such as the 9-3 and TL. A more accurate definition of near lux would be midsize cars that focus more on luxury than sport

Like the Lexus ES, but not the 9-3?

Basically the "premium" class is too diverse for such distinct classifications. Just throw everything into one class, and specifiy sport vs. luxury, size, engine size/power, or price within the class.

[TBR]

I suppose the certain FWD sedans could be put into the entry level category, such as the 9-3 and TL. A more accurate definition of near lux would be midsize cars that focus more on luxury than sport

Like the Lexus ES, but not the 9-3?

Basically the "premium" class is too diverse for such distinct classifications. Just throw everything into one class, and specifiy sport vs. luxury, size, engine size/power, or price within the class.

So now you have decided to erase an entire market segment?  

[ifcar]

It isn't from the '50s, one car in that comparo hasn't been through anything more than a mild facelift since then.

Three haven't, actually: LS, Bonneville, Diamante (though the last two are not seeing 06).

BTW, the LS is RWD. There goes the idea that near-luxury meant FWD.    

[ifcar]

I suppose the certain FWD sedans could be put into the entry level category, such as the 9-3 and TL. A more accurate definition of near lux would be midsize cars that focus more on luxury than sport

Like the Lexus ES, but not the 9-3?

Basically the "premium" class is too diverse for such distinct classifications. Just throw everything into one class, and specifiy sport vs. luxury, size, engine size/power, or price within the class.

So now you have decided to erase an entire market segment?

I had never recognized it anyway, and have never seen it used anywhere but Consumer Guide (which separates cars based only on size anyway, not using your definition).

[TBR]

It isn't from the '50s, one car in that comparo hasn't been through anything more than a mild facelift since then.

Three haven't, actually: LS, Bonneville, Diamante (though the last two are not seeing 06).

BTW, the LS is RWD. There goes the idea that near-luxury meant FWD.  

True enough, I forgot about the Diamente and didn't notice that the Lincoln was in it (wouldn't have been so quick to post it if I had ). They probably figured that since it was a Lincoln it would fit, but it is obviously more sporty than all of the other cars in that comparo. I still say that the entry level market is divided into two distinct segments, one of which focuses on sport and the other focuses on luxury.  

[ifcar]

Focused primarily on luxury would be pretty much limited to the ES330, everything else is either focused on sport or an all-arounder.

[TBR]

Focused primarily on luxury would be pretty much limited to the ES330, everything else is either focused on sport or an all-arounder.

The 300 (non C), Lacrosse, Zephyr, and S60 (non R) all focus more on luxury than sport.

[ifcar]

Focused primarily on luxury would be pretty much limited to the ES330, everything else is either focused on sport or an all-arounder.

The 300 (non C), Lacrosse, Zephyr, and S60 (non R) all focus more on luxury than sport.

According to C/D, even the 3.5-liter 300 is sporty. The LaCrosse is, I suppose, but it's much less expensive than the ES330 even fully loaded. The Zephyr may be an all-arounder, depending on just how much softer it is than the Mazda6 (and only driving it will tell), and the S60 non-R is neither sporty nor luxurious, so I suppose it counts as an all-arounder.

[TBR]

By the way, the ES330 is horribly overpriced for what it is.  

[TBR]

Looks like they lowered the prices, which is good because it used to be you had to spend near 40k just to get leather.  

[ifcar]

What the market will bear, I suppose. And it's not bad as an entry-lux/whatever car either, it can do anything but handle. I'd easily take a Camry XLE V6 or Avalon over it though, one's the same car for less money, and the other is more car for the same price.

[ifcar]

Looks like they lowered the prices, which is good because it used to be you had to spend near 40k just to get leather.

What? Leather was always standard on the ES, at least in this generation.

[TBR]

Looks like they lowered the prices, which is good because it used to be you had to spend near 40k just to get leather.

What? Leather was always standard on the ES, at least in this generation.

You sure?

As far as the ES's "goodness" is concerned, I am not impressed at all. Not only is it not fun to drive, but it is hopelessly boring in its styling and really doesn't have that impressive of an interior. It doesn't have much power, and probably doesn't have particularly spectacular ride.  

[SJ_GTI]

You guys are hilarious.    

[ifcar]

Looks like they lowered the prices, which is good because it used to be you had to spend near 40k just to get leather.

What? Leather was always standard on the ES, at least in this generation.

You sure?

As far as the ES's "goodness" is concerned, I am not impressed at all. Not only is it not fun to drive, but it is hopelessly boring in its styling and really doesn't have that impressive of an interior. It doesn't have much power, and probably doesn't have particularly spectacular ride.

Positive. I'm pretty sure the previous ES did as well.

Onto the car, I'll agree that it isn't fun to drive, styling is subjective, and the interior quality is excellent, probably class-leading among the vehicles that make up what my idea of an entry-lux sedan is. Power is sufficient with the new 3.3-liter, though I'll agree that the ride gets too floaty at high speeds.

[ifcar]

You guys are hilarious.  

I'm glad you're entertained.  <_<  

[R33 GT-R]

it's pretty funny

[TBR]

Leather was an option:
http://www.edmunds.com/used/2002/lexus/es3...price.15.Lexus*

[ifcar]

They added it for 03 then as standard equipment. But I highly doubt you had to option it up to $40K to get leather, as I've never seen one without the option.

[TBR]

So now you're calling me a liar?  

[ifcar]

So now you're calling me a liar?

Where'd that come from? I simply doubt the accuracy of your statement.

[TBR]

So now you're calling me a liar?

Where'd that come from? I simply doubt the accuracy of your statement.

Think about what you just said. You're saying that something I said wasn't true.  

[ifcar]

So now you're calling me a liar?

Where'd that come from? I simply doubt the accuracy of your statement.

Think about what you just said. You're saying that something I said wasn't true.

If I said that the Lexus ES300 had leather standard in 2002 and it didn't, does that make me a liar or simply inaccurate?

[TBR]

Inaccurate because I found a source that said otherwise.

[R33 GT-R]

calm down ladies there's enough crumpets for everyone