Toyota: They never look for a silver bullet

Well, that's the secret to their success... a very conservative approach...

Toyota, GM locked in fight for worldwide supremacy

By Christine Tierney and Ed Garsten The Detroit News

"Toyota's going to be No. 1. And whether they do it under the radar or by announcing it, it's going to happen," said Maryann Keller, a longtime automotive consultant and analyst.

Toyota already has overtaken Ford Motor Co. to become the world's second-largest automaker. By 2006, it is shooting to sell 8.5 million cars and trucks worldwide, edging close to GM, ranked No. 1 since 1931. If Toyota surpasses GM, that would have a profound psychological impact on the U.S. industry, one of the last manufacturing sectors where Americans still lead. It would also undermine GM's ability to dominate the industry and buffet smaller players such as DaimlerChrysler AG's Chrysler Group with its price wars.

As the two auto giants compete in every segment and every region, GM faces a dynamic challenger in Toyota that is not only similar in scale but also draws strength from its superior profitability.

At the North American International Auto Show last month, Toyota board member Yoshimi Inaba downplayed the automaker's ambitions.

"Every manufacturer, every corporation needs some growth," he said.

At the same show, GM Chairman and CEO Rick Wagoner sounded defensive. "We've been ahead for 73 years in a row, and the betting odds are we'll be ahead for the next 73 years," he said.

But Toyota has the upper hand as GM struggles through its toughest stretch since a near-bankruptcy in the early 1990s.

GM's unresolved problems -- a bloated staff and too many brands -- are now exacerbated by unforeseen factors. Soaring health care expenses, rising to $5.6 billion this year, have eclipsed its hard-won gains in quality and cost control.

Despite GM's assertion that its prospects will brighten in 2006 with the rollout of new large pickups and sport utility vehicles, Wall Street is worried. Debt-rating agency Standard & Poor's is reviewing a possible downgrade of GM to junk-bond status.

With its Triple-A rating and $36 billion cash hoard, Toyota seems unstoppable. It holds 44 percent of the impenetrable Japanese market. In the United States -- the key battleground -- it has doubled sales to 2.1 million vehicles in 10 years.

But the company's success poses new challenges. Toyota executives are under enormous strain to attain their sales goals without compromising the vaunted quality of the vehicles.

Toyota is also keenly aware of hungry rivals in South Korea -- and newcomers in China -- that are charging from behind with good cars built at rock-bottom costs. A reinvigorated Nissan Motor Co. is growing faster than Toyota in North America and has overtaken Honda Motor Co. to become Japan's No. 2 carmaker. Nor do Toyota's bosses underestimate Detroit's will to come roaring back.

...

"The idea of the regional Big Three is dead -- the issue now is who will be the Global Big Three," said David Cole, chairman of the Center for Automotive Research in Ann Arbor. "GM and Toyota will be two of them. I'm not sure who the third will be."

Stretch marks

With Toyota ramping up production rapidly in North America, the automaker is relying more on U.S. managers to steer startups. Its Princeton, Ind., factory is the "mother plant" for a truck plant under construction in San Antonio, Texas.

For more than 40 years, the Toyota Production System was taught by practiced experts who supervised their pupils. Stressing kaizen, or continuous improvement, the system encourages everyone, from top managers to line workers, to seek ways to improve operations and eliminate waste.

"The Toyota culture has been a great source of strength, with everyone working off a common playbook," said Christopher Richter, auto analyst for Merrill Lynch in Tokyo. "Now you've got a lot of people coming into the company at the same time, and they have to try to keep that culture from getting too diluted."

Toyota's top bosses may be setting ambitious goals to sustain the momentum that brought the company to its current heights, he said. "You're one of the biggest automakers, you're the most profitable automaker, and you want to prevent a culture of complacency from settling in."

Rivals are redoubling efforts to instill quality in their manufacturing process -- and GM has achieved the biggest strides among the U.S. automakers.

In U.S. quality rankings, Toyota Motor still leads the industry, and its premium Lexus brand perennially wins top honors. But Toyota-brand vehicles slipped behind Cadillac and Buick models in the last J.D. Power and Associates survey of vehicle quality in the first 90 days of ownership. Because of the Toyota brand's strength, its vehicles retain value better than Cadillac or Buick cars, says Raj Sundaram of Automotive Lease Guide. But perceptions tend to catch up with reality.

Senior Toyota officials recognize the danger. "A lot of the things we discuss among high-level executives have to do with quality," Inaba said. "How do you maintain quality during this period of high growth and beyond? This is something we're always discussing."

...

To instill its standards, Toyota recently opened a Global Production Institute in Toyota City, Japan, where overseas workers are trained by expert Japanese operators on assembly techniques. Rising managers are steeped in the company culture at the Toyota Institute, whose curriculum was developed with the help of the Wharton School.

As part of the "continuous improvement" mantra, Toyota has expanded early-detection systems to nip problems in the bud. It set up a squad of two dozen Japanese troubleshooters in Torrance, Calif., two years ago. Instead of waiting for dealers' reports of problems to pile up, the specialists now check on rare and minor glitches.

"Problems get fixed faster," said Don Esmond, head of U.S. sales for the Toyota brand. "Before, by the time they were explained to Japan and they got back to us, there was a lag.

"Maybe we're a little paranoid, but there's nothing wrong with that."

If not paranoid, Toyota certainly is wary. It shies away from mergers and acquisitions, although it retains a keiretsu, a web of associated companies and suppliers, such as Denso Corp. and Aisin Seiki Co. Ltd.

Steady as she goes

In his autobiography "Shift," Nissan CEO Carlos Ghosn describes Toyota as "imperious and sure of itself."

Yet the company is also deeply provincial and cautious. Toyota lets others blaze trails and tracks their progress from its headquarters in central Japan's Aichi prefecture. It established production operations in the United States after Honda. It lags Nissan in its bid to challenge Detroit's automakers in the lucrative full-size pickup segment. Skittish about the Chinese market, Toyota missed out on a recent sales boom.

Despite its prudent approach, Toyota has its share of slip-ups. Most recently, its Echo compact tanked in the U.S. market. But with its plentiful resources, Toyota keeps trying. It will pull the Echo from the lineup and replace it with two small cars.

The automaker can afford costly forays into new technologies. It scored big with its Prius gas-electric car, with orders far outpacing production. While it's unclear whether its hybrid program makes money -- rivals say it doesn't -- the clean cars have earned Toyota high marks for good citizenship. This year, it will launch two SUVs equipped with its fourth-generation hybrid technology.

Under pressure to follow Toyota's lead, GM and DaimlerChrysler teamed up in December to develop hybrid powertrains.

"Toyota is using its deep pockets," said GM Chief Financial Officer John Devine. "They have more (money) than any of us, so they can afford to lose a lot of money on the Prius."

But Toyota's biggest strength lies in its unwavering focus on its main objectives: making better cars and lowering costs.

While GM spent billions snapping up new brands, wasting $2.4 billion on an ill-advised investment in Fiat Auto SpA, "Toyota stuck to doing what it did best," Keller said. "They make a car, and then they make the next one better and see where the customer is taking them. They never look for a silver bullet."

"We spend $4 billion, if not more, each year than the No. 2 global auto manufacturer" on health care, said Wagoner, referring to Toyota.

That money could be used to build new plants, develop new technologies or reward shareholders, he says. "Over time that has an impact."

While GM, Ford and Chrysler benchmark the Japanese, Toyota is keeping close watch on lower-cost automakers in Asia. "We conduct research on our Korean competitors, and that is reflected in our considerations," says Toyota President Fujio Cho. "They have improved quality substantially. They produce vehicles at very low cost, and we consider them formidable competitors."

To lower its costs, Toyota has developed a basic platform, or chassis, for five vehicles -- three pickups, a sport utility and a minivan -- that will be built in low-cost plants in south Asia, South Africa and Latin America. Called the Innovative International Multi-purpose Vehicle project, it is expected to generate big savings by sharing components across 500,000 vehicles a year.

"From the U.S. perspective, Toyota looks like it's growing rapidly, but it has been growing a lot faster in the developing world," Richter says. "They want to grow rapidly in these markets, and they want to do it in a profitable way."

A long, hard winter

At the Detroit car show, Wagoner was braced for reporters' questions about Toyota's ascent.

"Look at China -- can we beat Toyota? Absolutely," he said.

...


http://detnews.com/2005/specialreport/0502/13/A01-87977.htm

Very nice read.

Good read. I just don't understand why Toyota doesn't expand into a more sporty segment. There is definately lots of money to be made there and a more loyal following to be had. I guess that is good for the U.S. automakers as they can still comfortably retain their lead there.
GM could stand to learn a little from Toyota.

Who would have guessed that a conservative approach of constant improvement would pay off in the long run? I would have figured it would have been better to design the cars to fall apart after three years so that the customer would have to buy a new one.

Who would have guessed that a conservative approach of constant improvement would pay off in the long run? I would have figured it would have been better to design the cars to fall apart after three years so that the customer would have to buy a new one.Chrysler is doing OK, so there's still a market for the latter.;)

Chrysler is doing OK, so there's still a market for the latter.;)

Yeah, and there still is a market for the latter as well. Toyota does not make one interesting car anymore.

Yeah, and there still is a market for the latter as well. Toyota does not make one interesting car anymore.

If you mean Toyota, not including Lexus, I think the Tacoma is pretty cool. The new Tundra will be cool I'm sure, though the current one is past its prime, especially in any terms of excitement.

Lexus? I think the new IS350 is badass... I mean, come on, it's the fastest car in its segment unless you consider the CTS-V, M3, and S4 in its segment, but realistically they're priced 15-20k dollars high for a reason. I'm talking the 35k dollar entry level sedan market.

The GS460 will be out for 07 sporting the new 8-speed auto and 400hp... I'd say that's pretty competetive with the competition, especially considering the GS460 won't even be charging a 'premium' for its motor... it's poised to be priced right along side any of the other standard V8s.

If the IS460/IS500 comes out w/ 400hp that should be quite exciting, too IMO.

And while the Lexus LS460's primary purpose is to *not* be exciting, I think it's exciting just to see some of the feature sets they've got available for it.

Yeah, I meant Toyota and Lexus. I do actually like the Tacoma, but that is about it. The new IS350 is a nice luxury car, but is far from exciting, at least on my list of exciting. I know it is far more performance oriented than it used to be, but that isn't exactly saying a whole lot. I am sure the IS460/IS500 will be nice cars, and will be pretty sporty, and competitively priced, but they are still unlikely to completely remove Lexus and its parent company Toyota of their hard earned boring stigma.

I know I am repeating the same thing that has been said countless times before, but Toyota would do well to give rebirth to it's Supra name. The Supra is still known to many as a high performance exciting car, and if Toyota could price it in the 30,000s, they could have a successful 350z competitor on their hands. Nissan seems to have no problem selling those, even years after they were introduced. It would give Toyota at least somewhat of an exciting image too.

It would be nice to see another mid engined sports car from Toyota as well, in the spirit of the MkII MR2s. The MkIII MR2s were rubbish.

Toyotas are boring Japanese appliances.

Yeah, I meant Toyota and Lexus. I do actually like the Tacoma, but that is about it. The new IS350 is a nice luxury car, but is far from exciting, at least on my list of exciting. I know it is far more performance oriented than it used to be, but that isn't exactly saying a whole lot. I am sure the IS460/IS500 will be nice cars, and will be pretty sporty, and competitively priced, but they are still unlikely to completely remove Lexus and its parent company Toyota of their hard earned boring stigma.

I know I am repeating the same thing that has been said countless times before, but Toyota would do well to give rebirth to it's Supra name. The Supra is still known to many as a high performance exciting car, and if Toyota could price it in the 30,000s, they could have a successful 350z competitor on their hands. Nissan seems to have no problem selling those, even years after they were introduced. It would give Toyota at least somewhat of an exciting image too.

It would be nice to see another mid engined sports car from Toyota as well, in the spirit of the MkII MR2s. The MkIII MR2s were rubbish.

Do me a favor and drive an IS350. It may be refined but it's far from boring and will also smoke the CTS, 330, A4, and so on, quite handily.:)

Do me a favor and drive an IS350. It may be refined but it's far from boring and will also smoke the CTS, 330, A4, and so on, quite handily.:)

Well, if I could manage to get my hands on one, don't worry, I would. Its not going to happen anytime soon in all likelyhood though.

Do me a favor and drive an IS350. It may be refined but it's far from boring and will also smoke the CTS, 330, A4, and so on, quite handily.:)
It will be interesting to see how the next CTS sport does against the new IS when it carries a 300 hp V6 and could have an OHC V8 mid model that could be in excess of 350 hp.

It will be interesting to see how the next CTS sport does against the new IS when it carries a 300 hp V6 and could have an OHC V8 mid model that could be in excess of 350 hp.

Do you have any more info on this? I'm very interested in hearing about the new CTS.

I'm not surprised by the V6 but I am surprised to hear of a V8 mid-model when they've got the CTS-V, still.

Do me a favor and drive an IS350. It may be refined but it's far from boring and will also smoke the CTS, 330, A4, and so on, quite handily.:)

It's not that its not quick or a good performer, it's boring looking. It doesn't have any "look at me" factor, all I see is another Lexus, and wouldn't be able to tell it apart from any other lexus without looking at the model name/number. I saw one at the LA Auto Show, and looked at it and even took a few pictures, but no matter what, it doesn't look exciting, as are all Toyota's at the moment. I'm not counting Trucks because they all pretty much look the same, and even then they don't have any special editions like the Big 2.5 do. (SS, SSR, Lightning, Harley Davidson and others including Saleen, Daytona...)

It would be an excellent idea to bring back the Supra and price it with new Camaro, Stang, 350Z and all the others that compete in that class. It would be a good idea to generate excitement for the brand at all. I wonder how long they're reputation of being dependable boring transportation can last without generating some kind of buzz with their brands?

I wonder how long they're reputation of being dependable boring transportation can last without generating some kind of buzz with their brands?

Well they've lasted 50+ years so far... and gaining momentum.

Consumers are to blame, not Toyota. Consumers don't do anything to punish them the same way they punished Nissan... at least Nissan have produced some great sportscars... but they also offered a lot of bland & boring vehicles and buyers stayed away.

Do you have any more info on this? I'm very interested in hearing about the new CTS.

I'm not surprised by the V6 but I am surprised to hear of a V8 mid-model when they've got the CTS-V, still.
I am merely speculating that an Ultra V8 may find its way into the next CTS as a mid model. GM has/is designing the Ultra line to fit into transverse applications and longitudinal. I would imagine that since it will be transverse it would dimensionally smaller than the N* which is as wide as a BBC. The Ultra is due in the first year of the Lambda crossovers and if the V6 is the DI version of the HF V6, 300 hp, then the V8 should carry more than 300 (simple math guesses say it could approach 400 hp. The Enclave concept holds a 3.6 DI but the engine bay would be the same as the production model. Anyone seen any underhood photos of the Enclave?

Do me a favor and drive an IS350. It may be refined but it's far from boring and will also smoke the CTS, 330, A4, and so on, quite handily

That's really not a fair comparison. The 350 is the performance trim of the Lexus' IS line. The "base" Lexus IS 250 puts out 204hp/185 ft-lbs of torque. The IS 350 is meant to be their performance-bent lux-sedan. Wouldn't a more proper comparison not be the CTS, but the CTS-V?

For comparision, GM's CTS offers 3 performance levels:
the 210hp 2.8l (which would favorably compare to the IS250).
the 255hp 3.6l (which would fall slightly lower than the IS350)
and the 400hp 6.0l (which would DESTROY the IS350's 306hp).

GM's 3.6l-powered CTS does 0-60 in 6.5s, the 6.0l does it in 4.6s
The IS350 does 0-60 in 5.6s
The Infiniti G35 does 0-60 in 5.8s
The BMW 330i does 0-60 in 6.1s

As you can see, the IS-350 slots-in right in-between the CTS's middle-performance 3.6l and top-tier 6.0l. The CTS certainly isn't lacking for performance (should you want it). I wouldn't call either one better (performance-wise) than the other - they are just different.

That's really not a fair comparison. The 350 is the performance trim of the Lexus' IS line. The "base" Lexus IS 250 puts out 204hp/185 ft-lbs of torque. The IS 350 is meant to be their performance-bent lux-sedan. Wouldn't a more proper comparison not be the CTS, but the CTS-V?

For comparision, GM's CTS offers 3 performance levels:
the 210hp 2.8l (which would favorably compare to the IS250).
the 255hp 3.6l (which would fall slightly lower than the IS350)
and the 400hp 6.0l (which would DESTROY the IS350's 306hp).

GM's 3.6l-powered CTS does 0-60 in 6.5s, the 6.0l does it in 4.6s
The IS350 does 0-60 in 5.6s
The Infiniti G35 does 0-60 in 5.8s
The BMW 330i does 0-60 in 6.1s

As you can see, the IS-350 slots-in right in-between the CTS's middle-performance 3.6l and top-tier 6.0l. The CTS certainly isn't lacking for performance (should you want it). I wouldn't call either one better (performance-wise) than the other - they are just different.

Um... no.

Generally the way you do market comparisons is by first looking at price and equipment and THEN comparing similarly priced cars in terms of performance.

The IS350 starts very nicely equipped at 35,400.
The 3.6 CTS starts at 32,000, but also doesn't come as well equipped in standard fashion, so pick your poison. Give it more options and the price quickly matches the IS350.

So then why would you think the IS350 should be compared to the 50,600 dollar CTS-V?

If the rumored IS460/500 comes out, it will have a price much closer to the CTS-V and would be the obvious comparison to the V, the M3, etc, etc.
As for now there is no car from Lexus intended to compete with the 50k dollar 'entry level luxury cars gone performance' category.;)

Oh, and I've seen the IS350 quoted in the magazines as low as 0-60 in 5.1, 1/4-mile in 13.7@104.
Not sure about the CTS, but just in case you were quoting best times or just randomly selected magazine times.:p

While you may make comparisons on price and work outward doesn't mean that everybody takes that approach. If money wasn't that big of an object (which can very possibly be the case if you are cross-shopping sport-luxury sedans that start at $35k), than perhaps the performance aspect of the car is your biggest factor. The truth is that everybody will hang various degrees of importance on each featureset of a car: whether it be options, price, or performance. No one aspect is better than another. You were comparing the level of performance between the IS350 and the A4, the 330, and the CTS. I'm not comparing options and/or price -- nor were you. I'm comparing levels of performance - and you are comparing the top-level-performance IS against the middle-level performance CTS. I'm just saying that the general comment of "smokes the CTS, etc." is a bit unfair - as it isn't apples-to-apples. Lexus doesn't have low-middle-top level performance tiers like the CTS - so you can either:
(a) compare the top-level IS350 against the middle-level CTS (and the CTS will lack, performance-wise), or
(b) compare the top-level IS350 against the top-level CTS (and the IS will lack).

It's also worth noting that the IS350 is brand-new for '06 and the CTS is in the middle of it's lifecycle, so all things considered, the CTS isn't that bad off. For those interested, the IS350 replaces the outgoing IS300 - which featured a craptacular-for-a-luxury-car 215hp 3.0l.

I'm just commenting that your comparison is lacking because of the different approaches towards trim/performance levels between Lexus and Cadillac. If you had clarifyed your (assuming you intended this) position that, dollar for dollar, the IS350 offers better more performance than the A4, 330, A4, and CTS, then I'd absolutely agree with you.. but that isn't because the CTS is lacking, it's because it's trim levels put it at vastly different price points - largely because it's top-of-the-line performance trim offers vastly-superior performance allowing them to command a vastly-larger sticker price.

While you may make comparisons on price and work outward doesn't mean that everybody takes that approach. If money wasn't that big of an object (which can very possibly be the case if you are cross-shopping sport-luxury sedans that start at $35k), than perhaps the performance aspect of the car is your biggest factor. The truth is that everybody will hang various degrees of importance on each featureset of a car: whether it be options, price, or performance. No one aspect is better than another. You were comparing the level of performance between the IS350 and the A4, the 330, and the CTS. I'm not comparing options and/or price -- nor were you. I'm comparing levels of performance - and you are comparing the top-level-performance IS against the middle-level performance CTS. I'm just saying that the general comment of "smokes the CTS, etc." is a bit unfair - as it isn't apples-to-apples. Lexus doesn't have low-middle-top level performance tiers like the CTS - so you can either:
(a) compare the top-level IS350 against the middle-level CTS (and the CTS will lack, performance-wise), or
(b) compare the top-level IS350 against the top-level CTS (and the IS will lack).

It's also worth noting that the IS350 is brand-new for '06 and the CTS is in the middle of it's lifecycle, so all things considered, the CTS isn't that bad off. For those interested, the IS350 replaces the outgoing IS300 - which featured a craptacular-for-a-luxury-car 215hp 3.0l.

I'm just commenting that your comparison is lacking because of the different approaches towards trim/performance levels between Lexus and Cadillac. If you had clarifyed your (assuming you intended this) position that, dollar for dollar, the IS350 offers better more performance than the A4, 330, A4, and CTS, then I'd absolutely agree with you.. but that isn't because the CTS is lacking, it's because it's trim levels put it at vastly different price points - largely because it's top-of-the-line performance trim offers vastly-superior performance allowing them to command a vastly-larger sticker price.

Are you arguing just for the sake of arguing on this subject or what? You know damn well that the IS350 is not the direct competitor of the CTS-V. Lexus currently has no competitor for the CTS-V/M3/S4/etc, nor is anyone trying to pretend they do.

If any major car magazine tried to do a test with the IS350 compared to the CTS-V I can assure you they'd get their mailboxes stuffed with people calling them idiots.


Where I *would* be wrong is if I said that Cadillac doesn't offer anything that will outperform the IS350. I didn't say that though. I said the IS350 is the fastest car in its class, and I don't think many people consider the M3 to be the same 'class' as the 330 or do they consider, for example, my lowly A4 2.0T to be in the same class as the S4.

If you truely were to say price doesn't matter, well then heck, we shouldn't be talking about hoopties like the IS and CTS in the first place, we should be over looking at the 180k dollar Brabus E class with the 6 liter twin turbo V12 or something along those lines.

You can always make a pointless arguement when you assume that nothing matters but performance, but that's a silly assumption unless we're all redneck millionaires here. And still silly none the less to bother comparing apples and oranges. If you're that rich then you're not going to be too worried about the small differences one model of car to the next.

the outgoing IS300 - which featured a craptacular-for-a-luxury-car

The 2JZ is a well-respected motor in the mod community. Very solid, but the stock power rating was truely bad for such a sportily marketed car.

Still, looking back and Cadillac's history it doesn't look that much more impressive to me either. The CTS came out 2 years after the IS300 did sporting only 10 more horsepower in its only available motor.
Now that the CTS offers 3 motors, the base one puts out even less power - 210hp /194 torque. Not saying that's bad - that may be more than enough for quite a few people - but if the 215hp/218tq was 'craptacular' I have to imagine your opinion of the CTS' base motor is even worse?

Not to mention the IS300's competition when it first came out - the POS Catera that everyone would like to forget. 200hp/195 tq, 4-speed automatic and one of the least suited for a luxury car drivetrains and chassis ever seen in recent years.

So was the IS300 a great car? No... other than predicted reliability I found very few other reasons to want to own one over its competition. But just keep in mind that Cadillac's pickings other than the V-series have never exactly been leading the 'craptacular' IS, either, except for briefly in the 2005 model year.

Geez - didn't mean to rile you up. I'm standing behind my opinion that claiming the "CTS gets smoked" isn't completely on-the-level - because it completely disregards a trim level of the vehicle - not because of what the CTS lacks - but because of what the Lexus lacks. IMO, that's bunk. My comment wasn't that the 3.0l was a craptacular engine, but that it was "craptacular for a sports-luxury car" -- which it is -- and I share that opinion of CTS's 2.8l -- which again, may be a wonderful engine, but has no business belonging in a sports-luxury car. Why should I disregard the CTS's top engine because of a Lexus's lack of a competitive entrant? The fact remains that the two simply don't match up well, primarily because the CTS offers 3 levels of performance and Lexus only 2.

Geez - didn't mean to rile you up. I'm standing behind my opinion that claiming the "CTS gets smoked" isn't completely on-the-level - because it completely disregards a trim level of the vehicle - not because of what the CTS lacks - but because of what the Lexus lacks. IMO, that's bunk. My comment wasn't that the 3.0l was a craptacular engine, but that it was "craptacular for a sports-luxury car" -- which it is -- and I share that opinion of CTS's 2.8l -- which again, may be a wonderful engine, but has no business belonging in a sports-luxury car. Why should I disregard the CTS's top engine because of a Lexus's lack of a competitive entrant? The fact remains that the two simply don't match up well, primarily because the CTS offers 3 levels of performance and Lexus only 2.

OK, simple question. What would be most anyone's response to an issue of Motortrend that compared, say, the CTS-V to the IS350? Would they say "that's a dumb comparison - those two cars weren't intended to compete and very few people who would buy a CTS-V would ever consider the regular CTS or the IS350". Or would they say "well hey, it's the best engine each of them offers!"?

It'd be absolutely no different than if the new Camaro comes out with only the V6 and Z28 version at first. Let's say the Z28 makes 350hp and costs ~28k bucks nicely equipped. So then motor trend decides to do a comparison test but says hey, Ford offers an SVT version with 500 horsepower. Yeah it costs 20 grand more and is really intended to compete with the Vette power and price wise, but still, it's a Mustang, and it's their top motor, so it's a good comparison.

Most f-body guys would cry foul and demand that a standard GT be compared as they would be far more comparable in price, performance, and market.

As mentioned... Lexus very well may be coming out with the IS460/500 with somewhere in the 400hp or so range. But until then I'd never even dream of recomending that anyone looking for a CTS-V look at the IS350 or vice-versa.

Haha...Kyle is just making sure the Emperor gets a few new kimonos ;)

I've seen worse Motortrend comparisions (LOL).

Comparing the CTS-V to the IS350 *would* be a faulty comparsion - solely because the Lexus lacks the top-end engine--hardly the fault of the Caddy. But isn't that my point? Your claim was the the CTS would get smoked by an IS350 - and my point was that your argument was deficient - solely because you are ignoring the CTS's top engine. If "smoking" someone was your sole critera (and your original post mentioned no other), then the CTS wins.

Lexus Reliability? I have a friend with an 02 IS300 with less than 50k miles. His AC is broken, with an estimated dealership repair bill of around 1800 bucks. The IS350 has a built in babysitter TC system that is hardwired into the engine management system (IIRC Toyota doesnt want it turned off at all).

As for the 2JZ the MAIN reason it is SO respected in the mod community is because deep pocketed guys have been paying out the nose for the R&D on reliable high HP systems for a decade or so. Now the knowledge to boost those motors comfortably into the 650+ WHP range is readily available.

I believe the CTS is nearing the end of its' lifecycle. The improvement in interior from the GMT800 to the GMT900 Escalade makes me feel pretty confident the CTS will be a big leap, too. With that and the improvments which should be made to the chassis, perhaps the CTS will become a legitimate 3-series fighter.

Just some additional info:

To match up options on the CTS and the IS350, you need to add a package to each:
Intellichoice lists the CTS "target price" as $31,404. From there, you'd need to add the $2100 "Luxury Pkg (Y41)" -> which gets you: Alarm System, Driver's Seat Memory, Garage Door Opener, Mirror, O/S Memory, Mirror, Upgraded Inside Automatic Day/Night, Seats, Upgraded Power Adjusters, Seats: Heated Front, Shift Knob, Wood, Steering Wheel, Wood, Wheels, Bright Machined Aluminum, Wood Trim Pkg. The caddy's total would be $33,504.

That actually puts you slightly "ahead" of the IS for equipment, so you'd need to take the base IS350, which Intellichoice lists the target price as $35,440, and add the $1290 "Performance Pkg" (PT). That package adds: Perforated Leather Seats, Heated Seats, Ventilated Front w/Memory Seats, Birds-Eye Maple Interior Trim. It also brings your total to: $36,730

That makes the Caddy about $3k cheaper for basically, the same equipment.

How, here's a little game: go to www.lexus.com & configure a top-of-the-line Lexus IS350 - go ahead and add that $8,994.00 top-level trim package. It puts the top-of-the-line IS350 @ $45,024. The CTS-V target price is $48,903 with hardly an option to be found (some odds-n-ends, colors, etc).
That's a difference of $3800.

So, back to your argument that they are priced too different to compare to each other: When the difference is $3k on vehicles that come in around $33,xxx-$36,xxx (about 10% of the vehicle price), that's ok. But when the difference is $3,800 on vehicles that are $45,xxx-$48,xxx (only 8.4%), then they are uncompatibly priced vehicles. Um, ok. :confused:

Lexus Reliability? I have a friend with an 02 IS300 with less than 50k miles. His AC is broken, with an estimated dealership repair bill of around 1800 bucks. The IS350 has a built in babysitter TC system that is hardwired into the engine management system (IIRC Toyota doesnt want it turned off at all).
So who told you there are cars out there that don't break?:think:
There are only cars that break more, and cars that break less.

Oh and your 'friend' is in luck, because his Lexus is covered by a B to B 4 year 50,000 mile warranty which from the sound of it he hasn't quite passed - even if he was slightly over the warranty coverage, most of the dealers out there would still cover that repair under good will. I don't think A/C is part of the powertrain warranty though (6yr 70k).

Either you're making that story up, don't know his year/milage correctly, or the repair was covered under warranty and you're just quoting the retail price of the repair had it not been covered.

And the IS' chassis and suspension was specifically tuned and intended to work best within the predictable perameters of Lexus' VDIM stability control. With that said, there's sort of a 'secret code' that can be entered to disable VDIM entirely, but it's intended to be kind of hush hush so that the average idiot doesn't think he's a better driver than his stability control system and try to turn it off to show off his 'mad skills'.:p


So, back to your argument that they are priced too different to compare to each other: When the difference is $3k on vehicles that come in around $33,xxx-$36,xxx (about 10% of the vehicle price), that's ok. But when the difference is $3,800 on vehicles that are $45,xxx-$48,xxx (only 8.4%), then they are uncompatibly priced vehicles. Um, ok. :confused:

Riiight.. and the BMW 330 when loaded to the hilt can actually cost more than the M3 with basic equipment. Is this a stunning discovery for you?:p Now you want to compare a loaded to the hilt IS to a much less equipped but more powerful CTS-V? That's just making the price points more comparable but the cars even more apples to oranges.

I seem to be repeating myself now, so after this I'm going to let this die. We don't see eye to eye on this. Big deal. I'm saying thaat you can't throw out an IS350/CTSV comparison because of price. The CTS-V is a loaded vehicle. The only significant option on that car is a $1200 shock upgrade. You can't compare a base IS350 against the CTSV because the IS350 needs a few options to acquire some of the comparable CTS-V features -- much like you needed to do to the 3.6l CTS to match the base IS350. Even though both vehicles are pretty loaded, you'll always find some items that don't match up: GM can offer things like OnStar, XM radio and 100 more hp while the IS350 will give you their relatively new brake assist feature. If the price is withink 3k, what remains to disqualify a comparison of 2 sport-lux sedans? I'd have to think that it's primarily because the CTS-V has way more hp -- which flies squarly in the face of your way-to-generic comment that the CTS would get smoked by an IS350.

BTW, just to clarify something: While I do tire of reading (seemingly) endless posts about Toyota/Lexus products on a Z28 forum, I can understand (and even appreciate) your enthusiasm for cutting edge auto technology. I do enjoy reading your posts and having a healthy discussion about our varying points of view. I appreciate you keeping these disagreements civil. Best wishes.

BTW, just to clarify something: While I do tire of reading (seemingly) endless posts about Toyota/Lexus products on a Z28 forum, I can understand (and even appreciate) your enthusiasm for cutting edge auto technology. I do enjoy reading your posts and having a healthy discussion about our varying points of view. I appreciate you keeping these disagreements civil. Best wishes.

Thanks for your honesty but realize that I didn't start this thread. In fact I almost never start threads here unless I'm posting new product information. Otherwise I mainly just join pre-existing discussions that others have started about Toyota (usually bashing them) or GM (usually praising them) and don't always agree, so I stick out like a sore thumb sometimes. I'd say my approach is already relatively conservative. I'm honestly here to learn new things, not to further some sort of retarded hidden agenda.:p

not to further some sort of retarded hidden agenda.:p

Who makes a retarded hidden agenda?:confused:

And the IS' chassis and suspension was specifically tuned and intended to work best within the predictable perameters of Lexus' VDIM stability control. With that said, there's sort of a 'secret code' that can be entered to disable VDIM entirely, but it's intended to be kind of hush hush so that the average idiot doesn't think he's a better driver than his stability control system and try to turn it off to show off his 'mad skills'.:p


Can you tell me this secret code, or do I have to ask some ten year-old on a Nintendo forum?

Can you tell me this secret code, or do I have to ask some ten year-old on a Nintendo forum?

Mercedes had this kind of horse sh*t on a previous SLK, and I think maybe the M3 did(does?) as well. I hate this kind of crap. Having to enter a secret code for you car is ridiculous. I know if I shelled out some big dollars for an IS460 and I had to enter some secret code to turn off the computer nannies, I would not be one happy customer.

Is this thread going to end up with a Civic racing a truck?

Is this thread going to end up with a Civic racing a truck?
So who thinks the new Civic SI will be faster than the Colorado Extreme regular cab 5 speed?

Mercedes had this kind of horse sh*t on a previous SLK, and I think maybe the M3 did(does?) as well. I hate this kind of crap. Having to enter a secret code for you car is ridiculous. I know if I shelled out some big dollars for an IS460 and I had to enter some secret code to turn off the computer nannies, I would not be one happy customer.

If the IS460 comes out, hopefully it'll have a defeat switch.

A lot of the IS350 guys are wiring their own defeat switch with a simple on/off switch inline with one of the fuses. It makes the car think that something is out of spec with the stability control system, so it disables the system entirely.

That or enter the 'code'

http://www.autospies.com/article/index.asp?articleId=5950&categoryId=1

So who thinks the new Civic SI will be faster than the Colorado Extreme regular cab 5 speed?

I don't see the Colorado running consistent low 15s in the 1/4 or handling as well so I'd say yeah, the Civic would be faster.:shrug::lol:

Considering that one is a pickup truck, geared towards towing, I'd certainly hope that a lightweight passenger car could beat it. Maybe that's the real joke: that somebody would even have to question the point.

It actually had me intrigued, so I checked it out:
The Colorado (assuming I5) clocks in at 8.4s:
http://www.carsdirect.com/research/new_cars/buying_guides/trucks/compact_trucks/rankings#acceleration
The Civic SI: does a 0-60 in 7.2s:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=108019/pageId=66617

The Civic EX in 9.6s:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=108601/pageId=67700

8.4s doesn't seem to be too bad. It's a pickup, not a sports car.. However, I *would* complain about that pathetic 4000lb towing limit on the truck..that's disgraceful.

It actually had me intrigued, so I checked it out:
The Colorado (assuming I5) clocks in at 8.4s:
http://www.carsdirect.com/research/new_cars/buying_guides/trucks/compact_trucks/rankings#acceleration
The Civic SI: does a 0-60 in 7.2s:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/FullTests/articleId=108019/pageId=66617

The Civic EX in 9.6s:
http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/Drives/Comparos/articleId=108601/pageId=67700

8.4s doesn't seem to be too bad. It's a pickup, not a sports car.. However, I *would* complain about that pathetic 4000lb towing limit on the truck..that's disgraceful.

Yup, that's maximum towing too, standard towing is as low as 1600 on the LS 2WD ext cab.:o

That website with the Colorado time has mostly base motors listed. I was suspicious when I saw the new Tacoma listed as only 8.7 seconds or something like that to 60 but then I saw the I4... the V6 @ 245hp and plenty of torque should be somewhere in the low 7s I'd guess. I know our 4runner is heavier and has the same motor and is rated 0-60 in as low as 7.2 seconds (though typically closer to 8 seconds)