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?

 

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.

 

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 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.

 

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 ****, 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.

 

So who told you there are cars out there that don't break?
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'.


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? 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.