Auto Express luke warm about the ES

[Dippo]

I've noticed that this forum's contributors are all great believers in Lexus (OK, I'll make an exception for the odd one or two), much more so than in other car forums. However, I do think it requires an extraordinary type of faith to say that as you believe the GS to be faster over 0 -100 kph than the figure quoted by Lexus, then the ES figures must be incorrect by a similar amount, and to even suggest a time down to 0.1 of a second.

Were these faster times ever officially recorded? What was the road surface? How many runs in each direction? What was the temperature, wind speed, atmospheric pressure, tyre pressures, fuel load, driver weight etc? How does that data compare to the conditions for the tests conducted by Lexus?

[Zotto]

Lexus, like other Asian marques, give prudential times and they are to be intended as "worst obtainable value" also because tests are made with a driver and a passenger aboard. Besides, in automatic cars values are easier to obtain from any user, while for manual clutch cars they are almost impossible if you are not a professional pilot.

[Dippo]

Do you have actual evidence of this, or is it anecdotal? I can't see any reason why a company would report data that shows it in a less favourable light than its competitors. 

[Habu]

Generally anecdotal with Toyota & Lexus but it always appears that the performance data is played down.  Take the GT86 for example.  0-62 in 7.6 seconds.  It was actually around very high 6s.  Bottom line though is that 0-62 is kind of meaningless to me.  I’m more interested in 50-70mph.

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, Dippo said:

Do you have actual evidence of this, or is it anecdotal? I can't see any reason why a company would report data that shows it in a less favourable light than its competitors. 

I am actually believer in Lexus, but no faith can make me so blind that I would approve FWD ES300h which barely fits into 9s to 62MPH. The last time I have been in car so slow it was when I was 16 and my mate had Opel Corsa 1.1 which did 0-62 is something like 9.2... that was long time ago and I am not that old. It is just not acceptable for premium car in 2019. Lexus is very good in making very reliable cars, I can swear by it and something like ES350 AWD would be amazing, but in UK we are really getting raw deal - 300h is not great power train and there are no reason to even argue about it.

As for the Lexus understanding their 0-60, that is evident over entire range of the cars. I have tried my old IS250 and it always faster to 60, than stated. Most of actual data I quote usually comes from Car and Driver magazine and rule of thumb Lexus understates 0-60 by ~5-8% and overstates speedometer readings by 5-10%. I have a theory that they do it to make Co2 figures lower i.e. does not push the car to the limits doing NTHSA "real driving" tests. Lower tax, emissions and quoted fuel consumtion are more important for average Lexus buyer than 0.3s, but it is hardly ever more then that. If it is quoted to do 8.9s - in reality it will do something like 8.4s.

@Habu - I can agree that 50-70 acceleration sometimes are just as important as 0-60 and for some it is more important. But if car does 0-60 in 8.9s it will not do great 50-70 either. Fact is 300h in any car = slow. I have done side by side comparison with RC300h when I had one for 24h and in any circumstances my slow IS250 leaves it in the dust, from 0-60, form 30-60, from 50-70 and even from 60-0. IS250 is technology from the past 2005 car and it will beat 2 generations newer ES300h to dust on any performance oriented comparison - again, just not acceptable, it seems like Lexus was sleeping under rock for 14 years, I expect better from them and they can do better.

@gdh300 - again, 600hp or 200hp is rather meaningless for me - I would say more is always better, but that is just me. I appreciate that sometimes there is simply "enough" power. But when we are talking about ES300h (or any 300h for that matter) the power is quite obviously "not enough". And secondly, I do not talk about FWD being able to handle 200hp - modern FWD probably can. It does not change the fact though that FWD is inherently wrong wheels to drive any car, never-mind premium one. Wrong balance, wrong feeling and wrong message to the driver.

 

[rich1068]

14 hours ago, Habu said:

Bottom line though is that 0-62 is kind of meaningless to me.

Ditto. I zone out.

[i-s]

13 hours ago, Linas.P said:

I am actually believer in Lexus, but no faith can make me so blind that I would approve FWD ES300h which barely fits into 9s to 62MPH. The last time I have been in car so slow it was when I was 16 and my mate had Opel Corsa 1.1 which did 0-62 is something like 9.2...

No. I can't find data for a 1.1, but assuming we're talking a 90s or early 00s corsa then you're looking at 12 seconds for the 1.2. 

13 hours ago, Linas.P said:

 I can agree that 50-70 acceleration sometimes are just as important as 0-60 and for some it is more important. But if car does 0-60 in 8.9s it will not do great 50-70 either. 

Not true. My V70 was pretty poor on 0-62 time (over 8s), but with 470Nm of torque it could go 50-70 pretty devastatingly quickly. The reason that the 0-60 was poor was it was very badly traction-limited - it would spin/traction control/etc off the line, as well as be rather laggardly before it built some boost. None of these things occured on 50-70. 

In terms of torque, power, weight and gearing it was very closely competitive to the E60 BMW 530d - a car with a 1.6 second faster 0-60 time because it had RWD traction. Physics says their rolling performance will be broadly comparable. 

13 hours ago, Linas.P said:

 And secondly, I do not talk about FWD being able to handle 200hp - modern FWD probably can. It does not change the fact though that FWD is inherently wrong wheels to drive any car, never-mind premium one. Wrong balance, wrong feeling and wrong message to the driver.

It's not about power - it's about Torque. A ~200bhp N/A petrol 4 pot (eg honda accord 2.4, 223Nm torque) will cope just fine while a 200bhp turbo diesel (eg my V70, 470Nm torque) can be a torque-steery mess.

 Of course, there's more to it than just the power and torque outputs - the honda had a double-wishbone front suspension design that was distinctly grippier than the cheap ford Mac-strut front end on the Volvo

I do, however, agree that RWD feels much more "premium" to drive - the very absence of Torque-steer, the much more secure traction out of junctions and onto roundabouts, etc makes for a much nicer driving experience. The reasons for FWD are to do with packaging and cost (not only of components but production). 

EVs are cheaper to produce in RWD, and suffer significantly from FWD torque effects (because you have INSTANT full torque available), so in the next few years you will see the "default" driven wheels switch back to RWD for all cars, even family hatchbacks. The first notable move on this is VW's MEB electric vehicle platform (the electric replacement for the MQB platform that currently underpins everything from a Seat Leon to the VW Atlas, Passat, Tiguan, etc), where RWD is the basic configuration (with AWD option). 

14 hours ago, Habu said:

Bottom line though is that 0-62 is kind of meaningless to me.  I’m more interested in 50-70mph.

This.

Overall though, I think that you must judge the ES on its success. It has outsold the GS every year by huge margins. It appeals to the market that Lexus appeals to - a comfortable, cosseting vehicle, rather than trying to compete with BMW (as the GS has tried to do). 

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, i-s said:

all

Volvo V70 with 470Nm is not relevant comparison for ES300h, I haven't been driving V70 and it might be true it has 0-60 in 8.2, but for 50-70 Torque does it's job - not arguing that at all. But ES300h is 8.9 0-60 in 2019 and 50-70 it will still be terrible - if anything probably even worse.

Like it is not enough, 300h in ES (A25A-FXS 156hp/?Nm) is actually de-tuned version from the older 300h's (2AR-FSE 178/221Nm). Lexus 300h hybrid does not work like Volvo T8 (and to be honest even 450h) where you have like 200Hp/150Nm petrol + 50Hp/100Nm electric for combined 250+250(or what ever the numbers), in Lexus electric motor only supports the petrol engine so you get something like "equivalent of 223Hp combined" (for ES only 200Hp), but no addition in max torque. What you get instead is extra torque in low RPM e.g. on it's own petrol would be like 70hp/25Nm @1500RPM, whereas with electric assistance you get maybe 90Hp/75Nm... but all in all you never get more then 200Hp and 221Nm... compare that to old-timer 4GR-FSE 204Hp/260Nm and in any rev range above 1500RPM you will be getting both more Torque and more Hp. So 300h has advantage literally for the first 1meter (ok maybe 2), I am not sure if it gives any advantage @50MPH at all ... and even if it does - 50Nm only makes up to 221Nm, far cry from 470Nm. So gain 300h is nothing like Volvo diesel which stinks 0-60, but flashes 50-70.. 300h stinks at 0-60 and stinks even more for 50-70.

In real life @50MPH if you floor IS250 vs. RC300h, RC300h keeps up for few meters until IS250 drops few gears, but then disappears from scene. ES300h is even heavier and even less powerful then RC300h so it will be even slower at any speed.

As for Corsa - I have checked it was apparently Corsa C 1.4L - 10.2s 0-60... BUT C'MON we are now comparing 2003 Corsa with 2019 Lexus for £40k - it just kind of highlights the point... the performance is so poor for what it is that the car becomes comparable to 20 years old trash cans, rather then contemporary premium cars... How can somebody find this acceptable?!

ES only outsold GS in US, the market there is different, ES is priced differently, US has 250, 250 AWD, 350 and 350AWD... not merely 300h. In fact 300h of last mk6 ES was niche model. And finally - why should I judge ES on it's "success" (if 700 cars/year can be called that) and not compare it to German competition, when Lexus themselves openly positioning it against BMW 5 and MB CLS?

[Zotto]

Yes, but ES 300h has mpg double compared to IS 250, and has much more nice features.

[Linas.P]

32 minutes ago, Zotto said:

Yes, but ES 300h has mpg double compared to IS 250, and has much more nice features.

That would be fair comparison if new ES would be released back in 2005, but it is 14 years newer, so that MPG and especially features can be taken for granted, any dirty diesel would put ES to shame, not only better MPG but way faster, BMW 330e - very closely comparable car does 0-60 in 6.1s and still has better MPG. Your logic is basically that in 14 years there were literally no improvement in technology... 

What Lexus should have done is either BMW plug-in hybrid way - stick much bigger Battery and stronger electric motor or Volvo way - stick turbo (or/and supercharger) to petrol engine. They have both technologies in house, no excuse no to use them, make a love child of IS300h and 200t, make it go to 0-60 in 5.6s and keep MPG figures... I am sure in Lexus there are people smarter than me, so the only reason I can think of is laziness. 

[Zotto]

Linas.P , the only solution for you is to buy a diesel BMW.

[dutchie01]

2 hours ago, Zotto said:

Linas.P , the only solution for you is to buy a diesel BMW.

The only solution for him is to build his own car!

[Linas.P]

...same old, same old - runs out of arguments and suggest to buy something else. Me buying BMW doesn't make ES300h any better, how long are you planning to ignore clear issues with the car?!

[gdh300]

Anyway, a quite positive article here on Car.

Unusual to find a journalist who is able park the understeer/oversteer part of his brain for the entire length of a review...

[dutchie01]

Same old same old for you also Linas you have been repeating your opinions again and again for years. Most are valid  and some are just well..

I have not driven the ES and will not judge the car based on articles or reviews alone. The looks are polarising you love or hate it. The interior i find beautiful, the dimensions debatable. In theory the car is a bit of an oddball with a different drivetrain, CVT and  performancefigs that are not on par with the competition, but maybe there is a world behind those figures? All i can say is that i drove an IS300H for 4 years and just liked that car, found it fast enough, torque in overtaking aplenty and top speed? dont know never drove it.

Linas, Lexus apparently has a strategy they are implementing in various markets. Where the States gets the full range the UK only gets selected models. Fine thats it. There is life after Lexus and if you cannot find your preferred spec or model spend your money somewhere else. I did i am driving a Volvo now and like it very much indeed.   

[dutchie01]

9 minutes ago, gdh300 said:

Anyway, a quite positive article here on Car.

Unusual to find a journalist who is able park the understeer/oversteer part of his brain for the entire length of a review...

if you want to see the best ( in my opinion) reviews of the car just google  MOTOMANTV  LEXUS ES ( sorry cannot copy a link on this laptop)

[Zotto]

We here have a proverb: "you can' have full beat and drunken wife". It would be nice to have a sport car but also comfy, powerful but not thirsty, well built and not expensive, silent and roaring, for most people here Lexus is the right choice, and what some define "issues"  for some others are not a problem, and sometimes are good features also, like eCVT, hate or love it. Lexus car have their precise mission, and do not need to imitate what cars with a different purpose do.

I remember when Rolls Royce did not tell the HP of their engines, "How much power the engine delivers? All power it needs" , and actually a RR is not a race car.

 

[gdh300]

12 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

if you want to see the best ( in my opinion) reviews of the car just google  MOTOMANTV  LEXUS ES ( sorry cannot copy a link on this laptop)

Funnily enough, I watched his two part review of the RC200t this weekend. Alex On Autos is pretty good too [I think I posted a link to one of his videos in the UX part of this forum].

[dutchie01]

4 minutes ago, gdh300 said:

Funnily enough, I watched his two part review of the RC200t this weekend. Alex On Autos is pretty good too [I think I posted a link to one of his videos in the UX part of this forum].

savagegeese is not bad either

[gdh300]

22 minutes ago, dutchie01 said:

savagegeese is not bad either

Indeed, I have watched all his Lexus videos, and few more beside, even things I'd never consider.

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, Zotto said:

I remember when Rolls Royce did not tell the HP of their engines, "How much power the engine delivers? All power it needs" , and actually a RR is not a race car.

Funny you mentioned that - don't you find it to be little bit ironical? Yes RR can say it, when under the bonnet there is 6.75L V8 producing nearly 400hp even back in 70s' and it truly has that much power it becomes irrelevant to quote the number. And that is exactly what I am saying, exactly how luxury cars needs to be - power needs to be "sufficient".... I don't know and don't need to know how much power car makes at every given second as long as it is "enough" to accelerate effortlessly. ES being new luxury car, I would expect that "enough" to be probably little bit faster then most of the cars on the road... importantly - effortless... almost without even trying. You don't need to use all the power all the time, but it gives the car recognition and status - when people see RR they know it is not fastest car on the planned, but at the same time not something to sniff at or try to race with. Not something one can claim about ES300h.... it is literally joke - I can almost visualise 17 years olds in rattly civics laughing their pans off "ahhhh grandpa bough new Lexus, can barely move from traffic lights before the light changes... Lexus pensioners car"!

@dutchie01 - fine with that... Opinion does not necessarily needs to be positive, neither we need to agree. I am just pointing out that instead of doing little bit of research, comparison and being little bit critical, people simply dismiss what I am saying on the basis that "I can go and buy other brand if I don't like Lexus literally making joke out of themselves". This is almost like saying - "ok you defeated me, I have nothing else to say"... but ... but.. I haven't finished yet, I still want to debate it ... 🙂  

[Zotto]

Considering price, in luxury brands Lexus is better than competitors with similar specs and options, and worse than not luxury brands, of course. Not considering price, I could decide to buy a Bentley that for sure is faster 🙂

[mrfunex]

13 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Funny you mentioned that - don't you find it to be little bit ironical? Yes RR can say it, when under the bonnet there is 6.75L V8 producing nearly 400hp even back in 70s' and it truly has that much power it becomes irrelevant to quote the number. And that is exactly what I am saying, exactly how luxury cars needs to be - power needs to be "sufficient".... 

 

I agree with most of what you are saying, but a 1970s Rolls Royce most definitely did not have nearly 400bhp. Not anywhere near it! For example, the 6.75l V8 was producing a rather heady 189bhp in the Silver Shadow from 1970 until approx 1980!

Its clear that the ES will not be a ‘driver’s’ car, but a comfortable, anonymous, reliable wafter.  Not that there’s anything bad about that, of course - it’s nice for Lexus to head off in a bit of a different direction to the Germans! 

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, mrfunex said:

I agree with most of what you are saying, but a 1970s Rolls Royce most definitely did not have nearly 400bhp. Not anywhere near it! 

As RR never quoted the figure... how do we know? 😄

I probably should have said - "capable of over 400hp", because same engines in later models are known to do over 400hp. More to the point I can find figures anywhere between 170 and 192hp before 1980s, but 540Nm of torque. Torque is not substitute for Hp, but there is massive difference between engine with 200Hp/200Nm and the one with 200Hp/540Nm... and finally I am sure in 70s' even 170Hp was the number almost irrelevant to quote.. I mean even likely the biggest engines one could get in contemporary cars like - Ford Essex V6 in it's race spec. was doing like 170Hp and standard was just over 100hp... but those were rare.. most cars had like 1.4 -1.6 engines with less then 70Hp... The only cars which could threaten RR back then were like V12 Jaguars, Ferraris and alikes.

After all I guess that is not the point, the point is - "RR could afford not to specify Hp, because it always has been well above sufficient". You can simply trust them - if they say "sufficient", then it is "sufficient"... because rest assured in your RR only the most extreme sports cars of the day can go faster then you. Truth back in 70's truth still to this day.

[Mike246]

An interesting point to note (and I must honestly confess that I have just noticed) that the UK version is hybrid only.

The US versions are both petrol and hybrid. The former is a 3.5 V6 with 302 bhp and the latter is a 2.5 in-line with 215 bhp.