Paris: Lexus IS250C

[johan tb]

Just a few thoughts: How stable is the car with the roof down and is there any room in the back (backseats) and last but not least the "normal" IS hasn't got the biggest boot in the world but if the roof is down how much luggage space is there left??

 

[Paul_The_Aussie]

How would I build a sleek convertible and retain luggage space, etc?
No idea, that is why there are engineers for that. But if I was to, I'd get a better donor car.

 

[Shawn]

Just a few thoughts: How stable is the car with the roof down and is there any room in the back (backseats) and last but not least the "normal" IS hasn't got the biggest boot in the world but if the roof is down how much luggage space is there left??

The boot isn't so bad, the opening is the worst part! It's voluminous enough, just can't shove anything in there. Same with the rear door, can't fit jack through it.

But I guess those are the sacrifices you have to make to get such a curvy, sexy shape.

As for the rear seats, I'm pretty sure they will be next to useless. Not only is it the same story with the 3er, CLK and other competing cars, but the back seats on the sedan IS are tight to begin with.

 

[edkwon]

Just a few thoughts: How stable is the car with the roof down and is there any room in the back (backseats) and last but not least the "normal" IS hasn't got the biggest boot in the world but if the roof is down how much luggage space is there left??

The boot shape and space actually looks bigger on the convertible based on the rear shape and where the rear seats are positions, presumably to make more room for the folding top, it will be interesting to see how much rear boot space there is when the top is down, with the top up, it appears to be bigger than the sedan.

 

[johan tb]

The boot isn't so bad, the opening is the worst part! It's voluminous enough, just can't shove anything in there. Same with the rear door, can't fit jack through it.

But I guess those are the sacrifices you have to make to get such a curvy, sexy shape.

As for the rear seats, I'm pretty sure they will be next to useless. Not only is it the same story with the 3er, CLK and other competing cars, but the back seats on the sedan IS are tight to begin with.

the lugage capacity of the sedan is a littlebit poor if you compare it with the new BMW 3 series and the Mercedes C and the Audi A4 and I know what I'm talking about I've got one too.

 

[Shawn]

I know the boot space isn't spectacular, but the boot opening is even smaller. You could fit a lot bigger stuff in there if it was a bit bigger.

 

[johan tb]

I know the boot space isn't spectacular, but the boot opening is even smaller. You could fit a lot bigger stuff in there if it was a bit bigger.

indeed, but I expect that the luggage space of the cabrio is hopeless with the top down.

 

[Shawn]

indeed, but I expect that the luggage space of the cabrio is hopeless with the top down.

Yeah, I think that's a safe bet... shouldn't even call it luggage space.

But is there any hardtop convertible out there with anywhere near adequate space in the boot with the top down? I know some cars like the Merc SL let you tilt up the collapsed roof to shove stuff under it, but that doesn't help at all.

I think it's pretty much given that a C+C will have very little space in the back with the roof down.

 

[MadCow809]

Here's some photos with the top down, and it looks much better

oh noes... you've just made the car look worse

 

[luvcars]

I don't think its too bad to be honest...

I really do like it

 

[edkwon]

oh noes... you've just made the car look worse

you really think it looks worse with the top down, now that the awkward roofline leading to the trunk is gone, it doesn't look quite as misdesigned, now it just looks... ordinary like a Solara convertible.

 

[Arctor]

So Lexus owners have to think like you...wow what a bunch of goddamn self centered arrogance. I can tell by your car selection you like serious drivers cars, and that's fine, so do i, but seriously there are PLENTY of manufacturers that make the kind of cars we want, why does every single brand/make have to make serious drivers cars when the ppl who buy lexuses and whatnot clearly buy what they want, and maybe they DONT want performance drivers. They want comfortable places to sit while driving back n forth from work.

News flash: ppl who buy lexuses have different wants and priorities than you, and guess what, they clearly like what lexus cars have to offer them and fits in their lifestyle. My parents have owned 2 lexuses, my friends own and drive many lexuses. ive driven them and they're great cars.

I love how ppl on these forums can be so close-minded and inflexible that every car on the market has to be for focused 'drivers' like them. They need to get over their sense of 'me me me' self-importance.

1. My opinion is just that. It is also more important to me than someone else's opinion on a car. I realize that may sound self centered but it's entirely reasonable. My judgements on a car are based on how I feel about it, not based on how I think other people would feel about it. Also a car does not have to be a focused driver's car for me to like it, but to remove a driver completely the way they do is just poor. Not to mention the utter lack of any interesting vehicle by Toyota or Lexus.

2. It is neither difficult nor more expensive to make a car that is more driver-centric. I understand people want comfort but the two are not mutually exclusive. Jag has been great at doing this, in spite of themselves. It makes no sense to me why any manufacturer would go out of their way to make cars into boring appliances rather than inject the slightest amount of character or fun into them.

 

[Shawn]

1. My opinion is just that. It is also more important to me than someone else's opinion on a car. I realize that may sound self centered but it's entirely reasonable. My judgements on a car are based on how I feel about it, not based on how I think other people would feel about it. Also a car does not have to be a focused driver's car for me to like it, but to remove a driver completely the way they do is just poor. Not to mention the utter lack of any interesting vehicle by Toyota or Lexus.

2. It is neither difficult nor more expensive to make a car that is more driver-centric. I understand people want comfort but the two are not mutually exclusive. Jag has been great at doing this, in spite of themselves. It makes no sense to me why any manufacturer would go out of their way to make cars into boring appliances rather than inject the slightest amount of character or fun into them.

What discredits your whole argument for me is that you want to label one of the biggest automakers in the world is boring. So none of their cars are fun or exciting at all? Okay, most of them aren't as they shouldn't be... 99 percent of Toyota buyers/owners actually want a sedated, easy-going ride.

Lexus does not go out of their way to make their cars boring, this is just BS. Do you think Buick goes out of their way to make their cars boring? No, they are mostly catering to a different market than the one we occupy.

As for the IS, it is just not boring in any way. You are just advancing retarded stereotypes. How do you find the IS boring? In terms of looks or how it drives? I can accept if you think it looks boring, which I don't agree with... understated doesn't equal boring. But I will not accept that it's a boring car to drive. I've driven plenty of 'sports cars' that don't give anywhere near the feedback the IS does.

Either you've not actually driven the IS, or you're fooling yourself for some odd reason. If the IS falls short in the driving department, it's by a tiny smidgen. It's got a tight body, extremely direct and sensitive steering and an awesome driving position.

You say Toyota/Lexus "remove the driver completely"... why are you so hyperbolic? Sounds like you're exaggerating to great ends just to get your point across.

And you're stupid for discrediting Toyota for making boring cars and not cars that you like. Why are they a bad company, for catering to a different segment of the market than the one you're interested in? Maybe that nulls Toyota in your book, but it doesn't mean they suck as a car company.

Maybe Ferrari sucks too because they make such awesome cars that you can't afford - what are they thinking?!?!

 

[johan tb]

Ok he says Toyota is boring So the Toyota Supra, Celica, Mr2, etc are also boring?? God what a humbug.:?

And Lexus has no character test drive a ISF and you'll be surprised

 

[Wizegui]

1. My opinion is just that. It is also more important to me than someone else's opinion on a car. I realize that may sound self centered but it's entirely reasonable. My judgements on a car are based on how I feel about it, not based on how I think other people would feel about it. Also a car does not have to be a focused driver's car for me to like it, but to remove a driver completely the way they do is just poor. Not to mention the utter lack of any interesting vehicle by Toyota or Lexus.

2. It is neither difficult nor more expensive to make a car that is more driver-centric. I understand people want comfort but the two are not mutually exclusive. Jag has been great at doing this, in spite of themselves. It makes no sense to me why any manufacturer would go out of their way to make cars into boring appliances rather than inject the slightest amount of character or fun into them.

The question is, how many Toyotas or Lexus' have you driven in the past and which ones? Come on, Toyota has made some cool cars in the past. Think the Supras, MR2s, Celicas, the Hilux, and Land Cruisers. Besides, how many Lexus owners do you know that are interested in a "driver centric" car? Hell, most of the BMW 3 series owners I know think that their cars have V6 engines. No doubt that they'll be looking for character in a car and not badge prestige...

 

[un-dee]

Funny, I normally hate all Lexi but I rather like this one.

After looking at it again I have to reconsider my vote - its absolutely awful. I don't know what I was drinking the other day.

 

[Arctor]

Ok he says Toyota is boring So the Toyota Supra, Celica, Mr2, etc are also boring?? God what a humbug.:?

And Lexus has no character test drive a ISF and you'll be surprised

I was talking about now. I owned an AW11 MR2 and it is still one of my all time favorite cars. I love older toyotas like the first generation Celica liftbacks and Supra MkIV, as well as the old pickups and 4Runner. They went away from those kind of cars now and make bland cars with every bit of personality engineered out.

The ISF is a lame attempt at an M3 rival, it looks great on paper but it's just not very engaging at all.

The question is, how many Toyotas or Lexus' have you driven in the past and which ones? Come on, Toyota has made some cool cars in the past. Think the Supras, MR2s, Celicas, the Hilux, and Land Cruisers. Besides, how many Lexus owners do you know that are interested in a "driver centric" car? Hell, most of the BMW 3 series owners I know think that their cars have V6 engines. No doubt that they'll be looking for character in a car and not badge prestige...

I've driven every current passenger car model and a few of the SUV's, and a ton of the older ones, every generation of Celcia and MR2, MkII, MkIII and MkIV Supras, just about every Toyota pickup model, etc.

I want to see Toyota to maky ANY sort of a fun car. I don't care about the people who are buying them, because the average owner age has steadily risen about 15 years over the past 5 or 6 and to me that's not acceptable. They've completely gone away from making fun everyday cars with great build quality and relaibility to boring everyday cars with decent reliabliity and merely average build quality (with the exception of Lexus).

 

[MattD1zzl3]

Ok he says Toyota is boring So the Toyota Supra

Toyota doesnt make that car anymore.

Mr2

Toyota doesnt make that car anymore.

Celica

The celica is boring, and has been ever since its split with the supra.