When I first heard Lexus was planning to offer a small, rear-wheel-drive sedan powered by a DOHC six, I was ecstatic. Aside from not offering a manual transmission until 2002 or so, this promised to come close to being my ideal car based on the early information and photos. I like compact cars, I prefer DOHC sixes over fours for their smoothness, and rear-wheel-drive creates the potential for a more balanced, more tossable chassis. Then I drove the car, and wrote a mixed review. For 2002, a manual became available, at least in the sedan (the new wagon is automatic only). Knowing that a manual transmission has considerably altered my judgment of cars in the past, I took a manual IS 300 for a very lengthy test drive, this time without the salesman along for the ride. The following review is a revision of my review of the 2001 IS 300 based on this second test drive.

Lexus IS 300 Reliability

Want better reliability information? Want to more clearly know what difference it will make if you buy an IS 300 rather than something else? My website, truedelta.com, will be providing this information in the form of "times in the shop" and "days in the shop" stats.

From these stats you might learn that your first choice, compared to your second choice, is likely to make 2.3 extra trips to the shop in its first five years. You might decide its advantages compensate for this, or you might not. Either way, you'll be able to make a much better informed decision than you can today.

I aim to provide the highest quality information to as many people as possible. Unfortunately, these goals conflict. If I simply give the information away, few will help provide it. So I'm doing the next best thing: those who have been active participants for at least six months will receive free access to this site's reliability information; otherwise this access will cost $24.95. The average time commitment for someone reporting on two cars will be (at most) 15 minutes a year, so you'll essentially receive $100 an hour for doing your share to help everyone make better decisions.

For the details, and to sign up, visit www.truedelta.com.

Background

Before I describe my impressions of the actual car, some additional background is in order. Lexus originally made a name for itself by offering cars that were extremely smooth and extremely quiet at prices less than those charged by the Germans. This formula sold a lot of cars, but parent Toyota was not satisfied. The automotive press (whose tastes tend to differ from those of the average luxury car driver) kept carping that Lexus were boring to drive, that they isolated the driver too much. For these auto journalists, BMW made the ideal cars, with excellent performance and unequaled feedback to the driver. For whatever reason, BMWs have also sold well recently.

So Toyota decided to create some BMW killers. To go up against the BMW 5-Series, Toyota redesigned the GS to make it more of a performance car and less of an isolation chamber. (The ES and LS have continued to serve those who prefer to be isolated.) Overall, the GS has succeeded in this task. While it still possesses the fluid feeling of a Lexus, it also provides enough feedback to the driver to serve as a credible BMW 5-Series competitor.

This brings us to the IS. BMW’s core product is their smallest car, the 3-Series. For worldwide markets, Toyota created the Altezza, a car which is very similar in size to the 3-Series and has a similar chassis configuration, i.e. rear-wheel-drive and nearly equally balanced over the front and rear axles. The largest engine in the Altezza is a 2.0 liter inline six tuned to produce about 210 horsepower at a very high RPM, much like the engine in the top Celica. This wasn’t a problem for overseas markets, which like high-revving engines.

But Toyota realized that this wouldn’t work as well in the US. Americans, especially those who buy luxury sedans, tend to prefer larger engines with more low-end grunt. So for the US market, they crammed in the 3.0 liter inline six from the GS300. The power output is about the same, but it’s much more accessible.

Toyota made one more change. Since they wanted to compete with BMW, they made the car a Lexus. And priced it like one: $34,000. While an equivalent BMW will run about $42,000, this is still a serious chunk of change for a small car. It’s about the same price as the ES300, which is larger and considerably more luxurious. The idea is people who want luxury will buy the ES, while those who want a true driver’s car will buy the IS.

So, how well does this plan seem to have worked? Is the IS 300 a legitimate 3-Series competitor? Is it like buying a BMW for $6000 or so less? I personally had high hopes.

Styling

With the 17” wheels in all the photos, the IS looks pretty good. A sharp, aggressive look. But the 2001 car I drove had the all-season 16” tires on it. With these smaller, less aggressively styled wheels, the IS looks about as special as a Mazda Protégé or Honda Civic. In fact, elements in its shape remind me of these cars, with a bit of Ford Focus thrown in as well. Ultimately the body styling is too dependent on the wheels for an effect. You can put nice 17” wheels on a Protégé and get much the same effect.

This is just what many young drivers are doing, especially on the west coast: taking Japanese compacts and tricking them out ("slamming" them). In the end, the IS 300 is this concept taken to the extreme: it’s a fairly prosaic Japanese compact with a big engine, fine rear-wheel-drive chassis, and boy-racer interior. It’s not in any way a luxury car. And it’s not a BMW.

The new for 2002 wagon is actually more distinctive, and somehow looks more “right” despite starting from the original sedan design. Sadly, it’s available only with an automatic. It also costs $1,500 more than the sedan.

The real problem with either version is the interior. Lexus is trying to pitch the IS as a “sufficiently radical” car, and the most radical aspect of the car is the design of the interior. To oversimplify for the sake of clarity, the interior is awful. The design doesn’t quite work. Also, it feels like the interior of a car priced in the low 20s.

I liked how this interior looked in photos and when peering through the window at the auto show. Sitting in the car, it seems like too many things are going on at once, and even one by one they just don’t look good.

The instruments are styled like a chronograph and are placed in a tall, narrow binnacle that resembles that of a motorcycle. The tall and narrow proportions of the instrument binnacle are jarring, both because they are unusual and because the rest of the dash has a strong horizontal emphasis. It’s somewhat like seeing a person with very broad shoulders and a tall, skinny head.

While most lines in the interior are straight to a fault, the shifter bezel and outboard vents are chrome-ringed ovals. The outboard vent styling is especially strange, since the inboard vents are plain rectangles. The door panels lack any contour whatsoever, like those in an economy car. Perhaps worst of all, the dash is topped by hard black plastic with ribs in it, even in the ivory interior. This last feature is truly puzzling for me. It simply looks awful. Hopefully it doesn't look as bad in the charcoal interior. And, because the instrument binnacle is so narrow, from the driver’s seat you see a bunch of this stuff on each side of it. Overall, I get the sense that at least half a dozen people designed this interior, and they didn’t talk to each other.

The seats in both cars I drove were half leather, half “Ecsaine,” a faux suede that is supposedly similar to the seating material used in race cars. The problem with the Ecsaine/leather combination is that it does not look nearly as good as an all-leather seat would. I don’t think I would mind as much if the Ecsaine didn’t extend beyond the center panels to include part of the seat cushion bolsters. It seems that Lexus received many complaints. For 2002, all-leather upholstery is available for an additional $300 over the leather/Ecsaine.

As if the aesthetics of the interior weren’t bad enough, it also feels on the cheap side. The plastics tend to be hard to the touch. Many of the trim pieces have a simulated metal finish, but look about as much like real metal as faux wood looks like the real stuff. These criticisms apply to the chronograph instruments, the various chrome rings, the plastic around the shifter and window buttons, and especially to that swath of black plastic across the top of the dash.

The intended look and materials recall the interior of the Mercury Cougar. Since the aesthetics of the Cougar’s interior are far superior, I don’t mind these materials so much there. That, and the fact that the Cougar is a $20k car. If you want a futuristic, “sufficiently radical” interior that both looks good and uses luxury car class materials, you’re going to have to get an Audi.

Why did Lexus use such cheap materials in a $33,000 car? I can think of two reasons. First, this car is a Toyota selling at a relatively lower price outside the US. Second, they were aiming at the previous generation 3-Series, the one that was on the market at the time the IS was being developed. This 3-Series interior did not feel particularly luxurious. The plastics were hard, and the surfaces were generally flat.

Unfortunately for Lexus, BMW was a moving target. Lexus scared BMW into making the interior of the new 3-Series far more luxurious than that in the previous car. The BMW does cost about $8,000 more comparably equipped. But the BMW's interior makes it feel like an entirely different class of car. Like a luxury car. Maybe I'm off-base, but once a car's price passes $30k, I expect the car to be luxurious, or at least not feel cheap inside. Doubly so if it's a Lexus.

Simply put, the IS does not feel like a Lexus. And no amount of "sufficiently radical," anti-conformist, "we wanted it to be unlike a Lexus" spin-meister blather is going to cover up the fact that this car was branded a Lexus as an afterthought. This does allow Toyota to charge more for the car, and it does allow Lexus dealers to attract a younger set of customers, but it dilutes the Lexus brand. If this car which differs so much from the core Lexus models really is a Lexus, then what is Lexus? By straying from its original focus and trying to be many different things, Lexus risks confusing buyers. If buyers do actually become confused, then the brand will lose a great deal of its value.

Accommodations

The IS 300 recalls the previous 3 in one other way as well: the rear seat is not particularly spacious on comfortable. At 5ֽ” I just manage to fit back there, but the seat cushion is quite low. It provides no thigh support, so my knees flop to the sides. The rear seat cushion in the new 3 is substantially higher, providing decent if not great thigh support, better contoured, and just plain roomier. It’s good enough that I wonder if the 5 makes much sense.

I have one other major issue with the rear seat in the IS: it does not fold down. Instead, there is a small pass-through through the center armrest. I cannot begin to count the number of times I’ve folded down the rear seats in the two sedans I own to carry items that would not fit in the trunk alone, including a couple of 7’ bookcases, a couple of tall file cabinets, and the (dissembled) crib for my daughter. I cannot imagine getting by without this feature. This is an option with the BMW, and I highly recommend getting it. With the Lexus, unless you’re carrying skis or just a couple of 2x4’s, you’re paying and waiting to have the items delivered. Unless you get the wagon. Then, although cargo volume is less than just about any competitor, at least you can fold the seats down.

The front seats could also be better. The Ecsaine does do a better job holding you in place than leather would in hard turns. However, even with the Ecsaine I found the bolsters inadequate. In the manual car I relied on a firm grip on the shifter to keep myself from sliding out of the seat.

One positive note: The driving position is very good. Unlike in the German competition, the dash is low, affording excellent visibility. This advantage, one I personally weight highly, leaves me really wishing the rest of the interior were competitive. In the wagon, thick D-pillars compromise rearward visibility. The C-pillars in the sedan are hardly thin, but do not pose a similar problem.

On the Road

The 3.0 liter engine is fairly powerful throughout most of the rev range with either transmission. It responds quickly to your foot. At the same time, it feels like it gives up much more than ten horsepower to the 3.0 liter six in the BMW. The problem may be that it is too smooth and lacks torque below 3000 RPM. The BMW six feels much torquier at low RPM, and possesses a much rawer voice, one that lends a great deal of excitement to the experience of driving what would otherwise be an overly refined car. Lacking these attributes, the Lexus six conveys little sensation of speed or power as it drives toward the redline, even with the manual. The car is sufficiently quick, but it could be more fun.

The shifter is a bit tall, making throws a bit long, but otherwise shifting gears is a rewarding experience. Effort is fairly light, but not so light as to resemble a video game, and shift quality is characterized by a minor amount of notchiness, which I personally prefer to the vague feel of many manual transmissions.

Especially with the stiffer suspension that comes with the manual, the IS’s handling is sharp. The highly responsive feel of the chassis is enhanced by quick steering and a steering wheel that is quite small in diameter, somewhat like you’ll find in a race car. This risks making the car feel darty, but I felt the car both tracked well and responded to the exact degree that I intended. I would appreciate less understeer, and more chassis responsiveness to throttle inputs. You cannot steer the car with the throttle to the degree you can the BMW.

The wider, “summer” 17” tires stick much better in hard turns than the narrower, all-season 16-inchers on the first car I drove. Sadly, to get all-season tires you must go with the later. Lexus should offer the option of all-season tires on the larger wheels. The manual car also had a limited-slip differential, which helps put the power to the pavement coming out of turns.

Ride quality is acceptable even with the stiffer suspension that attends the manual transmission. Bumps in the road are heard more than they are felt.

Last Words

If the IS 300 were priced in the low-to-mid-20s, I’d be tempted to give it five stars despite its shortcomings, because it does perform very well. But each $5k above that takes it down one star, ending up at three. At least you save $1,400 by going with the manual.

When I reviewed the 2001 I still recommended the car because there are so few cars of this type. Namely, the BMW and this car. If you want a rear-wheel-drive compact, the BMW 325i is not powerful enough for you, and you must stretch to even spend $34,000, then the IS was your only choice. It also helped if the interior somehow appealed to you.

This situation is changing. A new alternative is the considerably larger but only slightly pricier Cadillac CTS. Like the IS, the CTS possesses intentionally controversial styling, but I feel it thwarts luxury car convention more successfully. The main disadvantage relative to the IS is a more buried-in-the-car driving position.

Infiniti is about to offer another alternative. Priced a few thousand less than the IS, yet roomier and more powerful, on paper the G35 looks very promising. Especially when you factor in its more conventional styling—though it may go to far in this regard. Sadly, a manual transmission will not initially be offered. I hope to test drive a G35 soon after they go on sale.

Given these new alternatives, I cannot recommend the IS 300 at its current price. As a used car priced in the low 20s, though, it might make a lot of sense.

What I’d really prefer is for someone to offer a DOHC six cylinder, sharp handling, rear-wheel-drive compact in the low-to-mid 20s. While the Lexus may look like a bargain compared to the BMW, IMHO both of the current entries are overpriced. More competition could help this. I don’t even think the car has to be luxurious as long as it’s priced lower. This isn’t just your all-too-common “the same but cheaper” rant, because this is feasible. The now discontinued Ford Contour with a fine DOHC six sold for well under $20k. Do the same basic car, just on a balanced rear-wheel-drive chassis, and you’re there. From another angle, if you took a bit of luxury content out of the Lincoln LS and shrunk it down one size/price class, you’d also be there. If a car company could do this, they wouldn’t simply have my recommendation. They’d have my money.

To learn more about my reliability research and sign up to participate in it, or to perform thorough, up-to-date new car price comparisons, visit www.truedelta.com. A link to this website and alphabetized links to my other vehicle reviews can be found on my profile page.
Amount Paid (US$): 32000
Model Year: 2002