That, but also the things he did with the engine in one of them. It took him forever to blow it up

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

Not true. It became factory standard in 2020 for MY2021. That's when the IS got the heavy refresh. Regardless, it wasn't a couple years ago, it was five and a half years ago. Yes, they were late adopters, but they've had it for quite a while now.

[-]

Drenlin@reddit

I mean I have a fair bit of that? But mostly it comes from having been curious about that specific topic (what quantifies a vehicle's platform) and learning about it. TL:DR is that it's a pretty basic definition in most cases that usually involves only the geometry of the most fundamental structural components.

[-]

AllTearGasNoBreaks@reddit

Looks like they have something similar or maybe even the same thing you're referring to

I'm ok with Toyotas lack of technology for a lot of things.

In fact I wish my adaptive cruise just wasn't there, and I hate their lane departure system just as much as the adaptive cruise.

[-]

trail-g62Bim@reddit

Blows my mind when people don't like adaptive cruise. I saw in a review that Toyota was now including three levels of cruise -- an aggressive adaptive, less aggressive adaptive and regular non-adaptive cruise. That seems the way to go.

[-]

by_a_pyre_light@reddit

was now including three levels of cruise -- an aggressive adaptive, less aggressive adaptive and regular non-adaptive cruise. That seems the way to go.

Is that different from the normal three levels of adaptive cruise follow distance? Does it adjust the braking and acceleration speed?

I had adaptive cruise on my 2008 XKR and it was competent but always jerky. It would floor it to close a gap, then hard brake to maintain the distance, and it was constantly making small adjustments of the gas and pedal. It never just held a position with a comfortable bubble the way a human would, so it wasn't pleasant to use. I would still use it sometimes but it wasn't that good in traffic, which is the whole point.

[-]

MountainHarmonies@reddit

For me it depends on the car. Our CX39's adaptive cruise is pure ass. It slams in the brakes, then floors it to get back up to speed. It gets confused when the car in front goes into a curve and slams on the cmgas right as I'm entering the same curve

However the adaptive cruise on our 25 Taos is incredible. It gently brakes and accelerates and is never confused by curves.

[-]

Tapprunner@reddit

Yeah, the adaptive on an A5 is pretty good. My Sportage is good. I love using it.

Just give me a fan speed dial

Yeah, Mazda's adaptive cruise is pretty out of date. My 2023 CX-50 has that same aggressive brake and throttle response, although I fortunately haven't noticed that issue with curves. Overall, it feels very similar to the Eyesight system in my parents' 2015 Subaru Forester.

Obligatory "yeah I don't much like it". It was cool the first time I tried it on an MG4 test drive. But actually using it in the real world and yeah not a fan.

IMO the key question is "if the car in front of you is slower, do you want to pull out and pass, or remain behind"? If you like doing the former, ACC tends to be a hindrance. If you don't, it's magic.

Or if you don't use CC you will obviously not like ACC in most cases.

[-]

Ecsta@reddit

It's just Toyota's implementation of these systems sucks, so people think all manufacturers are like that.

VW/Audi/BMW/etc have amazing adaptive cruise.

[-]

ShadowBannedXexy@reddit

Maybe their older ones suck but it's great in the tss 3

[-]

Ecsta@reddit

Their previous iterations were laughably bad. The rest of the world has had good adaptive cruise control and lane centering since like 2014-2015, so its nice that in 2026 Toyota was finally able to catch up.

I want to go at a specific speed cruising the right or middle lane. If I *can't* go that specific speed because someone is in front of me, I'll pass on the left.

Problem with adaptative cruise control is that I end up silently slowing down.

[-]

Kamukix@reddit

Do you not noticed yourself 'silently' getting closer to the car in front of you haha? I always found that a little bit of a weird criticism, but maybe you could explain it better so I understand.

[-]

gimpwiz@reddit

I have the same annoyance, where sometimes the slowing down is too gradual to notice at first. Keep normal following distance to car going to same speed for a while, the. they coast down a little, I don't notice and find that I am going slower than I want.

[-]

Kamukix@reddit

Hahahaha I've had that happen once or twice, but I typically set my speed based on the other cars around me, or I'm very vigilant about going around them, so it's extremely rare to me for that to happen.

[-]

RAMBIGHORNY@reddit

The people that hate it are the ones who enjoy weaving in and out of traffic

[-]

Vikare_@reddit

Mazda Cx5 adaptive cruise uses the rear brakes too much. Instead of coasting it will use the brakes. Instead of engine braking sometimes it uses rear brakes. Just really stupid.

I've heard of some people having the rear brakes needing new pads at 25-30k which is ridiculous.

It sounds like Toyota has the right idea there, the tech isn't quite there for Mazda just yet.

Instead I can just use regular cruise control and pay attention. I don't want to put extra wear on something I don't need to. Accelerating the need for new brakes down the line (not just pads).

[-]

SRTie4k@reddit

The rear brake bias is not because of adaptive cruise, it's just the way Mazda tuned the brakes on their cars. It's done that way to get the car to rotate through corners and to minimize dive.

I never use the adaptive cruise in our 2021 CX-9 and the rear brakes were cooked at 20k miles.

[-]

Vikare_@reddit

I understand the cornering does contribute.

That's nuts with your cx9. Do you drive it hard sometimes or is that just normal everyday use?

[-]

gimpwiz@reddit

I hate adaptive cruise. Put me in the list of mind blowers.

[-]

Taymerica1389@reddit

Lane departure warning in my father’s Toyota is terrible, it’s a loud beep that is just annoying when you are just touching the middle line in a corner.

https://youtube.com/shorts/a3ONwLEg65Q?si=nEwgls1V325VnOSm

I have zero interest in a vehicle driving itself. It’s not that I don’t trust it, I’ve seen the reviews and the technology is admirable. But I enjoy driving, even commuting and I’d rather save the money and just continue being an old fart holding the wheel and pressing the pedals.

[-]

Due-Combination7924@reddit

You do drive some fun cars there i cant blame you.

I thought the same way until i got my tesla. You dont realise how much of a strain navigating rush hour traffic is until you dont have to worry about it anymore. Its second nature to just deal with it but once it becomes optional you literally gain an hour or two every single day back (depending on your commute).

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

You dont realise how much of a strain navigating rush hour traffic is until you dont have to worry about it anymore. Its second nature to just deal with it but once it becomes optional you literally gain an hour or two every single day back (depending on your commute).

You're still supposed to be paying attention to the road you dingus

[-]

Due-Combination7924@reddit

Of course you do pay attention to what its doing but you are relieved of making every braking , accelleration, merging and all the micro adjustments that go along with them. Im telling you from years of experience with it that it makes life so much better.

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

Of course you do pay attention to what its doing

YeahnI really don't believe that, and even if you are you're driving reactively instead of proactively. I'll stay as far away from that as I can, thanks

[-]

Due-Combination7924@reddit

The car drives proactively and correctly 99%+ of the time. Do you know that you can borrow a tesla for free from your local tesla dealer to try for yourself by yourself for several hours. Otherside you are just talking with such confidence without knowledge or experience- typical redditor behavior.

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

The car drives proactively and correctly 99%+ of the time

It doesn't matter what you think the car is doing, the driver is what's actually in charge. It's great to hear that someone I'm sharing the road with is going to be entirely unprepared to handle any unexpected situation on the road because you're just letting the car drive

Do you know that you can borrow a tesla for free from your local tesla dealer to try for yourself by yourself for several hours. Otherside you are just talking with such confidence without knowledge or experience- typical redditor behavior.

I'm the dude who spent a week driving one. Ignoring my lack of desire to monetarily support Elon Musk the car entirely failed to live up to its price tag on its own merits

[-]

Due-Combination7924@reddit

The unprepared part is where you are massively incorrect. You are literally watching the car the whole time the car makes you keep your eyes on the road or it wont self drive. I would say I am more alert and prepared for a bad situation because I am not so drained from the monotony of handling every micro-decision that extented time in heavy traffic demands. You experienced one older model car and it sounds like you did not utilize the FSD feature.

I will give you that the $55k for a new 2022 model 3 with those issues is overpriced sure. That car is literally $18k now.

I am telling you for certain that at current used prices and also the improvements made to the newer model years (which cost $35-40k now new) all of your complaints are now invalid.

I payed $40k for my 2019 model s performance in 2024. 700hp. 0-60 in 2.5 seconds. air suspension. Not a single issue with it and no maintenance or repairs except for tires. It drives its self 90% of the time while i relax, reflect and plan for the next part of my day

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

You are literally watching the car the whole time the car makes you keep your eyes on the road or it wont self drive. I would say I am more alert and prepared for a bad situation because I am not so drained from the monotony of handling every micro-decision that extented time in heavy traffic demands.

Whatever you say dude. Your eyeballs facing the road does not imply active engagement with what's going on in the road

I will give you that the $55k for a new 2022 model 3 with those issues is overpriced sure. That car is literally $18k now.

Please find me a non-salvage title 2022 dual motor Model 3 for $18k

I am telling you for certain that at current used prices and also the improvements made to the newer model years (which cost $35-40k now new) all of your complaints are now invalid.

Whatever you say dude. I do love the discussion, though. "Go drive the car, it's so good". Then when you drive it and it's garbage "your complaints are invalid"

It drives its self 90% of the time while i relax, reflect and plan for the next part of my day

You can still choose the regular cruise control by holding the cruise on button for a second.

Chief_34@reddit

Speaking of lane departure: I rented an SUV but was given a two door mustang. Why did I feel like the whole drive that Mustang’s lane departure system was actively trying to pull me out of my lane whenever I got close

[-]

USS-Hellcat@reddit

Toyota built an automotive empire on aging platforms. Its customers are ok with dated technology so long as they get the promise of reliability.

It's always been funny seeing bias when it comes to this stuff, too. For instance Toyota was universally loved for it. When people would talk about the previous gen Charger or Challenger it was "hurr durr old Mercedes platform." By the end of their lifecycle both the Charger and Challenger had become extremely reliable cars because the platform was old and had been refined. So much so they skyrocketed Dodge up the reliability rankings for a few years.

Now all their new stuff sucks.

[-]

Several-Eggplant4460@reddit

Toyota is universally loved for it because they deliberately go with old platforms in a bid to maintain very high reliability.

Dodge didn't set out to make the most reliable car by using an old platform, it was done because it was cheap.

There's a difference.

[-]

USS-Hellcat@reddit

This comment illustrates my exact point. They did the same thing but because one did it a little differently we treat them different?

[-]

soggybiscuit93@reddit

No, Toyota gets a pass because the end result is the most reliable car company.

Dodge has the downsides of an aging platform. But without the upsides like Toyota's reliability.

[-]

Ok how bout we just stop being rude to each other and just appreciate each other’s vehicles then? Why are we provoking challenger owners lmao

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

Journalists (and some car enthusiasts) hear old platform and treat it as if theyre buying a used car for the price of a new one. 90% of them cant say why exactly its bad other than the fact that it hasnt been completley redesigned.

Awesome username btw, also im not biased because my daily is based on a 26 year old platform

[-]

Nope, you just brought a very interesting idea into my head though, limited slip diffs are pretty rare for the W211s, but a quick search just confirmed that an LX diff drops in with minimal work and most manual Challengers came with LSD, meaning theres an easy/cheap LSD option for E55 AMGs.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

Nope so there is more difference?

To remind you again we're talking about platforms. What parts are selected for the platform doesn't change the platform itself. A base model Challenger and Demon 170 Challenger are the same platform they just use different parts.

So when you say the "rear suspension design still doesn't handle hard launches with traction well" you're attributing that to the Demon 170 as well. Which clearly isn't true in that model. And if you're also saying that the W211 is the same, then that attribute would be true for the E55 AMG as well.

What you've largely done is attribute differences in parts choices to the platform. Which of course is a falsehood.

Just as false as your argument that one platform is old because it's based on another. The W211 is based on the W210, etc.. follow that back and they'll all based on the Benz Motorwagen in 1886.

Sure change diffs between brands, I did something similar with my Datsun, I put a Subaru diff in it. But again Challengers aren't LX platform, in the LX/LD/LA family diff housing mounting changes with manufacture and ring diameter. Even in the LX/LD/LA family, we often need to change the rear subframe to change diffs. The early actual LX stuff is likely the same as W211. IIRC much of it was actual Mercedes parts. But the later stuff is different and most likely nothing from manual Challenger is the same.

[-]

THEREALCABEZAGRANDE@reddit

To my mind the most important factor defining a "platform" is the suspension and drivetrain. For the early LX these were lifted directly from the W211/W220. They were straight up MB labeled parts initially. The transmissions were initially all MB transmissions, they hadn't even gone to the effort of relicensing and making their own yet. So amongst the suspension and drivetrain, only the engines were substantively different. Beyond that the chassis is just a girder connecting these working parts, and the only substantive difference to be found in a chassis is torsional rigidity. They are very similar between the W211 and LX, which makes sense considering the nearly identical dimensions and literally identical mount points for the major suspension components. So while they're cosmetically different and slightly different in chassis design due to the use of cheaper materials in the LX, they are substantively and functionally nearly identical.

I was going to make the case to trace it all the way to the W210, but the W211 was enough different in fundamental design that I didnt. But with the LX it is LITERALLY the same parts. If you put a M113 in an LX Charger or a Hemi in a non-Airmatic W211 I think there'd be very little functional difference.

And the 226mm Chrysler diff mounting looks basically identical to the 215mm MB diff. And the stub ear to ear width looks to be similar too. It would be interesting to see how hard it would be. On the other hand it looks like Wavetrac finally has a reasonably priced LSD for the 215. But the Chrysler diff is CHEAP.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

To my mind the most important factor defining a "platform"

So now you're setting your own definition of platform.

The transmissions were initially all MB transmissions

That is what reviewers are talking about.

You would need way more then just a new transmission

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

The IS350 used to pretty easily outcompete cars like the 335i, but now, the 330i is quicker, and more efficient, and is pretty reliable.

Give me a naturally aspirated 3.5L V6 any day of the week over a turbo 2.0L I4. Sure, the 330i is quicker and more efficient, but in my use case, that doesn't really mean much to me. There's a lot more to a car than numbers on a spec sheet. I hate this mentality of "if the car isn't best in class, it's not good".

[-]

LongjumpingLock5875@reddit

And...

Not everyone cares about reliability enough to give into the rest of the mediocrity of the IS platform.

I would happily take a faster, more efficient, sportier handling car that is a true luxury car compared to a car that might last 300k miles.

If all you care about is reliability, just buy a Camry?

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

You say it's mediocre, but have you ever owned one or driven one at length?

There's always going to be something that's faster, more efficient, and sportier. That doesn't automatically mean that if something isn't class leading in all areas, that it isn't still very good or competitive. We're not dealing with absolutes here.

Oh, so I don't own a true luxury car, but a 3-series is a true luxury car. Do I have that right?

When did I ever say all I care about is reliability? And a Camry is a very different car from what I have.

[-]

lnlds@reddit

Hows the transmission and is automatic a dealbreaker in a 1-car solution situation? Does the engine sounds good enough compared to a K-series?

The 18+ IS350 checks a lot of boxes NA/RWD/Doublewishbones/LSD (except manual and fuel economy). I'm cross-comparing it mostly with a 20+ giulia which is a lot cheaper with less weight on the nose and better transmission.

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

I have nothing to compare it to except my Si, but that’s a manual. It’s pretty good in my opinion, and I like the option of using the paddle shifters when showing down, so I don’t have to use the brakes as much. I’ve only owned the car for just over 2 weeks now, so I’m still getting used to everything.

Only you can answer whether or not an automatic is a dealbreaker in a one car solution. For me, it’s totally fine. I’ve been driving manual most of my life, and for the past 25 years. But making the switch to automatic was no problem. I love my IS. It’s just such a nicer place to be than my Si. My more grown up, much quieter, much more powerful, more luxurious, etc.

The 2GR V6 in the IS350 sounds fantastic honestly. Very different from the K20 obviously. The K20 sounds great in VTEC, but the 2GR sounds fantastic in its own right. I really had no idea or expectations on what it was going to sound like. And yes, I have the ASC (fake engine noise) turned off.

Yeah the Giulia is supposedly the best chassis of the bunch, but I wouldn’t touch one. To each their own though. The 2021-2025 IS350 checked all the boxes for me, but only in fully-loaded guise. In addition to the reasons you listed for the IS, I love the idea of a luxury sport sedan. Going from a 2009 Civic to 2022 IS350 is night and day.

If you haven’t seen it yet, here’s a post I made after I bought my car.

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

When I hear "naturally aspirated" I think "no torque". Maybe a 3.5L would be enough to overcome it but personally I'm leaning towards the turbo engine all day

[-]

DodgerBlueRobert1@reddit

My car has plenty of torque, and it delivers it very smoothly.

But if you don't give a shit about speed, you then ignore that part of any review.. If it wasn't included at all in something that was pitched as a sports sedan *you* might be happier for it, but the rest of the space would be annoyed as hell..

I don't tow anything ever, but you don't see me throwing bricks at people when they mention towing capacity of anything in written or video media..

[-]

747WakeTurbulance@reddit

It's hard to "ignore" that part of the review when every damn reviewer considers that the top feature when writing comparisons. It may beat out its competitors in virtually every other category, and these idiots then rank it lower in comparisons because it's half a second slower to 60 mph.

It may be more comfortable, less expensive, more economical, far more attractive, vastly more reliable, cheaper to insure, and have a much stronger resale value, but they then shit all over it because it can't run the quarter mile in 12 seconds. Who gives a fuck? Far less than 1% of sports sedans sold will ever drive on a track.

I own a Corvette and a new BMW M50, both of which are much faster than my IS 350. Want to guess which one I'm taking when I have to drive 6 hours to see family?

[-]

IguassuIronman@reddit

Guess which car is going to still be on the road in 10 years or 150,000 miles, the 330i or the IS 350.

Both if I'm a betting man

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

Toyota has just stopped caring about the IS as a sports sedan, even the last IS500 wasnt considered a full F Car because that wasnt the focus, they recently facelifted the IS but now its more of a competitor to a regular 3 Series / C Class, A rwd luxury sedan with mildly sporty handling for buyers who dont want an SUV.

they simply can’t afford to invest in whole new everything

True. But the flip side of that for the customer is Nissans competitors do invest in whole new everything- and those cars are thus better than the Z for the money.

[-]

stakoverflo@reddit

Right, but to my point is that despite Nissan cutting corners it's barely slower.

0.2s for 0-60 isn't going to be noticeable to your butt dyno, nor will those carried over flaws matter if you're driving spiritedly but still reasonably on public streets.

[-]

TaskForceCausality@reddit

But everyone only focuses on lap times

Your point reinforces why the age of a platform matters.

Case in point, I visited a Nissan dealer in my G37 to order a part. While waiting I noticed a black Z on their showroom, stickered for $65k.

Given resale on a good G37s about $10-18k , is a brand new Z thats built on fundamentally the same platform $47k better? No. In fact, the G37s naturally aspirated 7k redline engine is more engaging than the VR30 turbo of the new car.

[-]

by_a_pyre_light@reddit

I do agree, the upper end price range of the Z's is detached from reality. The mid-$40s that most of them sit at right now is actually very competitive and getting lightly used ones in the $30s is a steal.

[-]

stakoverflo@reddit

Surely subjective though. I'm inclined to agree, but there are other things buyers consider such as warranty, more modern interior, and looks.

People constantly say this about the Nissan Z,

the Nissan Z is slower than cars with way less power because of aero and body dynamics and it can't put its weight down

it's a valid criticism.

[-]

stakoverflo@reddit

Sure, and for the miniscule percent of customers who will actually track their car and push its limits, go ahead and act on that. But again if you just like to do some spirited driving on the weekends or whatever, it really doesn't matter until you get well into "Driving like an actual fucking asshole" territory.

[-]

UmaThurmish@reddit

i dont totally disagree its still a good car

i do disagree with some of the things they are doing though, they are trying to upsell people so hard on the performance trim

[-]

bumpr2bumpr@reddit

You make a great point here. People act like the Supra absolutely destroys the Z. Yes it beats the Z in almost every measure, but, by miniscule amounts in all of those measures. It's like a half a second faster in the quarter mile etc. etc.

[-]

by_a_pyre_light@reddit

I havent heard anyone say: "the car handles well and its reasonably priced, but I dont think I will buy it because its built on an aging platform"

Uh, that's been the criticism against the Nissan Z.

Changed =/= improved.

[-]

mr802rex@reddit

Not always. Perfect example is electronic controls vs physical controls. It has changed, but it is vastly worse. Same with things like DoD and other cylinder deactivation engines. Its changed, but for the worse. Now you cant expect 200k out of the same basic engines that used to hit 300k without breaking a sweat.

[-]

_Thorshammer_@reddit

Then say that.

[-]

Uptons_BJs@reddit

Can platforms even "improve"?

Well, it depends on the definition of "platform" - Some automakers define platform as a set of shared dimensions and fixed hardpoints, in which case is there really better? These automakers (most notable GM, Chrysler), would refer to the chassis, floor pan, and core electrical components as an "architecture", which some other automakers (like VW) refers to as a "platform".

Here's how GM defines it: Feature Spotlight: So, What Is A Platform? - GM Authority

Simply put, a platform is a set of fix hard points to which a vehicle is assembled. It’s a series of concrete dimensions in space.

Whereas here's how Magna defines it (FWIW - this is the most expansive definition): What is an Automotive Platform - A Crash Course

At its most basic level, an automotive platform can be described as “the sum of all non-styling specific parts – functions, components, systems, and sub-assemblies – of a vehicle.” This means that an automotive platform is, in essence, the structural underpinnings of a vehicle. In other words, the platform is a consolidated group of components and systems shared by a range of different models. The main components are the powertrain, the chassis, the underbody, the seat structure, the thermal system, and the high-voltage and low-voltage architecture.

Which is why I really dislike discussions of platform - different automakers define what is a platform differently. If you use GM's definition here, there is no "good or bad" or "modern or outdated", since a platform is only a set of dimensions. But if you use Magna's definition, like, even upgrading the AC system is a "platform upgrade".

[-]

Erigion@reddit

Yes, platforms can improve generation to generation. Even if the dimensions somehow remain exactly the same on a new one, structures can be stiffened, weight can be reduced.

And GM Authority is not GM.

[-]

Hustletron@reddit

And nowadays I want to say it says to me that the vehicle platform hasn’t been enshittified

[-]

jordyb3231@reddit

My two cents is, sometimes the platform doesn't need to be changed, eg the MX5, absolutely perfect the way it is and has been for the better part of 2 decades.

[-]

Techmej@reddit

Nitpick. Bring back the GMT325/330, dammit

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

Ok GM nerd sure...

But seriously though this is an underrated comment, I genuinley think people would buy those trucks even if they just redesign the front end and add a touchscreen head unit for the reverse camera.

[-]

Techmej@reddit

Yeah, an actual pickup or enclosed TRUCK (not a pickup *crossover* like a Maverick, Santa Cruz, or Ridgeline mind you) that fits in tight spaces and can tow over 5000 would crush the market

[-]

EloeOmoe@reddit

Challenger

It hasn't stopped people from buying cars like this, largely because they have certain characteristics that are enviable. Like a big V8.

But drive a last gen Challenger and compare it to the successor platform in the Giulia and it is a night and day difference in performance.

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

Im sure it would perform better, but thats not what Challenger/Charger buyers are interested in.

Uuh… I have four cars and they are 98 99 04 and 09. The 09 is a wife driver. Old platform never bothered me. The flatscreens and the electronics bother me though. Some day I may buy a new car again but it really is hard to get your money’s worth these days. And I want one without a big flatscreen and have actual dials so that I can keep my eyes on the road.

[-]

They've been tweaking the same motors slightly for the past 29 years but haven't developed anything themselves. To put it in perspective the last time they introduced a new engine architecture was the V10 in the Viper and SRT10 truck. Everything else they've made has been recycling the same design. All of their smaller motors in their "economy" cars are Fiat designs.

For example, the Ram pickup truck had been available with the 5.7L hemi since 2003. Then in 2024 they killed it off. Due to popular demand they brought it back in 2026. This time it was offered along with the new more powerful and efficient Hurricane I6 motor. However, now its offered as a $1200 optional "upgrade".

To break that down, the same V8 the Ram has had for over 20 years is now a more expensive optional upgrade over the new, more powerful, more efficient twin turbo straight 6. Its just charging more just because. They did nothing to improve the motor, it just costs more now.

This is how Chrysler group has operated for the past 30 years. They are late to the EV race by nearly a decade and their new Hurricane I6 is cool but that's not what their customers want.

[-]

Drenlin@reddit

They've been tweaking the same motors slightly for the past 29 years but haven't developed anything themselves. To put it in perspective the last time they introduced a new engine architecture was the V10 in the Viper and SRT10 truck. Everything else they've made has been recycling the same design. All of their smaller motors in their "economy" cars are Fiat designs.

Sorry what? They introduced several new engines and co-developed quite a few more since then. LH engine in '98, Hemi in '03, World engine in '07 and Tigershark in '13, Pentastar in '10, Jeep 2.0 in '16, Hurricane I6 in '21, and that's not even counting the fact that several of those are entire families of engines and not one design. The 3.3 and 2.7 v6 under the "LH Engine" banner have little in common for example, nor do the early truck Hemis and the modern versions getting shoved in Hellcats.

The 5.7 Hemi in particular shares zero parts of any significance between the OG and current model. The same basic layout remains but everything else has changed. The lower block isn't even the same casting.

As for the cost of it, it's basically down to emissions penalties, which are why it was killed off to begin with. And yes the I6 is more efficient (by 2mpg combined) and powerful (by about 6%), but it requires premium gas where the 5.7 doesn't, is harder to work on, and keeps its components under much more stress. That's less than ideal for a truck engine.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

By that logic GM has been using the same engine since 1955. Is the engine in your Camaro just a tweaked 1955 small block?

[-]

PlutoniumOligarch@reddit

Name one innovation that the Chrysler group has made outside of supercharging a V8 over the past decade. Ford has Ecoboost and has one of the best DOHC motors out there. GM has some of the best chassis development in the industry, and the new motors in the Corvettes are incredible.

Go ahead and tell me what someone spending $75k on a Jeep Wrangler Rubicon is getting for their money?

How is the EV program going for Stellantis? They got literally laughed out of the room with the Charger EV.

What about the whopping two vehicles that Chrysler sells? How are those doing, and what changes have they made to those?

Chrysler Group stopped trying in 2016. Everything since then has been marketing.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

You can't answer the question so you decided to change your rant entirely?

I'll try to actually answer your stupid question though. But it really depends on what you mean by innovation. Ford didn't invent GDI, turbochargers, or overhead cams, so how are those innovations? In the last decade Chrysler created the new Charger platform which is modular enough to put a full ICE drivetrain or full EV drivetrain in the same vehicle, that's absolutely a first and a true innovation. The Hurricane engine is up there as well.

What exactly is uniquely good about GM chassis development. I read people on here saying shit like "the alpha platform is great", and I'll then ask "what's great about it"... response, crickets.

The Rubicon gets them a solid vehicle with the best 4WD system and off-road abilities available factory.

[-]

PlutoniumOligarch@reddit

Just say you're a Chrysler fanboy and get it over with.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

Wow, yeah I dig my Chrysler, it's a fantastic car. So? Me liking my Chrysler doesn't make you correct.

[-]

PlutoniumOligarch@reddit

You can like whatever you want. I'm glad you like your car, and I'm sorry that it sounds like I'm trashing Chrysler, but they just don't have it anymore.

In 2008, a Chrysler 300 was a badass car. 5.7L Hemi, RWD, luxurious interior, aggressive looks.

In 2012, the Dodge Charger SRT8 was one of the two car posters I had on my wall in High School. The other was the Viper.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

I'm certainly not going to argue that Stellantis has been good for Chrysler. But they canned Carlos Tavares who was the big problem. Put Antonio Filosa in charge who appears to be much better, most of all that he's put Ralph Gilles in charge of design, who's created a new standalone Chrysler design studio.

[-]

PlutoniumOligarch@reddit

I hope they can turn it around because playing magical chairs with the CEO for the past few years hasn't been it. Hopefully, Stellantis sells them off, or they can become a standalone brand again. They just killed production for the two best vehicles they had, and while the new charger is impressive from a technological standpoint, that's not what their customers want, and the sales figures are proving that. A few changes could transform their business.

Keep the Hurricane in production for other vehicles, but put the V8 back where it belongs in the Charger
Drop production of the Grand Wagoneer, we have enough $100k SUV's, we don't need more. Focus on more economical and mid-range vehicles instead of relying solely on the Grand Cherokee/Durango.
Develop more motors in-house instead of letting Fiat put whatever vacuum cleaner they have into your economy cars.
Give Chrysler and Dodge more sensible vehicles to make. Muscle cars are cool, but they shouldn't be the only thing you sell. Cars like the Neon, Stratus, and Dart sold well despite their reliability concerns.
Bring back the Dakota, the Ford Maverick, Chevy Colorado, Toyota Tacoma, and Nissan Titan; all sell very well and are proof there is a market for small trucks here.
Make SRT a separate division again and let them go crazy with development. The Viper was a masterpiece that had the wrong price tag. If they came out with a new Viper priced at $70k-$80k, they would be everywhere.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

One CEO change is hardly "magical chairs".

There's no reason not to have both as an option.
The Grand Wagoneer should have always been a Chrysler and marketed as a luxury SUV.
They have motors, the issue is that the crossovers are all rebadged Fiat crap.
Sure, and it appears they're doing just that. https://www.motor1.com/news/795622/chrysler-affordable-future-model/
Agreed, but keep it just a Durango with a bed, not some crossover based crap like the Maverick. Ford should be embarrassed by their attempt at a Ridgeline knockoff. It'd take it a step further and make/sell a Ute in the US and Australian market using the Charger platform.
SRT sure, but the Viper only works as a 6 figure halo car. Maybe make a V12 version of the Hurricane, and make a shooting brake, an American Ferrari FF/GTC4Lusso.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

Name one innovation that GM has made outside in the past decade?

[-]

Rough_Cancel7265@reddit

It's entirely subjective. The new Supra is all new, but a lot BMW. The new Nissan Z is all Nissan, but with a lot of 370Z DNA. Both are somehow not what a lot of people want. The Charger was basically the same underneath from 2006 up until the new one just came out. That was heavily criticized for largely being unchanged, but then when it was changed to the new body style/engine, suddenly there was a loud demand to go back. The last generation Outback was heavily criticized for not being a wagon. It was too tall, too big. Right up until the second the new Outback was unveiled. Then it was suddenly a wagon and "what is Subaru doing"

[-]

abrakadaver07@reddit

It's not always nitpicking, my mom's Lexus NX handles like a turd compared to my C-HR, despite being superior in most other areas. We got both in 2017, mine was on the new (at the time) Toyota platform, hers is on an ancient one that debuted in the late 00s.

[-]

Eastern_Yam@reddit

The TNGA platform was a crazy change. I have a 2016 Prius, which was the first model to adopt it. While the steering and suspension are obviously tuned for comfort, when you do take a corner quickly the car feels very planted, stable, and the steering lets you place the car very precisely. It just feels pretty balanced and intuitive.

Doing the same in a Toyota that's a few years older can feel like you're in a runaway mine cart or something.

[-]

cactusjakal@reddit

So it's a nitpick but it's also a fundamental reason you would write off a certain car

[-]

Eh, there is more to a car crash than survivability. Living is nice. Safety is about reducing/entirely mitigating injuries. Safety standards have come a LONG way, but there are still differentiators between legal safety standards and consumer standards and OEMs that go above and beyond that. You can see it for yourself by browsing the IIHS website and looking at TSP+ vs marginal vehicles.

Use of ultra strong steel isn't strictly for occupant protection. It is for occupant protection at a lower weight. It would be very easy to keep an occupant safe without using ultra strong steel. But it would need to be slightly thicker to compensate and thickness adds mass. This is mostly important for crash modes involving the sides of the car (e.g. t-bone).

I would guess improvements in crash safety that you're referring to may be more attributable to the introduction of a lot more active safety features, from emergency braking to simple extra indicators that might give you more warning a crash is coming. Nevertheless, in instances where those systems don't work out, having newer vehicle that achieved the highest safety ratings in consumer testing will be of benefit - many of those tests specifically test restraints, airbags, and the body structure of the car.

Depends on whether or not the car looks and feels bad/old

For example, I had a 2019 Mazda 3 which get super premium and ahead of its time back then, and now I just bought a 2026 and it still feels nice and fresh because its a very very good design, and it still drives so well.

It really depends if the car starts to suck over time or not.

[-]

Mental_Medium3988@reddit

part of it depends on the vehicle. a work truck/van having an aging but dead reliable platform is perfectly fine. an expensive luxury car it is not.

[-]

TenderfootGungi@reddit

I would rather buy the platform with years of refinements to get out the bugs. That is if they can get them out, some vehicles have too big of design flaws to overcome.

[-]

phoenix823@reddit

It's a fact. You can read as much or as little into the statement as you like.

[-]

apimpnamedkirby@reddit

You know what’s worse than a 20 year old platform with a plethora of used parts on the market? Platforms that were made for 1-3 years and didnt sell well.

I had a 70 ranchero. That platform was made from 1970-71. Good luck finding parts for them, and if you do, they’re expensive as fuck.

Compared to my 2007 xterra which can use parts from frontiers, pathfinders, and xterras from 2005-2015.

[-]

mini4x@reddit

That platform was made from 1970-71

But it was Torino based and they made that body style Torino for almost a decade. Also my favorite version of the Ranchero.

[-]

apimpnamedkirby@reddit

72-76 were completely different Torinos than the 70-71’s. And they didn’t sell a whole lot of them lol. I think it was 35k torinos and like 18k rancheros for those years.

[-]

AlbatrossStrong9085@reddit

I owned a 24 Z. It was sufficiently updated powertrain-wise. I think taking the same chassis and perfecting over time makes it better actually than starting from scratch every few years.

[-]

spongebob_meth@reddit

Maybe if the platform is actually what is holding a car back. But I have a feeling most journalists don't actually dig that far.

A 2004 mustang was technically on the same platform as a 1979 model. The two cars share virtually zero parts and aren't anything alike, but yeah same platform. That mainly just means they have somewhat similar construction and usually come from the same assembly line.

Plus a lot of times a new platform is simply cheaper to build. Old platform means older construction methods and more expensive. Not that the old platform can't meet new design standards.

[-]

TomatoFettuccini@reddit

That is not at all how the industry uses the term "platform".

That's like saying that the B-52 and B-21 are the same platform.

Platform, in how the auto industry uses it, refers to the specific design; the current Honda Civic and Acura Integra share the same platform, that is the base chassis/unibody is identical or a variant of the current chassis/unibody.

The current Honda Odyssey and Pilot are based on the same unibody structure.

The current Honda Civic/Integra does not have the same platform as the 1990 Civic/Integra. They share the same layout (front engine, front drive), not platform.

In this sense, "platform" means "chassis/frame/unibody".

[-]

spongebob_meth@reddit

The current Mustang has ZERO identical parts from the 1979 model, except maybe the fuses

Good thing i didn't mention a thing about the current mustang. Chill dude.

Yes, the sn95 was a modified fox platform.

[-]

mini4x@reddit

The current Mustang has ZERO identical parts from the 1979 model, except maybe the fuses.

Nope, back then they would have had glass fuses, now everything uses blade fuses.

[-]

mundotaku@reddit

The 70 series Toyota is the king of aged platforms and is great.

[-]

mini4x@reddit

1984 til present, for anyone who's curious.

[-]

Drenlin@reddit

Lada Niva and UAZ loaf van say hello, haha.

(The 70 series is by far the better vehicle though.)

But for a cab company running a fleet of Crown Vics or a mobility services provider running a fleet of GM Savanna wheelchair van conversions it means known and hence predictable failure rates.

We may want an aging platform just to keep buttons for common tasks.

[-]

Salt-Plankton436@reddit

It's definitely partially shit car journalists say, however sometimes there is definitely truth to it. There might also have been more truth to it in the past as well. There's one that stands out which is the Jaguar XJS (1975) which was then used to make the Aston DB7 (1995-2004) and the Jaguar XK8 (1996-2006). When you look at those newer cars, you can still see that awkward cramped driving position the XJS had and you can almost tell that the wheelbase is shorter than ideal for the cars. In addition they both have significant rust issues which might not be totally down to the platform but they are coincidentally a lot of the same issues as the XJS had. If you watch videos of those cars as well you can just see the night and day difference between those and the replacements. However, when we're talking about a 10 year old platform now, many of which are more customisable, I doubt there's much difference.

[-]

PRSArchon@reddit

Even if they are still competitive it is still a downside, because you know soon the new generation will come and make a huge step up.

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

Could be a bargaining chip to get the car at a discount, if the new model is coming soon.

Depends on how you look at it I guess

I had two cars on "aging platforms" (Challenger and IS500) and I enjoyed my time in both. There were features other brands had that were missing, but were never things I really needed in those cars at that time. I was in those cars for their engines and couldn't care less about having the newest tech or biggest screens.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

Curious what features were missing?

[-]

Stu__Pidasso@reddit

Challenger didn't have nearly as advanced of a safety/driver assist suite as the Lexus, believe it or not, considering most people think the Lexus is technologically behind. The Lexus interior was very old, only getting a touch screen in the 2021 "refresh", still had a CD player, touch pad. The Lexus drivetrain was also old, especially the transmission. It never personally bothered me, since I knew how to make it wake up, but plenty of people like to say the IS500 transmission was a hinderance to the car because it was tenths of a second slower than a ZF8 or some other shit, like they would realize that in real life

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

Challenger didn't have nearly as advanced of a safety/driver assist

I'd consider that a pro, not a con. I really dislike the modern ADAS crap. My 300 has just a "Forward Collision Warning", the dash will light up and beep at me if it thinks I'm going to hit something. And even that is too much, it's stupid, the last thing I need when I need to avoid something is my dash yelling "LOOK AT ME INSTEAD OF THE ROAD!".

[-]

I wonder if they say the same thing about the 911. Porsche may change the number every so often but the platform doesn't change much.

[-]

Musician-Able@reddit

Compared to the competition? Yes. Relevant to the average buyer than is comparing it to their old car? Maybe not as much. However, it can be an indicator of how and how much money to spend acquiring the car.

[-]

hack_my_nipples@reddit

It can absolutely be a reasonable criticism, the platform covers the drivetrain, chassis, electrical architecture, infotainment etc

For EV's that's a BIG deal, for ICE vehicles, it depends, some people might prefer older platforms that don't have touch screens or complex hybrid systems or whatever, but as a general rule yes it means the car is dated.

For me, I don't care at all, because I'm looking for a cohesive experience, not the latest tech.

[-]

Heavy_Gap_5047@reddit

They have to say something to satisfy their word count requirements.

[-]

One_Evil_Monkey@reddit

Depends on your definition of "platform".

Most "journalists" nowadays write stuff just to hear themsleves type.

It's still wonderful at what it does.

The GR86 is also in the same boat. Uses the last gen platform from 2012 but they upgraded the engine, the biggest weakness of the car. The platform itself is great.

Use critical thinking mate. Platform "age" has almost no bearing on the overall quality of the car. Obviously EVs being the exception, since platform changes there usually mean significantly improved power density, charging capability, etc.

Judge a car as a whole, not on what platform it's based on.

[-]

one_five_one@reddit

Global platform = no variety in their cars, all will be SUVs

[-]

mortalomena@reddit

My car is on a 20 year old platform and only thing I notice it from is the body is not quite up to modern standards in rigidity.

[-]

MajesticBread9147@reddit

Platforms that have been around for a while have lots of available parts both new and used, and they also have a documented history of reliability or lack thereof.

If there are aren't already hundreds of thousands of cars with the same powertrain each having hundreds of thousands of miles on the odometer, then you have no idea how many issues will pop up at 150,000 miles.

The only time when the downsides of CVT transmissions, Fords Dual-clutch transmission, and Cadillac's Northstar engine was unknown to buyers is when the platform was new.

[-]

CortaCircuit@reddit

The idea that things must change for the sake of change has always been a low IQ opinion.

[-]

ItsAStillMe@reddit

If journalist don't point out "flaws", real or imagined, there is no incentive to change anything. If something isn't changed and marketed as being better, real or imagined, there is no incentive to buy. If no one buys and no changes happen, there is no need for journalists. It's one of those uroborus situations. (I'm sure I butchered the spelling of that)

[-]

furrynoy96@reddit

If the product is good, I'm, not bothered. Don't fix what isn't broken

[-]

TheReaperSovereign@reddit

Its the never ending internet car circle jerk that threatens to make my eyes roll out of my head

"New cars suck, old cars are better"

"This car is outdated, why would you buy this"

[-]

Sprinklypoo@reddit

To me, it's just a "fashion" thing. Which I don't really care about, and especially don't care about in a vehicle cabin. I'd rather be comfortable than hip.

And some of that is nanny state keep you under their thumb-ness, which I'm also happy to do without. More technology isn't always better.

[-]

an_actual_lawyer@reddit

Nitpick for 95% of buyers.

[-]

ashzeppelin98@reddit

These folks would have a fit when they see the commercial van market.

underwaterknifefight@reddit

Given everything is moving towards fully subscription-based, and now full on big brother camera monitoring systems forced upon the consumer at their own cost, I think an aging platform with less technology and less amenities is vastly preferrable.

[-]

mgobla@reddit

\~2010-2020 was the peak for platforms.

After that most platforms got much WORSE bc they are designed to be shared with / used for EVs and PHEVs with heavy batteries.

Btw Dodge Durango ist the oldest model on the market (excluding fullsize vans designed primarily for commercial use) and last year the Durango had higher sales numbers than in any other year, its best year ever. Development for that platform (Mercedes) started in 1999.

[-]

Spicywolff@reddit

It’s absolutely reasonable. Times technology and materials change. If a company is using a 30 year-old platform or the competition moves ahead then it’s a valid criticism.

The longer you keep the platform alive, the more money you make off of it. On some cars like economy, bottom dollar vehicles I would be more accepting of it. Because it helps get the price down for consumer (in theory with a perfect vacuum of capitalism doesn’t exist) but on a performance car like the Nissan… it’s a bad look

[-]

Damogran6@reddit

I bought the 822,000th GMC Acadia/Saturn Outlook (not literally) and having a long production run meant all the bugs were worked out. It was an outstanding vehicle and I only got rid of it because we were returning to work after COVID, my boys were grown, and I didn’t need a 17mpg 3 row commuter.

[-]

ShadyDrunks@reddit

Its a super reasonable criticism, the 370 was like 15 years old before it got replaced by the Z, which continued to use the same chassis without any innovation. The new Z is literally them FINALLY slapping in a 10 year old motor into their Z chassis.

If they wanted the Z to actually be competitive, they needed to update the body and interior of the Z significantly, and make the VR30 a bit more stout. To come out and immediately be worse than the Supra which had already been out, is just sad.

Don't get me started on the Challenger, drivers aren't buying those, and the people who like them do not give a shit about what makes a good car

[-]

r_type2266@reddit (OP)

The new Z actually has upgrades in chassis rigidity and revised suspension tuning (which may or may not be noticeable depending on who you ask and if they actually push the car to the limit) and EPS instead of hydraulic steering.

I test drove one and it handled nice on the street, and i think I would only do some minor suspension/cooling upgrades if Im going to take it on track. A Huge benefit of it being on the aging FM platform is aftermarket support.

The GT-R was 17 years old when it was discontinued in 2025 but that dosent mean that nothing changed during that time, people did mention that aging platform again but couldnt say exactly why it was a bad thing

Even the new BRZ/86 is on a revised version of the old platform and I dont see people complaining about that either. No complaints even on the 11 year old ND Miata.

Overall I think "old platform" is mostly nitpicking especially for regular non enthusiast cars unless that the car is significantly behind the competition in refinement or hybrid tech. To some people its actually a good thing

[-]

TheDistantEnd@reddit

I think it depends on your priorities. There have been insane advancements in car technology in the last 20-30y. Cars aren't welded together much anymore, they're mostly glued together. We have body joints made with adhesives that have added so much rigidity and strength to auto bodies that's noticeable when you're really pushing a car aggressively.

I would have never thought we'd get to a point where a glued joint would be better than metal welded to metal, but here we are.

[-]

It means that it’s not the latest and greatest. But it also means that it’s probably a reliable car.

[-]

doughnuts_not_donuts@reddit

Also who cares if different cars share a platform. That doesn't mean they're related. Saab 95 and a Buick Lacrosse.. or the next Alfa and the next Dodge. I'm sure they couldn't be more different other than some basic math behind some engineering

[-]

AKADriver@reddit

I think it's far less important nowadays.

There was a lot of rapid improvement in chassis design in the past. When the SN95 Mustang was introduced in 1994 on a 15 year old "aging platform" it was stone age compared to more recent contemporary designs.

[-]

Lighthouse_seek@reddit

Old platforms can't change too much so you end up with cars being unable to add new features. Also issues with packaging. The crv for example needs a new platform since the hybrid battery removes all under floor storage
Old platforms for regular vehicles usually mean a redesign is around the corner. And people want new

[-]

karankshah@reddit

It's a nitpick.

Older designs do generally see slower sales volume, but generally the best special editions, with the most features, and the best developed engines come at least a few years into a launch.

If the car is newer and they want to dislike it they'll use the opposite terminology - untested, unproven, too new, etc.

It used to be that journos were (at least) important to help identify any major issues on cars before you even show up to a dealer, so that you don't waste your time on something that won't work for you at all.

Nowadays most cars are good enough that there aren't catastrophic issues that come out in the first few thousand miles, and performance is good enough that you need a fair bit of seat time to pick apart anything to note.

This means that not only are you wasting your time with most auto journalism - where they have seat time measured in minutes with new cars - but that the real way for you to determine whether something is good is for you to try it yourself.

[-]

jasonsong86@reddit

Funeral_Goat_1446@reddit

I couldn’t care less. Some of the most fun cars I’ve driven were built before I was born

[-]

PabloIceCreamBar@reddit

That’s not what the OP is referring to.

[-]

colpy350@reddit

Look my dad bought a Chevrolet Citation in the 80s and it was a first model year vehicle. He had all sorts of weird issues. I saw a photo of it and it had hood pins like a race car and I went to tease him for that decision. He said "the hood wouldn't stay closed without them."

I did NOT listen to my father's advice and I bought a new 2021 Elantra base model. I also had some WEIRD issues. Like the horn stopped working. My cruise control occasionally just doesn't turn on. My back up camera failed. I had many recalls. Steering bearing, seatbelt tensioner. And due to the covid pandemic I went a period without being able to find oil filters or brake pads. I did at least one oil only change because there were no filters to be had.

All that to say when you buy an aging platform you know that there are parts and that there are tried and true solutions for known issues.

[-]

Calibrumm@reddit

completely senseless term unless you specifically cater to people who roll negative equity every 2 years because they can't fathom being seen in an "old" (2 fucking years) vehicle.

[-]

Privateer_Lev_Arris@reddit

They gotta say something

[-]

TrafficOnTheTwos@reddit

I think the answer to this has simply changed. Because the difference in tech and development between a 2005 car and a 2015 car seems larger than that of a 2015 car vs. 2025.

[-]

rosen380@reddit

If I'm buying a brand new car, I'd rather it not be saddled with decisions from 10-15 years ago, so an old platform would be a negative.

[-]

SomeJayForToday@reddit

I'm not sure about the broad strokes, but it's definitely a big downside when it comes to hybrids/EV's built on a platform that was made with ICE in mind. Hybrid versions lose lots of usable trunk space while EV variants of ICE cars don't get any of the benefits that a dedicated EV platform gives you, like space and storage but also weight and the way the battery is designed into the chassis.