Compare Lexus ES 6 XV60 facelift vs Lexus ES 300 XV20 vs Lexus ES 7 XZ10
Variants
ES 200
ES 250
ES 350
ES 300h
ES 350
Capacity
Cargo Capacity
490 L / 17.3 cu-ft
370 L / 13.1 cu-ft
Fuel Capacity
65.0 L / 17.2 gal
70.0 L / 18.5 gal
Passengers
5
5
5
Payload
270 kg / 595 lbs
Chassis
Brakes | Front
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Ventilated discs
Brakes | Rear
Disc
Disc
Disc
Power Steering
Electric Steering
Hydraulic Steering
Electric Steering
Suspension | Front
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
MacPherson strut
Suspension | Rear
MacPherson strut
Multi-link
Tire Size
215/55 R17
205/70 R15
Turning Circle
11.4 m / 37.4 ft
Construction
Body Style
4-door Sedan
4-door Sedan
Platform
Toyota K platform
Dimensions
Size | Height
1450 mm / 57.1 in
1370 mm / 53.9 in
1445 mm / 56.9 in
Size | Length
4915 mm / 193.5 in
4830 mm / 190.2 in
4976 mm / 195.9 in
Size | Width
1790 mm / 70.5 in
1864 mm / 73.4 in
Track Width | Front
1550.0 mm / 61.0 in
Track Width | Rear
1520.0 mm / 59.8 in
Weight
1495.0 kg / 3295.9 lbs
Wheel Size
17 in
Wheelbase
2820 mm / 111.0 in
2670 mm / 105.1 in
2870 mm / 113.0 in
Performance
Acceleration | 0 - 100 km/h
7.7 sec
Acceleration | 0 - 60 mph
7.3 sec
Coefficient Of Drag
0.27
Fuel Economy
11.8 L/100km / 19.9 MPG (urban) | 8.4 L/100km / 28.0 MPG (highway)
Top Speed
225.0 km/h / 139.8 mph
Powertrain
Drivetrain Layout
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Front-engine (transverse), Front-wheel drive
Emission Standard
Euro 5
Engine
1MZ-FE
Engine | Bore
87.5 mm / 3.4 in
Engine | Compression Ratio
10.5:1
Engine | Displacement
3.0 L / 182.8 cu-in / 2995.0 cc
Engine | Power
223.0 hp / 166.3 kW @ 5800 rpm
Engine | Specific Output
74.5 hp/L / 1.2 hp/cu-in
Engine | Stroke
83.0 mm / 3.3 in
Engine | Torque
301 Nm / 222.0 lb-ft @ 4400 rpm
362 Nm / 267.0 lb-ft
Engine | Type
Naturally-aspirated multi-port injected petrol V6 DOHC engine with 4 values per cylinder
Transmission | Gears
6-speed
4-speed
Transmission | Type
Automatic
Automatic
Production
Availability
2015 ~ 2018
1997 ~ 2001
2018-2021
Reviews
Neofiliac score
31%
22%
33%
Pros
- Superb reliability record
- Good 0.27 drag coefficient
- Exceptionally reliable
- Reliable powertrain
- More upmarket styling
- Improved fit and finish
Cons
- No powerful engine options
- Stuck with MacPherson struts in the front
- Arguably over-styled
- No powerful engine options
- Uninspiring styling
- Bad handling
- Basic suspension setup
- Basic suspension setup
Remove
Remove
Remove
Add up to 4 products to the comparison using the search bar above
Information on this page is provided on an as-is basis. No warranty on accuracy is implied. This page may contain affiliate links to third-party merchants such as Amazon and eBay. If you make a purchase using the supplied link, we may receive a commission. Neofiliac places the utmost respect for your privacy. We use no cookie whatsoever beyond that needed for the proper functioning of the website.