1SICKBLOG: The RX 450h and 30MPG, unappreciated and what ever vehicle should offer
And here we are, this latest Lexus is faster, smoother and more economical than any comparable petrol, its even more economical than dreadful econoboxes such as Fit and Yaris, and where are these long promised clean diesels?
Furthermore, I think Toyota needs a small 4 cylinder 2.0 to 2.2L's for Camry and Rav 4 hybrids. I know that they will install the new 2.5L I4 in the Camry hybrid to compete with Altima and Fusion, putting it around 200 HP, but is that HP neccessary to sell a hybrid? Today perhaps. 5 years from now, maybe not.
1) Weight and torque
2) Lower development costs - many car makers have existing diesel engine sold abroad
3) Lower to consumer price - as mentioned 60 large is not the sweet spot of the RX demographic
You don't need a 3.0 liter diesel to push a SUV. Car makers could go smaller but the prestige issue will get in the way. (would you pay 45K for a 2.0tD?)
This thread brings up a good point. For all the eco discussion, most SUVs makers haven't done much on MPG improvements.
Last edited by werewolf; Aug 24, 2009 at 09:13 AM.
1) Weight and torque
2) Lower development costs - many car makers have existing diesel engine sold abroad
3) Lower to consumer price - as mentioned 60 large is not the sweet spot of the RX demographic
1. Weight. Hybrids and diesels both carry a weight penalty. Hybrids have heavy batteries. A diesel has a heavier engine block than a gasoline engine. Thus the suspension must be fortified, adding weight. Torque: Diesels have alot of it. Hybrids do to. I'd estimate that the advantage of a diesel comes in when towing heavy loads of 3000 lbs. or more, depending on the vehicle in question.
2. Cost. Existing diesels don't cut it in the States. They can't simply be sold here without measures made to meet emissions standards. This translates to R & D costs. Furthermore, the ML and X5 require urea injections to meet emissions. I believe that BMW has it covered in their 4 year maint. program. After that the consumer pays to have the tank refilled. If the tank runs dry, you have a certain of starts before the engine locks you out.
3. Price. The prices speak for themselves. Base prices for luxury alt. fuel SUVs:
RXh: $41,660 (32/28 MPG)
ML 320 CDI: $48,600 (18/24 MPG)
X5d: $51,200 (18/25)
The RX is the cheapest by far, while offering the best fuel economy. I disagree that Lexus buyers don't spend $60k on the RX. It should be noted that $55k was as high as I could get the build price on the Lexus website. The RX has had the title of no. 1 selling Luxury utilility vehicle for sometime. I think there are plenty of buyers willing to spend $55K.
Last edited by SLegacy99; Aug 24, 2009 at 09:24 AM.
Celebrating Lexus & Toyota from Around the Globe
My point is simple, its quite stunning this vehicle the 450h AWD or 2WD, (hell NO MATTER the price) gets MPG on par or better than MOST sub-compacts and compacts.
You can spin it anyway you want, add price, add people, add goats, subtract martians, subtract tax the MPG RATINGS DO NOT CHANGE.
29 MPG AWD (yes a shocking 1 MPG less)

Yes most companies offer 2WD SUVs with a AWD or 4x4 option. I thought you were a "choice" guy.

And here we are, this latest Lexus is faster, smoother and more economical than any comparable petrol, its even more economical than dreadful econoboxes such as Fit and Yaris, and where are these long promised clean diesels?

1) Weight and torque
2) Lower development costs - many car makers have existing diesel engine sold abroad
3) Lower to consumer price - as mentioned 60 large is not the sweet spot of the RX demographic
You don't need a 3.0 liter diesel to push a SUV. Car makers could go smaller but the prestige issue will get in the way. (would you pay 45K for a 2.0tD?)
This thread brings up a good point. For all the eco discussion, most SUVs makers haven't done much on MPG improvements.






