When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
There are a few Lexus-Toyota dealers still around. My area has one such dealer. I took a tour for an open house and it was pretty cool. They also have the only Toyota auto body paint shop on premises as well as a full auto body restoration on premises. The dealer also happens to be the number one dealer for customer satisfaction in the country. So Toyota will make some concessions to top performers.
Thanks. From what i remember, Lexus, when it was first formed, discouraged multiple-franchises under the same roof, (and that's the way it's always been in this area). But, as you point out, if a good enough shop satisfies enough customers, they might get a waiver.
As the Lincoln in this thread, that stupid PRNDL set up is utterly stupid. I doubt Lexus NX/X1 buyers will be swayed by this vehicle.
Don't blame Lincoln (or any other automaker) if you don't like that shift-pattern. And the NX will probably have the same pattern. It is a Federal safety-requirement, dating back to 1966, and it was adopted (partly at Ralph Nader's urging) for all new cars sold in the American market. Back then, different cars had different patterns, (GM, for example, used PNDLR, and the Edsel had shift-buttons arranged in a circle in the middle of the steering wheel). A lot of transmissions were damaged or ruined by confused or uncoordinated drivers hitting the wrong gear at the wrong time. The PRNDL law, in effect since then, was an attempt to standardize things. Of course, today, we also have different types of transmissions that didn't exist back then (CVT dual-clutch, DSG, SMT, etc...) but the idea is still the same...standarization to avoid confusion.
And as far as simply pushing buttons for the MKC's shifter, I didn't have any problems at all with them. They are large, well-marked/lit, punch easily, and respond instantly. As you know, I am not usually Mr. Easy-Acceptance when it comes to new electronic features in vehicles, but I found no problems with this one. I thought, for example, that it was a better system than the rotary-dial shifters used in Jags/Land Rovers and the new Chrysler 200.
For this segment
Tier 1: BMX X1, Lexus NX, Audi Q3
Tier 2: Lincoln MKC, Acura RDX
How about the Mercedes GLK? I'd say it fits in there too. But, IMO, in this range of small-to-moderate luxury/upmarket SUV/CUVs, it hard to draw the line between Tier1 and Tier2. That's why, in reviews, I usually say "Closest" competitors rather than "Exact" competitors.
Then we have the Buick Encore for select markets as well as some Mazdas as well.
I didn't include the Encore because I thought it too small and underpowered for this class (it's based on a sub-compact Chevy Sonic platform), though it is a little closer to the others in its price range. The Encore, IMO, is not one of GM's better efforts lately. Mazda vehicles, in general, except for the original Millennia that was supposed to be an Amati when the upmarket Amati division was cancelled, are not considered in the upmarket/premium range, so that's why I didn't include the CX-5 or CX-7, and the larger CX-9 is in a different size-class.
Lincoln could of done so much more.
Well......yes, simply by default. ANY vehicle could probably be better. There is no such thing as a perfect car. That's why I typically have a list of what IMO are MINUSES. But, for a first try, the MKC is not bad, ad it is a noticeable stup up from the ho-hum designs we've gotten largely from Lincoln. And it had better be.....much of the future of the Lincoln division could be at stake.
I'm guessing that the target market for the MKC won't mind the push buttons. The MKZ has them too.
After sampling both cars, I thought the ones in the MKC were better-done. They seemed to respond more crisply.
The whole idea for the dash push-buttons comes from freeing up more space on the console for cup holders, power-plugs, cubby-compartments, etc....without interference from the shift-lever.
All this hate for the push button shifting.
I love it!
+1
Originally Posted by mmarshall
The whole idea for the dash push-buttons comes from freeing up more space on the console for cup holders, power-plugs, cubby-compartments, etc....without interference from the shift-lever.
yes there's an emotional connection (possibly phallic ) to the shift lever but it's pretty pointless in an auto, and as i've noted before, i really dislike leather shift boots around those levers as they're a) pointless, b) collect dust/dirt. the added room without it is nice for storage/controls.
Thanks. From what i remember, Lexus, when it was first formed, discouraged multiple-franchises under the same roof, (and that's the way it's always been in this area). But, as you point out, if a good enough shop satisfies enough customers, they might get a waiver.
Don't blame Lincoln (or any other automaker) if you don't like that shift-pattern. And the NX will probably have the same pattern. It is a Federal safety-requirement, dating back to 1966, and it was adopted (partly at Ralph Nader's urging) for all new cars sold in the American market. Back then, different cars had different patterns, (GM, for example, used PNDLR, and the Edsel had shift-buttons arranged in a circle in the middle of the steering wheel). A lot of transmissions were damaged or ruined by confused or uncoordinated drivers hitting the wrong gear at the wrong time. The PRNDL law, in effect since then, was an attempt to standardize things. Of course, today, we also have different types of transmissions that didn't exist back then (CVT dual-clutch, DSG, SMT, etc...) but the idea is still the same...standarization to avoid confusion.
And as far as simply pushing buttons for the MKC's shifter, I didn't have any problems at all with them. They are large, well-marked/lit, punch easily, and respond instantly. As you know, I am not usually Mr. Easy-Acceptance when it comes to new electronic features in vehicles, but I found no problems with this one. I thought, for example, that it was a better system than the rotary-dial shifters used in Jags/Land Rovers and the new Chrysler 200.
How about the Mercedes GLK? I'd say it fits in there too. But, IMO, in this range of small-to-moderate luxury/upmarket SUV/CUVs, it hard to draw the line between Tier1 and Tier2. That's why, in reviews, I usually say "Closest" competitors rather than "Exact" competitors.
I didn't include the Encore because I thought it too small and underpowered for this class (it's based on a sub-compact Chevy Sonic platform), though it is a little closer to the others in its price range. The Encore, IMO, is not one of GM's better efforts lately. Mazda vehicles, in general, except for the original Millennia that was supposed to be an Amati when the upmarket Amati division was cancelled, are not considered in the upmarket/premium range, so that's why I didn't include the CX-5 or CX-7, and the larger CX-9 is in a different size-class.
Well......yes, simply by default. ANY vehicle could probably be better. There is no such thing as a perfect car. That's why I typically have a list of what IMO are MINUSES. But, for a first try, the MKC is not bad, ad it is a noticeable stup up from the ho-hum designs we've gotten largely from Lincoln. And it had better be.....much of the future of the Lincoln division could be at stake.
The GLK MB is not really a competitor. The upcoming MB GLA will be the competition for the NX, MKC, 1series and Q3.
As for the Lexus-Toyota dealerships, I believe most were dual dealers back in 89.
The Lexus RX350, admittedly, trumps it in engine-refinement, rough-road-noise-control, and rear-seat comfort, but the MKC is surprisingly competitive in other ways.
That's because the RX350 is a class up from the MKC and is lined up with the MKX, which is due for a major refresh. MKC will go head to head with the Lexus NX duo.
The GLK MB is not really a competitor. The upcoming MB GLA will be the competition for the NX, MKC, 1series and Q3.
As for the Lexus-Toyota dealerships, I believe most were dual dealers back in 89.
Based on size (interior and exterior) and price points, the Compact Luxury CUV segment consists of GLK, X3, Q5, RDX and newcomers NX and MKC. More will follow.
The X1, Q3, GLA etc. are smaller and different price points, although as with most segments the lines can easily blur.
Based on size (interior and exterior) and price points, the Compact Luxury CUV segment consists of GLK, X3, Q5, RDX and newcomers NX and MKC. More will follow.
The X1, Q3, GLA etc. are smaller and different price points, although as with most segments the lines can easily blur.
+1.
The "small" compact CUV class (typically 170-175" length) and ~30K starting, should not be confused to the compact class (typically 180-185" length) and starting in the mid 30K.
An anomaly is the Evoque which is a small compact, yet price-wise surpasses even the compact class.
The "small" compact CUV class (typically 170-175" length) and ~30K starting, should not be confused to the compact class (typically 180-185" length) and starting in the mid 30K.
An anomaly is the Evoque which is a small compact, yet price-wise surpasses even the compact class.
That's because the RX350 is a class up from the MKC and is lined up with the MKZ, which is due for a major refresh. MKC will go head to head with the Lexus NX duo.
The RX350 starts at almost $8000 more than the Lincoln and starts in V6 territory. The price point, size, prestige, and engine are all in a higher price point than the MKC. Totally different class of SUVs. mmarshall is wrong in his comparison, its like comparing a 4 cylinder Accord to a V6 Ford Taurus.
The NX, upcoming GLA, Q3 is where this class is at.
That's because the RX350 is a class up from the MKC and is lined up with the MKZ, which is due for a major refresh. MKC will go head to head with the Lexus NX duo.
I agree. The RX350 and MKX are competitors here. Base price of the RX350 AWD is $42.2k and MKX AWD is $40.5k. And as mentioned, NX/MKC will compete with each other.
The RX350 starts at almost $8000 more than the Lincoln and starts in V6 territory. The price point, size, prestige, and engine are all in a higher price point than the MKC.
Totally different class of SUVs. mmarshall is wrong in his comparison, its like comparing a 4 cylinder Accord to a V6 Ford Taurus.
Originally Posted by LexBob2
I agree. The RX350 and MKX are competitors here. Base price of the RX350 AWD is $42.2k and MKX AWD is $40.5k.
Not totally different, but, yes, somewhat different. Lexus, right now, does not make an exact SUV comparison to the MKC. That's why I said (if you read my earlier post).....CLOSEST competitors instead of EXACT competitors.
You mention the MKX. I found the MKX to be quite unimpressive, overall, for its price, and, in some ways, though the MKXt is closer to the RX350 in size/price, I thought that the MKC actually stacked up against the RX better in some ways. The MKX and MKT, IMO, were both basically a waste of time......Lincoln put needless time and resources into them.
I think I'd prefer the push-button system over Chrysler's retarded dial. Just sayin.
Although I'm the guy that misses column-mounted shifters with my autos.
What is so difficult about turning a **** left and right to select a gear? It saves space and in Chrysler's case, skips the theatrics that go along with Jaguar/Land Rover's dial that pops up upon engine start.
07-23-14, 06:09 AM
) to the shift lever but it's pretty pointless in an auto, and as i've noted before, i really dislike leather shift boots around those levers as they're a) pointless, b) collect dust/dirt. the added room without it is nice for storage/controls.
