Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

Motortrend: Luxury Crossover Shootout

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 03-17-15, 09:02 PM
  #16  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,577
Received 83 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Hoovey2411
Evoque is my dark horse. Love it, but I feel a car like this would be better leased. Damn your pretty design JLR!
The main problem. IMO, with the Evoque is that the rear end looks like it went halfway through a roof-crusher and then stopped. Rear visibility is generally a peephole-slit rear window.....somewhat like the Dodge Magnum, but even more so.

A little disappointed at the MKC. Its a success don't get me wrong however they had an opportunity to really bench mark the field and deliver something say with the current base 2.0T and optional 2.3T, but add a top end 2.7L V6 EcoBoost (perfect for Lincoln to introduce a sport line) and perhaps a hybrid variant. Upgraded plastics and less drab interior colors, more contrasts. Great exterior though.
I fully understand the reasoning behind the turbo 4-bangers in several of these vehicles (upcoming CAFE rules). But I still think that, given their price and upmarket-class, a nice, small-displacement, normally-aspirated V6 would be better-suited for them overall, without much loss of gas mileage, particularly with tall gearing or gears in the transmission. The 2.5L V6 used in the Lexus IS250, for example, would be an excellent power plant for vehicles like these if it was adapted to a transverse layout...or to a longitudinal layout with a FWD option.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-17-15, 09:52 PM
  #17  
Hoovey689
Moderator
Thread Starter
iTrader: (16)
 
Hoovey689's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: California
Posts: 42,283
Received 122 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
The main problem. IMO, with the Evoque is that the rear end looks like it went halfway through a roof-crusher and then stopped. Rear visibility is generally a peephole-slit rear window.....somewhat like the Dodge Magnum, but even more so.

I fully understand the reasoning behind the turbo 4-bangers in several of these vehicles (upcoming CAFE rules). But I still think that, given their price and upmarket-class, a nice, small-displacement, normally-aspirated V6 would be better-suited for them overall, without much loss of gas mileage, particularly with tall gearing or gears in the transmission. The 2.5L V6 used in the Lexus IS250, for example, would be an excellent power plant for vehicles like these if it was adapted to a transverse layout...or to a longitudinal layout with a FWD option.
a valid point, however this affects a large number of vehicles today which can easily be managed by Blind Spot Monitor, Rear Cross Traffic Alert, a host of Parking Sensors, Camera's (Back-up, Birds-eye, Side and Lane Watch) to name a few technologies



The 2.5L V6 though is too underpowered for that application with only 185lbft. The 2.7L EcoBoost avaialbe on the Edge and F-150 are rated 325-330hp and 370-375lbft, a more efficient tune and an upgrade to the transmission from a few more cogs would leave the car with plenty of refined power delivery and a mid 20's low 30's city/hw
Hoovey689 is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 03:22 AM
  #18  
ydooby
Lexus Champion
 
ydooby's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: CA
Posts: 2,010
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Good win for the NX, though the X3 doing 0-60 in 6 seconds flat is simply mind blowing. Either BMW got the gear ratios to perfection or they seriously underrated the engine's output.
ydooby is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 04:26 AM
  #19  
TangoRed
Lead Lap
 
TangoRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Washington
Posts: 4,585
Received 24 Likes on 18 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by ydooby
Good win for the NX, though the X3 doing 0-60 in 6 seconds flat is simply mind blowing. Either BMW got the gear ratios to perfection or they seriously underrated the engine's output.
I'm thinking both.
TangoRed is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 05:42 AM
  #20  
spwolf
Lexus Champion
 
spwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,841
Received 110 Likes on 81 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TangoRed
I'm thinking both.
exactly :-)

i am glad that apparently Lexus 2.0t is very flexible, it turned out to be great engine.
spwolf is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 09:26 AM
  #21  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,484
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by spwolf
exactly :-)

i am glad that apparently Lexus 2.0t is very flexible, it turned out to be great engine.
The 2.0t is the right engine for the class. People want something new and with some new tech. The V6 2.5 is way to old and inefficient. Also, this new buyer wants to feel the engine more than not hear it.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 09:27 AM
  #22  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,484
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

I am also not surprised that the Lincoln finished 4th. I guarantee in a few years we will see the NX get comparo tested again against the others but I predict the Lincoln will be left out.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 09:29 AM
  #23  
bitkahuna
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
 
bitkahuna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Present
Posts: 73,762
Received 2,126 Likes on 1,378 Posts
Default

nice win for lexus among strong competition.
bitkahuna is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 11:54 AM
  #24  
spwolf
Lexus Champion
 
spwolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 19,841
Received 110 Likes on 81 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexsCTJill
The 2.0t is the right engine for the class. People want something new and with some new tech. The V6 2.5 is way to old and inefficient. Also, this new buyer wants to feel the engine more than not hear it.
that 2.5l is simply outdated these days.
spwolf is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 02:04 PM
  #25  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,484
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by spwolf
that 2.5l is simply outdated these days.
Yes way too outdated. But more importantly, the segment foes not need a V6. The next turbo four is more fuel efficient and make more power than the Lexus 2.5.
Toys4RJill is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 02:33 PM
  #26  
LexBob2
Lexus Champion
 
LexBob2's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 10,987
Received 137 Likes on 111 Posts
Default

The RDX and GLK both have a V6, but they are 3.5's. Better suited for 4,000 lb. vehicles vs. the 2.5.
LexBob2 is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 05:31 PM
  #27  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,577
Received 83 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by LexBob2
The RDX and GLK both have a V6, but they are 3.5's. Better suited for 4,000 lb. vehicles vs. the 2.5.
Originally Posted by spwolf
that 2.5l is simply outdated these days.
I don't entirely agree on the 2.5L being outdated. While I don't necessarily have hard sales numbers on the RWD-vs.-AWD versions nationwide, the Lexus IS250AWD seems to sell quite well here in the D.C. area, where, in my experience, it outnumbers the RWD 250 handily.

LexBob2 has a point about luxury CUVs in this class not being featherweights (unloaded, they typically run 3800-4000 lbs). However, the IS250AWD is not very far behind in the pork department either, being over 3600 lbs. empty, and yet still sells quite well with the 2.5.

It's interesting that the 1Gen RDX had a turbo 4 (Honda's first in the American market), and its replacement 2Gen version upgraded to a V6, even with the upcoming CAFE rules. That alone, at least IMO, shows that turbo 4s aren't always the answer.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 06:27 PM
  #28  
TangoRed
Lead Lap
 
TangoRed's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Washington
Posts: 4,585
Received 24 Likes on 18 Posts
Default

Just because it sells well doesn't mean it's not outdated. Of course you see more IS250's- it's the cheaper model. As far as the AWD model is concerned, you're in an area of the U.S. where AWD sells well so that's expected as well. I would assume most dealers stock far more AWD models than RWD.
TangoRed is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 07:18 PM
  #29  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 90,577
Received 83 Likes on 82 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TangoRed
Just because it sells well doesn't mean it's not outdated.
Yes, I agree, strictly from an engineering point of view. But my point is that sometimes what is long considered "outdated" mechanically is what people actually want. For example, look at how long Mustangs sold with a live axle (just phased out this year), and how long the GM 3.8L V6, with push-rods, soldiered on before it was finally phased out. Mustangs go back to 1964, and the 3.8 to 1962.


Of course you see more IS250's- it's the cheaper model. As far as the AWD model is concerned, you're in an area of the U.S. where AWD sells well so that's expected as well. I would assume most dealers stock far more AWD models than RWD.
Another reason for the IS250AWD's popularity is probably because it is the only non-SUV lower-line Lexus product that offers AWD. The ES and CT, even with their electric booster-motors, are FWD. if the ES offered AWD, I think the IS AWD models would be much less popular.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 03-18-15, 07:18 PM
  #30  
Toys4RJill
Lexus Fanatic
 
Toys4RJill's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: ON/NY
Posts: 30,484
Received 62 Likes on 53 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by TangoRed
Just because it sells well doesn't mean it's not outdated. Of course you see more IS250's- it's the cheaper model. As far as the AWD model is concerned, you're in an area of the U.S. where AWD sells well so that's expected as well. I would assume most dealers stock far more AWD models than RWD.
The 2.5 is seriously outdated, the sales mean nothing because the entry level buyers like it because it keeps the MSRP down compared to the 3.5. The AWD is a very popular option on the IS and in 2.5 it is cheaper than going up to a IS350.

If the 2.0t were available in the IS line with the same pricing currently the 2.0t would still sell at 2.5 numbers.

The 2.5 is a decent engine, but with the weight of the IS is really gets bogged down for both HP, efficiently and MPG. But it is by no means on par with modern V6 engines of today.
Toys4RJill is offline  


Quick Reply: Motortrend: Luxury Crossover Shootout



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 02:39 AM.