corradoMR2

Expect the NX to transfer slightly more noise into the cabin since the ES has Lamisafe side windows among other extras to further deaden the sound (it's designed/engineered with an emphasis on quiet).

Based on reviews, interviews with the head engineer, and other bits of information, tNVH in the NX is expected to be similar to the current IS, which I own and find fairly good (but not as quiet as my RX which also has the Lamisafe windows).

Nights

The NX F Sport version's NVH is very similar to the IS, maybe just a tad quieter.

I think the hybrid's performance is fine, especially when you take into account it's mainly going to be used as a city car. Hybrids will always seem "loud" when you mash the pedal because the CVT will take the engine high (the same thing happens in our RX450h), however to be honest, we rarely have to floor it so to speak, and thus it's rare that you experience that noise. Journos always mention it an inordinate amount, however if you ask most hybrid drivers it's not a common occurrence because there's very little need to drive that way, especially if you're looking for good fuel economy. Conversely, they're usually deathly quiet at low speeds, in traffic jams etc which is where most of these cars are going to spend 90+% of the time, around different markets.

I found my experience with the 300h was similar to the numbers they got on that Autobytel 0-60 video on youtube. It's perfectly acceptable for a city runabout SUV. I never get the point of a "fast" SUV; it's just screaming "I like to go fast in straight lines". If I really want to enjoy my driving, I drive my Cayman S. If I want a comfortable daily driver that can also ferry my kids/family/gear around, with plenty of gadgets to play with, then the NX will suit us fine.

adamsmith

I'm not disappointed with the NX. You may not understand (well, I'm not explaining myself really) because I didn't talk about all the other features I found in the NX.
I was looking for a "luxury" SUV, not diesel, automatic (this may sound a strange wish in the US...), comfortable, not a typical car, well equipped, not to consume a lot...
The NX got it all, but its performance is not what i was used to. It's not that it disappointed me, it's just that during the last 5 years I've had:

• Alfa Romeo 156 TD 150CV
• Audi A3 2.0T 160CV
• Mercedes C220 CDI 170CV
• Mercedes CLK200 180CV
• VW Golf 1.4TSI 140CV

The NX is comparable, in acceleration and "push back" effect, to the A3. The rest feel better than the NX (may I say obviously?)
My past experience explains why I feel the NX lazy. (I should have said that I feel it lazy, instead of It's lazy, and maybe i would have been less ambiguous)
But since I'm not looking for a performer, I think I will not regret it. I may miss from time to time some good push back.. who knows. But most of my driving will be around city anyway.

It's not a matter of speed, but the feeling of the turbo getting into action when pushing down. You don't get this feeling either in the Golf, of course, but Golf feels more nervous than the NX when getting out from the traffic light: It's quite more lighter.

Specs also mention a difference in 0-60. If you try one car after the other you will notice the difference. It's not a world of difference, but there is.

If you haven't driven a hybrid before: yes the CVT whines on hard acceleration, but I don't think it's all that bad. Sure it may be louder than a normal 8-speed transmission, but I rarely think about how loud it can be at times. This noise shouldn't be a factor when deciding to buy a hybrid (in my opinion)

Well, your case is different than mine, since this is my first hybrid, and I have never tried an RX, so I can't compare. I can only say that you should try it: it drives quite well for me.




All these said: the NXh is a great car. Oh, and after all this controversy, the title of the post was about expectations, which is what you have to have clear in order not to be disappointed

corradoMR2

+1 from past CT and RXh ownership.

Mr Bond

Had a testdrive with NX 300h today and its a very good car, maybe one of the best SUV:s on the market, but the 300h is simply to slow. I am used to Lexus hybrids since I drive IS300h and Ct200h so I didnt expect anything special, just to make that clear. But NXh should at least have the IS 300h engine configuration in terms of power. NX is a luxury vehicle and decent power is a part of the luxury experience, but really nothing happens here.

I will definitly wait for the 2.0t now. I really like the NX in every way and I really hope that the power and driveability of that engine will make the Nx the car I want it to be . Another thing is that 2.0t will get real awd and not this electric one.

bunka

This actually explains a LOT. Many of your prior vehicles were Diesels. The difference you are feeling is the TORQUE that Diesels are well known to produce far more than gasoline-based engines. Adding an electric motor to a I4 can help a bit (Hybrid) but it's never going to provide the kind of torque a Diesel is capable of. If one of your "must not have's" is the Diesel engine, then the torque of the Diesel is what you elected to give up when you made that decision.

An overabundance of torque is one of the PRIMARY reasons I selected a Diesel in my BMW x5d. I wanted that type of power to be available to me should I need to pull a boat or carry a lot of weight up a mountainside without compromising fuel economy. If you want that type of power AND fuel economy, only a Diesel is capable of deliving it. As a side note, there is a car manufacturer who is bringing a Diesel-Hybrid to market. That makes great sense to me as it would give you the best of both worlds. Goo city fuel economy (Hybrid) and good Highway fuel economy (Diesel) and as a bonus you will also get that torque that Diesels are known to provide as an added bonus. I can't recall the manufacturer at this time but that particular vehicle may not be an SUV and it may not be in the actual market for another 3 to 4 years so if you are trying to buy something in the near term, you HAVE no choice but to make a decision.

adamsmith

Citroen os the manufacturer you mention, and it's not a SUV yet.
And yes, I elected to give up torque, against all the other things. The thing is that in Spain we have a kind of diesel mania, and for many years now it seams only diesel exists, whatever use you give to your car.
You mention about towing boats and going to mountains, and that is clear for a diesel. But if someone is moving around city, suburbs, making around 10000 miles per year, petrol is more rational.

And then diesels are noisier, and tend to get old sooner. At least that's my perception. So, bye, bye torque...

spwolf

yeah, NX is a lot heavier than those cars, plus it is SUV so aero is worse as well. For instance where Avensis with 150hp diesel feels fast, Rav4 with same 150hp diesel feels simply adequate.

I still think it should be fast at low speeds as long as you activate sports mode... those motors do add instant +40hp. Several reviews actually mentioned how it was faster in city than 2.0t.

bunka

I was not aware of the Citreon. Kia is the one in the article I read and it's not a SUV. Here's the article...
http://blog.caranddriver.com/the-kia...t-makes-sense/

Diesel's actually have a LONGER longevity than do Petrol engines. A typical petrol is "toast"/finsihed around the 200K mile mark whereas the (newer) Diesel's are just getting broken in. The lower revolutions per Horsepower unit is part of why they tend to last longer.

They are a bit noiser but as Porsche has shown with their Diesel SUV, they can be made quieter. We almost bought the Porsche over the BMW until BMW discounted the X5d by some $10K and porsche said...no discounts so BMW got the nod from us, by the cost savings at purchase.

spwolf

KIA is just a concept... Citroen has production diesel hybrids sold in Europe.

Keep in mind that we are in Europe, where at minimum half of the cars are diesels.

So as to diesel vs petrol longetivity, maybe 40 years ago... These days, modern diesels have a lot of maintenance and things to go wrong after 100,000 miles. One big issue is certainly DPF filter if you live in the city. Rest of the issues vary between manufacturers but they are a lot more complicated than petrols due to turbines, high pressure fuel pumps, fuel injectors, emissions equipment, more wear on clutch/transmission, etc, etc.

bunka

The ONLY way I knew that you were not from this side of the ocean due to the vehicles referenced. You really should put your locations in your profile so that others are aware of it as well. You know, like I have (Location = North Caorlina). I have to admit that I did find the OP's reported location as "SINGLE" humorious though.
Cheers!

adamsmith

Jajaja! The SINGLE thing wasn't intended on my side. In fact, while signing up I was wondering why anyone in this forum would like to know if I was married or not (translation issues...)
Already changed it...

ABC

I recall one of the reviews of the hybrid NX said the 0-60 time was somewhere in the 9 second range.

Nights

Mid 8s according to this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRqiqGlG8qM

tresmith00

looks like the awd might be a few ticks faster than the fwd if you go by what's in the brochure...same as the turbo versions of the car.

according to the brochure, they list the hybrid in either fwd or awd have the same zero to sixty (9.1) but the video shows that the awd is up to half a sec faster.

the awd turbo car is two tenths faster than the fwd car (7.0 vs 7.2)