Incendiary

X3 and Freelander, then RDX next year, then Q5 and possible MLK... Lexus has such a strong grip on the luxury SUV market already, if they don't release a small SUV soon, they'll find themselves caught napping.

BTW, I don't really understand the differentiation among RX, GX, and LX. RX is a medium-sized car-based SUV, GX is a tiny bit larger, and LX is even a tiny bit larger still but can go off-roading, as it's based on the capable Land Cruiser. Maybe it's just me, but I would've gone with Lexus versions of the RAV4, 4Runner, and Sequoia from the get-go. It'd have allowed more of a S, M, L type of distinction than there seems to be now. Anyone else see what I'm saying?

Falcon LS

I can't speak much about the North American market, but over at this end the RX and LX seem to fill in the gap. The GX comes as the Toyota Prado with the 4.2L V6, so the RX covers mid-size SUV and LX covers the fullsize SUV market as far as Lexus goes.

To be honest, the smallest vehicle Lexus offers is mid-size, spare the IS. Personally, I think the range can do without a small SUV, becuase I think the RX is more than capable of competing with its rivals in the small to mid-size class. Then they have the GX for more serious competition in the mid-size class and that leaves the LX to complete with the fullsize rivals. To the best of my knowledge though, the GX comes with a 4.7L V8. If they offered the 4.2L V6 which comes with the Prado as a choice, it would be pretty good.

LexFather

The Rav-4 has always been a good seller for Toyota. Many people don't want huge SUVs. I also think its one of the better looking ones or at least it looks different.
A Lexus Rav4, no sir. Honestly, the RX is small enough. It only seats 5. The X3 is selling well but universally thought of as the worst small luxury SUV and worst BMW ever. So why chase that? Acura is a downmarket brand, so a RDX makes sense for them. The Audi Q5 will be a X5 competitor, it will cost in the low 40s to start.

If you notice, Lexus invented the car based SUV (the RX) and now the performance/hybrid SUV (the 400h). They were the first company to battle Range Rover in the luxury SUV segment, with the LX 450. They also have used the strongest and some of the worlds most reknown SUVs to rebadge, the GX and LX (off Landcruisers overseas). Even if people don't go off-road, they like to know its there. The GX has won 4 wheeler of the year 2 years in a row. The LX has either won or places 2nd in every comparison possible. And this is now a very old car.

Lexus is the number one selling brand for the past 5 years without having to resort to going downmarket, to the 20-30k market. The RX 330 is their best seller and the avg price is around 41-42k. A rebadged Rav4 makes no sense to them, since IMAGE is so very hard to build. And its very easy to destroy.


With the designations, well, I guess the LX matches the LS in price, the GX matches the GS. in price, I am sure Lexus did not use EX for the RX because that is a well known Honda designation. So the RX does throw the other 2 off.

The next LX may indeed be based on the next Sequoia so your thoughts are not all off. And they do have a S, M, L SUV, RX, GX, LX. Expect the next LX to be much bigger than the current one.

Falcon LS

EXACTLY what I was trying to say when I mentioned the smallest vehicle in the range being mid-size. It kind of fits the image of Lexus offering more than competitors do for a simillar price.

Incendiary

I realize that S M L -- RX GX LX, but my point was the size difference isn't that great. It's kinda like Cadillac and their CTS/STS. The difference in length is only 5" or so. I realize that size isn't everything (someone feel free to make a snide remark about that), but it's something.

BTW, Q7 is X5 competitor, Q5 is the upcoming X3 competitor. I don't think there are any real concrete plans for it, but it's almost definitely going to happen. Earliest will be like 2008 release, though.

Anyway, I bet that by 2010, a small (i.e. smaller than RX, roughly RAV4 size) Lexus SUV will be out. When Toyota sees the competition making profit that they could have earned instead, they'll come around.

Incendiary

I thought this was a distinctly American idea, but I guess I was wrong. I hate the notion that manufacturers have that a small car (or in this case, vehicle) cannot be as nice or luxurious as a large one. I don't see a 5-series or a GS offering more than a 3-series or IS, I see it as offering less handling and less fun. I wish manufacturers would offer the same level of luxury appointments that they do in larger cars, like NICE leather instead of the plasticky crap that's currently available. There was an article sometime ago about how American car companies for some reason think that a smaller car must necessarily be cheaper and crappier. So for example, on the CTS there was some material quality or design flaw that the article mentioned that GM said would be fixed in the STS. The author talked about how ludicrous it was that you'd have to pay more for a larger car just to get something "fixed" that should never have been intentionally "broken" in the first place.

Anyway, the point of that rant was that you (or at least Lexus) can still offer a very nice, vintage-Lexus small SUV, regardless of a shorter wheelbase or less interior cubic capacity.

LexFather

Well its not the fact Lexus cannot do it, its that they won't. Lexus already has 3 SUVs. more than any other car maker. Another SUV can then hurt the image of LExus, by being a truck brand. Also, Toyota offers the Rav-4, Highlander and 4-runner. The Highlander and 4-runner are as well built and pretty luxurious for a Toyota. It makes no sense for Lexus to offer something down there.

The CTS, well, GM stil doesn't have it all together. It is way to big and the interior, well, its the old typical GM way. I am sure the next car will be better in that aspect. There is strong rumors of a BTS coming, a smaller Caddy. That is one reason Caddy has been a tough sell in Europe, too big compared to competitors (smaller roads, parking etc).

It is VERY tough to have it all for 30k or under 30k WITH a luxury badge. The 3 series comes closest and that is why it STILL is the segment leader. Otherwise, the A4 and TSX have very nice interiors but at thie price, I-4 engines, FWD and cheap leather, etc. The G35 and IS 300 offer driving dynamics of the 3, I-6 engines and RWD, but the interiors lack the 3s polish. (the next IS promises to meet/beat the 3, the IS 250 maybe something incredible)

Gotcha on the Q5/7 Audi is way too late in the game. I again, doubt a small Lexus SUV is coming. THe next IS will continue to offer a wagon and AWD will begin to be offered. The HPX concept may make production, which would be a AWD, Infintii FX fighter.

Incendiary

I don't think I understand what you're saying. Toyota has the RAV4, Highlander, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, and Sequoia. The Land Cruiser is already considered a luxury vehicle. Lexus has RX (based off Highlander), GX (based off 4Runner still?), and LX (based off Land Cruiser). I still think there's a case to be made for a smaller luxury SUV, since it wouldn't compete with the RAV4 as it's a Lexus, and it also wouldn't compete with the much larger Highlander or 4Runner. If anything, it made no sense for Toyota to Lexusize the Land Cruiser, wouldn't you say? It's already a luxury vehicle, like I said earlier.


BTS? Have you heard that anywhere other than the R&T article from last month? I haven't and would be a little surprised if Caddy really does that. I'd be all for it, but I'd be surprised nonetheless.

I'm not sure what you mean by your first line, but I agree that the next IS has big expectations. And you forgot to mention the MB C230k as an I-4, although it's not FWD. Cheap leather is also not something unique to Audi and Acura, as all of the entry level lux class is plagued by this problem. Well, the G35 leather is actually quite decent, whereas the leather on the M35/45 is actually much less supple, surprisingly.


Audi is late to the game, you're right, but I kinda suspect their SUVs will do well. It fits better with their image, I keep thinking for some reason. Maybe because of the AWD thing? I dunno. Haven't seen the HPX concept, but I'll do a search for it.

Really, I'd prefer SUVs not exist at all, or at least not in luxury form. I don't mean to advocate the creation of more of these non-sporty gas-guzzlers, but Lexus already does sell more SUVs than cars, right? I just see this as the next logical step, but I guess we'll have to wait a couple years and see how well the compact luxury SUVs sell.

MoFunk

wouldn't the biggest issue with a Lexus Rav4 vehicle be that it's a move too far downmarket? I mean how much could you actuaally charge for this vehicle? The X3 whilst smaller than the X5 is still much larger than a rav4 and priced not much below that of the X5.

videcormeum

The RAV4 is built in Japan.

If Lexus wasn't selling its pricier vehicles and had to pull an Acura - they could probably apply vinyl "leather" to the seats on a Rav, slap on some badges and sell them like boiled peanuts.

But Lexus doesn't have a problem selling its pricier vehicles - they are constantly moving up-market.

Producing a Lexus RAV wouldn't do much for them in any regard (financial, perception, brand cachet, or otherwise) - so I doubt we'll see it.

M.

mmarshall

First, Mike.......Ford and Chevy both have more than 3 SUV's each.

Ford...Escape, Explorer, Expedition, Excursion
Chevy.....Equinox, TrailBlazer, Tahoe, Suburban
GMC....ditto Chevy.

I think part of the reason we don't have a RAV-4 based Lexus SUV is simply the refusal of Lexus to market a 4-cylinder in the American market. Toyota has not yet developed a V6 powertrain for the RAV-4.
That is also the reason why we don't have the Lexus IS200 here or an entry-level Lexus version of the Corolla either like Infiniti did with the Sentra and the G20. Lexus simply refuses to market 4-cylinder vehicles here.

aloha08isf

iTrader: (2)

imo there is no need for a lexus rav4.

MoFunk

But the IS200 actually has a 6 cyclinder engine, just with a 1988 cc capacity. But the perception of 'underpower' in the US as i understand makes a big difference

mmarshall

Yeah...you got me on that one...I had forgotten it is a small 6. But the point is still taken...Lexus refuses to market low-power vehicles in the U.S. And I guess it depends on your perception of "underpowered". I, for one, am not a speed freak....I would have no problem with the IS200. Plus, in Northern Virginia's horrendous driving conditions and second-worst-in-the-U.S traffic, there isn't much room to speed anyway.

Gojirra99

I agree with the majority here, to a Lexus RAV4