Consumer Reports Picks NX as one of Worst Cars of 2015
08-27-15, 12:55 PM
#1
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Consumer Reports Picks NX as one of Worst Cars of 2015
CR states (nothing new):
'The Lexus brand promises luxury trappings, a supple ride, and a soothing cabin. But the NX's proletarian Toyota RAV4 underpinnings show through with a firm, jostling ride. Its handling is no match for its German rivals. Some interior bits feel cheap, and the infotainment system's touchpad is challenging to manipulate while driving. Lexus can do better.'
'The Lexus brand promises luxury trappings, a supple ride, and a soothing cabin. But the NX's proletarian Toyota RAV4 underpinnings show through with a firm, jostling ride. Its handling is no match for its German rivals. Some interior bits feel cheap, and the infotainment system's touchpad is challenging to manipulate while driving. Lexus can do better.'
08-27-15, 02:57 PM
#4
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I posted word for word what they wrote...in their latest edition, there is a short blurb on the Road Report page at the back of the mag that lists the 'Worst Cars of 2015'. The others listed are the Chrysler 200, Kia Sedona, and the Land Rover Discovery Sport.
08-27-15, 03:07 PM
#5
Driver
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: NC
Posts: 125
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is the general consensus when people do no like what CR says.
It's a consumer magazine, so they review vehicles from a different perspective. I would not call them a joke.
Do I agree with what they wrote? Well, I still love my NX. I do believe the interior is cheap, but that is the only thing I agree with. The roads are really smooth where I drive, so I have not experienced the jostling ride they reference (as some others here have posted). Also, I think the NX handles very well for the way I drive. I haven't experienced the 'extreme' torque steer that some here have complained about...so, it suits me just fine. I understand there are other vehicles in this class that handle better.
It's a consumer magazine, so they review vehicles from a different perspective. I would not call them a joke.
Do I agree with what they wrote? Well, I still love my NX. I do believe the interior is cheap, but that is the only thing I agree with. The roads are really smooth where I drive, so I have not experienced the jostling ride they reference (as some others here have posted). Also, I think the NX handles very well for the way I drive. I haven't experienced the 'extreme' torque steer that some here have complained about...so, it suits me just fine. I understand there are other vehicles in this class that handle better.
08-27-15, 05:23 PM
#6
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not to Lexus Standard
I have has Lexus's before, mostly ES series. I leased a fully loaded NX3200t ($45K). I had some reservation about the NX but the wife liked it even though it is primarily for my use. Plus I needed a car quickly since my 2013 Ford SHO was totaled. I have had nothing but problems especially with the electronics. Took it back to the dealer but all they could say is that it is a new system. The dealer left me a RX350 while my NX was in for the recall. It took 3 days to get the part.
Driving the RX made me realize that the NX is nowhere near what a Lexus should be. Talked to the dealer about changing it to a RX. The NX had 4400 miles. They would "close" the lease for $8000!
The NX is NOT a bad car just not to what a Lexus should be. I have 30 months and counting to turn it in. My bad choice. Next time I should not listen to the wife. I really wanted a GS.
Driving the RX made me realize that the NX is nowhere near what a Lexus should be. Talked to the dealer about changing it to a RX. The NX had 4400 miles. They would "close" the lease for $8000!
The NX is NOT a bad car just not to what a Lexus should be. I have 30 months and counting to turn it in. My bad choice. Next time I should not listen to the wife. I really wanted a GS.
08-27-15, 08:17 PM
#7
Driver School Candidate
I respect CR and they do get lot of attention from Auto manufactures. I am pretty sure you would see some serious changes in the next update. Most car manufactures penny pinch even on their luxury line. Today a loaded NX and RX cost almost the same give or take 10%. With an RX you get lot more car for the buck.
Being said that I like my NX for the smaller SUV I was looking for. Would I buy an RX, no; do I prefer a better interior and a better throttle response yes.
I think it is a good thing that CR rated it worst for those who own and for future owners as Toyota would consider the CR opinion making decisions about NX line in the future.
Being said that I like my NX for the smaller SUV I was looking for. Would I buy an RX, no; do I prefer a better interior and a better throttle response yes.
I think it is a good thing that CR rated it worst for those who own and for future owners as Toyota would consider the CR opinion making decisions about NX line in the future.
Trending Topics
08-27-15, 09:14 PM
#8
I have a hard time understanding those that think you get more with an RX currently? For example a loaded Luxury model NX vs a loaded RX...not base models or f sport. Can you find a 15' RX with PCS, lane keep, power rear seat, triple beam LED headlights? Most RX's I've seen are pretty basic. You do get more size with the RX. My Luxury Model NX 200T has a great interior...real leather and real wood. I also have a 2014 Ultra Luxury ES and a fully loaded 2011 GX. The ES could have used some interior improvements...which they are now fixing on the 2016 model with leather around the center console and more wood. Only the GX feels a bit more luxurious...but it cost 20k more than my NX...it should. I'm wondering if CR only tested the F sport model which would ride more firm...and interior lacks wood and leather?
Last edited by Frog98; 08-27-15 at 09:28 PM.
08-27-15, 09:29 PM
#9
I have mixed feelings about my NX200t. I think the engine is great. It is pretty quiet. The touchpad is a mistake IMO. Turning off haptic feedback made it a lot better, but I rely on the steering wheel buttons to control things. I swapped my 18" wheels w/ Geolanders for 17" wheels w/ Michelins. Ride quality improved quite nicely but still transmits more road imperfections than I would like.
08-27-15, 09:53 PM
#10
Their full review does mention the NX300h, so I think they drove both the FSport and the Hybrid. I noticed on my test drives that the F Sport was a lot stiffer than the non-F sport.
I have mixed feelings about my NX200t. I think the engine is great. It is pretty quiet. The touchpad is a mistake IMO. Turning off haptic feedback made it a lot better, but I rely on the steering wheel buttons to control things. I swapped my 18" wheels w/ Geolanders for 17" wheels w/ Michelins. Ride quality improved quite nicely but still transmits more road imperfections than I would like.
I have mixed feelings about my NX200t. I think the engine is great. It is pretty quiet. The touchpad is a mistake IMO. Turning off haptic feedback made it a lot better, but I rely on the steering wheel buttons to control things. I swapped my 18" wheels w/ Geolanders for 17" wheels w/ Michelins. Ride quality improved quite nicely but still transmits more road imperfections than I would like.
08-28-15, 09:48 AM
#11
Some thoughts …
1. Like much of the motoring press, I believe that CR doesn’t actually “get” the CUV craze. They concern themselves with families of four plus when CUVs are really aimed at singles and couples. At the bottom of their thinking is “Why bother with a CUV when one could buy a perfectly nice sedan or station wagon?” The answer is two-fold … in our current driving environments it is better and safer to sit high(er) and in a pinch one can carry more in a CUV after one lowers the back seats. As proof, look at the Buick Encore, which rates a lowish 69 but is selling like hotcakes. The marketplace doesn’t lie and, clearly, CR is misunderstanding key customer motivations and desires. But, what of the, say, X3 and Q5 you may ask?
2. The NX fairs better in comparative reviews in which all of the vehicles are equipped in a roughly equal manner and where price vs. content comes into consideration … i.e., the big 5-way Motor Trend review. CR does not do this but rather goes by notes and memories of impressions from previous years. They also do not test all of the versions (e.g., the questionable conclusion about the Lexus IS). A side by side comparison is important for judging handling, ride, NHV, seating comfort, etc. They prefer, it would seem, the BMW X3 and the Audi Q5 (as examples) more than the NX, but what if one now tries to equip those two admittedly good Germans with the safety goodies (blind spot monitor, parking assist, adaptive cruise, and lane departure indicators) which in this day and age are important equipment for many of us to have in our automobiles? Some of these are not available (or readily available) on those two vehicles and when some of them are included, the final price is usually in the mid to high 50s. What trim level and content is included in each vehicle at a specific price point (quality of materials)? Do they have power steering column, wheel positioning, and seat positioning with memory for fine tuning the driving position? Note that a cost of ownership calculation was performed in the MT review. Bench marking against a Porsche Macan is crazy for the obvious reason.
3. CR has side stepped what we all know will help support the choice of an NX … the frequency of repair data that will most likely accrue to the Lexus and the best dealer network in the USA. The quality of warranty support does matter. This is important for someone (like me) that lives two hours away from the dealers of interest.
4. Attributes like seating comfort and driving position are personal variables. There is many a car in their lineup rated with a better than average driving position that I could not easily live with (the short legs, long torso problem).
One could go on, but in the end one has to go out and determine what car suits one’s needs and budget. Car reviews get you into the ballpark, but you still have to find your seat on your own.
1. Like much of the motoring press, I believe that CR doesn’t actually “get” the CUV craze. They concern themselves with families of four plus when CUVs are really aimed at singles and couples. At the bottom of their thinking is “Why bother with a CUV when one could buy a perfectly nice sedan or station wagon?” The answer is two-fold … in our current driving environments it is better and safer to sit high(er) and in a pinch one can carry more in a CUV after one lowers the back seats. As proof, look at the Buick Encore, which rates a lowish 69 but is selling like hotcakes. The marketplace doesn’t lie and, clearly, CR is misunderstanding key customer motivations and desires. But, what of the, say, X3 and Q5 you may ask?
2. The NX fairs better in comparative reviews in which all of the vehicles are equipped in a roughly equal manner and where price vs. content comes into consideration … i.e., the big 5-way Motor Trend review. CR does not do this but rather goes by notes and memories of impressions from previous years. They also do not test all of the versions (e.g., the questionable conclusion about the Lexus IS). A side by side comparison is important for judging handling, ride, NHV, seating comfort, etc. They prefer, it would seem, the BMW X3 and the Audi Q5 (as examples) more than the NX, but what if one now tries to equip those two admittedly good Germans with the safety goodies (blind spot monitor, parking assist, adaptive cruise, and lane departure indicators) which in this day and age are important equipment for many of us to have in our automobiles? Some of these are not available (or readily available) on those two vehicles and when some of them are included, the final price is usually in the mid to high 50s. What trim level and content is included in each vehicle at a specific price point (quality of materials)? Do they have power steering column, wheel positioning, and seat positioning with memory for fine tuning the driving position? Note that a cost of ownership calculation was performed in the MT review. Bench marking against a Porsche Macan is crazy for the obvious reason.
3. CR has side stepped what we all know will help support the choice of an NX … the frequency of repair data that will most likely accrue to the Lexus and the best dealer network in the USA. The quality of warranty support does matter. This is important for someone (like me) that lives two hours away from the dealers of interest.
4. Attributes like seating comfort and driving position are personal variables. There is many a car in their lineup rated with a better than average driving position that I could not easily live with (the short legs, long torso problem).
One could go on, but in the end one has to go out and determine what car suits one’s needs and budget. Car reviews get you into the ballpark, but you still have to find your seat on your own.
Last edited by Koetsu; 09-13-15 at 04:41 PM. Reason: Fact check
08-28-15, 10:47 AM
#12
Lexus Champion
Some thoughts …
1. Like much of the motoring press, I believe that CR doesn’t actually “get” the CUV craze. They concern themselves with families of four plus when CUVs are really aimed at singles and couples. At the bottom of their thinking is “Why bother with a CUV when one could buy a perfectly nice sedan or station wagon?” The answer is two-fold … in our current driving environments it is better and safer to sit high(er) and in a pinch one can carry more in a CUV after one lowers the back seats. As proof, look at the Buick Encore, which rates a low 61 but is selling like hotcakes. The marketplace doesn’t lie and, clearly, CR is misunderstanding key customer motivations and desires. But, what of the, say, X3 and Q5 you may ask?
2. The NX fairs better in comparative reviews in which all of the vehicles are equipped in a roughly equal manner and where price vs. content comes into consideration … i.e., the big 5-way Motor Trend review. CR does not do this but rather goes by notes and memories of impressions from previous years. They also do not test all of the versions (e.g., the questionable conclusion about the Lexus IS). A side by side comparison is important for judging handling, ride, NHV, seating comfort, etc. They prefer, it would seem, the BMW X3 and the Audi Q5 (as examples) more than the NX, but what if one now tries to equip those two admittedly good Germans with the safety goodies (blind spot monitor, parking assist, adaptive cruise, and lane departure indicators) which in this day and age are important equipment for many of us to have in our automobiles? Some of these are not available (or readily available) on those two vehicles and when some of them are included, the final price is usually in the mid to high 50s. What trim level and content is included in each vehicle at a specific price point (quality of materials)? Do they have power steering column, wheel positioning, and seat positioning with memory for fine tuning the driving position? Note that a cost of ownership calculation was performed in the MT review. Bench marking against a Porche Macan is crazy for the obvious reason.
3. CR has side stepped what we all know will help support the choice of an NX … the frequency of repair data that will most likely accrue to the Lexus and the best dealer network in the USA. The quality of warranty support does matter. This is important for someone (like me) that lives two hours away from the dealers of interest.
4. Attributes like seating comfort and driving position are personal variables. There is many a car in their lineup rated with a better than average driving position that I could not easily live with (the short legs, long torso problem).
One could go on, but in the end one has to go out and determine what car suits one’s needs and budget. Car reviews get you into the ballpark, but you still have to find your seat on your own.
1. Like much of the motoring press, I believe that CR doesn’t actually “get” the CUV craze. They concern themselves with families of four plus when CUVs are really aimed at singles and couples. At the bottom of their thinking is “Why bother with a CUV when one could buy a perfectly nice sedan or station wagon?” The answer is two-fold … in our current driving environments it is better and safer to sit high(er) and in a pinch one can carry more in a CUV after one lowers the back seats. As proof, look at the Buick Encore, which rates a low 61 but is selling like hotcakes. The marketplace doesn’t lie and, clearly, CR is misunderstanding key customer motivations and desires. But, what of the, say, X3 and Q5 you may ask?
2. The NX fairs better in comparative reviews in which all of the vehicles are equipped in a roughly equal manner and where price vs. content comes into consideration … i.e., the big 5-way Motor Trend review. CR does not do this but rather goes by notes and memories of impressions from previous years. They also do not test all of the versions (e.g., the questionable conclusion about the Lexus IS). A side by side comparison is important for judging handling, ride, NHV, seating comfort, etc. They prefer, it would seem, the BMW X3 and the Audi Q5 (as examples) more than the NX, but what if one now tries to equip those two admittedly good Germans with the safety goodies (blind spot monitor, parking assist, adaptive cruise, and lane departure indicators) which in this day and age are important equipment for many of us to have in our automobiles? Some of these are not available (or readily available) on those two vehicles and when some of them are included, the final price is usually in the mid to high 50s. What trim level and content is included in each vehicle at a specific price point (quality of materials)? Do they have power steering column, wheel positioning, and seat positioning with memory for fine tuning the driving position? Note that a cost of ownership calculation was performed in the MT review. Bench marking against a Porche Macan is crazy for the obvious reason.
3. CR has side stepped what we all know will help support the choice of an NX … the frequency of repair data that will most likely accrue to the Lexus and the best dealer network in the USA. The quality of warranty support does matter. This is important for someone (like me) that lives two hours away from the dealers of interest.
4. Attributes like seating comfort and driving position are personal variables. There is many a car in their lineup rated with a better than average driving position that I could not easily live with (the short legs, long torso problem).
One could go on, but in the end one has to go out and determine what car suits one’s needs and budget. Car reviews get you into the ballpark, but you still have to find your seat on your own.
Just a couple of notes for clarification and I bring this up because up until recently I was a long term CR subscriber and read most of their automotive reports, tests etc.
1. I didn't notice any negative bias to the CUV segment in their reviews. It might just be a matter of perspective though.
2.CR purchases the vehicles they test and in addition to track testing, keeps them in their fleet until the testing is over. Various staff members drive them and report on their experiences during this period. In order for a vehicle to be "Recommended" is has to score high enough in their Road Test and have Average or better Reliability. I recall in the article on the IS250, which they didn't like, they ended the write up by saying "the IS350 is a much better choice".
3. CR regularly lauds Lexus for its reliability (rightfully so). I believe there is a report out now (I saw it in Car Chat) where they once again rated Lexus as the #1 brand for overall reliability..
I'm not defending CR here, just giving my thoughts and understanding of how they do things.
Last edited by LexBob2; 08-28-15 at 10:50 AM.
08-28-15, 11:39 AM
#13
I agree completely that each person needs to check out vehicles of interest and make their own decisions based on need and preference.
Just a couple of notes for clarification and I bring this up because up until recently I was a long term CR subscriber and read most of their automotive reports, tests etc.
1. I didn't notice any negative bias to the CUV segment in their reviews. It might just be a matter of perspective though.
2.CR purchases the vehicles they test and in addition to track testing, keeps them in their fleet until the testing is over. Various staff members drive them and report on their experiences during this period. In order for a vehicle to be "Recommended" is has to score high enough in their Road Test and have Average or better Reliability. I recall in the article on the IS250, which they didn't like, they ended the write up by saying "the IS350 is punchier but underwhelming".
3. CR regularly lauds Lexus for its reliability (rightfully so). I believe there is a report out now (I saw it in Car Chat) where they once again rated Lexus as the #1 brand for overall reliability..
I'm not defending CR here, just giving my thoughts and understanding of how they do things.
Just a couple of notes for clarification and I bring this up because up until recently I was a long term CR subscriber and read most of their automotive reports, tests etc.
1. I didn't notice any negative bias to the CUV segment in their reviews. It might just be a matter of perspective though.
2.CR purchases the vehicles they test and in addition to track testing, keeps them in their fleet until the testing is over. Various staff members drive them and report on their experiences during this period. In order for a vehicle to be "Recommended" is has to score high enough in their Road Test and have Average or better Reliability. I recall in the article on the IS250, which they didn't like, they ended the write up by saying "the IS350 is punchier but underwhelming".
3. CR regularly lauds Lexus for its reliability (rightfully so). I believe there is a report out now (I saw it in Car Chat) where they once again rated Lexus as the #1 brand for overall reliability..
I'm not defending CR here, just giving my thoughts and understanding of how they do things.
CR has made their share of mistakes over the years. Recall, if you can, the goof they made in the early 1970s by ranking the TI scientific calculator over the HP. Boy, did they get letters about that! And, they had to reverse themselves.
They are only human.Again, their weighting of attributes does not match with mine. I would have liked to have seen a more positive review, but I have every confidence in my selection of an NX200t Lux for my requirements.
Last edited by Koetsu; 09-13-15 at 04:42 PM. Reason: Fact check.
08-28-15, 01:52 PM
#14
I agree. I have followed CR over the years, too. And, as you say, it might be a matter of perspective. I made quite clear that I believe it is. By the way, not including the qualification within the ratings write up in their annual car issues and newsstand car book for the IS(350) is kinda sloppy, yes?
CR has made their share of mistakes over the years. Recall, if you can, the goof they made in the early 1970s by ranking the TI scientific calculator over the HP. Boy, did they get letters about that! And, they had to reverse themselves. They are only human.
Again, their weighting of attributes does not match with mine. I would have liked to have seen a more positive review, but I have every confidence in my selection of an NX200t Lux for my requirements.
CR has made their share of mistakes over the years. Recall, if you can, the goof they made in the early 1970s by ranking the TI scientific calculator over the HP. Boy, did they get letters about that! And, they had to reverse themselves.
They are only human.Again, their weighting of attributes does not match with mine. I would have liked to have seen a more positive review, but I have every confidence in my selection of an NX200t Lux for my requirements.
CR's "job", if you will, is to enumerate what features a product offers, what CR believes the product does well or does not, and what the overall value of said product is using CR's criteria. As consumers we can then take that information and make our own decision, interweaving CR's findings with our own needs and desires.
There is one important thing to note about CR: they buy products anonymously and do not accept samples from manufacturers, nor advertising. They go to great lengths to be impartial and to not allow themselves to be influenced by outside forces; they endeavor to be a selfless voice for the consumer. I strongly appreciate and support their way of doing business, and I do find myself wondering, at times, if the big-name car mags are similarly altruistic.
I'll be renewing my subscription (but throwing away their review of the NX!).
08-28-15, 02:31 PM
#15
I too am a CR subscriber and have been for many years, and before that my Dad always got it. I bet I've read every issue for about the last thirty-five years or so. I have come to understand and appreciate their perspective on things. In this case, I appreciated their criticisms of the NX, though I didn't agree with all of them.
CR's "job", if you will, is to enumerate what features a product offers, what CR believes the product does well or does not, and what the overall value of said product is using CR's criteria. As consumers we can then take that information and make our own decision, interweaving CR's findings with our own needs and desires.
There is one important thing to note about CR: they buy products anonymously and do not accept samples from manufacturers, nor advertising. They go to great lengths to be impartial and to not allow themselves to be influenced by outside forces; they endeavor to be a selfless voice for the consumer. I strongly appreciate and support their way of doing business, and I do find myself wondering, at times, if the big-name car mags are similarly altruistic.
I'll be renewing my subscription (but throwing away their review of the NX!).
CR's "job", if you will, is to enumerate what features a product offers, what CR believes the product does well or does not, and what the overall value of said product is using CR's criteria. As consumers we can then take that information and make our own decision, interweaving CR's findings with our own needs and desires.
There is one important thing to note about CR: they buy products anonymously and do not accept samples from manufacturers, nor advertising. They go to great lengths to be impartial and to not allow themselves to be influenced by outside forces; they endeavor to be a selfless voice for the consumer. I strongly appreciate and support their way of doing business, and I do find myself wondering, at times, if the big-name car mags are similarly altruistic.
I'll be renewing my subscription (but throwing away their review of the NX!).
Some of you here appear to believe that I do not know how CR goes about doing business. Well, I do. I've been reading CR for 50 years. Their tabulation of frequency of repair data, for example, is very useful and is compiled in a dispassionate way. But, to reiterate, their (honest) weighting of attributes in automobiles does not necessarily always align with mine and with my circumstances. As a rational adult, one does not have to slavishly follow all of their recommendations.