SW17LS

There is absolutely nothing rugged or capable about an RX. The RX is not a vehicle meant to be taken offroad...its not a GX.

Making an RX look rugged like a Jeep would be ridiculous. Its a street vehicle, and I applaud them for not pretending it isn't. If you want a vehicle that looks like a Jeep...buy a Jeep...I did!

AWD is superior, what I'm talking about is a RWD setup with an inline mounted motor, with the AWD system being rear biased. Like all other vehicles in its class, save for Buick.

Buick and Lexus...thats it for FWD based vehicles in this class. Not the company Lexus needs to be keeping.

Right...downmarket value offerings. When the 5 Series is FWD, come talk to me. Nobody is saying the CT needs to be RWD...but the RX is moving upmarket and they are trying to compete with cars like the X5 and the ML, and it needs to be RWD based to do that.

FWD is a value power train...thats why overwhelmingly all premium vehicles are RWD. Audis sold in the US are rear biased AWD, and when they go from a FWD car to RWD, they turn the engine the right way...very unique. Why is a Rolls Royce not FWD?

If they're happy building a non-enthusiast vehicle, fine. No enthusiast is going to buy a FWD based RX, they'll buy the ML and X5. Their movement in styling and equipment is cashing checks the platform can't fund. When they come up with a vehicle that looks the part AND is the part, then they have a shot of actually being a peer in that segment. As good as this RX looks to be, it will always be an afterthought compared to the X5 and ML when it comes to enthusiasts. The RX sells great, but they are saying they want to appeal to the enthusiast.

Thats the argument as for why this "sporty look" on the RX and ES is so pointless. They turn away their bread and butter with how the vehicle looks, when it doesn't have the platform or the capability to appeal to the buyer they could reach with the styling.

Don't want to beat the drum on this, like I said I love the new RX, I may in fact buy one, but I do agree with RNM GS3 that the time has come for Lexus really to jump into the true premium market with both feet and stop dabbling in Buick territory, it holds them back.

ericsan13

Exactly...as I said, a SUV is supposed to be rugged or capable. Actually I take my RX offroad - not on sand dunes or up 30% grades, but on rough remote dirt roads that are ungroomed. I will not pretend that it isn't a street vehicle though, but it has been very capable so far. It could be more rugged. I considered Jeep but I like the reliability and brand name of Lexus. I know you have a whole other conversation going on there in another thread.

As a potential shopper of X5 and the ML(GLE), I really don't care if it is RWD based. What advantage does it provide?

If X5 or ML could be bought at a better value as FWD (though I would opt for AWD), I would gladly buy them. ML and X5 are seen as more rugged even though they too are street cars. They have offroad packages or similar...why not RX?

This is a good point, they are trying to appeal to 'enthusiasts' while trying not to alienate their current population. What kind of enthusiasts are you talking about though? The X5 and ML are afterthoughts for me compared to the RX and the FWD point is negated if you buy AWD.

I priced a fully loaded RX450h against a fully loaded ML350 and the ML was only $1300 more.

I am very much enjoying the discussion by the way!

-Eric

kmar

I wonder what the release of information about the new 2016 RX will affect sales of the current 2015, especially since the 2016 won't be available until late this year? Might slow down sales for the 2015's causing dealers to offer better deals?

SW17LS

Thats more offloading than 99% of people do LOL. Really...very few people need more capability that that. I've done that level of offloading in all of my Lexus sedans in WV. The RWD LS's, the FWD ES's and the AWD GS.

RWD, or a RWD based AWD power train provides a lot of benefits. Once you become accustomed to a RWD vehicle. going back to a FWD vehicle is tough. Believe me, I did it.

A few of them:

1. RWD vehicles are in general smoother in the power delivery department.
2. RWD vehicles have more even weight distribution, FWD vehicles are front heavy
3. Power delivery while turning and cornering is better, since the drive wheels are not the steering wheels. Power delivery when turning pushing from the rear helps drive you through a turn too, can't do that with a FWD vehicle.
4. RWD helps with styling elements. Hate the RX's overhag/beak? Thats because its FWD. FWD vehicles (on the whole) have engines that sit in front of the front axle, because the power needs to be fed from the engine, to the transmission, back to the drive wheels. Having the engine sitting in front of the front axle makes the car look short hooded, and it also creates the weight distribution issue I mentioned. RWD vehicles have the engine behind the front axle, making a shorter front overhang, better weight distribution and overall better looking RWD proportions.
5. RWD vehicles have less moving parts to break over time.

Theres a reason race cars and premium cars are overwhelmingly RWD, and economy cars are overwhelmingly FWD.

Their offroad packages are just as dumb LOL.

Because you aren't an enthusiast (no offense intended). Any driving enthusiast understands the benefits of RWD vs FWD, anybody who is accustomed to premium vehicles understands that as well.

Buying AWD doesn't negate the issue. An AWD RX is still at its core a FWD vehicle. It has a transverse mounted engine, mounted in front of the front axle, and most power is sent to the front, and then directed to the rear when there is slippage. Thats the issue, an AWD Jeep, or my AWD GS, or an X5 or ML or anything like that has a longitudinally mounted engine, behind the front axle, with most power directed to the rear until slippage occurs then its shunted to the front.

Its like me saying I don't understand why an automatic movement in a watch is better than a quartz movement. I'm not a watch enthusiast, all the watches I own are quartz movement. Doesn't mean the automatic movement isn't better...it is...I just am not an enthusiast so I don't understand. Same thing here. Watch enthusiasts buy quality watches with automatic movements. Auto enthusiasts buy quality vehicles with RWD power trains.

Likewise! but we are way off topic. I don't want to hijack the thread. Feel free to PM me, or do some more reading on the subject.

SW17LS

It will slow it down somewhat. But...most buyers won't realize a new RX is even coming.

kmar

Perhaps most buyers are not like me, as I research what I'm considering buying. I spent the better part of a month reading everything I could find about the RX 350, including joining the Club Lexus Forum before I bought one. When you go to the Lexus website you can't miss the fact there's a new 2016 coming soon.

coolsaber

So you do know that the Italians Jeeps are actually German Mercedes MLs underneath. Heck the challenger, 300, charger are all mb platforms modernized.

SW17LS

You'd be shocked lol. A lot of people just walk in off the street and say "Hey, I want to buy a car" and thats it.

Your approach (and my approach) is perfectly reasonable considering the significance of the purchase. But, people are nuts.

ericsan13

Thanks for the succinct information on RWD.

None taken. I would still consider myself a 'driving enthusiast'...however the things I value are different from the benefits of RWD you listed. Personally I am interested in the 450h and points 1, 2, and 3 are less relevant with the hybrid. Point 5 not so much because Lexus just has awesome reliability.

The RX is successful because it hits the mark on so many things that I do not fault it for being a fuel economy focused FWD platform. This is a plus for the majority, who aren't 'racing enthusiasts', which is really where RWD is king.

So then if Lexus really wanted to target enthusiasts, they would produce a more robust AWD system that has a rear-bias. I'm most interested in the 450h AWD myself and hoping there will be more push from the rear, but this is not a requirement.

Hey, weren't you just defending the 4RX not too long ago??

-Eric

go3Ds

March 2015 RX sales in U.S. = 9177. That's with 1 less selling day than March 2014. Pretty impressive considering the 2015 MY has been out for quite some time, and many knew the 4th generation RX was on the way. Also 2015 March NX sales in U.S. = 3633, so RX sales could have even been a few more. I'm thinking the only way sales will slow down on the 2015 RX is when selection decreases, as Lexus and dealers eventually start to deplete inventory for the 2016's. Deals have been excellent, and just as good now as later, only with the better selection. As you mentioned, will be interesting to see what sales will be now that everyone knows what's up with the 2016, while still lots to choose from on the 2015.

I know one thing, no deals, or very little on the 2016's first few weeks, as demand will exceed supply until inventories build up some at the dealers. The start of the last generation was a madhouse trying to get one at the very beginning, as all of us early release 2010 RX buyers remember.

Nights

Larger, more exclusive RWD platforms cost more money. The GS platform would certainly cost more than the Highlander platform that the RX is based on. The associated parts would cost more as well. Which would mean increased overall costs. Best case in point is MBenz with their whole E-class coupe and C-class coupe. Both are actually based on the same C class chassis, whereas MBenz could easily have used the E class chassis yet it cost a whole lot more, and it was far more profitable for them to use the cheaper chassis and make the external sheet metal look like an E class.

FWD also brings packaging benefits, particular for smaller vehicles. You get more usable internal space (esp. boot space) in a more compact package. Hence why BMW has already stated that all 1 series based vehicles (next 1, 2, X1 etc) will likely be FWD, especially after their internal testing showed the vast majority of their 1, 2, 3 series owners didn't realise their cars were RWD, and wouldn't have changed their purchase decision if the car was FWD. Audi is a case in point. Their Quattro systems have not been particularly RWD biased until recently, hence their cars always had terrible understeer on the track. The majority of Audis sold worldwide are also FWD. RWD traditionally has been the domain of larger, more performance orientated vehicles because you couldn't get that much power down through the front wheels. But it doesn't make sense for small vehicles really, especially for those who use vehicles as city runabouts (which to be honest, is 95% of the worldwide purchasing population).

Your comment about the MBenz vehicles is very US centric. The rest of the world doesn't need/want such massive trucks as the US favours for a variety of reasons. Those small vehicles are big selling vehicles overseas for Benz, and a massive gateway for their brand. Get them in with an A Class, they'll buy a C class, then an E or an SUV etc etc.

Hey, I'm an enthusiast like yourself. I even have a second car that I own purely for weekend driving. However, the vast VAST majority of the population couldn't care a toss if the car was RWD or FWD. At dinner with some friends a few weeks ago, 3 of the couples had recently bought German cars. One an X5, one an ML, and one a 5 series. All buy German cars almost exclusively. When I asked them what were the main reasons for buying those vehicles, they said "interior luxury and image" overwhelmingly. None of them optioned any of the "performance" options that weren't cosmetic. None of the soccer moms that I drive past on the way to work, with the fleets of X5s, MLs or Range Rovers give any thought to whether a car was RWD or FWD, Nurburgring times, flat cornering, off road ability etc etc. My own mother, who owned about 5 generations of Mercedes (C, E and S) in a row never even realised that any of her cars were RWD until I mentioned it to her. The majority of the population just want comfort/luxury and the badge. I can bet you if tomorrow, Kia came out with an X5 clone, and people had a the choice of a Kia or a BMW, they'd still pick the BMW 99% of the time purely for the badge alone. It's the way the world works.

Btw, for most overseas markets, 45-65k is barely into premium territory. An X1, GLA can easily get to 60+k in Australia.

But back on topic, I think the RX will be a hit. It may not be what the Lexus traditionalists like, but I think they'll bring in a new younger demographic, which will have more long term purchasing power. I hope Lexus do push out and utilise more unique platforms in the future, but it'll take some time before that occurs. I think more importantly than platforms, are drivetrain development, and I hope we see what the next gen hybrid system plus Lexus turbos are capable of.

Nights

Unfortunately, some of it is driven by dealers as well.

A colleague at work recently bought a new Land Rover Discovery. He bought it 3 weeks before the new model was released, yet the dealer made no mention of the new model coming out to him.

Most people do little research at all unfortunately.

raylor4

You'd be shocked lol. A lot of people just walk in off the street and say "Hey, I want to buy a car" and thats it. SW13GS

My 85 year young mother-in-law liked the way it looked, we knew of Lexus reputation for luxury & reliability, but did no research. We love the car.

spwolf

generally, Toyota and Lexus new entries dont affect outgoing model sales... there is quite a difference between new and old when it comes to transaction prices.

SW17LS

Precisely. It goes deeper than that though. As a premium vehicle that is moving upmarket, it should be on a premium, rear drive longditudinally mounted engine platform. It shouldn't be on a value FWD platform.

If I'm paying $60,000 for a vehicle (which this vehicle will be with options) it should be on a premium platform.

And I still am, I think it looks to be a huge improvement from the outgoing model. I was just agreeing with another poster that the vehicle should really be on a RWD platform.