Generally, I agree....but don't forget that the new 2011 Explorer is no longer body-on-frame. It gave up the old truck-frame this year and went unibody and FWD in its standard configuration, which did improve the ride and handling (and maybe the gas mileage), but decreased the off-road and towing capability. You are correct, though, that only a small minority of SUV owners actually need true mountain-goat off-road capabilities......Jeep Wrangler jocks are perhaps the only significant group of owners who actually do go off-road on a regular basis.

 

GREAT review as always Mike... love the GX460

Not the R/T. One of my best friends is a Dodge GM, late April/early May ETA

Can't wait, especially if you get them in DC before here in WI...

 

Thanks for the review MM

I may have missed it, but how was trunk space with the third row down?

 

Sadly, there's no V8 4Runner anymore.

 

Good point. Toyota seems to have dropped the V8 option with the redesign last year....perhaps with an eye on the upcoming truck/SUV fuel-economy standards. That same V8 (the 4.6L) in the GX450 gets atrocious gas mileage...one of the points I made in the revew.

 

Sure...anytime.


The high, square roofline, of course, helps space-efficiency, but the twin 50/50 third-row seat-backs are located pretty close to the rear-window, so there isn't much available space with the seatbacks up. They drop down in halves, though, each with its own power-motor, so you can just drop one seat down if desired. With both seatbacks down, the available cargo space increases quite a bit, but not to what you would expect to find wth a full-size SUV like the Tahoe, Sequoia, Expedition, etc.... With the tall roofline, the GX's cargo space, seats up or seats down, seems to be geared as much or more toward height
as towards front-to-back length, but, if you need even more front-to-back room, the second-row seats, of course, also manually-fold down.

 

Thanks, Russ. It's rugged, plush, comfortable, and a good off-roader, but, IMO, there are better-choices, even in the Lexus family, for daily-driving, especially if heavy-towing and 3rd-row seat capacity is not needed.


Yes....I'll keep an eye out for it. I've also got review-requests for the new Ford Focus and Toyota Avalon.

 

Great review again MM. As you know I had requested the GX460 review and currently own the 2010 4runner. I was hoping the handling was better on the Lexus being my 4runner does not have Xreas or KDSS and therefore leans and dives too much in my opinion. I believe the GX comes standard with KDSS. I think both sound like they are undersprung (is that a word)?

Can you elaborate more on the handling in comparison to the 4runner?

 

Thanks.

Yes, as long as it is a reasonably-accessable vehicle, and the shop allows test-drives, I try and get to requested reviews, even if there is only one request for it.

I haven't driven the latest-generation (2010-2011) 4Runner for any appreciable distance, so I can't necessarily comment on its handling in direct comparison to the GX. The 4Runner, of course, has lighter V6 engines up front, which creates less weight on the front-suspension then the GX. But I did sample the GX in a variety of conditions yesterday. As I pointed out in the review, its tall (and fairly narrow) stance made me a little nervous about its center-of-gravity, even with the standard electronic-stability-system (Toyota/Lexus, I believe, because of patent-rights, does not have access to the even better Ford/Volvo Roll-Control Stability System). So, although I did give it some mildly-aggressive manuvers and steering input like I usually do with reviews, I was careful not to try anything dumb. The suspension is definitely on the soft side, especially by truck/SUV standards, and that, in combination with the relatively high-profile tires, produces slow steering response and marked body-roll. However, the roll, despite the high center-of-gravity and soft suspension, isn't necessarily unsafe. Consumer Reports does extreme roll-tests with outriggers fastened to the sides of the vehicle to prevent extreme tip-ups or rollovers, and they didn't specifically mention any extreme roll-tendencies or tip-ups with the GX, although, as I mentioned, some roll is noticeable even mildly-aggressive steering input. The GX, however, did have a factory recall to address a flaw in the stability system that allowed too much tail-out-slide (something I didn't try myself). CR mentoned that in their GX write-ups, but that should have been taken care of by now on production GX models.....that's why I didn't mention the recall in the review.

Another thing I noticed with the GX suspension (and, sorry, I forgot to mention it yesterday when I did the write-up) was the tendency for the front-end to bob-down momentarily and then pop back up again just as the vehicle stops. This occurs even with very mild applicaton of the brakes, which suggests to me perhaps a too-weak suspension, at low speeds, for the vehicle's weight. A shame, too, because the GX's suspension and tires generally produce good ride-comfort by truck-standards.

(I went back, BTW, and amended the review...I'll post it here):

Not necessarily. A number of factors go into a vehicle's handling softness/firmness, not just spring-rates (the tendency for springs to compress under pressure). Shock-damping rates (which are sometimes electronically-variable), anti-roll-bar size/strength, tire type/tread with/sidewall-height/PSI, front/rear weight distribution, unsprung weight(which is the amount of weight in the components under the springs/shocks that push up on them), weight of the suspension components themselves.....all of that, and much more, actually plays a part.

Also, don't confuse undersprung with unsprung weight....they are two different terms that address two different issues. Undersprung (as you use the term) refers to inadequate suspension firmness/damping for the vehicle's total weight. Unsprung-weight, as I just explained above, deals with the weight under the suspension itself pushing upwards on bumps and in corners.

 

yes i know, thanks, which is why i put it in with the rx and edge as less 'goat-like' suvs.

just looked and you're right. however the gx460 'premium' also has adaptive variable suspension (AVS) which probably makes a BIG difference.

from Lexus, kdss seems more about having flexibility for road conditions vs. off road with hydraulic mounts:

whereas AVS, only on premium model probably makes a huge improvement on road:




mike - i think you did not test a premium one, right?

 

I looked at a few CPO GX's before I bought my wife the 2011 Murano LE and I feel like it didnt seem as special as most of the other higher end Lexus vehicles. The fuel economy was really bad and the leg room in front wasnt all that great for taller drivers as well. Between those negatives ( amongst others) and the fact that I got the Murano at 1500 below invoice I went with the Nissan

 

Well, I agree that the Murano, for most people, is probably a better and more-sensible overall daily-driver than the GX, but I've always found the styling, on both-generation versons, to be controversal and awkward-looking. Underneath, though, it's a good, solid, sensible mid-sized car-based SUV, though the 1Gen version had an extremely cheap interior and dash. That was rectified with the 2Gen model.

 

No...I tested a option-laded base-version, which, at almost 59K, was expensive enough as it is.

 

good review

However, mmarshall

I have to say. It's good thing you didn't fall of asleep of boredom by driving what is the most boring looking Lexus SUV to-date.

 

Thanks.

Well, two things. First, the interior-trim was so nice that it tended to keep you fully-awake just looking at it. Second, (if you saw some of my subsequent posts), the vehicle's tall, narrow stance, despite the standard stability-control system, made me somewhat nervous about its center-of-gravity, especially during some of the more-aggressive steering inputs I gave it (I wasn't dumb enough, though, to really try something stupid).