Granted, the new Infiniti JX35 (QX60) which I did a full-review on, gives it a run for the money, but, IMO, the RX still wins. The Audi SUVs are outstanding in the interior-material-quality department and fit/finish, but lack the RX's quietness and powertrain refinement. I did not find the Mercedes GL or ML impressive at all outside of the excellent Bluetec diesels (the smaller SLK was actually a much better overall vehicle for the money). The BMW SUVs, of course, (especially those with the hydraulic, not electric, steering) have superb chassis engineering, but, IMO, are otherwise not very well-built. The Lincoln MKT is too generic, just plain ugly and, inside, too much like Fords, and the Cadillac SLX is too stiff-riding. So....simple process of elimination.

 

The Audi SUVs are not supposed to be as quiet as the RX. They are designed for a sportier, more involving driving experience. The problem with your "reviews" is that you don't review cars from an unbiased viewpoint, your reviews are basically how every car fits into your idea of what a car should be.

I'll tell you this, the only reason I would buy an RX over a Q5 is room. The Q5 is small in the back. The Q7 is too expensive. I find the RX the least compelling vehicle in its class...it is the definition of a driving appliance...I've had a lot of "driving appliances" and now I want cars that are high quality and refined, but that are also fun to drive and have some character.

An RX is "rich" inside the way a Holiday Inn is a "nice hotel". It looks pretty good, has nice wood, but leather is thin, plastics are hard and cheap. Same as the ES. "Richly appointed" means high quality materials, nice finishes, all assembled with precision.

I also like the QX60, but the issue there too is that the car has absolutely not one enjoyable gene in its DNA makeup.

If Lexus can build an RX that is high quality, has some enjoyable appeal to the way it drives, and seats 7 for between $45-55k...I think it would sell very well and move the model towards Lexus' new direction without ruining its comfortable mainstream appeal. This is their thinking as well...hence the F Sport version of the current RX.

Buyers do LOL

 

Actually, they are a little of both.

In what maner? Explain. it's not supposed to be a Shelby Dodge Durango.

Would? Last time I checked, it does.

 

Well, of course their buyers do. No one denies that. But even the Pontiac Aztek had its fans.

 

None that I've read.

You always go to extremes. Nobody is saying it needs to be a "Shelby Dodge Durango" The QX60 has a CVT, which provides no spirited acceleration or performance at all. The vehicle wallows in any sort of corner or turn, theres no aggression to the styling at all.

The biggest problem with that vehicle is the CVT. If it had a normal transmission and a little more power it would be more fun to drive, a'la the MDX which is a nice drive even though the vehicle is a little bland.

It does, for now. Like I said, times change. The market is shifting towards three row crossovers and obviously overall a sportier image and sportier driving dynamics are a growing desire for consumers.

Just because the vehicle is popular now doesn't mean it will continue to be, Lexus needs to evolve and change to keep themselves relevant. The Ford Explorer at one time was a HUGE sales success, 400k units a year as a body on frame two row SUV. Does that mean Ford is wrong/was wrong to move it to a crossover 3 row setup? No...thats where the market was going/has gone.

 

The Aztec had its fans, but never sold well.

 

Internet real quiet about that SUV. The RX got bashed/still gets bashed for year for not being sporty, Infiniti comes with a SUV even less sporty with a 265hp engine and a CVT and the fanbois are quiet and the Lexus haters never bring this thing up. I've driven it extensively it is so average its ridiculous and I'm perplexed why it costs so much. Nice big optional sunroof though. How do you add 2 more seats and give it 10 less hp than the RX?

 

It sells, but that doesn't mean you can't improve on that. There are more hard, rough and scratchy plastics in the 3RX than the 2RX.

Not sure if you've driven them back to back, but while the 3RX is a major improvement in handling and agility and less twitchy than the more body roll prone 2RX, cabin noise is also more obvious. I don't mind the booming noise of the engine, but freeway driving is not as isolated as it used to be.

 

While I agree with a lot of your points (i would add that Q5 doesnt have high quality interior and room is terrible, ride is harsh), RX is already by far the best selling car in the category, so no, Lexus does not have to do anything to it to change what it is. They need to build better RX basically, not better competition to cars that sell 3x less.

Sure, I will never buy RX like that (but I wouldnt buy Q5 either due to above)... Maybe NX would be better for us? We will see..

 

The biggest problem inside the 3Gen, IMO, is not the plastics but the mouse-controller. That's ther main thing that needs to go.


Lexus actually went from firmer-riding 55-series tires on the 2Gen model to taller, smoother 60s on the 3Gen. That, of course, is the reverse of most vehcle-trends today.

 

I think the interior of the Q5 is quite nice, and the ride is certainly firm but it contributes to the "go-kart" like feel that makes the vehicle so fun IMHO.

The issue with The RX and the ES for Lexus is that yes, they sell very well...but they don't fit into the framework of the new Lexus they are trying to create. Thats why you find the new ES is a little sportier looking...a little sportier driving...trying to bring it in line with the new philosophy without alienating the volume buyers that buy the car.

They'll do the same thing with the RX. You'll see a better quality interior, because looking at vehicles like the Highlander Toyota seems to have seen the error of their ways, and I think you'll see it look a little sportier and feel a little sportier. I do also really think it will have three rows...

LOL...its not going anywhere.

 

Fine. I'll respect your opinion. I put a lot of time and effort into them, but they may not be for everybody. And there are plenty of other ones available on the Internet.

 

Poor quality interior is not something you hear too often regarding the Q5. I agree it's small (compact CUV) so one needs to know this before taking the plunge. I found the ride/handling to be similar to the competition in most areas (GLK, X3 and better than the RDX).

 

Audis, in general, are lauded in the auto-press for their interior fit/finish, materials, and paint-quality. Looking at most of the American-market ones (though base A3 and TT models may be an exception), I tend to agree.

 

The first generation of Remote Touch with the Enter buttons was the easiest thing to master. This second gen while "cleaner looking" is much more fussy.

So they added taller tires on the 3RX. Doesn't mean they didn't lose sound deadening material during cost cutting exercises which offsets the benefits.