If you delete the LX for North America and replace it with a Sequoia. You would have your big hit.

 

instead of Lexusfy the sequoia and kill the LX like you suggest I think it makes better sense to de-contents the LX and start at $70-$75k instead.

 

The price is not the problem with the LX. The issue is that the LX is 1/8th too small compared to the others like the QX or Escalade for the price Lexus is asking for. The Sequoia is the right size for North America.

 

Buyers already have that option with the similar Toyota Land Cruiser, though it actually starts in the low 80s instead of the low-70s range you indicate. Big discounts, though, would probably be easy to get...I can't imagine anyone paying anywhere near full price for something like this, though the supply of Range Rovers has been tight for awhile.

 

I think the big problem with high end Toyota/Lexus SUV's in the US market is that they were never designed for the US market. This is why you have such stupidity as the Lexus GX with the rear door that opens the wrong way when you pull up to the curb ON THE RIGHT, the door opens the wrong way and blocks you from unloading the luggage. Its obviously designed for driving on the other side of the road, as if in Japan, you pull up to the curb ON THE LEFT, viola, the Lexus GX/Toyota Prado door opens the correct way and allows you to unload your luggage on the curb.

Same thing with the "big" Lexus LX/Land Cruiser J200. This car wasn't designed for the USA mom hauling 3-4 kids to school and the dad who wants to tow a boat to the lake on the weekend, that truck is the Chevy Suburban. The Land Cruiser J200/Lexus LX was designed for that wealthy Arab in Saudi Arabia or the UAE who wants a luxury 4wd truck that will never break down(hence its overbuilt and the high price), seats 7-8, has the best a/c system in the world, and is supremely capable off road in the sand dunes. This means a shorter wheelbase than something like the Suburban, so less interior room, solid rear axle, which takes up more room, IE the current Land Cruiser is designed to be big, but not so big that it compromises off road capability.

 

Toyota could of very easily made the GX with a lift hatch. The 4Runner is built in the same plant on the same frame, all they needed to do was add it.

 

Why would we want a new Lexus SUV based on the anciently outdated Sequoia?

What Lexus continues to need is a 3 row crossover around $55-65k. That has way more appeal than something like the Sequoia.

BTW, adding a hatch to the GX is harder than you think. The GX is a rebadged Land Cruiser Prado which has that barn door, reworking that to a hatch would add a lot of cost and manufacturing difficulty to the vehicle. The 4 Runner being on the same frame is meaningless when the Prado is the identical vehicle pretty much.

 

Never mind the hatch....right now, the future of the GX itself, in the American market, is somewhat iffy, although Lexus, to my knowledge, has not announced any firm dates for its discontinuance.

 

I don't think the GX will be cancelled. A three row crossover is coming in the longer form of an RX. Toyota and Lexus body on frame models have a very high customer satisfaction. Toyota knows that.

 

I agree it's extremely well-built....I did a full-review on a GX last year. But, in the auto business, numbers rule, so we'll see.

 

Numbers indeed rule. But Toyota has a worldwide distribution of the GX/4Runner chassis, so even if the numbers drop, they can still offer it. Toyota is the only mainstream manufacturer that I know of that has a body on frame and a seven passenger cross over competing in the same price point. That is the 4Runner and Highlander and for the record the 4Runner sales are at a all time high last month. So I am sure Toyota can absorb a GX sales decline

 

how do you really feel? oh and i agree.



gx/prado are also very narrow (probably designed for other country narrow streets - it's just a quirky vehicle.

 

What I find hilarious is the same people who decry Lexus for using old engines and keeping old platforms around for "too long" now think a Lexus based on the ancient Sequoia would be a "massive hit"

LS being old, LX being old = bad
Sequoia being old = incredible

Got it lol

 

I don't agree that the GX is a quirky vehicle. Its larger and wider than a Jeep Grand Cherokee. The issue with it is that it has a really dumb rear door that is not ideal for North America. Toyota makes the 4Runner/GX/Prado all off the same chassis. It would of been really easy for them to just design a rear lift in the overall design. The Prado, and GX gave different interiors and engines and different front ends, they could of just made the design have to two different rear hatches.

 

First off the GX is not wider than a Jeep Grand Cherokee. The Jeep is 2 inches wider than the GX, while the GX is 5 inches taller than the GC. That's what makes it quirky, it's narrow and tall. Sort of like an LR4/Discovery. They feel tall and top heavy too when you drive them. A quick edmunds check of these numbers will keep you from posting strong statements that are easily refuted. Took me about 40 seconds to determine you weren't correct.

The fact act that the 4 Runner is on the same platform as the GX and it has a hatch is meaningless. The GX is not a 4 Runner, it's a Prado, all it does with the 4 Runner is share the frame. Designing a hatch would cost money vs using what they already have in the Prado, and the only reason the GX exists is because it's so cheap for them to make since they sell so many Prados worldwide. Start designing complicated changes like an entirely different rear structure to accommodate a hatch, and no more GX.