Yes, but no. The PRICE equivalent to the ES is the NX. You get more for your money with a sedan than an SUV.

 

I agree with your price point. Our 2016 NXh had an MSRP of over 49K. I also agree that the seats were extremely comfortable. However, the ride and noise levels were not as refined as our 2015 ES. After we purchased the 2019 ES the difference was even more pronounced and the NX felt like it had a somewhat bouncy ride in comparison. After replacing the NX with a 2021 RX, I would argue that the ride, noise and just the general "feel" between the ES and the RX are much closer than the ES/NX matchup. I know this is a very subjective opinion and based on a previous generation NX, but I tend to agree that that the ES and the RX are more comparable in most seat-of-the-pants measure except price. Since this thread is about seats and neither my wife or myself have had any real issue with any of them, I believe the NX had the most comfortable seats for my body size/shape.

 

Agree with the ES/RX comparison. The NX seems to be aimed at a younger demographic who doesn't look for the greater comfort and quiet of the RX (or ES), or who might feel the RX is a bit stodgy for them.

 

The RX is quite literally the SUV version of the ES since they both share the TNGA-K platform. Pricepoint, yes, the NX is closer to the ES, but the NX is a Lexus version of the Rav4 and the RX is the Lexus version of the Highlander just like how the ES is the Lexus version of the Camry.

The ride quality and overall experience between the RX and the ES are far more similar than the NX and ES. Plus, you also have to factor in the fact that crossovers/SUVs flat-out cost more to build than sedans. So the fact that the RX starts $4,500 more than the ES is expected simply due to extra manufacturing costs. Look at the Camry and Rav4. The Camry is definitely nicer than the Rav4, but the Rav4 starts $1,000 higher than the Camry while the Camry crossover equivalent (the Highander) starts almost $11k higher.

 

I agree with all these reply posts about the RX/ES comparison, but they're making my point for me (and I strongly suspect the real-world price difference between the two right now is waaay more than $4,500).

The RAV4–Camry comparison (essentially the NX–ES comparison, except with non-luxury versions) is a valid one, too. It's the RAV4, not the Camry's cousin the Highlander, that displaced the Camry as America's best-selling non-pickup. This is the price point where more people buy.

It may cost marginally more to build an SUV version than a sedan. But there are AWD versions of sedans too (including the Camry and Prius as well as the Legacy), which is the only added cost I can see. As you pointed out yourself, they're on the same platform, often with the same engines and transmissions. What's more, most of the SUVs are the best sellers now, so they should benefit from volume efficiencies in manufacturing. Where's the big cost difference?

I think a more accurate analysis is that the carmakers are simply marking up the more popular body style to what the market will bear. Don't believe it? Just think back on the decades of ridiculous markups on the stagecoach-primitive Escalades and Navigators. Which returns me to my original point: The ES has more value per dollar and less baked-in markup than either the smaller, rougher NX or the pricier RX. And its lesser popularity is exactly the reason why.

 

Oh 100%. It’s the same way with trucks as well. The fact that they can squeeze an extra buck or two out of SUVs and Trucks is why *puts on tin foil hat* auto manufactures are pushing the market to fully embrace crossovers and SUVs over sedans.