Used Cars: '99 RX300 vs. '02 Honda CR-V
06-19-06, 01:41 AM
#1
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Used Cars: '99 RX300 vs. '02 Honda CR-V
Hi All,
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Here's what I like better about the RX 300:
1. V6 engine rather than 4, more powerful
2. Power seats, driver's seat has tilt adjustment
3. Better outward visibility
4. Rear liftgate opens upward, protection from rain when loading/unloading
5. FWD models available, better fuel economy (Honda offered FWD only on low-end CR-Vs without ABS, which I wouldn't buy)
6. Looks nicer, inside and out. More carlike demeanor, less trucky. Better outward visibility
7. Uh, it's a Lexus
But there are also things I like better on the Honda:
1. 4 cylinder engine, better gas mileage.
2. Manual transmission available (which I prefer)
3. Lower cargo load floor, more cargo space
4. Cargo door opens sideways, easier on my back. (too bad it's hinged on the wrong side, away from curb)
4. More legroom in back seat. I can't stretch out my legs in the RX 300.
5. Pass-through between front and rear seats (fold-away center console)
6. Normal double-DIN audio head unit that doesn't integrate climate controls. I plan to replace it with an in-dash nav & rear-view camera, which would be much more difficult on the RX.
And being a few years newer always helps. So what other reasons can you give to sway me towards the Lexus? Or away from it for that matter?
If you're wondering, I also have considered a Toyota Highlander (2001 was the first year), but while I like them, they are a bit larger than the other two and seem to be priced a bit higher when well equipped. I'm even considering a Mazda MPV (2000 or later) which, since I don't need AWD, would suffice for my needs and isn't much bigger than the others, but has depreciated much more and can now be had for $7000. Maybe because it's not a Honda or Toyota, maybe because minivans depreciate more than crossover utes. But when comparing FWD models, about the only difference between a car-based SUV and an unusually small minivan is the sliding vs. hinged rear doors. But I think the Lexus and Honda remain my favorites.
Thanks,
- Lee
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Here's what I like better about the RX 300:
1. V6 engine rather than 4, more powerful
2. Power seats, driver's seat has tilt adjustment
3. Better outward visibility
4. Rear liftgate opens upward, protection from rain when loading/unloading
5. FWD models available, better fuel economy (Honda offered FWD only on low-end CR-Vs without ABS, which I wouldn't buy)
6. Looks nicer, inside and out. More carlike demeanor, less trucky. Better outward visibility
7. Uh, it's a Lexus
But there are also things I like better on the Honda:
1. 4 cylinder engine, better gas mileage.
2. Manual transmission available (which I prefer)
3. Lower cargo load floor, more cargo space
4. Cargo door opens sideways, easier on my back. (too bad it's hinged on the wrong side, away from curb)
4. More legroom in back seat. I can't stretch out my legs in the RX 300.
5. Pass-through between front and rear seats (fold-away center console)
6. Normal double-DIN audio head unit that doesn't integrate climate controls. I plan to replace it with an in-dash nav & rear-view camera, which would be much more difficult on the RX.
And being a few years newer always helps. So what other reasons can you give to sway me towards the Lexus? Or away from it for that matter?
If you're wondering, I also have considered a Toyota Highlander (2001 was the first year), but while I like them, they are a bit larger than the other two and seem to be priced a bit higher when well equipped. I'm even considering a Mazda MPV (2000 or later) which, since I don't need AWD, would suffice for my needs and isn't much bigger than the others, but has depreciated much more and can now be had for $7000. Maybe because it's not a Honda or Toyota, maybe because minivans depreciate more than crossover utes. But when comparing FWD models, about the only difference between a car-based SUV and an unusually small minivan is the sliding vs. hinged rear doors. But I think the Lexus and Honda remain my favorites.
Thanks,
- Lee
06-19-06, 04:54 PM
#2
Pole Position
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 336
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by lb535
Hi All,
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Here's what I like better about the RX 300:
1. V6 engine rather than 4, more powerful
2. Power seats, driver's seat has tilt adjustment
3. Better outward visibility
4. Rear liftgate opens upward, protection from rain when loading/unloading
5. FWD models available, better fuel economy (Honda offered FWD only on low-end CR-Vs without ABS, which I wouldn't buy)
6. Looks nicer, inside and out. More carlike demeanor, less trucky. Better outward visibility
7. Uh, it's a Lexus
But there are also things I like better on the Honda:
1. 4 cylinder engine, better gas mileage.
2. Manual transmission available (which I prefer)
3. Lower cargo load floor, more cargo space
4. Cargo door opens sideways, easier on my back. (too bad it's hinged on the wrong side, away from curb)
4. More legroom in back seat. I can't stretch out my legs in the RX 300.
5. Pass-through between front and rear seats (fold-away center console)
6. Normal double-DIN audio head unit that doesn't integrate climate controls. I plan to replace it with an in-dash nav & rear-view camera, which would be much more difficult on the RX.
And being a few years newer always helps. So what other reasons can you give to sway me towards the Lexus? Or away from it for that matter?
If you're wondering, I also have considered a Toyota Highlander (2001 was the first year), but while I like them, they are a bit larger than the other two and seem to be priced a bit higher when well equipped. I'm even considering a Mazda MPV (2000 or later) which, since I don't need AWD, would suffice for my needs and isn't much bigger than the others, but has depreciated much more and can now be had for $7000. Maybe because it's not a Honda or Toyota, maybe because minivans depreciate more than crossover utes. But when comparing FWD models, about the only difference between a car-based SUV and an unusually small minivan is the sliding vs. hinged rear doors. But I think the Lexus and Honda remain my favorites.
Thanks,
- Lee
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Here's what I like better about the RX 300:
1. V6 engine rather than 4, more powerful
2. Power seats, driver's seat has tilt adjustment
3. Better outward visibility
4. Rear liftgate opens upward, protection from rain when loading/unloading
5. FWD models available, better fuel economy (Honda offered FWD only on low-end CR-Vs without ABS, which I wouldn't buy)
6. Looks nicer, inside and out. More carlike demeanor, less trucky. Better outward visibility
7. Uh, it's a Lexus
But there are also things I like better on the Honda:
1. 4 cylinder engine, better gas mileage.
2. Manual transmission available (which I prefer)
3. Lower cargo load floor, more cargo space
4. Cargo door opens sideways, easier on my back. (too bad it's hinged on the wrong side, away from curb)
4. More legroom in back seat. I can't stretch out my legs in the RX 300.
5. Pass-through between front and rear seats (fold-away center console)
6. Normal double-DIN audio head unit that doesn't integrate climate controls. I plan to replace it with an in-dash nav & rear-view camera, which would be much more difficult on the RX.
And being a few years newer always helps. So what other reasons can you give to sway me towards the Lexus? Or away from it for that matter?
If you're wondering, I also have considered a Toyota Highlander (2001 was the first year), but while I like them, they are a bit larger than the other two and seem to be priced a bit higher when well equipped. I'm even considering a Mazda MPV (2000 or later) which, since I don't need AWD, would suffice for my needs and isn't much bigger than the others, but has depreciated much more and can now be had for $7000. Maybe because it's not a Honda or Toyota, maybe because minivans depreciate more than crossover utes. But when comparing FWD models, about the only difference between a car-based SUV and an unusually small minivan is the sliding vs. hinged rear doors. But I think the Lexus and Honda remain my favorites.
Thanks,
- Lee
Lexus has the proven name..the high customer service ratings year after year is a strong indication about the brand...These cars will last a lifetime..the reliability is there, the ride is second to none....
06-20-06, 01:31 AM
#3
Driver School Candidate
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Maryland
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You are comparing apples to oranges. That's like comparing an Lexus LS to a Honda Accord
And when you look closely, these sorts of comparisons actually aren't as apples-to-oranges as they first seem. Whilst in 1999 the RX300 was certainly worthy of wearing the Lexus nameplate, it would never fly as a luxury car by today's standards. Could you imagine any company trying to sell a luxury SUV that didn't offer, even as options, a power liftgate, HID lights, navigation, side-curtain airbags, stability control, or a rear-seat DVD player? These items are now expected on high-end vehicles, at least as options, and they're starting to filter down into midrange vehicles too. So when I compare older used luxury cars with newer non-luxury cars, they often are comparible.
Anyway, nobody would look askanse if I were comparing, say, an '02 CR-V to a '02 Highlander. And we all know the Toyota Highlander shares its platform, drivetrain (on V6 models anyway), and many other key parts with the Lexus RX300. The bodies look completely different, but hop in a Highlander and the surroundings, although not identical, will look very familiar to RX300 drivers. So given that the RX was in production two years before the Highlander, I don't find it a mismatched comparison. I'm shopping the Lexus because its the only vehicle of its type that's been around long enough to have depreciated to where I can afford one. If BMW, Infiniti, etc. were building the X5 or FX35 back in 1999, I'd be contemplating buying one of those as well. But Lexus beat everyone to the market with a luxury crossover utility vehicle (or whatever you want to call these car-based SUV-like things - I prefer to reserve the term "SUV" for real off-road vehicles built on truck platforms) and as such, is giving me the choice to to buy an Lexus at the same price as lesser brands, if I'm willing to buy a car that's a few years older. I could, for the price of an 8-year-old RX, buy a new car, but only a bottom-feeder economy car. I actually looked at a new Toyota Yaris hatchback and a few others of its ilk. But I think I'd be happier with a used luxury car than a new cheapo.
06-20-06, 06:45 AM
#4
Super Moderator
I was also going to write apples and oranges.
I think the last time I went to look at an FX35, it did not have a power liftgate. The features just depend on the cars. My major pet peeve with the RX300 is the turning radius, and second (only because I modified my RX) is the transmission, but as a daily driver I had no issues.
You have to buy a car for what you want against your needs and resources. If the CRV does it for you, then by all means.
When I was looking at a vehicle to bring down to Mexico, I scratched the CRV off the list. One friend who had already gone to Mexico with one complained incessantly about bad suspension and repeated trips to the dealer.
I thought it was a lone case, but then my boss at my last company also had a CRV (one year old) and had similar issues.
I think the last time I went to look at an FX35, it did not have a power liftgate. The features just depend on the cars. My major pet peeve with the RX300 is the turning radius, and second (only because I modified my RX) is the transmission, but as a daily driver I had no issues.
You have to buy a car for what you want against your needs and resources. If the CRV does it for you, then by all means.
When I was looking at a vehicle to bring down to Mexico, I scratched the CRV off the list. One friend who had already gone to Mexico with one complained incessantly about bad suspension and repeated trips to the dealer.
I thought it was a lone case, but then my boss at my last company also had a CRV (one year old) and had similar issues.
06-20-06, 01:40 PM
#5
Lead Lap
If I may add my $.02
In the past when friends have asked my opinion on future car purchases, I have always asked, "think about what purpose the car will serve primarily, ie: daily commuter, kid hauler, long distance cruiser, material hauler, et..."
That pretty much narrows down the search, combined with your previous purchase history, what class of vehicle are you prepared to drive? Can you afford the insurance and maintenance costs of a higher valued luxury car when something breaks down, ie: cracked exhaust manifold on lexus or worn out tailgate struts, or blown out instrument cluster light, etc...?
Its your choice!
There both reliable vehicles with great resale value.
Cheers, and
have fun shopping
In the past when friends have asked my opinion on future car purchases, I have always asked, "think about what purpose the car will serve primarily, ie: daily commuter, kid hauler, long distance cruiser, material hauler, et..."
That pretty much narrows down the search, combined with your previous purchase history, what class of vehicle are you prepared to drive? Can you afford the insurance and maintenance costs of a higher valued luxury car when something breaks down, ie: cracked exhaust manifold on lexus or worn out tailgate struts, or blown out instrument cluster light, etc...?
Its your choice!
There both reliable vehicles with great resale value.
Cheers, and
have fun shopping
Trending Topics
06-21-06, 09:24 AM
#8
I will tell you a few things since I own a 2000 Rx300. I love the powerband of the Rx300. It has tons of torque off the line and is great for towing boats, jetskis, and snowmobiles. It DOES ride like a luxury car. Have you test driven one yet? It rides better than an ES300 and almost as nice as an LS. The CRV is not a luxury ride. You do need to be aware of a few issues with RX300's.
1. Engine Oil Sludge
It has the 3.0 litre engine, so you need to do your research on sludge buildup in the engine. The oil passages were a bit small and prone to oil sludge build up. This sludge build up usually only occured in vehicles that had oil change intervals greater than 3000 miles. In other words, if the previous owner changed oil every 3K miles, it is less likely that the engine will have sludge build up. If the oil was changed every 5-7K miles, then the engine may have sludge build up on the oil passages, causing the head and valves to have premature wear due to lack of oil. You need to do your own research on this issue.
2. Transmission
Some transmissions have been known to have premature failure. Some of these vehicles were covered under warranty, so it may have a new tranny. Most likely these tranny problems were caused by improper towing or lack of maintenance. Search the forum to get more info on the various tranny issues.
However, the Rx300 does in fact ride like a luxury car. Our Rx300 rides nicer than my GS400, but my GS has 17 wheels with Z rated 245 series tires. The offroad traction of the RX will be way better than the CRV. RX can tow much easier due to the torque and suspension. Also, the RX is much bigger inside than the CRV. The CRV gets better gas mileage, but that is about the only benefit. As far as ride comfort, RX wins. As far as fun factor, RX wins. Believe me, I take our RX out in the snow here in MN during the winters, and it is a blast with the all wheel drive and the powerful V6.
Just my 2 cents worth. You asked for feedback so dont get defensive. You cannot come onto a Lexus forum and ask us if we think you should buy a Honda. Try going to a Honda forum and ask them if they think you should buy a Lexus!! I am not trying to flame you here, just making a very valid point.
1. Engine Oil Sludge
It has the 3.0 litre engine, so you need to do your research on sludge buildup in the engine. The oil passages were a bit small and prone to oil sludge build up. This sludge build up usually only occured in vehicles that had oil change intervals greater than 3000 miles. In other words, if the previous owner changed oil every 3K miles, it is less likely that the engine will have sludge build up. If the oil was changed every 5-7K miles, then the engine may have sludge build up on the oil passages, causing the head and valves to have premature wear due to lack of oil. You need to do your own research on this issue.
2. Transmission
Some transmissions have been known to have premature failure. Some of these vehicles were covered under warranty, so it may have a new tranny. Most likely these tranny problems were caused by improper towing or lack of maintenance. Search the forum to get more info on the various tranny issues.
However, the Rx300 does in fact ride like a luxury car. Our Rx300 rides nicer than my GS400, but my GS has 17 wheels with Z rated 245 series tires. The offroad traction of the RX will be way better than the CRV. RX can tow much easier due to the torque and suspension. Also, the RX is much bigger inside than the CRV. The CRV gets better gas mileage, but that is about the only benefit. As far as ride comfort, RX wins. As far as fun factor, RX wins. Believe me, I take our RX out in the snow here in MN during the winters, and it is a blast with the all wheel drive and the powerful V6.
Just my 2 cents worth. You asked for feedback so dont get defensive. You cannot come onto a Lexus forum and ask us if we think you should buy a Honda. Try going to a Honda forum and ask them if they think you should buy a Lexus!! I am not trying to flame you here, just making a very valid point.
06-21-06, 09:28 AM
#9
Super Moderator
Granted, Lexus has had its SUVs out just about 10 years, but keep in mind that our parent Toyota Motor has a much longer history in the SUV/truck department that Honda. Everytime down here I have a friend ask me about a CRV vs. the new RAV4 (that would be the ideal comparison), I remind them of that fact.
06-21-06, 10:18 AM
#10
Originally Posted by Matt L
However, the Rx300 does in fact ride like a luxury car. Our Rx300 rides nicer than my GS400, but my GS has 17 wheels with Z rated 245 series tires. The offroad traction of the RX will be way better than the CRV.
I personally was thinking about the RX when I bought my GS but the GS just fit my needs more at the time.
06-26-06, 02:18 PM
#11
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: GA
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I also considered a Honda CRV before buying my '99 RX. I've had three other Hondas, including a 2003 Odyssey EX-L RES right now. One of my friends has a CRV as a second vehicle, so I drove it a couple of days and compared it to a co-worker's RX I've also driven.
I'm a 6-1, 200 lb guy, and was told the RX would be too tight for me and gas mileage would be much lower than the CRV--but I'm able to adjust the seat and lumbar in the RX and just couldn't get the seats to adjust enough to suit me in the CRV. The ride on the RX is much smoother than the CRV, too--that makes a big difference whether around town or on a trip. I like the power of the RX , but am not disappointed in the gas mileage (after getting 12-15 in a fullsize SUV, anything is great!). I must get lots better gas mileage than some RX drivers. I get an average of 23-25 on a typical tank of mixed driving in metro Atlanta. I usually get 24 on a trip driving 75-80 mph on the freeway. I've gotten as high as 36 driving 65mph on a 200 mile trip thru Virginia (I will not speed in Virginia!!). I also like how the normal Lexus finishings are standard, but are available only on a higher end CRV. I figure the maintenance will be similar on each as they age. After getting a great deal on the Lexus, I couldn't refuse it.
I'm happy with my choice of buying the '99 RX...I guess the only down side to is that the RX is considered a "ladies SUV"...oh well...I bought an '01 GS 430 to compensate for that!
I'm a 6-1, 200 lb guy, and was told the RX would be too tight for me and gas mileage would be much lower than the CRV--but I'm able to adjust the seat and lumbar in the RX and just couldn't get the seats to adjust enough to suit me in the CRV. The ride on the RX is much smoother than the CRV, too--that makes a big difference whether around town or on a trip. I like the power of the RX , but am not disappointed in the gas mileage (after getting 12-15 in a fullsize SUV, anything is great!). I must get lots better gas mileage than some RX drivers. I get an average of 23-25 on a typical tank of mixed driving in metro Atlanta. I usually get 24 on a trip driving 75-80 mph on the freeway. I've gotten as high as 36 driving 65mph on a 200 mile trip thru Virginia (I will not speed in Virginia!!). I also like how the normal Lexus finishings are standard, but are available only on a higher end CRV. I figure the maintenance will be similar on each as they age. After getting a great deal on the Lexus, I couldn't refuse it.
I'm happy with my choice of buying the '99 RX...I guess the only down side to is that the RX is considered a "ladies SUV"...oh well...I bought an '01 GS 430 to compensate for that!
Last edited by LDD; 06-26-06 at 02:23 PM.
06-27-06, 09:49 PM
#12
Originally Posted by lb535
Hi All,
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Thanks,
- Lee
I have about $11,000 to spend on a used car and need something that's roomy inside without being too big or trucklike - parking is tight where I live. I'm considering an RX300, most likely a 1999 model (first year they were made) since it will have depreciated the most and will probably be the only ones in my price range that are in decent condition. As an alternative, I'm also considering buying a Honda CR-V, again most likely the first year the current-generation models were made, which would be a 2002. Seems like comparing apples and oranges at first, but although the Honda was considerably less expensive when new, with less depreciation from being 3 years newer, they both wind up selling for about the same price now as used cars. Both are about the same size and have a similar feature set. Both are from manufacturers reputable for their reliability. So I'm trying to decide which I should shop for....
Thanks,
- Lee
You really have an idea on what you want, and I assume you have seen models in your price range. The facts are there. The Lexus would have the edge over the honda because if Toyota has been making trucks for much longer time.
With that being said, they are all good cars (Honda, Toyota /Lexus) and if taken care of, they should last a very long time. What ever you look at, try to see if you can find some Maint. records, if you look at the Lexus, you can call a local dealer and give them the vin, they'll let you know the last time (miles on the car) when it was serviced.
The best advice I can give you, before you buy, find the ones in your price range, and go take them for a ride and see their features, and buy the one you like the most.
After you take them all for a ride and buy one, all I can say is, enjoy your new RX
07-01-06, 10:05 AM
#14
Driver
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Virginia
Posts: 110
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
RX300 vs Honda CR-V
Why are you comparing the RX300 with the CR-V? The comparison should be between the RX300 and the Honda Pilot. The Pilot is larger vehicle than the CR-V and has 270 horsepower, same as the Accura MDX. The CR-V is a " toy "!
07-09-06, 12:26 AM
#15
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Illinois
Posts: 34
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
as an owner of an ' 02 CRV I can fill you in on some problems i've had with the car, mainly just the computer the car has. everytime the gas cap isnt rotated a full 3+ clicks i believe it is, the check engine light goes on and can only be disabled by a dealer. but apart from that, the crv has a lot of cargo space and what not, but having also frequently been in an rx300, the rx is hands down a much more comfurtable ride and moreover a lexus. the crv does not come in leather in 2002 and didnt even have navigation as an option. apart from that though i have never had any problem with the car and it's running strong. funny part about a crv is the picnic table included hidden in the trunk.