RX offroading video!
Pole Position
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,145
Likes: 960
From: Toronto, ON
Pole Position
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 385
Likes: 1
From: CA
One wheel off the ground...lots of wheel spin with minimal forward motion.
Last edited by CometVR4; Jul 5, 2013 at 01:53 PM.
Pole Position
Joined: Dec 2012
Posts: 2,145
Likes: 960
From: Toronto, ON
Certainly this other video is better evidence that the previous 0.5 seconds of video. 
I was thinking for a bit you'd make an excellent judge to make the justice system more efficient. Each side has 0.5 seconds to state their case before the gavel goes done for judgement.
But seriously, as a whole though, I do take a little issue with these gimmicky videos (another one comes to mind is the one with various SUVs going up a 30% incline coated with specially prepared sheet ice) as definitive evidence of inferior design.
To have an inferior design, the design must not meet the design goals. If the design goal was to be able to drive up 30% inclines of specially prepared sheet ice, or free itself from rollers in a parking lot, clearly the RX fails miserably. But obviously these were not the design goals, nor was off-road driving as clearly Lexus does not recommend it. So what are the design goals of RX AWD system? Unfortunately it does not seem that Lexus makes much comment about that other than the little bits from marketing (and what do they know about cars
)
What I could find just as often or more so talks about their AWD system as being more fuel efficient with less parasitic loses, better functioning with VDIM (ie stability control systems), better driveability in tight corners as well as the obvious "improved traction". If the design goal is somewhere in here, then to pronounce it inferior the RX must roll over more often, get worse gas mileage, be rougher in tight corners, and suck more with everyday traction challenged situations.
Clearly someone that is looking for a vehicle that performs well in situations of 0.0001% dry traction situations, the RX is a very poor choice, but to pronounce it inferior, I don't think the right evidence is being considered...
I was thinking for a bit you'd make an excellent judge to make the justice system more efficient. Each side has 0.5 seconds to state their case before the gavel goes done for judgement.
But seriously, as a whole though, I do take a little issue with these gimmicky videos (another one comes to mind is the one with various SUVs going up a 30% incline coated with specially prepared sheet ice) as definitive evidence of inferior design.
To have an inferior design, the design must not meet the design goals. If the design goal was to be able to drive up 30% inclines of specially prepared sheet ice, or free itself from rollers in a parking lot, clearly the RX fails miserably. But obviously these were not the design goals, nor was off-road driving as clearly Lexus does not recommend it. So what are the design goals of RX AWD system? Unfortunately it does not seem that Lexus makes much comment about that other than the little bits from marketing (and what do they know about cars
)What I could find just as often or more so talks about their AWD system as being more fuel efficient with less parasitic loses, better functioning with VDIM (ie stability control systems), better driveability in tight corners as well as the obvious "improved traction". If the design goal is somewhere in here, then to pronounce it inferior the RX must roll over more often, get worse gas mileage, be rougher in tight corners, and suck more with everyday traction challenged situations.
Clearly someone that is looking for a vehicle that performs well in situations of 0.0001% dry traction situations, the RX is a very poor choice, but to pronounce it inferior, I don't think the right evidence is being considered...
Pole Position
Joined: Nov 2012
Posts: 228
Likes: 10
From: USA
Certainly this other video is better evidence that the previous 0.5 seconds of video.
I was thinking for a bit you'd make an excellent judge to make the justice system more efficient. Each side has 0.5 seconds to state their case before the gavel goes done for judgement.
But seriously, as a whole though, I do take a little issue with these gimmicky videos (another one comes to mind is the one with various SUVs going up a 30% incline coated with specially prepared sheet ice) as definitive evidence of inferior design.
To have an inferior design, the design must not meet the design goals. If the design goal was to be able to drive up 30% inclines of specially prepared sheet ice, or free itself from rollers in a parking lot, clearly the RX fails miserably. But obviously these were not the design goals, nor was off-road driving as clearly Lexus does not recommend it. So what are the design goals of RX AWD system? Unfortunately it does not seem that Lexus makes much comment about that other than the little bits from marketing (and what do they know about cars )
What I could find just as often or more so talks about their AWD system as being more fuel efficient with less parasitic loses, better functioning with VDIM (ie stability control systems), better driveability in tight corners as well as the obvious "improved traction". If the design goal is somewhere in here, then to pronounce it inferior the RX must roll over more often, get worse gas mileage, be rougher in tight corners, and suck more with everyday traction challenged situations.
Clearly someone that is looking for a vehicle that performs well in situations of 0.0001% dry traction situations, the RX is a very poor choice, but to pronounce it inferior, I don't think the right evidence is being considered...
I was thinking for a bit you'd make an excellent judge to make the justice system more efficient. Each side has 0.5 seconds to state their case before the gavel goes done for judgement.
But seriously, as a whole though, I do take a little issue with these gimmicky videos (another one comes to mind is the one with various SUVs going up a 30% incline coated with specially prepared sheet ice) as definitive evidence of inferior design.
To have an inferior design, the design must not meet the design goals. If the design goal was to be able to drive up 30% inclines of specially prepared sheet ice, or free itself from rollers in a parking lot, clearly the RX fails miserably. But obviously these were not the design goals, nor was off-road driving as clearly Lexus does not recommend it. So what are the design goals of RX AWD system? Unfortunately it does not seem that Lexus makes much comment about that other than the little bits from marketing (and what do they know about cars
)What I could find just as often or more so talks about their AWD system as being more fuel efficient with less parasitic loses, better functioning with VDIM (ie stability control systems), better driveability in tight corners as well as the obvious "improved traction". If the design goal is somewhere in here, then to pronounce it inferior the RX must roll over more often, get worse gas mileage, be rougher in tight corners, and suck more with everyday traction challenged situations.
Clearly someone that is looking for a vehicle that performs well in situations of 0.0001% dry traction situations, the RX is a very poor choice, but to pronounce it inferior, I don't think the right evidence is being considered...
Pole Position
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 385
Likes: 1
From: CA
I agree the RX was never designed for true off roading. Though as a SUV, even an urban designed SUV their are some basic expectations. I live in a snowy climate and I must say the RX AWD is awful. The only reason why my friends X5 got stuck this winter and my RX didn't is the snow tires. Overall the RX AWD is inferior, and the 4x4 lock does not do anything. I am not even sure why they bother to include it. But anyways back to the point the RX's peers were in the video and they could all get off the 3 rollers in the parking lot. The Q5, X3 and Cadillac SUV seem to be all targeting the same consumers as the RX. It is a bit of a disappointment that the competitors can get off the rollers, but the RX can't. Hence hopefully I never have 3 wheels on ice in the RX which could happen in a parking lot in the winter. Also I should make a note, I have never gotten stuck in my 10 RX or 04 RX. Also i should note that it seems that the older RX has a better AWD system then the newer model.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post