GS300 to RX450H or GS450H???

[GSLV6]

I don't know if this is the best place to post the question, so I've posted it both here and in the GS section.  My wife and I are considering buying a newer Lexus but aren't yet sold on the idea unless there's benefit in doing so.  We like our GS300 (2007 model SE), and over the past two years have sunk a lot of money into it.  Fair to say, it has not (unusually) been the most reliable car we've owned (that was a merc C220 diesel estate which did star-ship mileage with no real issues whatsoever bar a few faulty sensors).  In 18 months on a car bought with just 64K miles, it's had a couple of shock absorbers, a complete new cat back exhaust, two new HID bulbs (£80 odd plus vat and fitting each), new TPMS valves (£383 just for the valves), a reflash of the ECU because the boot opener packed in for no reason anyone understands, a complete engine out and top end strip and rebuild to replace a failed hydraulic tappet (the lot were done....cost £3200), wheels refurb due to flaking finish (£340) and professional front end respray due to bubbling of paint on bonnet (£770).  Fair to say, we're a bit fed up with the expense, and whilst we accept any 10 year old car will need stuff doing....this one has needed too much stuff doing to justify its reliability reputation.

On the positive side, it's reasonably frugal for what it is, roomy, with a huge boot and ski flap, handles very well for the size, very comfy, and runs perfectly (now!) and performance is brisk with safe overtakes a breeze when needed.  It is also refined and very quiet in the cabin and has loads of kit.   We've only covered 12K miles in it since we've bought it.  I am considering whether to move to the newer GS450H for the advances in Lexus trickle-down technology and reliability so duly visited the dealership and had a quick look at a 450H Lux car.  My first impressions weren't overly favourable if honest. It seemed to have less space in the cabin and in the back, the boot was considerably smaller (Battery housing), and most disappointingly, the levels of kit and comfort that we enjoy in the GS300 just aren't there except as options!  Come on Lexus, what re you playing at?  You charge close on £50K for a new GS and offer less kit as standard than the outgoing GS300...really?  "What sort of way is that to treat your customers?" was the first thought followed by "greed".  No passenger 10 way adjustable memory seats (no driver 10-way seats for that matter);  no premium sound system (which I do have in mine), less rear leg room, no through "ski flap" (pesky batteries again) but a  considerably larger price tag and really only marginally better real world fuel consumption.  I was left scratching my head.

I know that I will have missed something, if not a lot here, so am inviting you GS450h drivers to fill me in...educate me, and convince me...where's the draw here?  What is the convincing factor?  Is it that much better to drive, day to day, is it quieter, faster and safer on over-takes?  Does it deliver its extra-urban claimed fuel efficiency? Is it more reliable and is it more comfortable?  Why should a Mk3/4 GS300 owner exchange for a newer model?  Must admit, I am struggling to see the hook here.  I can't stretch to a low miles F-Sport (a different car with a definite draw....performance and handling), nor to a Premium version (which only has what mine seems to have as standard anyway).  Your comments/observations invited.  I'd love to hear your stories and what you think is great about the new models.  I am considering a low miles 2012 to 2014 Lux spec model if I decide to go that route.

The second part of this is the alternative.  As I do need the boot space (young family plus my hobbies need the boot space).  The RX450h is the obvious choice...that is until you scratch beneath the surface.  FWD instead of RWD (black mark?).  Rear motor not strong enough for genuine off road ability (black mark?);  Very steep price tag for what's on offer....compared with a Range Rover or say Land Rover disco sport which it closer competes with, the Landy offers way more comfort and kit.  X3/5 better to drive and Merc GLS, whilst 10K pricier is arguably worth the extra if you had the cash.  So whilst I love the seating position in the RX, and regard it as very comfortable (I have looked at one, again in Lux spec), there appear to be downsides.  Handling isn't meant to be a strong point, but most surprisingly, there are reports that it isn't capable of rapid progress for safe overtaking due to struggling with the additional weight.  I'm unsure why it doesn't come with the same power 450H powerplants as the GS, which by comparison can't be accused of being a slouch.

I can forgive the fact that it'll never match a saloon in the handling stakes.  I can overlook the FWD only option on 450 guise if it drives ok, but I couldn't overlook a 2 tonne plus vehicle with a large petrol hybrid powerplant that can't safely overtake if the opportunity exists except where a mile straight is concerned.  I did like the rear load space, the finish, the room and the comfort, so again, unless I'm missing something, is that what this one's about...just the comfort and load space but forget any pretence of modest performance or ride quality?  Love to hear from those with feedback.

If I did change my GS to another lexus, it would only be for one of the above two models.  The IS is simply too small with insufficient load space and the test drives I've had revealed a sound handling decent motorcar, utterly ruined by a very small but very stupid oversight...no adjustability of the seat headrests  resulting in my neck aching unless the seat was set too far reclined for comfort.  I couldn't live with that, nor with the lack of family space.

I'm struggling here...do I continue to pour money into the old GS, and rely on the powerplant taking me to 300K miles, accepting that suspension, brakes and other consumables will all need costly replacement in due course, plus put up with increased punitive road fund tax and higher running costs, or is there a genuine case for going the a 450 hybrid?

Sorry for the long post.  Just looking for real world feedback on the issues which I have found when seriously looking for an excuse to part with hard earned to change up.  The Merc E350 estate or Jag XF are both looking mighty tempting at the minute as the better alternatives but I hope that the Lexus models have something that I'm missing with my initial observations.  I am test driving both so will be better able to judge but that's no substitute for feedback from some of you longer term owners.  I would like to stay in the "Lexus Club" as the service offered by Listers is second to none by my own experiences.

[Zotto]

I think you have to decide your priorities.

GS 450h is really FAST, while RX 450h is just a big fast SUV; both have very good mpg in their category of vehicles.

I drive a Premier GS 300h, mainly because I am worried to keep my driving license happy for wonderful mpg but sometimes missing the power of 2008 GS 450h I had before . Besides, new GS is better for all the rest.

[Malc1]

considering the amount of money you have poured into your existing car and the fact that it is still just 10 years old, I would keep it and think that further maintenance would probably be be less costly ( maybe the other 2 corners needing sorting at some stage ) and apart from consumables like tyres, brakes and normal servicing costs which you would have with any car whatsoever and can discount as attributable to your existing car alone. Amortize your existing over another 5 years and you will have " won " financially and be in a position, maybe, to take advantage of better technology available in 5 years time when you do actually buy your " new " car.

The aged voice of experience speaking here with a 21 year old brilliant Ls400, cosseted in supreme comfort and with finger tip power and acceleration and tiny maintenance costs even approaching 200k miles.

Good luck whatever your decision

Malc1

[mhelander]

My TPMS sensors were sub-$20 a pop, including ATEQ tool to program & manage sensors yours were little expensive to put least. Of course if all from dealership then...

What comes to RX, not very experienced owner but for us this fresh 2008 RX 400h AWD proved to be top quality vehicle... Right now driving it in Finnish winter, just -22°C outside and dashboard shows -6F...

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk

[GSLV6]

4 hours ago, Malc1 said:

considering the amount of money you have poured into your existing car and the fact that it is still just 10 years old, I would keep it and think that further maintenance would probably be be less costly ( maybe the other 2 corners needing sorting at some stage ) and apart from consumables like tyres, brakes and normal servicing costs which you would have with any car whatsoever and can discount as attributable to your existing car alone. Amortize your existing over another 5 years and you will have " won " financially and be in a position, maybe, to take advantage of better technology available in 5 years time when you do actually buy your " new " car.

The aged voice of experience speaking here with a 21 year old brilliant Ls400, cosseted in supreme comfort and with finger tip power and acceleration and tiny maintenance costs even approaching 200k miles.

Good luck whatever your decision

Malc1

Thanks for the feedback Malc.  Yes, sage advice.  I do though have need of a little more load space than I currently enjoy, well ideally at any rate, plus the older I get, the more I have developed a conscience for things like pollution, hence the lower emissions of the newer vehicles is a draw, but not enough to counter the argument of the carbon footprint of manufacture (although one can argue that they're already made!).

I did test drive both vehicles today and have posted a summary over on the GS discussion section.  Briefly though, both had pluses and minus points.  On the positive for the GS, it did fly when you prodded the "go" pedal, and handled very nicely.  It felt more sure-footed and safer than the older GS, was more frugal, and rather surprisingly (to me anyway) was a more refined and quieter in the cabin.  Fit and finish were excellent as you'd expect.  the downsides though...

To start with, there was less space, both in the cabin and in the boot.  Not sure if I could live with the lack of space for my hobby which demands a boot at least up to the old GS (I'm not a golfer by the way so don't measure a boot's usefulness by how many golf "sticks" I can get in a boot!).  It was also less comfortable and by a margin. I have a bad back and after 30 minutes, perhaps less, my back was starting to ache.  The seats were just too firm and lacked the 10-way adjustability of the older car or newer Premium versions.  Also, I found the interior controls and console layout too fussy.  A backwards step from the older model imho.

Onto the RX.  Lovely and comfortable, spacious and practical with (to my mind) a more intuitive and simpler layout, although the console didn't have the look and feel of a premium brand compared with either GS.  Zotto, you described the RX as "...a fast SUV" but I beg to differ, at least from my test ride.  It felt quite pedestrian, with little initial shove and little overtaking ability.  You'd really have to plan your moves well in advance and couldn't safely make opportune nip and tuck over-takes.  Both GS models were notably faster, even the old model.  However, it is a 2.2 ton SUV so allowances made, it wasn't exactly a slouch either...it just doesn't, realistically, have the rapid acceleration of the other two.  The FWD also means that it isn't as sharp or focused to drive but under-steer seems well controlled.   All in all, it was a competent and very practical, supremely comfortable vehicle with one MAJOR drawback....that of cabin noise.  I found that it really was quite intrusive and not at all acceptable for a premium vehicle like this.  The culprit is two-fold:

Firstly, that big exposed belly of the beast raised up higher than the GS offer the road, and the larger wheels, means more turbulent under-chassis air flow, allied to large footprint and tyre noise.  Secondly, the SUV lacks the rear bulkhead of a traditional saloon, so that intrusiveness feeds in from both front and back into the cabin, although mainly from the rear.  It needs better chassis damping to control noise (are you listening Lexus?).  There are elastomer damping compounds about that are very effective, although they will increase mass, by possibly 50Kg or so, to adequately treat the noise, but to my mind, that is a price worth paying.  Just up-rate the motors and batteries for greater electrical shove. I'd happily pay the premium for slightly more power and a quiet cabin.  Not all SUVs are the same.  Merc manage it with their premium SUVs and even the Kias aren't that bad!

All said and done, neither would tempt me away from our GS unless they were the Premium or F-Sport models with better road manners (in the case of the RX) and providing the level of comfort and toys that we now have.  The additional real world 10mpg alone isn't enough to justify a change.  We can see ourselves trading up for a Premium RX as an everyday car and living with the compromises for the increased practicality and space plus comfort.  We'll see.  For now, we're happy with the old GS.

[Malc1]

37 minutes ago, GSLV6 said:

For now, we're happy with the old GS.

......... and squillions in pocket too if you don't make that change  .................  but I rarely buy cars, can't abide giving my money to car stealers and the like  ..........  hahahahaha, my " modern " motoring is the 10 year old Honda legend SH-AWD we've just bought  .....  amazing technological advances over the old Ls400 but that 3.5 ltr V6 just doesn't compete with the V8 4ltr   0 - 60 in 6.9 secs and supreme Lexus ride comfort on what seems to be ( on the Honda ) crappy Pirelli P6000 tyres  ( I hate them )

Enjoy making your decision and, well, just make the right one

Good luck

Malc1

[GSLV6]

Hi Malc.  Interesting that you should mention tyres. When time came to change them on our GS, I fitted mid range Davanti tyres (never heard of them either!) and the ride improved and cabin noise decreased markedly.  Tyre choice is critical.  I never liked the P6000's.  Show them a greasy road and they didn't seem to like it plus they seem to wear out in front of your eyes, and noisily too!

My trouble is that I have spinal injuries which have resulted in a regressive condition, and the back pain gets worse as the years knock on (long story but partly due to a teenage spinal condition and partly due to motorcycle and mountain bike accidents). As comfortable as the old GS is, it's no match for the newer RX Hybrid.  I suffer on longer trips so am tied to vehicles that don't make the pain intolerable. Whilst the GS is ok, the RX seemed much better, so I am tempted!  The cabin noise could be lessened by better tyre choice I'm sure.

[Malc1]

.....on the bad back front ( no pun ) I too suffer considerably from spinal curvature and compression issues that are permanent BUT I absolutely never ever have discomfort when driving my Ls400  ( or indeed any of the three I've had over 15 years ) and I know that whatever the length of journey, many hours, I can jump out of my drivers seat feeling absolutely fine with zero issues......  as fresh as the moment i started my drive.

Maybe for long, well, and short journeys too, for your back alone, and huge boot space to boot, you should get yourself an elderly Ls400 or Ls430 !

Keep your GS and get a "real " car too  ...  the increased fuel and running costs will pale compared to the capital cost savings.  ........  but if you're an age fiend then there's no point in taking what might seem a regressive step 

Malc1

[ISJason]

Hi there, I'm here to defend the RX.. it moves like the proverbial clappers.. so with respect you might need to kick down or manually select the gear when overtaking. Enjoy your motoring.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Funkyboy]

I test drove the GS300h but was really disappointed. Suspension was a bit crash round town but great on motorway. Bit too much wind noise also on motorway. Also agree that there's not a great deal of rear leg room. Maybe I was just expecting too much.

had a 24hr test drive in a is300h and thought that was much better but still still a bit crash from the suspension. Only slightly smaller inside than gs300h but much cheaper second hand buy

[GSLV6]

1 hour ago, ISJason said:

 

Hi there, I'm here to defend the RX.. it moves like the proverbial clappers.. so with respect you might need to kick down or manually select the gear when overtaking. Enjoy your motoring.

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

  Hi Jason.  I'm not here to attack the RX....in fact I rather like it for comfort and practicality alone. With all respect to Malc, the LS (any of them) would be just too expensive to run given our mileage and the hills we have round here plus bigger than we need!  Yes, I could put the capital saved to one side for petrol, but part of my brain can't compute the logic of taking a risk on a car perhaps 20 years old of unknown heritage (and maintenance) then feeding it for a sub 20 mpg locally which is all we'd get.  Have you ever driven a GS300 by the way?  If you had, I suspect that you'd you'd concede the difference in performance, and the 430 is even quicker!  I think that safe overtaking performance is a must.  The RX has it, but needs more care and thought in planning the move.

I have run a GS300V6 for a few years, and did put my foot absolutely to the floor in the RX.  Being a CVT, there is no kick-down, and even engaging one of the "faux" gear steps makes no real odds to acceleration.  All the real world motoring tests don't lie.  0-60 (best time) I've read was low 7 seconds and average closer to 8 seconds.  That's not sports car performance. Our re-mapped Fabia vRS does the 60 sprint in under 7 seconds (it's a diesel).  That is a fast little car and would show the RX a clean pair of heals, absolutely no question whatsoever.  Our GS300 has a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds and been tested at 6.9 seconds.  It is also unquestionably much faster than the RX (being much lighter).  We did a fair few miles today in the RX and performance-wise, it simple can't hold a candle to the older, last generation GS petrol only models, but that's not really what the car is all about, plus it simply doesn't have the poise nor handling to carry off sports-car performance anyway.

We viewed it for its plus points which we saw as supreme comfort and practicality, combined with excellent build quality and so far at least, very few reported problems. It performs adequately.  I have looked in depth at the competition, including Kia's Sorento, the X5, the Merc GLE etc.  The Sorento can't hold a candle to the build of the Lexus but is also a good practical car, not as comfy or as rapid but it does hold its value well, much better, in fact, than the RX which has shocking depreciation of 50% in the first 3 years.  The X5 is much quicker, handles much better and has at least some pretention as a genuine 4 x 4 although not as good as the Merc.  It is horribly expensive on tyres and when it goes wrong (which they do) the suspension costs are enough to make you weep.  I wouldn't own one.  I also think that they're dreadfully dated and cheap looking on the inside.  The GLE seems to be the best of the lot, but not cheap to run and a good deal more expensive to buy plus offers no better comfort, although handling and performance are better.

That brings us full-circle to the RX.  Lexus have been rather clever here.  They have produced the "Grey Man" of the SUV field, yet it's better screwed together than any of the rest (with the possible exception of the GLE), more comfortable, cheaper to run and probably the most reliable of the lot. It only sacrifices a second or so to 60 over most of the others and has a simpler gear train with the single speed CVT orbital gearbox (reliability again), but lets not kid ourselves that it's a "driver's car" because it simply isn't.  I don't say that in a derogatory manner.  It's just not designed to compete on those terms, that's all.   It goes reasonably well, handles competently but didn't inspire confidence  and had very little feel through the wheel. It reminded me a lot of driving some of the older Avensis cars and Camrys.  It would take some adjustment coming from the faster, better handling and better equipped GS, but I think it's an adjustment that Id be happy to make.

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, GSLV6 said:

  Hi Jason.  I'm not here to attack the RX....in fact I rather like it for comfort and practicality alone. With all respect to Malc, the LS (any of them) would be just too expensive to run given our mileage and the hills we have round here plus bigger than we need!  Yes, I could put the capital saved to one side for petrol, but part of my brain can't compute the logic of taking a risk on a car perhaps 20 years old of unknown heritage (and maintenance) then feeding it for a sub 20 mpg locally which is all we'd get.  Have you ever driven a GS300 by the way?  If you had, I suspect that you'd you'd concede the difference in performance, and the 430 is even quicker!  I think that safe overtaking performance is a must.  The RX has it, but needs more care and thought in planning the move.

I have run a GS300V6 for a few years, and did put my foot absolutely to the floor in the RX.  Being a CVT, there is no kick-down, and even engaging one of the "faux" gear steps makes no real odds to acceleration.  All the real world motoring tests don't lie.  0-60 (best time) I've read was low 7 seconds and average closer to 8 seconds.  That's not sports car performance. Our re-mapped Fabia vRS does the 60 sprint in under 7 seconds (it's a diesel).  That is a fast little car and would show the RX a clean pair of heals, absolutely no question whatsoever.  Our GS300 has a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds and been tested at 6.9 seconds.  It is also unquestionably much faster than the RX (being much lighter).  We did a fair few miles today in the RX and performance-wise, it simple can't hold a candle to the older, last generation GS petrol only models, but that's not really what the car is all about, plus it simply doesn't have the poise nor handling to carry off sports-car performance anyway.

We viewed it for its plus points which we saw as supreme comfort and practicality, combined with excellent build quality and so far at least, very few reported problems. It performs adequately.  I have looked in depth at the competition, including Kia's Sorento, the X5, the Merc GLE etc.  The Sorento can't hold a candle to the build of the Lexus but is also a good practical car, not as comfy or as rapid but it does hold its value well, much better, in fact, than the RX which has shocking depreciation of 50% in the first 3 years.  The X5 is much quicker, handles much better and has at least some pretention as a genuine 4 x 4 although not as good as the Merc.  It is horribly expensive on tyres and when it goes wrong (which they do) the suspension costs are enough to make you weep.  I wouldn't own one.  I also think that they're dreadfully dated and cheap looking on the inside.  The GLE seems to be the best of the lot, but not cheap to run and a good deal more expensive to buy plus offers no better comfort, although handling and performance are better.

That brings us full-circle to the RX.  Lexus have been rather clever here.  They have produced the "Grey Man" of the SUV field, yet it's better screwed together than any of the rest (with the possible exception of the GLE), more comfortable, cheaper to run and probably the most reliable of the lot. It only sacrifices a second or so to 60 over most of the others and has a simpler gear train with the single speed CVT orbital gearbox (reliability again), but lets not kid ourselves that it's a "driver's car" because it simply isn't.  I don't say that in a derogatory manner.  It's just not designed to compete on those terms, that's all.   It goes reasonably well, handles competently but didn't inspire confidence  and had very little feel through the wheel. It reminded me a lot of driving some of the older Avensis cars and Camrys.  It would take some adjustment coming from the faster, better handling and better equipped GS, but I think it's an adjustment that Id be happy to make.

Have to say that frankly some of your conclusions are a bit odd.

As for the GS450h, its expensive as something called inflation exists and hence, the price of cars go up as they add more safety and kit to them. The new GS450h has adaptive cruise control etc as standard, things which arent available on the GS300 not to mention, goes like stink. Also worth remembering that it has rear wheel steering (surreal on the motorway, seems to change lanes like lightning). The GS450h also has heavy £7k discounts on them going at the minute.

The new RX is better built than the GLE, there is simply no question about that. I think you'll also find that the car is deceptive of its speed. Lets not forget that the RX has mid range acceleration to beat a Porsche Cayenne hybrid with over 400hp. 0-60mph doesn't really matter at all in hybrids, its the mid range acceleration where they excel. Itll give the GS300 and the Fabia VRS a slap from a rolling start, I dont doubt that for one second as the figures really dont lie.

The perception of speed is blunted as it doesn't change gears so feels like its holding one gear and therefore not going anywhere, yet when you look at the speedo it'll be doing 100+mph.

 

[GSLV6]

Odd?  Not at all.  I rarely use cruise control, so adaptive or not, it isn't a big selling point for me.  It's a gadget I wouldn't use.  Only the F-sport has rear wheel steering according to the blurb and Lexus sales staff also have confirmed this to me. 

Yes, the RX is well built.  Better than the GS?  Hmmm, the jury's out on that...I'm not so sure.  I agree that the CVT makes speed deceptive but I know what a fast car feels like as I've owned a fair few very fast cars and the RX doesn't have anything like the mid range punch of a genuinely fast vehicle.  Anyone who's ever driven a really quick car knows that and wouldn't argue the point.   A BMW 3 litre diesel would comprehensively see it off, as would my humble Fabia vRS but as mentioned previously, the RX isn't about speed.  It's simply not a fast car.  That's not a criticism,  so no need to take these things to heart.  

Its utter nonsense to even suggest that it'll better a vRS from a  standing start. It wont.  I've driven both...have you?  The vRS and the GS 300 are faster to 60 from a standing start.  I know that so am bemused why anyone would argue black is white on that.  The GS450 is considerably quicker than the vRS or the GS300 though and feels it too.  Have you driven a mapped vRS with over 180BHP and over 250ft-lbs of torque in something weighing about half of what the RX does?  Lets not be silly about this.  It's not a competition, I was merely highlighting my own experiences and thoughts after driving the RX.  It's a nice car but a sports car? No, not a cat's chance in hell.  This is detracting from the main point though, which as I see it are the real positives about the RX.  Performance and handling are not, from my perception, it's strong points.  Build quality, comfort and practicality however are.  It's a great cabin, and a relaxing drive.  I like the car a lot, probably motre than the newer GS. Performance alone doesn't endear it to me. I prefer the older generation if honest.  

[rayaans]

3 hours ago, GSLV6 said:

Odd?  Not at all.  I rarely use cruise control, so adaptive or not, it isn't a big selling point for me.  It's a gadget I wouldn't use.  Only the F-sport has rear wheel steering according to the blurb and Lexus sales staff also have confirmed this to me. 

Yes, the RX is well built.  Better than the GS?  Hmmm, the jury's out on that...I'm not so sure.  I agree that the CVT makes speed deceptive but I know what a fast car feels like as I've owned a fair few very fast cars and the RX doesn't have anything like the mid range punch of a genuinely fast vehicle.  Anyone who's ever driven a really quick car knows that and wouldn't argue the point.   A BMW 3 litre diesel would comprehensively see it off, as would my humble Fabia vRS but as mentioned previously, the RX isn't about speed.  It's simply not a fast car.  That's not a criticism,  so no need to take these things to heart.  

Its utter nonsense to even suggest that it'll better a vRS from a  standing start. It wont.  I've driven both...have you?  The vRS and the GS 300 are faster to 60 from a standing start.  I know that so am bemused why anyone would argue black is white on that.  The GS450 is considerably quicker than the vRS or the GS300 though and feels it too.  Have you driven a mapped vRS with over 180BHP and over 250ft-lbs of torque in something weighing about half of what the RX does?  Lets not be silly about this.  It's not a competition, I was merely highlighting my own experiences and thoughts after driving the RX.  It's a nice car but a sports car? No, not a cat's chance in hell.  This is detracting from the main point though, which as I see it are the real positives about the RX.  Performance and handling are not, from my perception, it's strong points.  Build quality, comfort and practicality however are.  It's a great cabin, and a relaxing drive.  I like the car a lot, probably motre than the newer GS. Performance alone doesn't endear it to me. I prefer the older generation if honest.  

If you read my post carefully, I said the RX is better built than the GLE, not the GS. I think the GS and RX are roughly the same build quality.

As I said before, you won't feel the acceleration in an RX. There are a few reasons for this. Firstly the CVT is smooth and no gear changes which makes it harder to sense how fast you are going. Another reason is because the RX sits higher than a saloon or hatchback. In my RX I can do 70mph and feel like Im going at 40mph whereas Id FEEL like I was going faster in a car sitting lower to the ground.

For the second time I say "read my post carefully". Ive never suggested an RX450h is quicker from a standing start. I specifically said rolling start which is basically day to day driving and utilises the hybrid system strengths which are mid range acceleration. Standing starts make no difference in reality but I accept that the RX doesn't get up and go from a standstill very well and thats because it takes time for the traction Battery to engage etc etc. The way to bypass this is to hold brake and accelerator at the same time and then let the brake go.

Now lets just flip your comment "Lets not be silly about this" back to you and get you to think about some of these figures:

       Porsche Cayenne Hybrid (410hp/5.5k RPM, 590NM/1.25k RPM)                               Lexus RX450h Premier (308hp/6k RPM)

0-60mph                5.5s                                                                                                                                        7.8s

30-50mph              3.0s                                                                                                                                        2.9s              

50-70mph              5.9s                                                                                                                                        3.8s

 

Now look at the above and tell me those aren't some seriously impressive looking figures for a car weighing 2.2 tonnes with "only" 308hp. 

The thing absolutely flies in Sport mode with the throttle fully pressed and I think the F-Sport handles fairly competently for the behemoth that it is. 

[Malc1]

seems a little pedestrian to me tbh .  .........  the ancient and well proven Ls400 technology achieves 0 - 60 in 6.9 seconds .............  and it still feels like it.

...... does the Tesla achieve the same environmental benefits as the hybrid Lexus but in ultra quick time of 2.5 seconds 

whichever way you look at it, old fashioned petrol or new electric, the new generation of Lexus cars just doesn't seem to hack it at all sensationally.

Malc1

[GSLV6]

Rayaan

Roll-on figures in top gear for the Cayaan may not be comparable because the Cayaan doesn't use the same peak torque CVT system.  Surely, all you'd have to do is drop it a gear or two to leave the  RX trailing in a real world true test using whatever gearing you would for say an overtake?  You seem to miss the point that I was not comparing a 308BHP F-Sport. I was comparing the previous generation 295BHP Lux model without the gadgetry of "Sport" improving throttle response, my views on the car the I test drove still stand. Yes, they are impressive for a car of that mass, but its still no sports car whatever way you chop the figures. There's no way I'd call it quick.   The lux and Premier models don't have the option of an instant throttle re-map because they're fully automatic, non-switchable systems on the older cars at least, so they suffer more lag as everything tries to reset to the required throttle settings as a result.  Competent and capable? Yes. Fast? No.  

124mph top speed is also super-mini territory these days, not fast car territory (autobahns permitting!).  It's not top trumps though, so peace ...let's end the game of top trumps . It's more about the feel and every day driving experience and I take the point that as an everyday car, it's justifiably a very popular vehicle.   It's just a shame that the model I drove had so much intrusive cabin noise, it really was quite unpleasant, especially for rear passengers (my wife complained that the rear was awful for road noise which would be tiring and unwelcome on a run).  I can't but help think that a change of tyres might help at least a little here?  (ie does any other owner find it a little noisy?  If not then tyre choice seems the culprit).

For the record (I'm not top-trumping....honest ), the vRS is quicker in 50-70mph top gear roll on (in mapped form) than the quoted F-Sport figures . The standard 130 ASZ engine still manages the drag in a shade over 4 seconds.  The BLT (155BHP) is quicker.  The mapped 180BHP car, much quicker, partly due to the torque remapping of that car. We did initially try a more aggressive map, but the torque would have destroyed the transmission.  It was able to light up the front tyres in 4th gear from a 40mph roll-on, so the car was "de-tuned" to make it more sensible and reliable.  I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make but I'm with Malc here. Telsa, by the way Malc, make some super-fast fully electric cars that leave most so-called "super-cars" for dead but range is still an issue as is purchase cost.  Telsas are mighty impressive cars though.

I'm really not sure on the credentials of electric only cars because they still burn fossil fuels to get the electrickery, fossil fuels to manufacture just like any other car, and Battery pack recycling involves the dumping of some pretty environmentally unfriendly substances.  Hybrid seems to be a good halfway house and at least Lexus have pinned their colours to the mast and progressed the technology arguably further than any other manufacturer.

Where we all share something in common is respect for a manufacturer who continues to manufacture some of the best put together vehicles on the road today, and I'm a big fan.

[rayaans]

5 hours ago, GSLV6 said:

Rayaan

Roll-on figures in top gear for the Cayaan may not be comparable because the Cayaan doesn't use the same peak torque CVT system.  Surely, all you'd have to do is drop it a gear or two to leave the  RX trailing in a real world true test using whatever gearing you would for say an overtake?  You seem to miss the point that I was not comparing a 308BHP F-Sport. I was comparing the previous generation 295BHP Lux model without the gadgetry of "Sport" improving throttle response, my views on the car the I test drove still stand. Yes, they are impressive for a car of that mass, but its still no sports car whatever way you chop the figures. There's no way I'd call it quick.   The lux and Premier models don't have the option of an instant throttle re-map because they're fully automatic, non-switchable systems on the older cars at least, so they suffer more lag as everything tries to reset to the required throttle settings as a result.  Competent and capable? Yes. Fast? No.  

124mph top speed is also super-mini territory these days, not fast car territory (autobahns permitting!).  It's not top trumps though, so peace ...let's end the game of top trumps . It's more about the feel and every day driving experience and I take the point that as an everyday car, it's justifiably a very popular vehicle.   It's just a shame that the model I drove had so much intrusive cabin noise, it really was quite unpleasant, especially for rear passengers (my wife complained that the rear was awful for road noise which would be tiring and unwelcome on a run).  I can't but help think that a change of tyres might help at least a little here?  (ie does any other owner find it a little noisy?  If not then tyre choice seems the culprit).

For the record (I'm not top-trumping....honest ), the vRS is quicker in 50-70mph top gear roll on (in mapped form) than the quoted F-Sport figures . The standard 130 ASZ engine still manages the drag in a shade over 4 seconds.  The BLT (155BHP) is quicker.  The mapped 180BHP car, much quicker, partly due to the torque remapping of that car. We did initially try a more aggressive map, but the torque would have destroyed the transmission.  It was able to light up the front tyres in 4th gear from a 40mph roll-on, so the car was "de-tuned" to make it more sensible and reliable.  I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make but I'm with Malc here. Telsa, by the way Malc, make some super-fast fully electric cars that leave most so-called "super-cars" for dead but range is still an issue as is purchase cost.  Telsas are mighty impressive cars though.

I'm really not sure on the credentials of electric only cars because they still burn fossil fuels to get the electrickery, fossil fuels to manufacture just like any other car, and battery pack recycling involves the dumping of some pretty environmentally unfriendly substances.  Hybrid seems to be a good halfway house and at least Lexus have pinned their colours to the mast and progressed the technology arguably further than any other manufacturer.

Where we all share something in common is respect for a manufacturer who continues to manufacture some of the best put together vehicles on the road today, and I'm a big fan.

Just to point out, Im just presenting the facts here so in no way do I disregard or disrespect any of your opinions :)

It appears that I may have misread your initial post or became confused but we are talking about the 2016 RX correct? Not the 2012-2016 model?

The 295hp RX would suggest its 2009-2016 setup with less power, in which case, some of the facts I presented would be irrelevant. On a side note, the Luxury model DOES have the Sport mode but requires a few clicks of the steering wheel buttons to get through them. (Menu, down arrow, [Sport mode will be shown] and enter). Something else to note is whether the car was in Eco mode which is shown by the green light on the instrument cluster. IMO its the worse thing you can do it and feels like a boat in that mode. (ask me how I know!) Well its because when I bought the car, the salesman suggested leaving it in Eco mode and set it up. As the car was new, I didn't know how to change it and I was initially extremely disappointed with the acceleration from junctions as the car just wouldnt move until 3/4 throttle.

With regards to the Cayenne, the figures Ive quoted are fastest figures achieved in lowest gear possible, basically they were all in 3rd gear. 

I dont find the RX loud at all - but I can say that I did change my tyres to Michelin Latitude Tour HP. The OEM dunlops on the car from factory are loud without a doubt.

 

[GSLV6]

Hi Rayaan

no...we're discussing the 2012-2015 model.  Sorry, I should have made that clearer at the start. Interesting you mention the menu options. I did ask the salesman about this (the one we drove was a 2013 RX on Lux spec) and he was very certain in his response that it didn't have the sport mode which the Premier and F-Sport have, to sharpen up the throttle response.  He claimed it was done automatically on the Lux spec, and that it suffered a bit of lag. It started off in Eco mode, and I didn't twiddle with any settings, as from what he said, there seemed little point. He also said that it didn't have kick down in the conventional sense, as the CVT just builds revs to peak power when floored.  It did have a lag though when I tried it.

Yes, I could well believe the tyres make a big difference. This one was fitted with OEM Dunlops, pretty well worn ones too and they were dreadfully noisy. It was a relief to get back into the comparative serenity of our old GS after that test drive. 

I do have another test drive when they can locate me an F-Sport or Premier to try, so having learned a few tips from what you've said, I'll re-evaluate then. 

[GSLV6]

Could I please ask for one more bit of feedback from RX owners?  (thanks for your patience!)

I've now discounted the GS450 and will definitely be seeking out an RX.  I have one or two concerns which the dealership has answered by saying "we never have any problems at all", well they would say that when I'm looking to buy one 

It relates to Premium spec RX and air suspension.  I've done a search and found a few issues on older air suspension, especially on the GS.  As this is such an expensive one to sort if it goes wrong, does the Premium's air set up better the standard coil springs by much and are they generally reliable (including compressors and sensors) or is it a case of avoid anything over 10 years old?  (ie is it worth going down the Premier spec route at all?).

Also considering the F-sport. Are the seats as comfy as the Lux model, and is it worth the extra for, essentially, a styling change as I understand that the "lateral damper" system is (in the words of a chap at lexus) just an anti-roll bar within the engine compartment.  I once fitted an upper strut brace to a beemer I had and it did sort out the vague handling and was worth it on that.  I'm guessing that the actual suspension is the same as the standard model and the real changes are styling and an 8 step CVT over a 6 step?

Your feedback appreciated.  I'll be looking for a low miles example between 2012 and 2015 if that helps.

 

[Funkyboy]

There's not that much noticeable difference with the air suspension (test drive both on the same road and see for yourself) to warrant the extra complexity.

As you will be aware the CVT gearbox 'step change' is gimmicky given the car has no separate gear ratios so don't let that cloud your decision    

 

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, GSLV6 said:

Could I please ask for one more bit of feedback from RX owners?  (thanks for your patience!)

I've now discounted the GS450 and will definitely be seeking out an RX.  I have one or two concerns which the dealership has answered by saying "we never have any problems at all", well they would say that when I'm looking to buy one 

It relates to Premium spec RX and air suspension.  I've done a search and found a few issues on older air suspension, especially on the GS.  As this is such an expensive one to sort if it goes wrong, does the Premium's air set up better the standard coil springs by much and are they generally reliable (including compressors and sensors) or is it a case of avoid anything over 10 years old?  (ie is it worth going down the Premier spec route at all?).

Also considering the F-sport. Are the seats as comfy as the Lux model, and is it worth the extra for, essentially, a styling change as I understand that the "lateral damper" system is (in the words of a chap at lexus) just an anti-roll bar within the engine compartment.  I once fitted an upper strut brace to a beemer I had and it did sort out the vague handling and was worth it on that.  I'm guessing that the actual suspension is the same as the standard model and the real changes are styling and an 8 step CVT over a 6 step?

Your feedback appreciated.  I'll be looking for a low miles example between 2012 and 2015 if that helps.

 

Air suspension is slightly better than the standard setup. Ive not heard of any owners of 2012-2015 having issues with air suspension but it seems to plague the 400h's. Id suggest getting the extended warranty if going with a Premier as one failure and the warranty will be paid for.

F-Sport has exactly the same seats as the Luxury model for 3RX. F-Sport gets the HUD as standard on top of Luxury spec. There are no engine/gearbox changes between trim levels

Lexus chap is talking bull**** - The suspension itself is stiffer and there is a lateral damper up front and in the rear. Can be seen from underneath the vehicle and pretty hard to miss

Its up to you to decide whether its worth it or not, drive both and see. Personally I feel the F-Sport handles a lot better and its flatter around sharp turns. Obviously this does mean a stiffer ride though - sometimes gets quite harsh on potholes but its much better on the motorway, less vibration and gives more confidence than the Luxury/premier models.

[GSLV6]

Thanks Rayaan.

From what you say, the F-Sport or standard Luxury models may be the longer term safer bet. I was planning on taking out their £56 annual hybrid drivetrain warranty, so will enquire what the full warranty might cost annually.  If it's not cost effective, I'll go the F-Sport or perhaps the Lux + Advantage route instead.  Wasn't overly taken with the turn-in on the Lux model as it didn't take too much to provoke understeer.  I thought the chap was talking nonsense and it never ceases to amaze me how little some salespeople seem to know about the products they're trying to sell.  Not impressed.  I was also promised a call back today on a model I wanted to test drive. No call, so I won't chase them.  They either want my custom or I go somewhere else.

[rayaans]

20 hours ago, GSLV6 said:

Thanks Rayaan.

From what you say, the F-Sport or standard Luxury models may be the longer term safer bet. I was planning on taking out their £56 annual hybrid drivetrain warranty, so will enquire what the full warranty might cost annually.  If it's not cost effective, I'll go the F-Sport or perhaps the Lux + Advantage route instead.  Wasn't overly taken with the turn-in on the Lux model as it didn't take too much to provoke understeer.  I thought the chap was talking nonsense and it never ceases to amaze me how little some salespeople seem to know about the products they're trying to sell.  Not impressed.  I was also promised a call back today on a model I wanted to test drive. No call, so I won't chase them.  They either want my custom or I go somewhere else.

Here are the warranty prices:

https://www.lexus.co.uk/owners/warranty-and-insurance/#LexusCareExtendedWarranty

So £995 for 2 years but also has roadside assistance (normally £125 a year)

[GSLV6]

That's a hell of a cost!  I suspect the prices quoted to me were monthly then and not annual 

 

I can't see that its worth it until the car gets to a certain age.

[rayaans]

2 hours ago, GSLV6 said:

That's a hell of a cost!  I suspect the prices quoted to me were monthly then and not annual 

 

I can't see that its worth it until the car gets to a certain age.

The hybrid healthcheck is £59 per year and gives you 1 year warranty on the hybrid system.

The £995 for 2 years is a full warranty which includes everything apart from wear and tear.