Last post on Mar 15, 2012 at 9:02 PM
You are in the Lexus RX 300/330/350
What is this discussion about?
Lexus RX 300, Lexus RX 330, Lexus RX 350, Toyota Highlander, Car Comparisons, SUV
#45 of 58 Re: Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander Limited (both 2012) [whichone2012]
Feb 03, 2012 (9:09 pm)
Did quite a bit of reading-up on the Web before we narrowed down to the Highlander Limited with 4WD and the Lexus RX 350 AWD. Test-drove both vehicles on (unfortunately only) dry roads but within 1 hour of each other.
My impression re big differences:
The HL seats 7 (third row is somewhat cramped, but it's there); the RX350: seats 5. The HL has more clearance from the ground; the RX 350 is not really meant for off-road use - more aimed at comfort & safe driving. On the HL we tested, with less money we could have gotten the NAV system. But the HL ride was quite noisy (almost as much as my 4Runner) and a little bouncy. Also, the labelling on some of the controls and the quality of the chrome pieces on the HL Limited were not up-to-par. The SE trim level didnt suffer the chrome pieces, but you lost some of the options.
The real clincher for us was absolutely top-notch quality of material used and design on the RX 350 and the ride was super-quiet and cushioned. The interior quality on the RX 350 is several grades above the HL.
Once we test-drove the RX350, we could not bring ourselves to settle for the HL. Have had the RX350 for 4 days now and we just simply love it! If you are down to these two, then test-drive both, in close succession, if possible.
#46 of 58 Re: Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander Limited (both 2012) [nit2]
Feb 04, 2012 (8:37 am)
There is a reason why RX350 has much nicer interior and better tuned suspension then a HL. Toyota want's you to shell out more $$$$ for a Lexus and these $$$$ need to be well justified in the buyers eyes. It's up to the buyer to decide if it worth to spend significantly more for luxury RX350 vs significantly less for more practical HL.
#47 of 58 Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander
Feb 04, 2012 (7:36 pm)
Neither is meant for real off road use. Would compare RX350 to Venza instead of Highlander since Venza has similar hatchback body style.
#48 of 58 Re: Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander [typesix]
Feb 05, 2012 (9:51 am)
Could we possibly, FINALLY, put this "not for off-road use" issue to BED...??!!
F/awd, R/AWD, RWD, these are all about SAFETY, SAFE on-road driving but in adverse or wintertime surface conditions.
The few who are interested in off-road have their own choices to make....4WD/4X4, etc.
The "world" was perfectly satisfied with the state of affairs until the switch was made to FWD, FWD market dominance.
#49 of 58 Re: Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander Limited (both 2012) [whichone2012]
Feb 11, 2012 (9:26 pm)
we did a brief test drive of both. we diced to go with the highlander because of the softer ride . however we liked the rx but the ride appeared to be a little stiff.?!??
#50 of 58 Re: Lexus RX350 v. Toyota HIghlander Limited (both 2012) [nosdivad]
by Stever@Edmunds HOST
Feb 12, 2012 (6:31 am)
Tire pressures in new cars are overinflated for shipping and sometimes dealers forget to air them down to spec when they prep them for the lot, making for a bouncy test drive. You may want to try another one.
Either way, a longer test drive is a good idea before buying.
#52 of 58 Performance
Mar 13, 2012 (3:51 pm)
I'm a long time 4Runner owner but am thinking of switching to a Highlander. Haven't driven one yet, but have been doing a lot of research. I'm confused by the different descriptions of it's performance in the Edminds ratings and the Edmunds review. The Edmunds rating says with the 3.5 V6, it "has only enough power to allow for adequate acceleration". That kind of turned me off, but then I read the Edmunds review. There the Highlander with the 3.5 V6 "has especially brisk acceleration". Guess I'll take Edmunds ratings and reviews with a grain of salt from now on. What do owners think about it's performance with the V6?
#53 of 58 Re: Performance [mgrody]
Mar 15, 2012 (8:56 am)
Going from a RWD "based" AWD/4WD/4X4 4runner to a FWD based F/awd vehicle might be fraught with peril unless you truly understand, KNOW, the tradeoffs.
And I do NOT mean the availability of a mostly useless 4X4 mode.
Both of the vehicles you mention are primarily FWD vehicles with only PART-TIME. AUTOMATIC PART-TIME "awd" systems.
I would suggest you consider the base Porsche Cayenne, R/awd, instead, especially if you are in an area of harsh wintertime road conditions.
Decidedly more safe than ANY F/awd system, inclusive of even the best of the best, the SH-AWD system.
#54 of 58 Re: Performance [wwest]
Mar 15, 2012 (10:19 am)
I don't know about the RX350, but the Highlander uses 3 open differentials (front, center, and rear). So it is not primarily FWD with only "AUTOMATIC PART-TIME "awd" systems". As long as traction/friction is equal on all four wheels, power is sent to all four wheels equally, hence "full-time" awd. But as you know with open diffs, power always wants to go to the wheel with less resistance (i.e. traction). This is true regardless if the vehicle is f/awd or r/awd if there are open diffs involved. Hence the use of electronic traction control (i.e. applying brake pressure to the slipping wheel to increase resistance, thus sending power else where).
The notion that r/awd are better than f/awd is false. Without traction aids, any type of awd system (regardless if its fwd based or rwd based) with three open different are really one-wheel drive. A f/awd vehicle with traction aids (e.g. diff lockers, limited slip diff, etc.) will perform better than a r/awd with open differentials.