Article Comments - 2010 Lexus RX 350 First Drive

14 messages, Last post on Feb 18, 2009 at 1:37 PM

You are in the Lexus RX 300/330/350 Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & tidester

What is this discussion about? Lexus RX 350, SUV

2010 Lexus RX 350 First Drive - First Impressions: Lexus builds us a slightly more refined, slightly higher-tech version of the most popular luxury SUV of the last decade. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 2 of 3: 1; 2; 3; Prev; Next; Last

#2 of 14 F/awd by wwest Jan 08, 2009 (11:39 am)
A few more details on the operation of the new AWD system would be desirable. Hopefully it will operate, DYNAMICALLY operate, along the same lines as the Honda/Acura SH-AWD system, itself an ABSOLUTE MODEL for AWD implemenation with a sideways mounted engine, base FWD vehicle. The rear mounted electric clutch would sure allow for that capability.
#3 of 14 Too Fat by soonercat Jan 09, 2009 (9:51 am)
Lexus ruined a chance to have slight weight gain with increased performance and better MPG. The lower cd, revised engine and tranny are wasted by the 400 pounds. Replies to this message: la4mead (Jan 09, 2009 10:20 am) wwest (Jan 09, 2009 1:10 pm) la4mead (Jan 09, 2009 2:00 pm) and 1 more...
#4 of 14 Re: Too Fat [soonercat] by la4mead Jan 09, 2009 (10:20 am)
Replying to: soonercat (Jan 09, 2009 9:51 am) I absolutely agree. The new 5-passenger-only RX with the revised multi-link suspension could easily have been scaled back to a lighter, more nimble and agile design that still had plenty of room and utility inside. But instead, I think they were focusing on continuing the trend of American up-sizing. The Lexus car line could use a change from their current feature-rich but boring models. Lexus would really get my interest with a fun, nimble, and useful 5 door "GT" style sportwagon (without those stupid roof rails permanently attached). Speed isn't as important as flat cornering, gearbox control, and efficiency to me. Lexus made a meager attempt with the first-gen IS300, but failed to meet their marketing expectations, mostly because many buyers were put off by the awkward styling and the poorly designed interior (flash over function). Good luck with it, Lexus. I'm sure you'll sell lots. Replies to this message: wwest (Jan 09, 2009 1:10 pm) la4mead (Jan 09, 2009 2:00 pm) roblaw (Feb 18, 2009 1:37 pm)
#5 of 14 Re: Too Fat [la4mead] by wwest Jan 09, 2009 (1:10 pm)
Replying to: la4mead (Jan 09, 2009 10:20 am) It's a shame that the high prices of fuel didn't last long enough for Lexus to commit, be "forced" to commit, to an RX225 using their new I4 but upgraded to DFI. Even better would have been an RX225h using that same technology. Sad. Replies to this message: la4mead (Jan 09, 2009 2:00 pm) roblaw (Feb 18, 2009 1:37 pm)
#6 of 14 Re: Too Fat [wwest] by la4mead Jan 09, 2009 (2:00 pm)
Replying to: wwest (Jan 09, 2009 1:10 pm) You're absolutely right. Lexus had some great options, but chose to modernize the same old pattern: bigger is better for to sell their cars on the U.S. I'm disappointed Lexus doesn't seem to recognize a market for high-content/quality, upscale appointments in a lighter, more nimble (and fun to drive), and fuel efficient design. P.S. FWIW, the Venza shape looks better to me, but it's too big. It's similar looking to a Matrix (but more upmarket), and the Matrix just doesn't offer the Lexus level of refinement and equipment. Replies to this message: roblaw (Feb 18, 2009 1:37 pm)
#7 of 14 Nav while driving? by sigmabody Feb 06, 2009 (12:13 pm)
The important question to me, and one which has net been answered yet, is will you be able to enter navigation data while driving? This is the single reason I haven't updated the nav information in my current Lexus (the factory version has the hidden override which allows entry while driving, which is incredibly useful just to let passengers enter data, if nothing else). If it still has this lockout and no known override, it's going to be a tough sell to me, no matter how many other features they put it: basic driver usefulness has to come first. Hopefully with all the other focus on driver utility, this huge glaring deficiency has been remedied; anybody know? Replies to this message: Firebird_EOU (Feb 06, 2009 8:11 pm)
#8 of 14 Re: Nav while driving? [sigmabody] by Firebird_EOU Feb 06, 2009 (8:11 pm)
Replying to: sigmabody (Feb 06, 2009 12:13 pm) I doubt it... You should research if it lets you enter via voice command instead.
#9 of 14 No interest in this topic by soonercat Feb 09, 2009 (1:31 pm)
Is it me or does the forthcoming 2010 RX have no interest? I think direct injection would have been quite nice from their GS 350 etc. Replies to this message: la4mead (Feb 09, 2009 2:41 pm) wwest (Feb 10, 2009 2:49 pm) soonercat (Feb 11, 2009 9:54 am)
#10 of 14 Re: No interest in this topic [soonercat] by la4mead Feb 09, 2009 (2:41 pm)
Replying to: soonercat (Feb 09, 2009 1:31 pm) I plan on going to the local preview event tomorrow night, hoping to be impressed but I'm not expecting a big wow factor. It looks like the same formula as before. Bigger, lazier, and more sedate which don't really inspire me much. Let's hope I'm wrong. I'm prepared (not expecting) to be impressed by a better handling, lower, well-built vehicle that's extremely efficient, agile and fun that includes lots of intuitive features in the price. But that's not what I've heard so far. The specs and pics of the new RX make me yawn. And for those who place a value on styling, I'd have to say the Venza has edgier, cleaner, and crisper lines. Either one seems like the size is getting just too big and clumsy, though.
#11 of 14 Re: No interest in this topic [soonercat] by wwest Feb 10, 2009 (2:49 pm)
Replying to: soonercat (Feb 09, 2009 1:31 pm) Actually DFI would have been even nicer on the new 187HP I4 in the new Venza and 2009 Highlander. DFI on that engine would have put in the "class" needed to power the RXh and even, or especially so, with DFI and Atkinson, the RXh. Replies to this message: soonercat (Feb 11, 2009 9:54 am)