Had some clunks w/ my '99 when it went over certain kinds of rough road. Turned out to be a bad strut. There was a TSB on this so it was a widespread problem. Didn't happen on downshifting or upshifting. Sounds more like a motor mount or transmission program.
We have an '04 with nav and on the way back from Chicago yesterday, we thought we'd look for a Mexican restaurant. In my '01 GS, you can hit category, restaurant, mexican, etc and it will give you a list of the restaurants in order of distance away from your current location. In the RX, the list button is greyed out when it says it's found say 12 items. You have to hit the first letter of the restaurant and it still doesn't give you a distance until you select it and map it. Am I doing something wrong or is the old system better for this?
I own an '04 RX FWD and an '03 MDX (AWD). I have confirmed what several have suspected with regard to the RX330's passing capability, or lack thereof. I have not race the vehicles head-to-head (yet), but I have timed both with a stopwatch. The MDX does 0-60 in about 8.3 seconds, while the front-wheel-drive RX does it in about 8.6 seconds. But in 45-65 mph passing tests, the RX is almost a full second doggier than the MDX. It's surprising, because the MDX "feels" like a heavier vehicle. But the engine is stronger and the transmission is more refined in the MDX. Down-shifts are less abrupt and engine noise under hard acceleration is less obtrusive. The RX reminds me more of a 4-cylinder vehicle when passing. The MDX is no speed demon, but it's drivetrain is much stronger and impressive. Too bad it doesn't feel as nimble as the RX. I am confident the RX would take the MDX in a slalom or similar race. But in normal driving, the MDX is the more "BWM-ish" of the two for sure.
BMW's are known for great steering and handling. Curious that you say the RX is more nimble, and would win in a slalom race, but the MDX is more "BMW-ish." As far as your 0-60 times go, Car & Driver shows the time for the RX330 at 7.8 seconds, the same as the MDX. The quarter mile times are within a tenth of a second of each other (16.2 vs. 16.1 respectively). Roadholding is also a dead heat, with the RX edging out the MDX (.75 vs .74). Performance wise, these two are about equal, except 70-0 mph braking where the RX bests the MDX 176 vs 200 feet.
With the tripling of registration fees in CA that came into effect today (Oct.1), I was fortunate to have taken delivery of my rx330 before then. I'm assuming many people in CA would've kept this in mind when contemplating on even getting one (actually, any car for that matter).
It really sucks that compared to most other states, californians get stuck with paying higher fuel costs, registrations fees, sales tax, etc. Btw, many CA dealerships were open up until midnight last night, so buyers can take advantage of not paying the triple fees. Come to think of it, though, maybe better discounts will be given now that lexus may be hurting for business since the tripling of fees may be keeping potential buyers away.
I am considering purchasing a 2004 RX 330 and am interested in the Neptune Blue Mica color. I was told by the dealer it is a fairly unusual color and they do not have any in stock. I am concerned it may have a "purple" tint to it in certain light. I cannot tell by looking at the Lexus website or by the color chip in the brochure. The dealer said he thought it was a navy color and would not have the purple tint to it. Does anyone have this color or have they seen this color? Thanks for your help.
JBaumgart: The RX seems to turn faster than the MDX. The steering is "lighter". It feels more "nimble". Maybe the MDX's "clumsiness" in this area is due to the fact that it is taller, wider and longer (the driver sits noticeably higher as well). Still, if I go 50mph and change lanes and back very quickly, the RX remains composed and quickly enters and exits each lane. The MDX is less comforting. It seems to stay in the lanes longer. If I slow the MDX to between 40 and 45mph, it feels more like the RX did at 50mph. Maybe this is due, in part, to the fact the the MDX is taller, wider and longer than the RX. The driver also sits higher. All this makes it feel less "nimble".
Having said all this, the MDX's steering is better weighted and provides more feel and control during normal driving (within the vehicles limits). So while a Ford Focus might travel faster down a twisting mountain road, a 5-series BMW will feel better.
I guess it would be more fair to compare cars that are more similar - a Focus is much smaller than a 5-series and the RX is noticeably smaller than the MDX. Still, I think the RX's "nimbleness" is more impressive than the MDX - even if the road feel is slightly worse.
more for JBaumgart: ....And your right. The brakes are more responsive in the RX. The RX stops much more confidently and I rarely overshoot the threshold of the intersection like I do in the MDX.
Every few nights, I take my 2-year-old son on a ride so he will fall asleep. After stopping by bmwbob27's to trade stories about cold-air and counter-intuitive moonroof controls (not to mention the fact that we're the only RX owners in Sonoma County who are male), I cruise on the freeway a few exits then return home. Some nights I'll take the RX and others the MDX - I let my son choose. Both vehicles cruise so nicely that you often don't realize how fast you are going. I often fail to slow down enough for the freeway offramp and am forced to apply more brake pressure to come to a stop before the intersection. I often overshoot threshold in the MDX, but not in the RX. I have gone so far as to duplicate my exit "trajectory" in both vehicles and the RX always stops better. I realize that this test is less scientific than my other tests which involve stopwatches and real measurements. But I am confident that I am not lying when I purport that the RX out brakes the MDX in a noticeable way.
JBaumgart: ....As for Car and Driver, all I can say is that I never have been able to get anything close to their numbers - even with an automatic transmission. For that matter, I looked up 0-60 times on several websites. The only ones that are close to mine are on the website for a leading consumer magazine. They got 8.2 seconds for the MDX; I got 8.3. They got 8.8 seconds for the RX (AWD); I got 8.6 seconds for the RX (FWD). And here's the kicker. The consumer magazine was the only website that actually buys cars at the dealerships like you an me. All the other cars were supplied by the manufacturer. Many, before vehicles were available to the public. In fact, the Lexus brochure says they got there times with professional drivers and prototype vehicles. I used to think that I could use Car and Driver's numbers for relative comparisons - even if my times were slightly worse. I have learn that that is not the case. Car and Driver's numbers can be opposite of what you and I can do in the production vehicles (relatively speaking). That's why I dismiss them entirely. I must admit, though, that C&D's braking numbers look good. Bot C&D and the leading consumer magazine got about 12% shorter stops in the RX than they did with the MDX. Maybe it's harder to rig the breaks on those "prototype" vehicles - or maybe the manufacturers don't care as much about those numbers.
I really think that Lexus really wanted the RX to accelerate better (because that was on of the biggest complaints about the dated RX300) and Toyota just couldn't do it. So Lexus marketing just hyped and exaggerated a little more than companies usually do.
The RX is still a great car. It's just not the speed demon they want you to think it is. It's really more like the old RX300 in that respect.
I've had my RX330 for almost three months. I love all the toys from the nav package to the power tailgate, but in terms of actually driving the car it just is not "fun". Comfortable--yes. Sure footedness--yes. Trouble-free--so far yes. BUT NOT FUN. Any comments?
Despite the hype from the mfgs, an SUV is just about the last vehicle you should buy if "fun" is high on your "want-list". The "sport" part of SUV was originally rock-hopping and mud-bogging. You will get great utility and satisfaction from your RX, but "fun" it will never be.
Point fairly well taken if we were talking about an Explorer or even the other two Lexus SUVs as they are all truck based. The RX is really not much more than a Camry or ES with more body armor and all wheel drive. It should have more life. Maybe it is just that Toyotas do not have "soul".
I've been a C&D subsciber for many years and I do trust their numbers as being authentic. But as they often point out, any given individual car of a given model will be slower (or faster) than another of the exact same model. Not all engines will come off the assembly line exactly the same. And on any given day, conditions might be different too.
They also will tell you that they extract the best possible time for each model that they test. On automatic and AWD-equipped cars like the RX, this means employing a technique that you and I would never do to our own vehicles - giving it plenty of gas with our left foot on the brake, and then letting it go. On cars that develop too much wheelspin to hurt performance, this means less throttle. For this reason their 5-60 mph test is probably a better measure of real-world performance. You are already moving slightly and then mash the gas pedal. But the 0-60 and quarter mile times are achieved using the best possible technique on each car they test. I don't think Consumer Reports would ever do this, so in the reports that I've seen their times are always slower than those achieved by C&D. It's not the fact that C&D are given perfectly prepared, super-fast examples of cars, whereas Consumer Reports just buys them off the lot. If this were true, C&D wouldn't find much in the way of rattles and other manufacturing defects that they often do. And oftentimes they buy a car for a long-term evaluation, and the car is a little faster after 20,000 or 30,000 miles than it was when brand new (not too often, but this happens sometimes).
So I do not believe that they fudge the tests in any way. This is one magazine that is very critical of models that they don't care for, and even critical of certain features of models that they do care for. This and their often humerous writing style is mainly why I've liked it and have been a paid subscriber for so many years. Like anything else, you don't believe everything you read as if it were the Gospel, but it's about as consistently honest as I've found for printed car mags.
P.S. They are not big fans of SUV's generally, but I still bought an RX330 and a FX45, so I don't always follow their recommendations! <g>
I agree with JBaumgart on the testing method, and actually have read some of the magazine testers stories about how they test cars. Most often, the car will be in neutral (auto) and the gas up to the max torque level and slammed the gear into drive. For manuals, clutch is dumped at high RPM. Sometimes I wonder how long those clutches and transmissions last on the press cars.
I remember Road and Track testing Bugatti EB110 (AWD) by running the RPM upto 7000 and dumping the clutch, because the thing would not spin the tires at lower RPMs.
Consumer Reports on the other hand, seems to test the way average Joe would drive their cars. So I tend to rely on their numbers for more realistic data.
I seen this color at local dealer. To my eye, there is no purple. Direct sun light, I see the dark navy blue at close look. In show room, almost black. Out side at distance with sun light darker navy blue. Best is to see it by yourself to make sure. Also, checkout the transmission during test drive at 25 mph range. It's not smooth like previous 4 speed auto train on the RX300 (awd). It (awd) "clunk" "thug" and "lag" when down shifting, specially at 25 mph. Not sure the fwd have this problem.
BWM4... I have the Neptune Blue -- I don't see purple in any way. It is a very true, deep navy blue. My friends have commented about my "black car", because it does look black from a distance .. but no purple.
I have that color and during the day it looks dark blue and at night it looks black, if you look closely you can see navy blue mixed in. I can guarantee their is no purple.
Comparing the C&D 0-60 and other acceleration times is only really valid if you compare vehicles tested for the same article. Different weather and road surface conditions can easily throw off the results by a few tenths of a second.
The most direct speed comparison between the RX330, MDX, FX35, etc. can be found in the recent Consumer Reports article. All the vehicles were tested under similar conditions so I'd go with those numbers over individually tested numbers from C&D. CR tends to run acceleration tests more conservatively than C&D, Thus they post slower times, but the deltas are pretty accurate.
Someone I know who works for the company emailed me this today:
Hey Jim, > Yah, I have been busy latley with the launch of the > refreshed LS430. > We were in Seattle last week and they showed off the > 2005 GS. Let's just > say it will be well worth the wait. That is one > nice assss car. > Very well thought out, There will be an AWD > version, not sure if the V6 or > the V8 gets it. > I have not heard any news of a hybrid > Sequoia/Tundra. But as time goes by > Toyota/Lexus will introduce hybrids into more and > more of the models. > So what's new with you???"
I emailed him with lots of questons and this was his reply:
is indeed a doctored up HPX. Doesn't look anything like the new GS. The new GS is lower and longer. I don't know about power output or performance. I do know the base eng will be a V6. What struct me the most is how clean the car is styled and the interior of the vehicle as well. I would say the best looking Lexus or Toyota yet. Doesn't look like anything esle that Lexus or Toyota has come out with. Nice set of wheels as well. Lets just say I can't wait to get mine!! The hybrid RX was there as well. That has some performance as well. Faster that a BMW X5 V8 and gets 36mpg in the city."
Hopefully some pic's may surface now that the car is in the US.
I've had my rx330 for about 6 wks now and only have 458 miles. I haven't scheduled my 1 month/1K service yet, as I was assuming it should be taken in at either/or. If I wait any longer to bring it in, will I still get the complimentary service? To be specific, when does this service offer expire? Also, what exactly is done at the 1k service? Is the oil changed? And most importantly, is this service free? I've heard conflicting info. - are the first two services free (1k and 5k)?? Please clarify, I've misplaced my owner's manual.
This is what Lexus will call the RX hybrid. It has the power of a V8 engine and with a compact car's fuel economy. It will debut in fall 2004 as 2005 model.
Suggest you just give a call to your dealer's service department and ask them about when would be the best time to bring it in. I'm sure they will honor the free 1000 mile service if you are anywhere close to the 1000 miles. Since you have very few miles on it yet after 6 weeks, they may tell you to bring it in as soon as they have an opening, or they may tell you to wait until you approach the 1000 miles. Either way it should be free. There is no oil change at this service - it's primarily just an inspection.
Most dealers (I think) including my own also do not charge for the 5,000 service. This may even be a Lexus policy, I'm not sure. At this service they do change the oil. The real question in your situation is should you wait until then to get your first oil change, as it may be a whole year before you reach 5,000 miles. I would ask your service advisor about that as well. If it were me I would have it changed at least every 6 months, regardless of the mileage, but that's just me.
Let's look a little deeper into this. What REALLY defines "harsh" conditions?? Certainly, we cannot be allowed to provide our own definitions concerning Lexus maintenance or warranty issues. I decided to go to the source. After hacking into the Lexus database mainframe, I was able to take an extremely educated guess as to what constitutes "harsh or rough duty use" (or something to that effect):
- Driving in temperatures above 100 degrees F. - Driving in temperatures below 30 degrees F. (Note: Isn't it amazing that the Lexus mainframe uses Fahrenheit instead of Celsius for units of temperature measurement?)
- Taking short trips of less than 10 minutes duration. - Driving in any stop-and-go traffic. - Allowing the engine to reach 4500rpm or greater. - Taking the car off pavement. - Eating a Big Mac while driving. - Driving with more than 1 child under the age of 24. - Remembering the ol' Toyota/Lexus 3.0 Liter V6 engine oil sludge controversy. - Driving while talking on the cell phone!
OK, I admit that I made up that last item. Sorry, but some of that cell phone usage is a pet peeve of mine.
Now, how many of us can look our service advisors straight in the eye and honestly say that we never drive under any "harsh" conditions?
I agree with cotmc - it makes sense to go with 5,000 miles. For me it's just peace of mind, as clean oil will never harm the engine, and just may help it last longer. This has certainly been proven with the previous model, and nobody has had enough experience with the new engine to know for sure. If I was on a three year lease, I'd probably go with the 7,500 interval, but we own the vehicle and may keep it for up to 10 years (our daughter turns 16 in 3 1/2 years, and she isn't getting a Corvette). Spending an extra $40-$50 per year on an extra oil change is cheap insurance, IMO. And here in Minnesota we definitely qualify for "harsh" conditions - it's already been below 30 degrees F, and we may go another 60 degrees below that before winter is over!
I just bought my RX 330 last month and, so far, I am not very happy with it in term of engine noise. It's seems like valve rattling noise or so. This noise can be heard quite clealy from the cabin. The rattling sound sounds like diesel engine noise, but the sound is not loud. You need to pay attention while parking and little surrounding noise. I thought this is just my RX330, but when I came back to dealer and test drive on other exact model, it's just the same noise I can hear from the cabin. I've never heard this noise/sound on my 1999 Solara with 135000 miles on it. It sounds smoother than RX 330 either when accelerating. Try to notice this noise after driving home and you'll know what I am talking about. I'll complain this to Lexus when I have my 1000 miles check-up next Tuesday and keep you posted.
Ditto on the valve noise. Its audible at idle, 750RPM's? Another theory on another board is that the exhaust system in the RX330 is only attached at the the front and back of the vehicle. Thus creating a harmonic vibration that can be felt and heard in the vehicle. Keep the theories and observations coming. Hopefully Lexus will address this issue.
What is the "real" official definition specifically for this vehicle? I doubt it means if you "ever" drive in traffic and stop at a red light or if you drove the vehicle for 3 hours while the temperature dipped to 29 degrees, you now are driving in "harsh" conditions. Lexus probably should have sensors like BMW and Mercedes that analyze your driving and the oil as you drive and have a maintenance light that comes on at a custom interval rather than having a set schedule.
As for the previous Toyotas with sludge problems: They were defective engines. The solution was not more frequent oil changes any more than adding oil to a leaking engine is the "solution."
Anyone have any "offroad" experiences in their RX to share?
When I attended a Lexus driving event in Northern Virginia, three separate courses were set up for the RX, GX and LX (and their competitors.) The RX course was entirely on pavement and smooth dirt roads. The GX and LX had "off-road" courses that had been built by moving earth around in a parking lot. Though they were only 300 yards or so long, the "off-road" courses, which were slightly more extreme for the LX and its competitors, included some railroad ties to drive over, a 30 degree sidehill and some mini 6 ft hills with staggered peaks so you could drive with 1 or 2 wheels in the air.
The RX's competitors included the X5 3.0 and the ML 350. The GX and LX's competitors included the X5 4.4 and the ML 500. Net result was that drivers got to take the same basic MB and BMW products on both the onroad and offroad courses (albeit with different engines). And, although it was very short and artificial, both the MB an BMW performed just fine on the off-road course.
When I asked an event staffer whether we could drive the RX 330 over the off-road course, she said no. When I asked why, she said that few RX buyers ever go offroad and that that capability isn't a critical selling point. When told her I was looking at the RX and GX and wondered how the RX would do off-road, she said that early in the morning, they'd brought an RX out to the off-road track, because as car enthusiasts themselves, they were eager to see how it would do. The RX, she said, got 'stuck.'
For 95% of the driving I do, on road, I'd rather have an RX than a GX. But I'd like to know that if I drive on the beach or on a moderately difficult forest road, my RX won't be getting stuck far from help when a GX, X5 or ML could have easily passed.
Please share your experiences taking RX's offroad or let me know where you've read reviews that have taken RX's off pavement. Thanks.
I called my dealer to schedule the 1k mile service, and they asked if I'd like them to come to my home and do it. I hadn't heard of that before. It'll be fun to watch them and see what they do. The dealer is in Mission Viejo, CA.
Anyone out there with less than 1k miles (say, about 500 miles or so) when it reached the 30 days since taking delivery? If so, did you already schedule/have your first free service (at 30 days), or will you wait until you reach closer to 1k miles instead?
I thought there were only 3 leather interior colors to choose from (black, light grey, ivory) for the rx330. I visited a lexus dealership recently after I took delivery of my rx330, and I saw what appeared to be charcoal grey (noticeably darker than the regular grey, but lighter than black). Don't know if it only appeared to look charcoal due to me peering through the window tint of a locked rx330. Also, I recall reading a post somewhere where someone mentioned having gotten charcoal leather interior. Has this color always been available?
The RX series isn't even a capable on-road AWD if the conditions are adverse, snow and ice. The AWD RX300 is predominantly a FWD ONLY, and will route some engine torque to the rear wheels under extreme conditions, 75/25 after an extended period of front wheel loss of traction, for instance.
The RX330 has the potential to be a lot better were it not for the 45 second ABS pump/motor protection timeout.
I find that my RX has the tendency to wander over the road unless I keep a tight control on the steering wheel. I've set the tires at the pressure suggested on the door. It seems as if you take your eyes off the road for a second the car takes it own direction.
How many of you RX330 owners have pinched their fingers in the exterior door handles??? I have just gotten my 5th blood blister. Another design marvel!!! One would think that I should have learned my lesson after the 2nd one??? DAHA!!!
Seriously, I've noticed that it could have a better on-center feel, but on the occasions that I've driven it I didn't have any problem keeping it in my lane, even with just light pressure on the wheel.
"As for the previous Toyotas with sludge problems: They were defective engines."
I agree. Less frequent oil changes (such as 7500-mile+ intervals) should never have caused those problems. But what you and I believe to be true isn't always what the service center or the car manufacturer believes to be true. For the first few Toyota/Lexus owners to experience this problem, how much time, effort, and cost were expended before Toyota admitted the engine was fully to blame?
"Lexus probably should have sensors like BMW and Mercedes that analyze your driving and the oil as you drive and have a maintenance light that comes on at a custom interval..."
I would agree if they truly perform a good analysis of all your driving conditions. In my opinion, there's not a great deal of analysis involved with the BMW maintenance indicators. For example, I've had both a BMW E39 5-series and an E46 3-series sedan. Harsh stop-and-go driving seems to result in a custom interval of, say, 13K miles, while I've actually experienced an interval of 17K miles for mostly light freeway driving. Yes, that is with synthetic; but isn't it amazing how much longer the oil change intervals are when the manufacturer provides the maintenance for free? I prefer to be my own judge.
I never did hear definitively what was the defect in those engines that caused the sludge problem that Toyota finally admitted to (?). If the "engine was fully to blame" what modifications did they make to all of the 3.0 liter engines that were manufactured after they admitted that these engines did have this problem, and what remedy did they offer to owners of models that developed this engine defect? I was under the impression that most instances of sludge problems were found to be in vehicles that probably did not have frequent enough oil changes. I was also wondering if anyone who has had their oil changed at 5,000 mile intervals has experienced a sludge problem. Finally, what specifically did Lexus do to eliminate the possibility of sludge build-up on the new 3.3 liter engine of the RX330?
Any answers from people who know the real facts of this issue would be appreciated.
Comments
It really sucks that compared to most other states, californians get stuck with paying higher fuel costs, registrations fees, sales tax, etc. Btw, many CA dealerships were open up until midnight last night, so buyers can take advantage of not paying the triple fees. Come to think of it, though, maybe better discounts will be given now that lexus may be hurting for business since the tripling of fees may be keeping potential buyers away.
tedcruiser
And that pales in comparison with a $40 BILLION deficit which the recall may fix - a prudent investment - but we should really stick to the topic! :-)
tidester, host
The RX seems to turn faster than the MDX. The steering is "lighter". It feels more "nimble". Maybe the MDX's "clumsiness" in this area is due to the fact that it is taller, wider and longer (the driver sits noticeably higher as well). Still, if I go 50mph and change lanes and back very quickly, the RX remains composed and quickly enters and exits each lane. The MDX is less comforting. It seems to stay in the lanes longer. If I slow the MDX to between 40 and 45mph, it feels more like the RX did at 50mph. Maybe this is due, in part, to the fact the the MDX is taller, wider and longer than the RX. The driver also sits higher. All this makes it feel less "nimble".
Having said all this, the MDX's steering is better weighted and provides more feel and control during normal driving (within the vehicles limits). So while a Ford Focus might travel faster down a twisting mountain road, a 5-series BMW will feel better.
I guess it would be more fair to compare cars that are more similar - a Focus is much smaller than a 5-series and the RX is noticeably smaller than the MDX. Still, I think the RX's "nimbleness" is more impressive than the MDX - even if the road feel is slightly worse.
....And your right. The brakes are more responsive in the RX. The RX stops much more confidently and I rarely overshoot the threshold of the intersection like I do in the MDX.
Every few nights, I take my 2-year-old son on a ride so he will fall asleep. After stopping by bmwbob27's to trade stories about cold-air and counter-intuitive moonroof controls (not to mention the fact that we're the only RX owners in Sonoma County who are male), I cruise on the freeway a few exits then return home. Some nights I'll take the RX and others the MDX - I let my son choose. Both vehicles cruise so nicely that you often don't realize how fast you are going. I often fail to slow down enough for the freeway offramp and am forced to apply more brake pressure to come to a stop before the intersection. I often overshoot threshold in the MDX, but not in the RX. I have gone so far as to duplicate my exit "trajectory" in both vehicles and the RX always stops better. I realize that this test is less scientific than my other tests which involve stopwatches and real measurements. But I am confident that I am not lying when I purport that the RX out brakes the MDX in a noticeable way.
....As for Car and Driver, all I can say is that I never have been able to get anything close to their numbers - even with an automatic transmission. For that matter, I looked up 0-60 times on several websites. The only ones that are close to mine are on the website for a leading consumer magazine. They got 8.2 seconds for the MDX; I got 8.3. They got 8.8 seconds for the RX (AWD); I got 8.6 seconds for the RX (FWD). And here's the kicker. The consumer magazine was the only website that actually buys cars at the dealerships like you an me. All the other cars were supplied by the manufacturer. Many, before vehicles were available to the public. In fact, the Lexus brochure says they got there times with professional drivers and prototype vehicles. I used to think that I could use Car and Driver's numbers for relative comparisons - even if my times were slightly worse. I have learn that that is not the case. Car and Driver's numbers can be opposite of what you and I can do in the production vehicles (relatively speaking). That's why I dismiss them entirely. I must admit, though, that C&D's braking numbers look good. Bot C&D and the leading consumer magazine got about 12% shorter stops in the RX than they did with the MDX. Maybe it's harder to rig the breaks on those "prototype" vehicles - or maybe the manufacturers don't care as much about those numbers.
I really think that Lexus really wanted the RX to accelerate better (because that was on of the biggest complaints about the dated RX300) and Toyota just couldn't do it. So Lexus marketing just hyped and exaggerated a little more than companies usually do.
The RX is still a great car. It's just not the speed demon they want you to think it is. It's really more like the old RX300 in that respect.
They also will tell you that they extract the best possible time for each model that they test. On automatic and AWD-equipped cars like the RX, this means employing a technique that you and I would never do to our own vehicles - giving it plenty of gas with our left foot on the brake, and then letting it go. On cars that develop too much wheelspin to hurt performance, this means less throttle. For this reason their 5-60 mph test is probably a better measure of real-world performance. You are already moving slightly and then mash the gas pedal. But the 0-60 and quarter mile times are achieved using the best possible technique on each car they test. I don't think Consumer Reports would ever do this, so in the reports that I've seen their times are always slower than those achieved by C&D. It's not the fact that C&D are given perfectly prepared, super-fast examples of cars, whereas Consumer Reports just buys them off the lot. If this were true, C&D wouldn't find much in the way of rattles and other manufacturing defects that they often do. And oftentimes they buy a car for a long-term evaluation, and the car is a little faster after 20,000 or 30,000 miles than it was when brand new (not too often, but this happens sometimes).
So I do not believe that they fudge the tests in any way. This is one magazine that is very critical of models that they don't care for, and even critical of certain features of models that they do care for. This and their often humerous writing style is mainly why I've liked it and have been a paid subscriber for so many years. Like anything else, you don't believe everything you read as if it were the Gospel, but it's about as consistently honest as I've found for printed car mags.
P.S. They are not big fans of SUV's generally, but I still bought an RX330 and a FX45, so I don't always follow their recommendations! <g>
I remember Road and Track testing Bugatti EB110 (AWD) by running the RPM upto 7000 and dumping the clutch, because the thing would not spin the tires at lower RPMs.
Consumer Reports on the other hand, seems to test the way average Joe would drive their cars. So I tend to rely on their numbers for more realistic data.
Best is to see it by yourself to make sure. Also, checkout the transmission during test drive at 25 mph range. It's not smooth like previous 4 speed auto train on the RX300 (awd). It (awd) "clunk" "thug" and "lag" when down shifting, specially at 25 mph. Not sure the fwd have this problem.
The most direct speed comparison between the RX330, MDX, FX35, etc. can be found in the recent Consumer Reports article. All the vehicles were tested under similar conditions so I'd go with those numbers over individually tested numbers from C&D. CR tends to run acceleration tests more conservatively than C&D, Thus they post slower times, but the deltas are pretty accurate.
Hey Jim,
> Yah, I have been busy latley with the launch of the
> refreshed LS430.
> We were in Seattle last week and they showed off the
> 2005 GS. Let's just
> say it will be well worth the wait. That is one
> nice assss car.
> Very well thought out, There will be an AWD
> version, not sure if the V6 or
> the V8 gets it.
> I have not heard any news of a hybrid
> Sequoia/Tundra. But as time goes by
> Toyota/Lexus will introduce hybrids into more and
> more of the models.
> So what's new with you???"
I emailed him with lots of questons and this was his reply:
"Hey Jim,
That pic you sent
http://www.autofiend.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&a- mp;a- mp;sid=96
is indeed a doctored up HPX. Doesn't look anything
like
the new GS. The new GS is lower and longer. I don't know about power
output or performance. I do know the base eng will be a V6. What
struct
me the most is how clean the car is styled and the interior of the
vehicle
as well. I would say the best looking Lexus or Toyota yet. Doesn't look
like anything esle that Lexus or Toyota has come out with. Nice set of
wheels as well. Lets just say I can't wait to get mine!!
The hybrid RX was there as well. That has some performance as well.
Faster that a BMW X5 V8 and gets 36mpg in the city."
Hopefully some pic's may surface now that the car is in the US.
But now back to the subject at hand.
Most dealers (I think) including my own also do not charge for the 5,000 service. This may even be a Lexus policy, I'm not sure. At this service they do change the oil. The real question in your situation is should you wait until then to get your first oil change, as it may be a whole year before you reach 5,000 miles. I would ask your service advisor about that as well. If it were me I would have it changed at least every 6 months, regardless of the mileage, but that's just me.
Absent harsh or rough duty use Lexus recommends the first service at 7500 miles.
- Driving in temperatures above 100 degrees F.
- Driving in temperatures below 30 degrees F.
(Note: Isn't it amazing that the Lexus mainframe uses Fahrenheit instead of Celsius for units of temperature measurement?)
- Taking short trips of less than 10 minutes duration.
- Driving in any stop-and-go traffic.
- Allowing the engine to reach 4500rpm or greater.
- Taking the car off pavement.
- Eating a Big Mac while driving.
- Driving with more than 1 child under the age of 24.
- Remembering the ol' Toyota/Lexus 3.0 Liter V6 engine oil sludge controversy.
- Driving while talking on the cell phone!
OK, I admit that I made up that last item. Sorry, but some of that cell phone usage is a pet peeve of mine.
Now, how many of us can look our service advisors straight in the eye and honestly say that we never drive under any "harsh" conditions?
I doubt it means if you "ever" drive in traffic and stop at a red light or if you drove the vehicle for 3 hours while the temperature dipped to 29 degrees, you now are driving in "harsh" conditions.
Lexus probably should have sensors like BMW and Mercedes that analyze your driving and the oil as you drive and have a maintenance light that comes on at a custom interval rather than having a set schedule.
As for the previous Toyotas with sludge problems: They were defective engines. The solution was not more frequent oil changes any more than adding oil to a leaking engine is the "solution."
When I attended a Lexus driving event in Northern Virginia, three separate courses were set up for the RX, GX and LX (and their competitors.) The RX course was entirely on pavement and smooth dirt roads. The GX and LX had "off-road" courses that had been built by moving earth around in a parking lot. Though they were only 300 yards or so long, the "off-road" courses, which were slightly more extreme for the LX and its competitors, included some railroad ties to drive over, a 30 degree sidehill and some mini 6 ft hills with staggered peaks so you could drive with 1 or 2 wheels in the air.
The RX's competitors included the X5 3.0 and the ML 350. The GX and LX's competitors included the X5 4.4 and the ML 500. Net result was that drivers got to take the same basic MB and BMW products on both the onroad and offroad courses (albeit with different engines). And, although it was very short and artificial, both the MB an BMW performed just fine on the off-road course.
When I asked an event staffer whether we could drive the RX 330 over the off-road course, she said no. When I asked why, she said that few RX buyers ever go offroad and that that capability isn't a critical selling point. When told her I was looking at the RX and GX and wondered how the RX would do off-road, she said that early in the morning, they'd brought an RX out to the off-road track, because as car enthusiasts themselves, they were eager to see how it would do. The RX, she said, got 'stuck.'
For 95% of the driving I do, on road, I'd rather have an RX than a GX. But I'd like to know that if I drive on the beach or on a moderately difficult forest road, my RX won't be getting stuck far from help when a GX, X5 or ML could have easily passed.
Please share your experiences taking RX's offroad or let me know where you've read reviews that have taken RX's off pavement. Thanks.
Willard is way off the mark on his FWD rants though :-)
Steve, Host
The RX330 has the potential to be a lot better were it not for the 45 second ABS pump/motor protection timeout.
Anyone else sense that problem?
Seriously, I've noticed that it could have a better on-center feel, but on the occasions that I've driven it I didn't have any problem keeping it in my lane, even with just light pressure on the wheel.
I agree. Less frequent oil changes (such as 7500-mile+ intervals) should never have caused those problems. But what you and I believe to be true isn't always what the service center or the car manufacturer believes to be true. For the first few Toyota/Lexus owners to experience this problem, how much time, effort, and cost were expended before Toyota admitted the engine was fully to blame?
"Lexus probably should have sensors like BMW and Mercedes that analyze your driving and the oil as you drive and have a maintenance light that comes on at a custom interval..."
I would agree if they truly perform a good analysis of all your driving conditions. In my opinion, there's not a great deal of analysis involved with the BMW maintenance indicators. For example, I've had both a BMW E39 5-series and an E46 3-series sedan. Harsh stop-and-go driving seems to result in a custom interval of, say, 13K miles, while I've actually experienced an interval of 17K miles for mostly light freeway driving. Yes, that is with synthetic; but isn't it amazing how much longer the oil change intervals are when the manufacturer provides the maintenance for free? I prefer to be my own judge.
Any answers from people who know the real facts of this issue would be appreciated.