Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
Both my wife and I both feel that these lights are ugly and, in general, do not like any vehicles that are sporting these lamps today. Like you said, they look like some cheap aftermarket add-on.
I am waiting to see what they look like after a few years when they accumulate surface scratching and the nice clear plastic starts turning yellow like most of them seem to do. Knowing Lexus (Toyota's) tendancy for this type of lense to accumulate condensation, not only are they ugly new but they are certain to get uglier as time progresses.
Seems to me this type of lense only is popular with the under 25 group, not the 45+ group of a typical Lexus buyer.
Getting back to the RX, I remember that the 03 and earlier RX300 had a clear tail light lenses with red reflectors. The clear lenses was very cheesy and on the outside part of tail lights, a part of the round brake lights is actually cutoff by the hatch to make it fit. Almost looks like a after thought. I figure they would improve on it for the 04, but I actually think they made it uglier. Like bobeberhardt said, lenses like that only appeals to the 20s crowd who like to add things to their cars, it does not appeal to the typical buyers of the RX330, middle age females who do not like to sup up cars. Luckily for Toyota, alot of people can look pass a set of ugly tail lights for other quality that the RX has, but its like every other things, there will be a few people who will actually like them.
You stated, "my correct assessment of the tail lights." "Correct" by whose standards? Not by mine because I don't agree, and my wife really likes the look--not run of the mill. Has anyone taken a poll? What is your empirical data? Very little mention of the tail lights in the numerous magazines and newpapers that have reviewed the 330, positive or negative.
My problem with statements such as this is that they project personal opinions as ones shared by the majority of others. Personally, I have NO problem with you disliking the tail lights. That's what makes us individuals. However, in the absence of any other evidence, IMO my point about sales holds more validity concerning the general feeling about the tail lights than your personal view.
Not to start any more "wars" about the RX330's styling, but I personally am not crazy with the overall look of the FRONT end, which to my eyes looks a little bland...maybe "dowdy" is the word I'm looking for. I do like the side profile, and as stated above the rear, much better. Best of all is the overall construction and luxury touches that Lexus gives you, which in this class are unmatched by any other, IMO.
adp3: You are right, it depends alot on exterior colors, I agree with you that it looks better with light colors. I think with the dark colors, it make them stand out more and they already draws too much attention by them self. I find the front end of the RX330 average looking, did not change much from the RX300 at all, which was very disappointing. I know that Toyota is capable of making a very nice looking front end. Just look at the front ends of the ES300 and the Toyota Sienna, they both have the contour head lights look, very sleek. BTW, are you two related?
Besides, with all of the rave reviews the XLR and CTS-V are getting, there's a whole lot going on in Caddyland.
In my opinion (and it is merely a subjective opinion) the only vehicles in this category I'd be happy to see in my driveway would be the Cadillac SRX or the Infiniti FX45/35 based on appearance alone.
hopeitsfriday: On a different note, I disagree with your assessment of the XLR...I think for whatever reason the CTS and SRX both look more "correct" than the XLR. Cadillac messed up with the XLR and toned down the styling (and horsepower) too much. They should have left the XLR looking like the evoq...now THAT is a good looking car!
( http://www.cadillac.com/cadillacjsp/models/gallery.jsp?model=evoq )
adp3: Your conclusion is incorrect. The reason there are so few posts by Cadillac owners on the SRX is that there are so few SRX owners. The SRX is JUST NOW starting to show up on dealers lots so there are very few SRX owners.
As eaton53 said..."We're waiting for it to dominate the next round of fancy crossover comparos".
Again, I LIKE the SRX and expect to like it more when I get in one. I am just ocmmenting on the EDMUNDS community.
Perhaps there is a place on the web where Cadillac fans (or foes) congregate, but I don't know of it.
Given the relatively HIGH PRICE that SRX is set at, your generic "motor head type" is not going to be too intersted. Couple that with the LACK of CONTROVERSY (unlike the OUTRAGE some felt toward Porsche for the very concept behind the Cayenne) and the SRX is FRIGHTENINGLY BUZZ_FREE.
I would HOPE that Caddy does a MUCH BETTER JOB of building interest in this VERY CAPABLE vehicle, but this IS the company that thought Brooke Shields and a duck that faced the wrong way was a "good plan". How freakin' out of touch...
Speaking of creepy, imagine if they also used:
<Bob Hope voice> Hey. Lemme tell ya about that Brooke Sheilds. HOWBOUTTHAT. And what about the duck? WHOO BOY ha </bob hope voice>
YIKES!!!
Some of them hang out in places like these:
2004 Cadillac SRX
2004 Cadillac SRX
Cadillac Escalade
tidester, host
and you posted two links to the same board
like I said - where is everybody?
I don't think Volvo Moms are more into cars than Caddy drivers, but I don't think Volvo moms populate these boards, in any case, though some of the XC90 posters are women (maybe 25%?). How did Ford create such a buzz for the Volvos but GM has not for the Caddy?
The question was where do Cadillac fans (or foes) congregate.
and you posted two links to the same board
Oops! Slip of the mouse! You can do your own search if you're interested.
tidester, host
I guess they don't engender a lot of rabid enthusiasm like other marks.
Except for the CTS which is wildly popular among it's owners.
The SRX will take time to build a following.
If you want, i can give you some URLs for Caddy info and forums.
rwebb@prucar.com
They are looking for a safe, solid vehicle.
While Volvo may have the buzzwords like "turbo" and "AWD" they are not purely performance oriented like a BMW is.
Back in the late 70's and 80s when the Volvo and Saab turbos first came out they were pushed as performance cars, when in reality they were sedans with good straighline acceleration and a European driving feel.
These were not great cars. Nor are they great cars today.
Who really wants a 5 cylinder engine when the competition offers a straight or V angle 6?
I personally think there will be a buzz about the SRX but it will take many years for Cadillac to get back in the public's good graces.
Much like it will take Mercedes a long time to get out of the public's good graces with their currrent problems that they aren't able to fix.
Another thing is that the cost of the SRX is higher than many people thought it would be.
I contend a 35K base price and a 41K V8 price would get people interested.
It would pretty muuh stop many people from considering the Toureg or Volvo.
I've been to the Cadillac dealership on several occasions and found the way they interact with me amusing. Cadillac is really not used to dealing with younger customers and I feel extremely out of place lounging around the waiting room with my 1.5 year old daughter. The sales staff and service department are never really sure HOW to treat me and act somewhat uncomfortable around me. I can't remember EVER a time in which I wasn't the youngest customer in the showroom...and I'm not THAT young!
Cadillac is on the right track and I feel their sales will continue to increase as they redesign the rest of the line. The only real problem I forsee is that they are now designing cars that appeal to younger buyers (CTS) or families (SRX and Escalade) but pricing them out of reach for most.
In my opinion the SRX is MUCH more than a stealth station wagon but the price should be closer to $40K than $60K.
Of course, the Audi A6 wagon is overpriced, as is the Volvo XC70 (Cross Country). Heck, what AWD wagon isn't overpriced? The VW Wagon with AWD? The Subaru?
It all depends on what your preferences (size, luxury, prestige and performance) are and how much you're willing to spend. There are plenty of wagon/car-based SUV's to choose from in each price range. And of course the lower the price point, the greater the potential customer base.
JBaumgart: I think that Lexus sell so many RX330 is because they get the upgrade minded customers from Toyota. Toyota and Lexus are almost starting to be a house hold name when it comes to quality and reliability. Buyers who wish to do very little homework and who are not motor heads are the RX330 biggest customers. If you ask most RX330 owner if the engine was 2 valves per cylinder or 4 valves or what the compression ratio of the engine is, I bet over 75% would not know without looking it up.
How many CTS customers or SRX customers would know how many valves their engine has, compression, size of engine, etc.? over 75%?
Now, maybe that record comes from none of their "new" vehicles being all that "new" - maybe they are just gussied up versions of stuff that they already have on the market. BUT, they do seem to deliver, even in the first model year. Am I wrong?
The SRX will almost certainly be the best GM vehicle yet -- I wonder how many people will "wait till they get the bugs out"?
Personally the sludge issue is enough to keep away from most Toyota/Lexus V6s...
That speaks volumes to me.
but it is doing a pretty good job of it right now.
Interesting that neither Mercedes nor Toyota seems to have suffered from their engine oil gelling problems from a few years ago. Even Honda/Acura seems to have come out okay after their massive transmission problem. All three essentially covered up the problems until being exposed by the public. I wonder why the public looks the other way when it is a foreign manufacturer.
The current sloppy assembly, high dealer visit reputation.
All of the dealers I've used for service in recent years call to see if one is satisfied. When they call I ask them to not call again. I don't want to be bothered.
I've found most dealers do a good job on the simple and routine items, but when there is a significant problem it is more the luck of the draw - will a good mechanic be assigned the job.
adp3: Doubt it is the manufacturers that "suck." The dealers are independent and they are the ones that don't do the job. Part could also be attributed to how well the manufacturers back the dealer when it comes to warranty work. But, the bottom line is the dealer is the one that does the work, not the manufacturer. I've found significant differences between service departments at dealerships owned by the same person or group.
My selling dealer (12 miles away) for my MDX washes the car and gives free loaners when the MDX goes in for service. If they could just repair as well as they wash... The other Acura dealer near me (also 12 miles away - opposite direction) is owned by the same person and gives good service, but doesn't wash or give free loaners.
I've noticed a significant difference around here in how much dealers charge for the same service and parts. Some dealers charge as much as 20% over suggested retail for parts, while others discount. I found labor charges for the same work to vary by as much as 300%. It pays to shop around for dealer service.
Can anyone offer some feedback on these models. At least for now, the Pacifica seems to be the lowest priced, but it's also the lowest powered.
The SRX gets very pricey very quickly, but the power is more suitably matched to its size and utility.
Both the Pacifica and the SRX get poor reviews in terms of interior-gadget & control quality from the press. These factors are important to me.
The MDX still seems too truck-ish and expensive.
I'm coming from an '00 Volvo V70 and this category (7-passenger room) seems tremendously appealing.
Thanks!
The Pacifica costs the least, but seats six at most. The third row is not for adults and the car could use more engine, especially from a standing start.
The SRX can be expensive and I have been told by Caddy dealers the third row is very tight. The V8 is very expensive, but should have plenty of power. The V6 has almost as much power as the MDX, so it should perform okay.
The XC90 can get expensive too, especially the 6. The rear seat is short on headroom for adults, and with the third row option leg room is reduced in the second row.
The MDX is getting a bit long in the tooth design wise. Still, it offers the most room for people, a reasonable resale, Honda reliability, and can carry adults in the way back (Yes, it is tight back there, but there is enough headroom for adults and enough knee room for high school teens).
All are well made, all are fine for up to four in the vehicle (five for all except the Pacifica), all are car-like in ride and quiet, and all are reasonably safe. Buy what feels best to you.
In regard to Lexus dealers calling after a service visit, I find that an intrusion. If I am not happy about something I will let them know. I do not need their phony concern interrupting me during the business day.
Don't knock it! Tin prices are higher than aluminum, copper, zinc and lead - combined! :-)
tidester, host