davidc1

No doubt we are not comparing apples to apples. But I believe LX sales have been declining over the years, while GX sales have remained strong. It hasn't been updated much for something that costs $70k+. At that price, it's competing with Range Rover, Porsche Cayenne S, etc.. Notice they haven't upgraded the engine in LX for '05. Its power was considered adequate when it first came out but today, it's considered seriously underpowered for its weight. I wouldn't be surprised if this was the last year in its current format. There are all sorts of rumors, including one about Sequoia based LX with 5.6l engine. Who knows. My gut reaction is that Lexus should go upmarket with the next LX instead of making it a deluxe version of Sequoia. But then, the economics might not work that way since it's not a high volume vehicle. Besides, it might not make a whole lotta difference to most folks who doesn't see beneath the sheetmetal and plush leather.

loflin

Engima and Gohawks, not sure if your comments were directed to me about "...silly trying to compare" and "apples and oranges"..

I wasn't comparing anything. itsZep asked the question about sales, I answered as I had the nums at my fingertip.

<VENOM>

This is rumored to be the next generation LandCruiser
http://forum.ih8mud.com/showthread.php?t=35458

If it's built in the US on the Sequioa platform it will not have the quality that current and past LC owners have come to expect, when I worked in Toyota their where LC coming in with 200k that just had basic oil changes of course we informed the customers of several things that where way past due but overall LC/LX are tanks, their is a reason why you only see them in countries with dirt roads where they consider offroad driving a normal daily driving routine

Call me old fashion but I liked low volume cars with their own unique platforms, I guess with all the current competition the Car Makers are doing away with those single car platform for vehicle lineups where all the trucks share a similiar platform and the same for the cars, all in the name of profit.

I'd rather pay more for a low volume vehicle that is unique

The LC/LX is 1 of the few vehicles being sold today that could be kept for 20 years and half a million miles try that with a Naigator or an Escalade, not

Rx900

Hey guys, both SUVs are great especially that they are made by Lexus. Now the LX is a little out dated for the price that you would pay (hint hint, sales rep told me last week that there might be a possible redesign for the LX in 06 and the LS in 06 as well) so that's why I chose the GX in the first place. besides, the GX was "in" when no one in the world knew what that SUV was around dec 02-jan 03 (jan 03 for me). not to be braggin or anything, the GX gave me so much attention. People from the Baskin and Robins to people in your neighborhood that normally don't talk to you come up to me to check out this "new creation" back then. huh, i was at a fast food place once and a Yukon pulled up next to my Gx BUT the Yukon just stayed there and the two ladies were just checking out my GX. Unlike if you buy an LX, uhh, yeah it's a great vehicle also and a "WOW" price but seems that it is a little out-dated.

Enigma869

Okay...

Here is what I don't understand at all...I keep reading from GX owners that the LX is "outdated" and too pricey for such an old design. Am I missing something here? Have any of you people even been inside of an LX?? If you have, please tell me what is so different and more modern in the cabins of your GX's that the LX doesn't have?? I test drove the GX before I even considered purchasing my LX, and the GX didn't have anything the LX didn't have and the interior finishing were very similar, in terms of what era the materials came from. Another point...The GX certainly doesn't look anymore "futureistic" on the exterior to my eyes than the "dated" LX. I guess I'll chalk all these comments up to sour grapes. I guess most people think the vehicle they chose to purchase is the greatest thing on the planet. Like I've said in the past, it all comes down to a matter of taste. I actually do indeed like the GX and would even buy one. I just think the LX is a nicer vehicle and sharper looking, in spite of its "dated" design.

To my Davidc who mentioned the LX is competing with the Range Rover and Porsche Cayenne S at that price tag...it sure is, and if you do your homework, most in the auto industry consider the LX to be a far superior vehicle. Although I belive the Range Rover won "car of the year" from some magazine this past year, it has had a history of well documented problems and has spent more time in the service bay than on the road for most owners. Prior to the 2005 model year, I've never read a single good thing about the Range Rover. In terms of the Porsche...if you're into a souped up SUV, it's certainly a great vehicle. That said, I prefer to keep my sports cars as sports cars and SUV's as everyday drivers. Another point... I've been in the Cayenne, and am not at all impressed with it. I also think it's hideously ugly SUV (sorry if I offend any Cayenne owners). It's ugly from the front, and ugly from the back. For the record, I am generally a fan of the appearance of Porsche cars, but the SUV is just all wrong for my eyes!

In closing, I hope all these rumors I'm reading about a redesigned LX are in fact true. I'll be one of the first in line to check it out and take it out for a drive. If it's better than it is today, then I'll be buying a new LX. Happy driving to all my "high-tech" GX driving friends

John from Boston

daijuk

Well, I am still shopping around and have at various points considered and test driven the GX, LX, X5, and Range Rover.

After having narrowed it down to the LX and GX, I am now heavily leaning towards the GX because of the LX's outdated exterior. I prefer the LX interior (with the exception of the passenger dash) and the extra room, but we just cannot get over the exterior. My wife has ruled it out outright, saying it looks too "old-fashioned". I've tried to convince her that its not bad, but only half-heartedly since I pretty much agree with her. If you like the way it looks, then good for you! All things being equal, I would prefer the range rover, but the combination of the extra $ and the extra maintenance hassles keeps it on the back burner for now.

Personally, I would guess that our tastes do not differ too much since I also think the cayenne is a very ugly vehicle. I'll prolly offend some people, but that car is not an suv. It is a station wagon on steroids. (and the RX is almost as bad )

Enigma869

Hey daijuk...

A station wagon on steroids...I never thought of it that way, but I think you actually summed it up perfectly! I was trying to think of what the awful looking SUV looked like, and now I know

As for the RX...I've never liked it for two reasons. First and foremost, it's just too small. Secondly, EVERYONE on the road seems to be driving one! Every road I'm driving down, I can look around me and see a half dozen RX's at any given time! I'd just rather not own the same car everyone else seems to own. From all the reviews I've read, it's a great vehicle, but once again, it comes down to style, and I've never liked the looks of the RX. Let's hope that if Lexus does redesign the LX that they do a better job than they did redesigning the RX. The RX looks almost the same to me with the exception of the tail lights that look like they came off of a souped up 1981 modified Toyota Corolla! Sorry to hear you think the LX is so dated. I hope you find the car you're looking for, and I think you're probably wise to steer clear of the Range Rover because of the reliability issues. You might want to take a look at the new M-Class the Mercedes is unveiling April 15th. While I'm not at all a fan of the current generation of M-Class (I bought a 2003 ML500 and got rid of it a month ago after reliability issues), everything I've read about the new M-Class is outstanding. It's a drastic redesign, so it might be worth a look.

John from Boston

PitBull

If you want a RR check these out. www.motorwerkscars.com You can get a low mileage one for what a GX will cost you, letting someone else take the hit for the initial depression.

PitBull

Edge you hit the nail on the head and to me this is the pull of the LX/LC, it's looks are dated but I like its looks. It doesn't make logical sense to buy one over the GX470 unless the little bit of extra room is important to you but it is the best built SUV on the market and if you keep it for 10 years it might even make sense from a $$$ stand point If you have the $$$ buy it, and have the best. It's more of a emotional decision. JMHO

daijuk

Hi John, the mercedes never appealed to because while many of the new suvs look like station wagons, the ML looked a little too mini-van-ish to me. However, I will wait to see the new look before making a decision. I was actually looking forward to the Q7 since I really like Audi, but knowing that it shares a platform with the cayenne and touareg is a downer for me.

Pitbull, thanks for the link. Actually, cost alone isnt disqualifying the ranger for me. Its the combo of that and the reliability. I was browsing the Mk3 boards at rangerover.net, and even the RR enthusiasts seem to agree that reliability is very bad. It's really too bad because this is my favorite car in most other respects.

davidc1

John, "Outdated" means different things to different people. As far as function and performance is concerned (except for power), LX is just fine. But after so many years, all cars and trucks look "outdated" simply because they've been around a while. Don't take offense to "outdated" remarks. People generally want more (power, gizmos, etc..) after a few years. And as far as the LX being superior to RR and Cayenne, that depends. In some aspects, it sure is. At others, especially performance and handling, it sure itsn't. I think the problem with LX is that it's priced (70K+) like a an ultra SUV but it doesn't meet what people expect of ultra premium SUVs these days. Most folks want 300+ horsepower and close to carlike handling now. No one (ok maybe there a few) buys $70k+ SUV to go off roading. It's to look and feel good on the road and mall parking lots, right?

Enigma869

Hey David...

I guess we can agree to disagree on why people buy luxury SUV's. I certainly didn't by an LX470 for power. We do indeed agree that the LX is underpowered for a vehicle of its size (as I clearly pointed out as a flaw in my original review of the 2004 model). Having said that, it's my contention people buy sports cars for power (at least that's what I do). I guess I'm just the opposite in the respect that I think the biggest flaw with the Cayenne is that it doesn't know what it wants to be. I think Porsche should have allowed their cars to be the speed machines, and not their SUV.

As far as the whole "dated" thing goes. I guess it is indeed a matter of perception. My only real argument with those making such comments, is that many of them haven't even been inside of an LX. I've seen the interior of older models of the LX and I can assure you that the interior I have in my 2004 model is a significant upgrade over the models from a few years ago. While the interior hasn't undergone any significant changes, the look still works for me. I definitely do agree with you and everyone else on this forum that the LX is indeed due for a facelift. My reasons for feeling that way have nothing to do with any flaw I have with the existing LX platform...it's simply time. My only real argument is people who make the GX sound like it's lightyears ahead of the LX in terms of style. I can tell you from experience that most people who really aren't that familiar with Lexus can't even tell the difference between the two vehicles. Hell, the guy I bought my home from drives a 2003 GX and was talking to me and my 2004 LX and didn't even realize that I wasn't driving the same model he had! I guess the reason most don't believe the GX is "dated" is that it's a Johnny come lately model for Lexus that simply hasn't been around that long.

I will definitely be keeping my eyes wide open to see what Lexus comes up with for the new LX!

John from Boston

ADVocate

I understand your points. The GX will have its' day in the "dated" category as well.
I wanted to add some comment to this thread (although I am a bit late to this game), the LX and GX are targeting different tastes (I would not even categorize the difference as "demographics"). The GX suited mine, and the whole HP and performance thing played a rather key role in that decission. That, and staying above 16 MPG for general fuel. consumption.
But, I do disagree with you on your view of the interior of Lexus autos and trucks. You cited in your initial critique of the the LX, having a better interior than the MBZ. But, the German Engineers are not noted for having the poshest of interests in mind. Their designs seem to be more functional than austere. The Lexus interiors are nothing compared to RR or Jaguar, as far as I am concerned. The English high end autos are laid out a bit more luxuriously, and with a better detail finish overall. The Lexus is without any soul and rather blasse in their approach to luxury. Granted, all of the buttons and switches are where you think they should be. But, art can also be accomplished with a simple pencil and paper too.
Don't get me wrong, I like my GX. But, these cars don't hold a candle to the true decadence that is part of luxury. If you can't appreciate what I am referring to, I guess my point is muted as well. If the, Range Rover, was just as dependable as any of the Lexus', you probably would not be finding any of my postings here ....

davidc1

Nice to have another perspective. I find some German interiors top notch (Audi/VW). LR/RR needs to do more than increase its reliability. Their service level must go up to match the price tag. Regarding "soul," I think that word's been used too many times before. It's almost unfair, I think. I find Lexus reliability/comfort/service quite sexy if not soulful.

tigmd99

Wow, if you guys think the LX looks dated, then what will you think about my SUV??

A few tidbits about LX vs. GX interior:

- GX has dual automatic temperature settings for driver and passenger; LX only has one control.
- LX has auto recirculation feature; GX does not (you have to manual do it).
- LX has soft-touch material throughout the cabin, including top and bottom of doors; GX has only in the upper part of door.
- Although both SUVs have the same brandname stereo (Mark Levinson), i prefer the LX sound over GX. GX system is probably better for movies, but in terms of music clarity, i prefer LX's system.
- LX has a nice center console that can support your elbows, especially if you don't use the skinny armrest.
- LX has more wood and dash plastics are better finished.

As for Jaguar, i have disagree. It's interior will look nice to the untrained eyes, BUT fit & finish leaves a lot to be desired. And with Ford taking over, you can see quite a bit of Ford parts (flimsy quality) on it's highest model (Jaguar XJ series). The good thing about Lexus is that you may see a few Toyota parts, but these parts are already of high-quality.

Range Rover's interior is truly magnificent. IMO, the best looking interior of any SUV. The problem is that it's just a dumb execution of buttons. It's Navi system (prior to 2005) is even worst than my COMMAND system! Beauty is only skin deep. Lexus interior, on the other hand, is of high quality and good design...and extremely easy to use and well-organized. Ease to use and well-organized ergonomic in itself SHOULD be regarded as "art." In my eyes, i would take a Lexus interior over ANY SUV interior, bar none.