QX vs. LX
02-29-04, 05:09 PM
#46
Doc,
Interesting comments. For a person who claims to "appreciate" LX's capability, you sure don't mention it...in fact, not at all! Nor are you aware that capability costs $$$$. You just toss that aside and question where is the power rear hatch?!!
Hmmm, again, you're assuming things about me. I love hypocrits!
Maybe you don't understand ME. I appreciate the CURRENT LX because of what it is. I am very scared of the new platform, which will likelly by WIMPIFIED (spelling??). It will likely be no better than the Caddy or QX56 in off-roading. Yes, i am sure that it will have the required power stuff (rear hatch for example). I am sure that the new design will be PERFECT OF YOU. However, it is not for me. Understand??!!
The REASON i am defending the current LX because i see things that you do NOT see...i see the real value in it that a few of us part-time off-roaders see. I feel that the LX is actually a BARGAIN when compared to it's off-road capable PEERS, such as Range Rover and Mercedes G500. I see what you do not see. THUS, MY WHOLE ARGUMENT UP TO NOW. Understand??!!
Ahhh...Rubicon. The hardtop does not decrease noise THAT much because it does cause some "drumming" noise on the highway. I am glad that you can read the brochure.
**** on LX to shift into 4-LO??? There's no "****." It's a shifter for crying out loud! It directly connects to the transfer case. FYI.
Toyota probably will not make the new LX like the current version...why??
- Safety regulations for car-compatibility crash test...aka lower to the ground with lower bumpers...which destroys ground clearance, approach/breakover/departure angles
- May have rear independent suspension to have car-like ride AND have room for stowaway third row seating
- Less things tuck underneath the body because the floor will be lower...easier to get into and out and more headroom. If you notice on your LX, the underbody is very clean, everything is tucked UP into the body. If you look underneath a Sequoia or Caddy, then you will see a big difference. My 4runner is not as clean as the LX. But, to pay for a clean underbody, you have a high step-in height and less room.
- Less travel on the suspension in an effort to decrease body roll and improve handling (via thicker anti-roll bar, stiffer springs & shocks). This is obviously bad in off-roading.
- Suspension components will be weaker due to weight saving (less unsprung weight) and cost cutting (to keep price low) and improve handling. Of course, like the famous Hummer H2 video, this can be bad when you're off-roading...things break!
This is all i can think of right now. I am just a bit concerned about the future of SUVs based on the current trend. Real SUVs are gonna be extinct in the next few years.
Finally, LX now and future will NEVER cost $50K. No way! That's GX territory. LX will always be higih-priced. So, no, LX will NEVER be a direct competitor to QX. I will bet you on that.
I hope that i explained myself enough to you. Maybe if you see your LX for what it really is, then you will see the error of your ways. It's unfortunate.
Immature, Thai.
Interesting comments. For a person who claims to "appreciate" LX's capability, you sure don't mention it...in fact, not at all! Nor are you aware that capability costs $$$$. You just toss that aside and question where is the power rear hatch?!!
Hmmm, again, you're assuming things about me. I love hypocrits!
Maybe you don't understand ME. I appreciate the CURRENT LX because of what it is. I am very scared of the new platform, which will likelly by WIMPIFIED (spelling??). It will likely be no better than the Caddy or QX56 in off-roading. Yes, i am sure that it will have the required power stuff (rear hatch for example). I am sure that the new design will be PERFECT OF YOU. However, it is not for me. Understand??!!
The REASON i am defending the current LX because i see things that you do NOT see...i see the real value in it that a few of us part-time off-roaders see. I feel that the LX is actually a BARGAIN when compared to it's off-road capable PEERS, such as Range Rover and Mercedes G500. I see what you do not see. THUS, MY WHOLE ARGUMENT UP TO NOW. Understand??!!
Ahhh...Rubicon. The hardtop does not decrease noise THAT much because it does cause some "drumming" noise on the highway. I am glad that you can read the brochure.
**** on LX to shift into 4-LO??? There's no "****." It's a shifter for crying out loud! It directly connects to the transfer case. FYI.
Toyota probably will not make the new LX like the current version...why??
- Safety regulations for car-compatibility crash test...aka lower to the ground with lower bumpers...which destroys ground clearance, approach/breakover/departure angles
- May have rear independent suspension to have car-like ride AND have room for stowaway third row seating
- Less things tuck underneath the body because the floor will be lower...easier to get into and out and more headroom. If you notice on your LX, the underbody is very clean, everything is tucked UP into the body. If you look underneath a Sequoia or Caddy, then you will see a big difference. My 4runner is not as clean as the LX. But, to pay for a clean underbody, you have a high step-in height and less room.
- Less travel on the suspension in an effort to decrease body roll and improve handling (via thicker anti-roll bar, stiffer springs & shocks). This is obviously bad in off-roading.
- Suspension components will be weaker due to weight saving (less unsprung weight) and cost cutting (to keep price low) and improve handling. Of course, like the famous Hummer H2 video, this can be bad when you're off-roading...things break!
This is all i can think of right now. I am just a bit concerned about the future of SUVs based on the current trend. Real SUVs are gonna be extinct in the next few years.
Finally, LX now and future will NEVER cost $50K. No way! That's GX territory. LX will always be higih-priced. So, no, LX will NEVER be a direct competitor to QX. I will bet you on that.
I hope that i explained myself enough to you. Maybe if you see your LX for what it really is, then you will see the error of your ways. It's unfortunate.
Immature, Thai.
Last edited by tigmd99; 02-29-04 at 05:16 PM.
02-29-04, 05:18 PM
#47
Originally posted by Doc C
The LX470 pushed the envelope in styling for an SUV when introduced, just like the SC 300/400.
The LX470 pushed the envelope in styling for an SUV when introduced, just like the SC 300/400.
02-29-04, 07:01 PM
#48
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But you said it sells so well? It would make sense for Lexus to continue with the ultra off road ability wouldn't it?? Don't they want to sell more SUVs? I guess what I meant by pushing the envelope design-wise was that it was so much more elegant and less truck-like than SUVs at that time. I have always talked about the capability of the LX. You are hooked on semantics aren't you? Shifter in LX does have a **** thank you very much. Maybe your brother will let you look at his. It might be in your brochure. It has a large H-N-L on it. I thought such an offroader like you would know that.
Man, you like the power rear hatch comment don't you? My point was that most other SUVs have this and the LX doesn't. Women will be most likely making the buying decision on the "family truckster" so to speak. If Lexus would give it some of the "bells and whistles" it might increase LX sales and then you could have your "capability" and Lexus could make more money. If the LX did have a power hatch, how does that adversely affect its offroad "capability"? I know you like that word.
It is certainly a bargain and way more reliable than the others you mention. No argument from me there. No insults? No name calling? C'mon tigmd99, you can do better than that. Take care.
Doc C
Man, you like the power rear hatch comment don't you? My point was that most other SUVs have this and the LX doesn't. Women will be most likely making the buying decision on the "family truckster" so to speak. If Lexus would give it some of the "bells and whistles" it might increase LX sales and then you could have your "capability" and Lexus could make more money. If the LX did have a power hatch, how does that adversely affect its offroad "capability"? I know you like that word.
It is certainly a bargain and way more reliable than the others you mention. No argument from me there. No insults? No name calling? C'mon tigmd99, you can do better than that. Take care.
Doc C
02-29-04, 07:15 PM
#49
Originally posted by Doc C
No insults? No name calling? C'mon tigmd99, you can do better than that. Take care.
Doc C
No insults? No name calling? C'mon tigmd99, you can do better than that. Take care.
Doc C
Last edited by tigmd99; 03-01-04 at 05:09 PM.
02-29-04, 07:21 PM
#50
Originally posted by Doc C
But you said it sells so well? It would make sense for Lexus to continue with the ultra off road ability wouldn't it?? Don't they want to sell more SUVs? I guess what I meant by pushing the envelope design-wise was that it was so much more elegant and less truck-like than SUVs at that time. I have always talked about the capability of the LX. You are hooked on semantics aren't you? Shifter in LX does have a **** thank you very much. Maybe your brother will let you look at his. It might be in your brochure. It has a large H-N-L on it. I thought such an offroader like you would know that.
But you said it sells so well? It would make sense for Lexus to continue with the ultra off road ability wouldn't it?? Don't they want to sell more SUVs? I guess what I meant by pushing the envelope design-wise was that it was so much more elegant and less truck-like than SUVs at that time. I have always talked about the capability of the LX. You are hooked on semantics aren't you? Shifter in LX does have a **** thank you very much. Maybe your brother will let you look at his. It might be in your brochure. It has a large H-N-L on it. I thought such an offroader like you would know that.
It's consumers like you that Lexus will abandon it's off-road heritage (or likely) in favor of gizmos. AGAIN, off-road capability = $$$$. Therefore, to keep price reasonable, AND to have gizmos, Toyota needs to make compromises...SEE ABOVE PREVIOUS POST BY ME. Comprehension problem??
If you want to have it all, then the price will be AT LEAST $70K...see Range Rover.
A repeat:
Finally, LX now and future will NEVER cost $50K. No way! That's GX territory. LX will always be higih-priced. So, no, LX will NEVER be a direct competitor to QX. I will bet you on that.
I hope that i explained myself enough to you. Maybe if you see your LX for what it really is, then you will see the error of your ways. It's unfortunate.
Thanks,
Thai.
Last edited by tigmd99; 02-29-04 at 07:22 PM.
02-29-04, 08:21 PM
#51
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, it's consumers like me and 95% of the people who buy the LX and other SUVs that will make LX a better selling vehicle and Lexus more profitable. Sensitive?? Not at all. Seems like you finally can argue your point without stupid insults and immaturity. Good for you!!! as I'VE said before, Lexus can go one of two ways. Build your capable SUV with "gizmos",more power, more space, and keep price where it is today. That would be worth every penny. Or, rebadge a Sequoia, lose "capability" offroad, keep gizmos, and price in the $54-58K range. Probably worth it too, although they'd lose the offroaders like tigmd99 and others as customers. Plus, in my opinion, would ruin heritage and legacy of TLC. If they go this way, then I hope they call the Toyota version something else and not Land Cruiser. Save that name for something worthy of it. Same with LX for that matter.
QX will outsell LX 4:1 in the next 2 years IMO. Is it a better SUV??
If you want power, gizmos,space,flexible seating arrangements, safety,towing,performance, value. Probably.
If you want offroad "capability", probably not. Depends on what you're looking for. I hope Lexus can got moving on next LX. I hope it also can maintain said "capability". With BMW possibly coming out with an X7, and others joining the fray of large luxury SUVs, they need to do something different. A dolled up Sequoia with no "capability" for $70K+ won't work. take care.
QX will outsell LX 4:1 in the next 2 years IMO. Is it a better SUV??
If you want power, gizmos,space,flexible seating arrangements, safety,towing,performance, value. Probably.
If you want offroad "capability", probably not. Depends on what you're looking for. I hope Lexus can got moving on next LX. I hope it also can maintain said "capability". With BMW possibly coming out with an X7, and others joining the fray of large luxury SUVs, they need to do something different. A dolled up Sequoia with no "capability" for $70K+ won't work. take care.
02-29-04, 08:33 PM
#52
Originally posted by Doc C
With BMW possibly coming out with an X7, and others joining the fray of large luxury SUVs, they need to do something different. A dolled up Sequoia with no "capability" for $70K+ won't work. take care.
With BMW possibly coming out with an X7, and others joining the fray of large luxury SUVs, they need to do something different. A dolled up Sequoia with no "capability" for $70K+ won't work. take care.
Why would Lexus do any different given the competition and the consumers like you??!! The end of Toyota great REAL SUVs is near.
THAT's my point.
P.S.: i see that you are no longer asking to close this thread...are you taking some psych meds??
Last edited by tigmd99; 03-01-04 at 04:43 AM.
02-29-04, 08:48 PM
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
When u look at platform sharing, you look at the cheapest model. That is the core for the car. The LandCruiser is considered by many worldwide to be the greatest SUV ever. Or at least 2nd or tied to Range Rover. It is platform specific and what an incredible starting point for Lexus and the LX470. A Landcruiser is a 50k SUV itself.
The QX, no matter what, is a gussied up Nissan Titan pickup truck with a camper. No getting around that. THe Titan is a 22k SUV starting. The QX is over twice that. Do u get twice as much stuff. IMO, hell no. Like the Escalade. They are based on pickups and made into luxo barges B/C that is what the market dictated.
Hell, initially, Caddy said they would NEVER rebadge a Tahoe into an Escalade. When they saw the success of the Denali (and the Navigator, an F-150 with a camper), they sure jumped ship.
Infiniti and Nissan is a business trying to make money. So the QX56 is a natural for them. But Infiniti nor Nissan is about being #1. That is Lexus mission. It is their goal. So there is a total different philosophy from even designing how a cupholder opens to Lexus. That is why Lexus rebaged the GX from the 4-Runner instead of the current Sequoia. If you NEED TO you can go off-road with no problems. And it comes with the image of owning a Lexus.
The QX56 will be a good vehicle for Infiniti, I am sure it is perfectly fine for most people. But it's no Lexus.
The QX, no matter what, is a gussied up Nissan Titan pickup truck with a camper. No getting around that. THe Titan is a 22k SUV starting. The QX is over twice that. Do u get twice as much stuff. IMO, hell no. Like the Escalade. They are based on pickups and made into luxo barges B/C that is what the market dictated.
Hell, initially, Caddy said they would NEVER rebadge a Tahoe into an Escalade. When they saw the success of the Denali (and the Navigator, an F-150 with a camper), they sure jumped ship.
Infiniti and Nissan is a business trying to make money. So the QX56 is a natural for them. But Infiniti nor Nissan is about being #1. That is Lexus mission. It is their goal. So there is a total different philosophy from even designing how a cupholder opens to Lexus. That is why Lexus rebaged the GX from the 4-Runner instead of the current Sequoia. If you NEED TO you can go off-road with no problems. And it comes with the image of owning a Lexus.
The QX56 will be a good vehicle for Infiniti, I am sure it is perfectly fine for most people. But it's no Lexus.
03-01-04, 05:14 AM
#54
Driver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Doc,
In an effort to figure out what the hell your decision making process is, why are you looking at D90's, Rubicon's, LX's and the Armada(QX)???? I don't understand what your wants are in a vehicle?
The D90 and Rubicon are extremely capable vehicles that don't make compromises for cushy on road manners. The LX is an extremely capable vehicle that happens to ride wonderfully on the road as well. The QX is a vehicle that rides well on the road, good at pulling larger payloads as well and is a joke where the pavement ends. Again I revisit my statement that the QX is similar to an Escalade, or Navigator in these respects, you should look at those if the QX truly impresses you.
Also, the interior items that you were enthralled by on the QX and were appalled by the LX not having are definitely not available on a Defender or Rubicon. What gives now? I understood these to be important to you in the earlier statements.
In an effort to figure out what the hell your decision making process is, why are you looking at D90's, Rubicon's, LX's and the Armada(QX)???? I don't understand what your wants are in a vehicle?
The D90 and Rubicon are extremely capable vehicles that don't make compromises for cushy on road manners. The LX is an extremely capable vehicle that happens to ride wonderfully on the road as well. The QX is a vehicle that rides well on the road, good at pulling larger payloads as well and is a joke where the pavement ends. Again I revisit my statement that the QX is similar to an Escalade, or Navigator in these respects, you should look at those if the QX truly impresses you.
Also, the interior items that you were enthralled by on the QX and were appalled by the LX not having are definitely not available on a Defender or Rubicon. What gives now? I understood these to be important to you in the earlier statements.
03-01-04, 05:25 AM
#55
Driver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Bearcat
I think it is very interesting to know that when we are all driving new Lexus and Infiniti vehicles in the year 2025, you will still be driving you 2000 LX. But that makes sense, because just as you said, after the LX470 is gone, it's all downhill from there....
I think it is very interesting to know that when we are all driving new Lexus and Infiniti vehicles in the year 2025, you will still be driving you 2000 LX. But that makes sense, because just as you said, after the LX470 is gone, it's all downhill from there....
It is completely taste driven IMO as to wheather it's all downhill or not. But from a capability standpoint, the newer LX's are not equal and are not going to grow in capability to go offroad. But that is my taste. In comfort and quality I am sure that it will continue to be a class leader. Some people prefer the latest 996 Porsches, my taste would be a 73-74 Carerra RS 2.7 instead.
03-01-04, 06:21 AM
#56
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've taken my LX in some pretty rough places. It does well in that environment. However, I get a little nervous when brush and trees scrape down the side of a $70K+ vehicle. I was mentioning the D90 and Rubicon, because I could buy a QX and with the difference between it and an LX, I could almost buy a Rubicon (or used Wrangler) as well for offroad endeavors. I wouldn't worry too much about trashing out a Rubicon. I mean if you get stuck in mud and have to get out in it, its not real fun to carry those muddy feet back into your LX. You can say what you want, but any luxury sport ute (LX included) loses a lot of prestige and resale when it's scratched up and full of mud. Not to mention if you have any damage. REAL expensive to fix.
SICKLEX makes my argument. The Landcruiser IS supposedly very capable and is a $50K SUV. Tigmd99 has said it can't be done for $50K. "Capability" has to cost $70K+ like the G500 or Range Rover. You point out the difference between Titan and QX, but what about the $22K difference between LC and LX? What does $22K get? It used to be the adjustable air suspension, but now the LC has that as well doesn't it?? By the way, the difference between the TItan and Armada are not much different than the Tundra and Sequoia. Infiniti is not about being #1, but yet they have been ranked #1 by JD Power over Lexus many times. Lexus is better IMO, I just don't think Infiniti is a slouch. Also, you're saying that Lexus doesn't want to make money?? I'm sure stockholders would be interested in hearing that. You guys say that Lexus is caving to market pressure to make an SUV barge like everyone else. I assume they would do that because it is more profitable for the company. But, if Lexus doesn't care about that, then why not make a bunch of niche vehicles that cater to the 5-10% of the population?
I was asking earlier to close the thread because the only arguments tigd99 could make was name calling and personal attacks. He's getting better. He still likes to make psych med and nonproductive juvenile remarks. When you start to lose an argument, you usually have to resort to name calling and personal attacks to try and hide your lack of social currency. I don't think that's the point of forums like this. In the SC430 forum, that would have been stopped immediately by Gene. Good day.
SICKLEX makes my argument. The Landcruiser IS supposedly very capable and is a $50K SUV. Tigmd99 has said it can't be done for $50K. "Capability" has to cost $70K+ like the G500 or Range Rover. You point out the difference between Titan and QX, but what about the $22K difference between LC and LX? What does $22K get? It used to be the adjustable air suspension, but now the LC has that as well doesn't it?? By the way, the difference between the TItan and Armada are not much different than the Tundra and Sequoia. Infiniti is not about being #1, but yet they have been ranked #1 by JD Power over Lexus many times. Lexus is better IMO, I just don't think Infiniti is a slouch. Also, you're saying that Lexus doesn't want to make money?? I'm sure stockholders would be interested in hearing that. You guys say that Lexus is caving to market pressure to make an SUV barge like everyone else. I assume they would do that because it is more profitable for the company. But, if Lexus doesn't care about that, then why not make a bunch of niche vehicles that cater to the 5-10% of the population?
I was asking earlier to close the thread because the only arguments tigd99 could make was name calling and personal attacks. He's getting better. He still likes to make psych med and nonproductive juvenile remarks. When you start to lose an argument, you usually have to resort to name calling and personal attacks to try and hide your lack of social currency. I don't think that's the point of forums like this. In the SC430 forum, that would have been stopped immediately by Gene. Good day.
03-01-04, 10:31 AM
#57
Driver
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: South Carolina
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ahhh, a QX and a Rubicon for the same price as an LX, I see where you are coming from now. That's pretty good logic I agree. I would still suggest looking at an Escalade as well as the QX. The Escalade is well thought of in the road manners category recently recieving best SUV in it's category I believe.
I do cringe when limbs run down the side of the LX but so far the paint job is fantastically resilient. The mud that is tracked in from the jobsite is handled by Lexus all-weather floormats although if anyone asked I would recommend the Husky floorliners from previous experience. The point about damage being more expensive is more of a double-edged sword. We've had Tahoe's, 4Runners, and Z71's as work vehicles. The 4Runners and my LX were more expensive up front but their durability and longevity have made up for lost time with the Chevrolets being in the shop more often. We've never had a Chevrolet product that has not needed a transmission replaced. This is out of 4 Chevy vehicles currently. Dollar for dollar the cheaper vehicles look better on paper but when the lost time is factored in with them being in the shop more the Toyota products make sense for us. Honestly the LC makes ALOT more sense for our company than the LX but I got a good deal on the LX so that's what I went with
.
Also, as far as what does the $22k get, you are exaclty right. It is just prestige, a little tighter QC, and some frills added on but mostly prestige.
I do cringe when limbs run down the side of the LX but so far the paint job is fantastically resilient. The mud that is tracked in from the jobsite is handled by Lexus all-weather floormats although if anyone asked I would recommend the Husky floorliners from previous experience. The point about damage being more expensive is more of a double-edged sword. We've had Tahoe's, 4Runners, and Z71's as work vehicles. The 4Runners and my LX were more expensive up front but their durability and longevity have made up for lost time with the Chevrolets being in the shop more often. We've never had a Chevrolet product that has not needed a transmission replaced. This is out of 4 Chevy vehicles currently. Dollar for dollar the cheaper vehicles look better on paper but when the lost time is factored in with them being in the shop more the Toyota products make sense for us. Honestly the LC makes ALOT more sense for our company than the LX but I got a good deal on the LX so that's what I went with
.Also, as far as what does the $22k get, you are exaclty right. It is just prestige, a little tighter QC, and some frills added on but mostly prestige.
03-01-04, 01:55 PM
#58
Lead Lap
Thread Starter
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 452
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
tabraha,
Good points. You probably have the best perspective on the repairs etc. of any of us. I might look at an Escalade, but it's a little bling bling for my tastes. Also, it's a GM product like the Chevys you mentioned. But I'll definitely take a look. I had forgotten the LC was so much less than the LX. I thought it was in the low to mid 60s. That may be the way to go. Other than sound deadening and Mark Levinson, is there much difference? Seems silly to buy an LX over an LC for $22K difference. Even though I did it in 2000. I don't think that the difference was quite as much then though. And, at that time the LX had the air suspension while the LC didn't. I guess you can get offroad capability and luxury for around $50K.
I talked to a guy that uses his LX as a work vehicle too. He goes out to oil wells a lot and the road is sometimes very rough and extremely muddy. He said he never has a problem getting there. Thanks for your thoughts. You've got it made driving your LX as a work truck. Good idea on the floor mats too. Take care.
Doc C
Good points. You probably have the best perspective on the repairs etc. of any of us. I might look at an Escalade, but it's a little bling bling for my tastes. Also, it's a GM product like the Chevys you mentioned. But I'll definitely take a look. I had forgotten the LC was so much less than the LX. I thought it was in the low to mid 60s. That may be the way to go. Other than sound deadening and Mark Levinson, is there much difference? Seems silly to buy an LX over an LC for $22K difference. Even though I did it in 2000. I don't think that the difference was quite as much then though. And, at that time the LX had the air suspension while the LC didn't. I guess you can get offroad capability and luxury for around $50K.
I talked to a guy that uses his LX as a work vehicle too. He goes out to oil wells a lot and the road is sometimes very rough and extremely muddy. He said he never has a problem getting there. Thanks for your thoughts. You've got it made driving your LX as a work truck. Good idea on the floor mats too. Take care.
Doc C
03-01-04, 02:36 PM
#59
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: California
Posts: 2,085
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I often hear that the Escalade is bling bling (newly inducted word/phrase in the webster's by the way) just out curiosity what exactly makes it bling bling? Is it its bold styling, the big grill the big square headlamps because other than that its a Tahoe which is kinda mediocre. They don't come with OEM 22' spinners do they or big sub woofers in the rear and TV monitors on every head rest do they. I mean what gives them the Bling factor off the lot? If anything I'd say the QX / LX / Range R/ G wagon etc. is more bling bling because of all the wonderful goodies they give, where as the Caddy dosen't give you half. I'm not throwing a wet sandwich at anyone here but I just hear that so much and I just don't see the Bling in the Escalade. Now don't get me wrong I do think its a hansome SUV but bling, what makes it bling it dosen't have that much crome no more than any other Luxo SUV. Please explain.
03-01-04, 02:41 PM
#60
Doc, YOU have made my argument!! The TLC is cheaper...true. It is capable...true. HOWEVER, it does not have all the bells & whistles as the LX...and QX has a ton more! TLC does not even have real wood trim nor memory seats, among other things. For you Doc, TLC does not have power rear hatch!!
TLC + gizmos = LX (sticker around $65K average). Thus, PRICE DIFFERENCE! Oh yeah, don't forget about the big difference in customer service between Toyota and Lexus.
Like i said...and AGAIN, I AM REPEATING MYSELF...to get capability AND luxury gizmos, you need to spend quite a bit of $$$$. MY ARGUMENT STANDS.
As for resale, i don't plan on selling the LX anytime soon. UNLIKE OTHER SUVs, the LX is made to last for a long time, even in the worst conditions known to man.
Doc, if you notice, i never made any personal attacks...i just use your arguments...did you not mention "momma"??
When did i lose an argument?? You have no idea about your LX's capability except for it's lack of the power rear hatch??
READ AGAIN MY POSTS. There is a reason why the next LX will be less capable. READ.
AGAIN, i am NOT disputing that the QX has more gizmos. HOWEVER, i am arguing that the LX costs as much as it does BECAUSE of the way it is built and it's awesome capability. READ THIS AGAIN.
Thanks...read again if you still don't understand.
TLC + gizmos = LX (sticker around $65K average). Thus, PRICE DIFFERENCE! Oh yeah, don't forget about the big difference in customer service between Toyota and Lexus.
Like i said...and AGAIN, I AM REPEATING MYSELF...to get capability AND luxury gizmos, you need to spend quite a bit of $$$$. MY ARGUMENT STANDS.
As for resale, i don't plan on selling the LX anytime soon. UNLIKE OTHER SUVs, the LX is made to last for a long time, even in the worst conditions known to man.
Doc, if you notice, i never made any personal attacks...i just use your arguments...did you not mention "momma"??
When did i lose an argument??
You have no idea about your LX's capability except for it's lack of the power rear hatch?? READ AGAIN MY POSTS. There is a reason why the next LX will be less capable. READ.
AGAIN, i am NOT disputing that the QX has more gizmos. HOWEVER, i am arguing that the LX costs as much as it does BECAUSE of the way it is built and it's awesome capability. READ THIS AGAIN.
Thanks...read again if you still don't understand.
Last edited by tigmd99; 03-01-04 at 05:08 PM.