SaintLexus

iTrader: (4)

Correct me if I am wrong: the 1st and 2nd gen LXs are holding up their values well better than the 3rd gen.

But whenever I’d check or see the values of the older ones, it seems as if they are doing well.

vraa

iTrader: (2)

Which is what? You mean 100 series vs 200 series? 300 series is not out yet?

2007 100 series for 20k, 2008 200 series for 20k, the early 200 series just sucked IMO

hankinid

Obviously, fewer remain on the road as time passes. Beyond that more off-road oriented upgrades are available for trucks prior to '08, fewer electronics to possibly go TU, and imo better visibility which means easier driving off-road.

UZ214

how exactly the early 200 series sucked? I had a 08 kept it for 5 years about 85k miles. Not a single issue; was a very nice SUV.

hankinid

So you owned one...

Why did it "just suck"?

Wandl

I think SaintLexus is referring to the 08-15 years holding their values better than the 16-19's?

If so, the newer cars will have a bigger financial impact to depreciation given that they are just starting their curve; however they rank favorably among other luxury full size SUV's (i.e. Escalade, Navigator) so overall the LX is holding their own for depreciation.

hankinid

Many thought the front end "refresh" was not only garish to say the least, but also decreased the truck's approach angle. Ignoring the restyle, the LX will still have far better reliability in the long run than Escalades, Navigators, or anything else I can think of.

SaintLexus

iTrader: (4)

2008 and up is considered the 3rd gen... no?

I'm not new to the car scene and may not be as active as I used to be . But I know a little bit about cars.

My theory is that the reason why the 1st and 2nd gens are holding their values well is simply because of less complexities when it comes to "high-tech" ammenities.


Every now and then... I'll search classified ads, for example, a 2004-07 LX can be worth just as much as an 08-10 with almost having similar mileage and having a clean title.

vraa

iTrader: (2)

I was brash earlier

I think we are just discussing semantics

I am in full agreement with you