LexBall

they have no respect 4 us! wut yall think???

http://mbworld.org/forums/showthread...ighlight=lexus

salimshah

MB/Chrysler Lexus/Toyota is at the end simply name-calling and generally can be attributed to a name brand assosiation and generally has very little to do with the actual vehicle in question.

Play the word assosiation game with any one ..

MB --> safety
Lexus --> Customer service
Chrysler -> Non-exotic run of the mill
Toyota -> Non-exotic reliable

People end up bying the vehicles they prefer and geniunly feel their choice is better [wont it be a shame parting with all those $$ for something they did not like]. The over-all ownership experience comes with time..., fun to drive, reliability, dealer after sale service, maintainace, repair, resale value etc.

Since the ML and RX are not identical each would have its strong points and weak points. Some of the items are subjective, such as styling, and one can not determine which is better.

If we measure success by sales, vehicles in service and customer sat, the winner and looser is very very obvious in the first generation of RX and ML.

Salim

Lexmex

YAWN.

Even before I modded my RX to death. I was running pretty close within .3 seconds in the 1/4 mile of the old ML350. Now, the new ML350 just barely catches my wake at the track (looks (though the new once has nice curves) and runs like a land barge).

I have driven the new ML350 of a friend who promises to get a Lexus SUV when they are finally available down here and this thing gives me the creeps on high speed turns on the highway.

They claim more power on the MB, but I think the MB weighs more from my recollection.

I will say this...the new ML350 looks a lot better than its predecessor.

RX330 vs ML350? Depends on personal tastes and research.

Personally I still like my RX300 over the RX330.

Edited to add some additional information for comparison (and I know that those hp figures can be funny but the weight is not)

1999 RX300 AWD- 3.0L V6 220 hp 3900 lbs. (and I got mods)
2006 RX330 AWD- 3.3L V6 223 hp 4065 lbs.
2006 ML350 - 3.5L V6 268 hp 4819 lbs.

katzjamr

Are those ML350's made in Alabama???

spwolf

First of all, BASE ML350 with leather as only option costs as much as RX400h with everything included - 49k.
ML350 with equipment similar to top end RX400h (without RSES) costs 57k, 8 k more.

:-).

So you can save 10k, and still end up being a lot faster in your RX400h than ML350, plus save some 8-10mpg in the process of being faster. Or you can get ML500 and be as fast, but spend 61k and get 12-15mpg less than RX400h, while paying some 12k more.

Now the fact that RX330 is actually faster than ML350 while being some 14k less expensive in top spec trip (and while having more luxury features), makes it an easy choice.

I do have to say that new ML looks a lot better than previous one and is pretty attractive car, I just love the way new RX looks though (I live in Europe, not many around).

nopcbs

Let's face it the RX330 is a pumped up Camry/ES and it is a ladies car with modest acceleration, poor handling, poor driving dynamics, a comfy ride, nice interior, good reliability,and cute styling. It's a chick car start to end. We just bought one because we were shopping for a soft-core SUV for my wife and she is a dyed-in-the wool Lexus fan. Iam not a fan of it other than the likley very good reliability.

Looked at the new ML at a local car show and it was impressive. Not sure how it drives, but I'd guess it's between the RX and the BMW X3 andX5 models. Crappy mileage. If Merc put their superb E-Class diesel in it it would be very attractive even with the likely mediocre reliability.

nopcbs

Those Merc heads are off-base saying the RX is "only" a Toyota. That's like saying the Pieta is only a statue by some dead Italian guy.

Toyota is the gold standard for reliability. No German brand even comes close. certainly not Mercedes.

TunedRX300

I am too busy modding my RX and Acura to pay attention to moronic MB owners who believe they must put down other cars to feel good.

foxda

I had a 99 ML430. I loved the way it handled. It drove almost like a sports car. However, I have never had a car with as many maintnenace problems. Way too numberous to list, the biggest being a new transmission and torque converter ($6000 out of my pocket). I had an extended warranty that covered many things (like the transfer case) or I would have spent evern more. I did not do any hard off road. I live at 5000 ft elevation in souther CA and have a 1/4 mile dirt road that is not plowed in the winter. The new transmission started to act up so I gave up on the ML and bought a '04 RX330. Great decision. The RX has been perfect with no maintence problems. It does great in the snow during winter. It doesn't handle quite as well as the ML IMHO, but it has better luxury features and it is reliable. I highly recommed the RX and would warn potential customers about the ML maintenance problem.

nopcbs

You are quite wrong about the RX330 being faster than the ML350. According to Consumer Reports the RX330 does 0-60 in a 8.8 sec, 45 to 65 in 6.2 sec, and the quarter mile in 17 sec. Their respective numbers for the ML350 are 7.8, 5.3, and 16.2. The ML350 is MUCH quicker (which is what I assume you meant by faster) than the RX330. Braking is identical on the two. The emergency handling of the RX is better as is the mileage (18 vs. 16 mpg, overall on their test course). The ML350 weighs some 600 lb. more than the RX330, which makes its acceleration advantage even more impressive and explains the worse mileage.

The RX330 needs more engine and Lexus will give it that next year. Pity they didn't do it from the RX330's launch.

ph_RX330

MB customers are always complaining about Lexus vehicles… mainly because they ended up paying 15K more for a vehicle that has far lower reliably, ugly exterior (ML350 looks a lot like the KIA sorento), ugly interior (not even close to the comfort of a Lexus), and way lower gas mileage. So other than a little more muscle when it flexes, the ML doesn’t have much to offer over the RX.


I drove both vehicles before I bought a 2006 RX, I will admit the ML does have more *****. But that box-like thing is just not worth the price. The RX is far more stylish, and has adequate power, not like I plan to race everyday (around the corner is the 2007 RX350 to match in that catagory as well).

spwolf

i must be wrong... but my argument still holds when it comes to RX400h, it is a lot quicker, cheaper and gets better mpg....

jaydunn

\

I don't think you are wrong. My RX330 is way quicker than 0-60 in 8.8 seconds, more like 7.8 seconds. I am a Consumers Union member for >25 years and the mag is the last place I would look for 0-60 times.

russianmd

If Lexus is "only a Toyota", then MB is "only a Chrysler." Fergodsakes, why do they need to bring down the entire brand?

Lexmex

8.8 is the stock time for my 1999 RX300 AWD. I know Consumer Reports said 17.0 for the RX330, but I can't remember if they timed the 0 to 60 offhand, but 7.8 has been mentioned before for the RX330.