Want to buy a lexus...
09-02-10, 01:43 PM
#16
If you can afford the 2nd generation, I would hold out for one of those. I think the transmission is more reliable, and the styling is so much nicer. I never drove a gen 1, so can't speak to the turning radius, but can say the 04 we purchased turns and drives nicely.
That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota. I'm hoping and praying our RX turns out to be a good vehicle, since I've invested about $1K in preventative maintenance (had 60k miles, 6 years old when purchased). Really can't afford to throw a lot of money at this vehicle if things start to go. We normally keep a car 2-3 years tops, so barring a breakdown, we should be OK.
Good luck with your purchase. I see a lot of the 1st gen still on the road, so that says something.
That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota. I'm hoping and praying our RX turns out to be a good vehicle, since I've invested about $1K in preventative maintenance (had 60k miles, 6 years old when purchased). Really can't afford to throw a lot of money at this vehicle if things start to go. We normally keep a car 2-3 years tops, so barring a breakdown, we should be OK.
Good luck with your purchase. I see a lot of the 1st gen still on the road, so that says something.
09-02-10, 02:29 PM
#17
Moderator
I'm not sure what this means:
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
09-02-10, 02:37 PM
#18
Lexus Test Driver
I'm not sure what this means:
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
09-02-10, 03:12 PM
#19
I'm not sure what this means:
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
"That said, I'm not completely sold on Lexus reliability. They are, after all owned by Toyota."
For 20 years, Toyota has been the benchmark for vehicle reliability and retention of value. When Lexus was introduced, it quickly set new standards in the luxury car market. The Powers surveys over the past many years bear this out.
The only bad mark was with the recent rash of reported "sudden acceleration" incidents, now disappeared, which have been shown, like the Audi incidents of the 80s, to have been almost exclusively operator error.
Even after those overreported and underinvestigated incidents, Toyota and Lexus retain their reputation with owners and knowledgeable automobile enthusiasts for outstanding reliability.
This is why, after all, Lexus can sell to informed buyers a 6 year old car at a fair percentage of its new car value, and is exactly why so many of the 2001-2003 first gen cars are still on the road.
Toyota continues to have recalls unrelated to the sudden acceleration, they just announced another one involving the Corolla and one other model (don't remember which) in the past week or so. Not all of the sudden acceleration issues are operator error; I think like anything, there people that try to take advantage of a situtation like this by having their own "accidents".
Toyota owns the Lexus division so guilty by association.
While looking at various '04 RX models, I found there are documented and repetitive problems with: headlight condensation, wheel paint peeling, luggage rack crossmembers that don't release, quarter panel window trim that flies off, probably others but these are the ones that came to mind. Not examples of a quality product, IMHO although I attibute most of these issues to Lexus/Toyota not keeping the rigors in place on their suppliers.
I agree that for years Toyota WAS the reliability leader. I think they became too complacent resting on their laurels.
Our '04 RX is certainly one of the nicest vehicles we've owned. Fit and finish on the interior is unmatched. I have a reasonable amount of confidence in the drivetrain, but not so much in all the bells and whistles.
When someone is looking at purchasing a used vehicle that I happen to own, I believe in giving them my unvarnished opinion, and not just sugar coating everthing simply because I own one. I think that is especially important in a luxury car that will not be cheap to fix if something does go wrong.
I will quantify my responses in that we've only had this vehicle about 5 months. If we have it for a couple years and it's problem free my opinion on it will be more positive. My opinion of where Toyota is currently on their quality may be more positive as well, but anyone that thinks there's not a problem with them right now is deluding themselves.
09-07-10, 08:06 AM
#20
The NHSTA will come out with their final report regarding the Toyota UA issue. Other than the floor mat issue, there are no findings about electronic gremlins. In short, no issue with Toyota as alleged on the serious throttle issue.
09-07-10, 09:29 AM
#21
Moderator
"Sudden Acceleration" has never really been documented to have occurred as the drivers relate.
As reported, the driver states that he had his foot on the brakes and pressed as hard as possible, but the engine just kept racing and the car kept going forward. Automotive engineers have several problems with these reports.
First, the brakes on a car are always stronger than the engine. If you press both gas and brakes at the same time, the car will always stop. Most drivers are unaware of this.
Secondly, brakes do not fix themselves. As a hydraulic system, failure would be do to a leak of pressure, which will always remain until repaired. None of the SA cars, examined after the accident or incident, ever exhibited any problem with the brake system.
Similarly, none exhibited any discernible or measurable problems with the acceleration system, although drive by wire systems leave open the transient electronic malfunction.
Finally, Occam's Razor teaches us that the most likely solution is the most probable. For all of the events which comprise SA to occur, as related by the drivers, many highly unlikely events have to happen simultaneously. However, if we postulate just one even more likely event: the driver had his foot on the accelerator and not the brake, then nothing else needs to be explained or examined, and there are no physical or engineering components that need explanation or even investigation.
As with the Audi cases, this is, after all the hype, the conclusion reached by those examining the reported cases.
The major consequence of the Audi cases was the institution of the interlock to require the brake to be depressed during engine ignition, which insures that the proper pedal is depressed at the only time such an interlock can be utilized, which was a situation involved in some of those Audi SA cases, but none, as far as I know, of the more recent Toyota cases.
As reported, the driver states that he had his foot on the brakes and pressed as hard as possible, but the engine just kept racing and the car kept going forward. Automotive engineers have several problems with these reports.
First, the brakes on a car are always stronger than the engine. If you press both gas and brakes at the same time, the car will always stop. Most drivers are unaware of this.
Secondly, brakes do not fix themselves. As a hydraulic system, failure would be do to a leak of pressure, which will always remain until repaired. None of the SA cars, examined after the accident or incident, ever exhibited any problem with the brake system.
Similarly, none exhibited any discernible or measurable problems with the acceleration system, although drive by wire systems leave open the transient electronic malfunction.
Finally, Occam's Razor teaches us that the most likely solution is the most probable. For all of the events which comprise SA to occur, as related by the drivers, many highly unlikely events have to happen simultaneously. However, if we postulate just one even more likely event: the driver had his foot on the accelerator and not the brake, then nothing else needs to be explained or examined, and there are no physical or engineering components that need explanation or even investigation.
As with the Audi cases, this is, after all the hype, the conclusion reached by those examining the reported cases.
The major consequence of the Audi cases was the institution of the interlock to require the brake to be depressed during engine ignition, which insures that the proper pedal is depressed at the only time such an interlock can be utilized, which was a situation involved in some of those Audi SA cases, but none, as far as I know, of the more recent Toyota cases.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
TomKog
RX - 1st Gen (1999-2003)
5
08-03-17 12:32 PM
drivemycar
RX - 3rd Gen (2010-2015)
1
07-13-15 10:34 AM
