Lexus SUV with reclining second row?
06-11-17, 01:08 PM
#31
Lexus Champion
The fact act that the 4 Runner is on the same platform as the GX and it has a hatch is meaningless. The GX is not a 4 Runner, it's a Prado, all it does with the 4 Runner is share the frame. Designing a hatch would cost money vs using what they already have in the Prado, and the only reason the GX exists is because it's so cheap for them to make since they sell so many Prados worldwide. Start designing complicated changes like an entirely different rear structure to accommodate a hatch, and no more GX.
If the Prado/GX was not already designed to handle a top-hinged rear hatch, it would require a lot of complex and expensive re-engineering to strengthen not only the D-pillar cross-member, but both D-pillars to handle the new strengthened cross-member. This type of engineering would be easier to do when a new generation of Prado/GX is designed and engineered rather than retrofitting it.
06-11-17, 01:40 PM
#32
Lexus Fanatic
It requires a lot of structural strength to hang the hinges for a vehicle door. The right-hand D-pillar on the Prado/GX will be very strong to allow a hinged door to hang from it. The top structural cross-member over both D-pillars on the 4Runner will be very strong to allow for the top-hinged hatch to hang from it.
If the Prado/GX was not already designed to handle a top-hinged rear hatch, it would require a lot of complex and expensive re-engineering to strengthen not only the D-pillar cross-member, but both D-pillars to handle the new strengthened cross-member. This type of engineering would be easier to do when a new generation of Prado/GX is designed and engineered rather than retrofitting it.
If the Prado/GX was not already designed to handle a top-hinged rear hatch, it would require a lot of complex and expensive re-engineering to strengthen not only the D-pillar cross-member, but both D-pillars to handle the new strengthened cross-member. This type of engineering would be easier to do when a new generation of Prado/GX is designed and engineered rather than retrofitting it.
06-11-17, 02:18 PM
#33
Lexus Fanatic
While (as you know) I'm a big proponent of real (vs. temporary) spare tires, the back of the tailgate is generally not the place for them. That can cause a lot of both sheet-metal and glass damage, even on very low-speed impacts.
06-11-17, 02:26 PM
#34
Lexus Fanatic
Last edited by SW17LS; 06-11-17 at 02:31 PM.
06-11-17, 03:23 PM
#35
Lexus Fanatic
It requires a lot of structural strength to hang the hinges for a vehicle door. The right-hand D-pillar on the Prado/GX will be very strong to allow a hinged door to hang from it. The top structural cross-member over both D-pillars on the 4Runner will be very strong to allow for the top-hinged hatch to hang from it.
If the Prado/GX was not already designed to handle a top-hinged rear hatch, it would require a lot of complex and expensive re-engineering to strengthen not only the D-pillar cross-member, but both D-pillars to handle the new strengthened cross-member. This type of engineering would be easier to do when a new generation of Prado/GX is designed and engineered rather than retrofitting it.
If the Prado/GX was not already designed to handle a top-hinged rear hatch, it would require a lot of complex and expensive re-engineering to strengthen not only the D-pillar cross-member, but both D-pillars to handle the new strengthened cross-member. This type of engineering would be easier to do when a new generation of Prado/GX is designed and engineered rather than retrofitting it.
06-11-17, 03:28 PM
#36
Lexus Fanatic
Exactly, its cost cutting. It's too expensive to change the GX that much from the Prado.
It's not "difficult" it's all about cost. They can design anything.
It's not "difficult" it's all about cost. They can design anything.
06-11-17, 08:45 PM
#37
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (20)
^^ given the relatively tiny gx sales numbers, re-engineering for top hinge would probably make no financial sense in that there would likely be little sales increase after spending millions on it. it's not just the engineering, you have to then go through certification and crash testing again...
06-11-17, 08:54 PM
#38
Lexus Fanatic
^^ given the relatively tiny gx sales numbers, re-engineering for top hinge would probably make no financial sense in that there would likely be little sales increase after spending millions on it. it's not just the engineering, you have to then go through certification and crash testing again...
Are we serious that a top hinge GX would of been that costly or difficult to do? As for doing it now, I don't think I ever suggested it.
Last edited by Toys4RJill; 06-11-17 at 08:58 PM.
06-11-17, 09:08 PM
#39
Lexus Fanatic
They did that for the Prado because they sell hundreds of thousands of them a year, and they sell 70-100k 4 Runners. They sell 20k GXs in a great year, and they sell them without having to design a new hatch. It's not worth it.
06-12-17, 07:22 AM
#40
Lexus Champion
Do you honestly think it would be that difficult for Toyota to desogn the Prado with a side hinge and the GX with a top hinge? Think about it for a second, the 4Runner is essentially a Prado chassis with the 4.0/5 speed. They took the extra step since the 80s to design the 4runner with a top hinge. I simply see cost cutting as the reason why Toyota skipped on the top hinge.
The Prado and the 4Runner are related only through the ladder frame that both rest on. The body styling and structural engineering are different. The body structural engineering of the 4Runner allows for a top-hinged hatch; the body structural engineering of the Prado/GX does not allow for a top-hinged hatch. It is NOT about cost cutting; it is about designing a product to meet the needs of the market within a certain budget and the marketing needs did not require a top-hinged hatch or left-hinged door for the Prado/GX.
Consider the Honda CR-V and the Toyota RAV4, both of which sold well and continue to sell well in North America. Despite the number of sales, both models went through 3 generations with a rear cargo area door hinged on the "wrong side" (for North America and Continental Europe) -- the right or curb side. Honda and Toyota did nothing to correct that, not even move the hinge to the left side for North America (which is probably much easier to engineer than a roof-mounted hinge).
06-12-17, 11:46 AM
#41
Lexus Test Driver
Wife test drove a Sequoia Plat, a Toyota LC and LX all in one afternoon. She immediately disqualified the Sequoia because of the outdated tech (it's 2017, and $60k doesn't get you lane departure?) and very rough powertrain. The LC/LX is still under consideration (leaning towards LC, less flashy, takes regular gas) but the RX350L is coming out next year I hear so may wait on that.
To mmarshall's earlier point, if Lexus had a Lexus version of the Highlander, that would be a hit...a V6 3rd row (vs the outdated GX or the ultra LX) would genuinely fit a niche in the brand.
To mmarshall's earlier point, if Lexus had a Lexus version of the Highlander, that would be a hit...a V6 3rd row (vs the outdated GX or the ultra LX) would genuinely fit a niche in the brand.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post