[wmquan]

Lexus will be showing a new SUV on at the North American International Auto Show next month.

http://www.detnews.com/2001/autosinsider/0112/19/autos-370979.htm

http://www.caranddriver.com/xp/Caranddriver/dai/2001/december/20011218_dai_lexus.xml

Doesn't seem to be the RX300 replacement, but something that goes in between the RX and the LX470.

 

[remery]

Looking at the price and configuration (V8) lseems like they are going after the X5 4.4i. If it has a third seat, maybe they might even be tempting prospective MDX buyers who don't want to wait 3 months or so to get one, but at a significantly higher price.

 

[Iceman]

It looks like I'll have another vehicle to consider now. I like the customer service and cachet of Lexus, but the RX300 is too small and eggy and the LX470 is too expensive and long in the tooth. It will be interesting to see what the GX470 looks like and how it's outfitted feature-wise!

 

[wmquan]

Very little details available now. On Edmunds there's speculation that it's a Sequoia-based model. But one article said it would be mid-sized and the Sequoia is full-sized. Maybe the article is wrong. I'd imagine Lexus wouldn't build it from scratch and base it on an existing platform, so the Sequoia is logical.

Also, the Sequoia is bigger than a Land Cruiser/LX470, isn't it? Makes slotting a bit more difficult.

At its possible price range, it does compete with the ML500 too.

Whatever the vehicle is like, Toyota/Lexus sure seems determined to offer an SUV at every price point. RAV4, Highlander, 4Runner, Land Cruiser, RX300, GX470, LX470.

 

[acuruss]

There is a picture of nose here, just scroll down to the end. I was assuming the Sequoia variant would replace the LX470, but guess I was wrong.

My guess now is that GX470 will not have all the bells and whistles that the LX has. Note that C&D mention a "rear adaptive height controls" and not the full adjustable suspension that the LX has. I'm also guessing the vehicle will be very similar to the Sequoia since it is likely to be much smaller volume than the RX300 and won't justify the additional tooling costs. It will also have the Sequoia/Tundra V8 and not the smoother, Lexus LS400-derived V8 of the LX470. So, the GX470 will basically compete with the Escalade and Navigator and the LX470 will compete with the Land Rover Range Rover and Mercedes G-Class.

 

[TheWorm]

Good links guys. I also was under the impression (lots of rumors) that the LX470 was going to be (re)based on the Sequoia platform. I guess it sticks with the Landcruiser platform while the GX gets based on the Seq.

Makes sense in the overall scheme of things @ Toyota/Lexus insofar as their lineup goes (by level-of-luxury and cost):

Highlander-RX
Sequoia-GX
Landcruiser-LX

It'll be interesting to see it!

 

[richardallen]

GX470

Just want to clear this up. The pics of the Lexus GX470 are most certainly a frontend redesign of the Toyota Prado sold in other countries except North America. It's just a wee bit smaller than the Toyota Landcruiser and even smaller than the Sequioa. It's as capable offroad as the Landcruiser and is very popular in Africa, Australia. The Toyota Prado seats 7 passengers just like the Toyota Landcruiser. I suspect that the next 4runner will be very similar to the Prado with a V6. Parents live in Africa and drive a Toyota Prado GXL with dual fuel tanks.

 

[MDXLuvr]

Hey Acuruss- I might be wrong, but I believe that the Tundra/Sequoia/GX470/LX470 share the same V8.

 

[acuruss]

MDXLuvr, you may be right about that. I believe when I looked at the Land Cruiser and Sequoia last year, the salesman said the LC was based on Lexus V8 while the Seq. was the Tundra engine.

Looking at MSN Carpoint here are specs:

LC:
Horsepower 230 @ 4800 RPM
Torque (lb-ft) 320 @ 3400 RPM
Displacement (cc) 4664
Bore X Stroke (in.) 3.7 X 3.31
Compression Ratio 9.6
Fuel Type Gas
Fuel System EFI

Seq.:
Horsepower 240 @ 4800 RPM
Torque (lb-ft) 315 @ 3400 RPM
Displacement (cc) 4664
Turbo/Supercharger No
Bore X Stroke (in.) 3.7 X 3.31
Compression Ratio 9.6
Fuel Type Gas
Fuel System SEFI

Looks like it's the same base engine with some differences, maybe just different exhaust and air cleaner set-ups. But, the LC and LX are built in Japan while the Tundra and Seq. are built in USA. So the two engines, while using the same basic short block, may get different intakes and possibly heads in Japan.

Oh well, maybe someone here knows the real story...

 

[wmquan]

Here's a short article ...

http://www.detnews.com/2002/autosho...utos-383779.htm

Vehicle is derived from the Toyota Prado, which is a good offroading vehicle. Priced around $45k-$50k, meant to do battle with ML500's, Land Rovers, etc.

 

[BigSkyTL]

GX470 sounds like a great vehicle, but it won't be on the market until January of 2003. that's too far away for me, but it's tempting to wait.

maybe they'll release it early...like fall of 2002?

 

[vicpai]

Here's some more info on the competition.....

............yes, I'm one of those converts who initially was in the market for the MDX (fit me like a glove, except for it's WIDTH) and now will be buying the GX 470 when it comes out in Jan 2003.

I just got back to L.A. from my "one-day" trip to Detroit where I'd gone just to see the GX in person and I REALLY liked what I saw!!!. While I was there I had an interesting and informative conversation with a Lexus marketing person who gave me a good amount of info (There's of course detailed info on the GX now available at the Toyota/Lexus website - link posted below)

Here are some of the highlights of what this guy had to say and why I've decided to go with the GX

The GX is aimed to compete with the MDX, the ML 320 and the X5 although not necessarily on a price-point basis, but more in the "size and type" classification. Price for the base GX he said will start at around 45K and a FULLY-LOADED-TO-THE-GILLS GX 470 stickering around 53K

It's length is almost identical to the MDX (188.9 inches) vs. 188.2 inches for the GX. Width is 2.4 inches narrower than it's bigger brother the LX and 3 inches narrower than the MDX - MAIN REASON FOR MY DECISION TO SWITCH - this gives it plenty of room inside (in fact it's 8 passenger capable) without going overboard and hampering manuverability in tight situations such as driving on narrow twisty two-lane roads, narrow congested city streets and those "compact" parking spots that are becoming all too common nowadays will not be a nightmare. and BTW the GX will weigh about 4600lbs - 200lbs heavier than the MDX and a whopping 800lbs lighter than it's lower powered (230bhp) bigger brother the LX 470

Here are some of the advantages the GX has over the MDX

There's a killer 11-speaker Mark-Levinson audio system available as an option

Very high quality leather - same as that used on the LS 430

Using extremely high-tech engineering they are able to achieve true off-road ability (low range, body-on-frame/live rear axle) with the TYPICAL Lexus-sedan-smooth ride - Lexus claims that over the years and a lot of experience with the LX 470 they have managed to perfect this design to be as RIGID as a unibody construction!! - It has independent front suspension and a rear air-suspension with ADAPTIVE VARIABLE shocks at all 4 corners which can be set in several different levels from "maximum comfort" to "sport". Although the GX 470 will be somewhat lower than the LX it has slightly more ground clearance than the MDX - an interesting feature associated with this is ADAPTIVE HEIGHT CONTROL - the body can be raised or lowered 4 inches so that it exceptionally performs the 2 seemingly contradictory fuctions: be it crawling over rocks or refined, streamlined cruising at high speed on the freeway

The GX will have an optional factory installed DVD entertainment system available for rear passengers which neatly folds in when not in use ( I have a strong feeling the 2003 MDX might offer this to be competitive)

HIDs (xenon headlamps) will be available, as will VSC(vehicle skid control), SIDE CURTAIN AIRBAGS are standard-a very very very important safety feature!!!!, daytime running lights, Brake Assist with electronic brake-force distribution (EBD)

Interior is likely to be "TOMB-QUIET" as Car and Driver likes to say (LX 470 is currently one of the quietest vehicles, let alone SUVs)

genuine 6,500lbs towing capacity!!!!

ADVANTAGES THE MDX (and predicted for 2003 MDX) will likely have over the GX

Better fuel economy from the V6 (I don't expect really good fuel efficiency from the V8 - probably much better than the LX, but less than the V6 MDX

The 2003 MDX will probably be around 260bhp and have a performance advantage over the GX at 235bhp (expected 0-60 times of around 8.5 seconds for the GX) - MDX will likely be in the mid to high sevens

I've heard rumors the 2003 MDX will have some sort of a rear parking assist using a TV monitor to display the rear area

Better "Navigation system" support from Acura (people are getting the runaround from Lexus about obtaining DVD updates- including my brother who owns a 2001 RX 300 w/Navi)

Better price point (good value) - provided this "MSRP" and "over MSRP" saga does not continue for too long as production volume as well as competition in the market increases

So from the above it can be seen that it basically boils down to really what one's needs are. Before the GX 470 came along the MDX most closely matched what I was looking for: Reliability, Quality, good performance, Fantastic Navigation system and a good level of luxury packaged in an at-least "moderately off-road" capable machine - and even though the MDX's width was always an issue, I was willing to reluctantly "live with" it, until the GX 470 came along, and at a whole 3-inches narrower, instantaneously sovled my problem - while giving me the options of some more goodies at the same time!

BTW here is the link to the toyota website giving compete detailed specs on the GX 470

http://www.toyota.com/html/about/news/archive/press_release/product/docs/2002/20020106a_gx470.jsp

 

[HypoDenny]

The GX is aimed to compete with the MDX, the ML 320 and the X5 although not necessarily on a price-point basis, but more in the "size and type" classification.

Oh Come on..... kinda like the Porsche 911 Turbo is designed to compete with the Ford Focus?... it's amazing to me how quickly people discard the affordability of the MDX relative to its peers... I mean, if Acura offered the MDX $5K more expensive, just imagine all the goodies they could pack in.... but that's not their target, is it?.... and the complaint about too much width?... har-dee-har-dee-har.... that's one of the main reasons we bought it... for the ROOM !

The GX470 will no doubt be very nice -- but the MDX is the best in ITS class , still. It's a great thing that there are so many vehicles in the marketplace to fill all these niches, eh? Kinda like an ice-cream shop ...

 

[remery]

Not for that price

vicpai,
I hear yah, but I don't agrees with ya. Assuming the fully loaded version for $53K, you have not offered any truly compelling reasons to pay $14K more for a smaller vehicle unless you are into real off-roading and heavy duty towing. For that price differential you should be getting a lot more but doesn't appear to be the case. If it were $40K-$45K your logic would be much more convincing. 3" less width is not that much, I used to drive a Yukon and had no problems with parking lots or even most underground garages. It still sounds like a great vehicle, but I suggest you sharpen your pencil a bit more and don't forget about the great Navi you will be missing if you go the Lexus route.

 

[ifeldman]

When I was first looking at the midsize SUVs, I thought I would end up with something smaller than my minivan (Ford Windstar). I had something like the RX300 in mind initially. I realize that the MDX is about the same width as my minivan, but shorter.

I was originally concerned about the width of the MDX, but I really dont notice it now that I am driving one. 3 inches seems like such a small difference. I notice that widths are measured from the widest point on the vehicle, which is the ends of the side mirrors. 3 inches could easily be the difference in 1-1/2 inches in side mirror widths.

What does make a big difference to me is the turning radius. My MDX is much easier to maneuver than my minivan because of this. It would be nice to know how the turning radius of the new Lexus compares to the MDX.

 

[Robyjo]

Vic,

Sorry to see you go, but you really can't go wrong. Both trucks are going to be excellent choices for reliability, etc., it's just a matter of exact specs that one is looking for in a SUV. In any case, you will have to wait 1 year, which apparently you have the luxury to do--so who knows, maybe you'll change your mind in that time when you see the XC90! Or the 2003 MDX!

In any case, keep us updated.

Rob

 

[Fireblade6]

LEXUS

One thing that really bothered me about Lexus is styling/design. I have to give Lexus props for taking an existing design ...re fabricated, make it better, more reliable, more affordable...but sometimes...their styling is blatant plagiarism.

For example...The LS400 sedan...LOOKS SO MUCH like a Mercedes Benz 500 series SL class. and now the GX470...the front is a complete copy of the Mercedes ML320. Ugh....To be honest...its damn FUGLY! God..we dont need another "CAN"

At least Acura keeps its styling to what Acura represents. In the past...Acura..was trying to find a niche...a design, a style that if you look at it...you would say..Hey! Its an Acura...Now..I think they are about 98% accomplished...If you look at ALL of the models, the TL, RL, RSX, MDX...you can see the accents of its fascia. All have a representation of what "A"cura denotes. If you look at the models from the top, the models I have mentioned looks very much like the "A" from Acura. I like the way Acura created its emblem for the vehicle. One of the Honda engineer told me that the "A" not only represent the first letter of its mark but also the "Performance Precision by Engineering" philosophy when Honda first created Acura. If you look closely at the "A" it is also an engineering compass. So all the models have that sharp nose wedgy look...I really like where Acura have evolutionize to date. With the exception of the NSX...The exotic sports car is overdue for a major due to fit in with the rest of the line...hopefully this will happen in 2004.

On the other hand...Lexus...doesn't have this uniform styling..the RX300 looks different from the new GX470 which looks like half ML320 and half Landcruiser. the LS400 and GS400 looks different to the IS300...When you look at all the models in the Lexus parking lot...the vehicles...look "lost"

Anyway...enough of bashing on other vehicles...it just my twisted and "The Far side" observation.

 

[vicpai]

here's my take on this..........

vicpai,
I hear yah, but I don't agrees with ya. Assuming the fully loaded version for $53K, you have not offered any truly compelling reasons to pay $14K more for a smaller vehicle unless you are into real off-roading and heavy duty towing. For that price differential you should be getting a lot more but doesn't appear to be the case. If it were $40K-$45K your logic would be much more convincing. 3" less width is not that much, I used to drive a Yukon and had no problems with parking lots or even most underground garages. It still sounds like a great vehicle, but I suggest you sharpen your pencil a bit more and don't forget about the great Navi you will be missing if you go the Lexus route.

Hi remery!
I agree and disagree with you on this. Yes, 14K is quite a big difference....but then again you get a whole list of additional goodies....Mark Levinson, HIDs, VSC, side curtain airbags etc. etc. etc. and the GX is not really smaller, only NARROWER than the MDX - and in every other dimension (wheelbase, length, height etc. it is almost identical to the MDX). Now, I'm not a "big" person. I'm 5'10" tall, small framed and skinny and to top it all I'm single with no kids or cargo to haul around!!!. So why do I need all that extra room????......By the same token you will have to agree that smaller vehicles ARE much much much more fun to drive than large ones - they are nimble, agile, "throwable", turn on a dime, a delight to squeeze into tight spots, and blast to slip in and out of heavy traffic. Yes, if were living in a make-believe world of endless stretches of super-wide freeways with very light traffic, all the parking space in the world etc. etc. then there would not be any need at all for the compromise, but here we are in "reality land" (and especially here in L.A. )......

If something like a TOYOTA RAV4 4WD were available with all the luxury, features, performance and refinement that I desire, I would have to look no further........but manufacturers just seem to think that if you want a "high-end" vehicle you also want it to be huge. Although the RX 300 would have really fit me very well in most respects, it goes toward the other extreme of being too car-like (substantially less rugged than than the MDX)......and yes I do use my vehicle in what might be considered light to moderate off-pavement use (going through snow covered and rough mountain roads in the winter to go skiing/snowboarding) and I do not like to push my vehicles to the limit. That is if they're designed for heavy duty off-road work, I'd like to limit it to moderate levels and so on and so forth, thereby leaving a good margin for the manufacturer's claims! and the vehicle itself.

I'm not saying that they should have made the MDX a lot smaller, only that it's length to width ratio does not really seem to make sense. (Note that although the MDX's length can be truly classified as being "midsize", the width is almost the same as a large FORD EXPEDITON which happens to be a whopping 16 inches longer than the MDX!!!! The reason Acura did this is because they are relatively new to the SUV market and having just ONE model to cover and "please" a very wide market segment they tried to combine as many different attributes as possible into one vehicle. Hopefully in the future they will have 2 or 3 diverse HIGH END SUVs to cover everybody from single people who don't really need to sacrifice a fun driving experience and "everyday liveability" for tons of space TO people who actually need the space and are willing to compromise a little to meet their requirements........and that's what I like about Lexus. The RX 300 serves that market very well, the LX 470 served it's own market well (the bigger-is-better, the more the merrier crowd) and now the GX 470 will serve people like me who want the ultimate balance - reasonable and not extreme on any one aspect is the key word here. Reasonably good passenger and cargo space, reasonable exterior dimensions (length, width and height) - my current 4 runner is 68 inches wide and at 74 inches the GX a whopping 6 inches wider - which is plenty -around 71-72 inches of width would have been much better, but I can live with 74 (but that's probably as far as I'd want to go - do you see my point??)

Finally addressing the Navigation issue, although I believe the Acura Navi is still probably the best overall, the Lexus DVD Navi is a very close second!!! and in some ways (graphics, speed of calculation/re-calculation and street level coverage for the entire U.S.) better. The area that the Lexus Navi lacks compared to Acura's is in the USER INTERFACE (sorting functions, search options etc.) and it's POINT-OF-INTEREST coverage which is abysmal. - but this is something I'm willing to live with, hoping future updates will resolve some of this

 

[vicpai]

THANK YOU FOR SEEING MY POINT.....

Vic,

Sorry to see you go, but you really can't go wrong. Both trucks are going to be excellent choices for reliability, etc., it's just a matter of exact specs that one is looking for in a SUV. In any case, you will have to wait 1 year, which apparently you have the luxury to do--so who knows, maybe you'll change your mind in that time when you see the XC90! Or the 2003 MDX!

In any case, keep us updated.

Rob

I totally agree with you: Both the MDX and GX are really great vehicles, functionally, and the final decision to buy one depends on one's specific needs. Although you can almost NEVER find a vehicle that PERFECTLY 100% matches your needs and requirements you've got to go with one that most closely matches them........and on the same note, while I was at the Detroit auto show I came across another interesting vehicle that seemed to even more closely match my needs - the Infiniti FX-45 which is a smaller (RX 300 sized) rugged SUV loaded with all the luxury and performance (300bhp V8, Navi, run-flat tires?? to name a few), but the Infinity DVD Navigation system is not as good as the Acura or Lexus units and I did not like the "too-futuristic" star-wars-like interior design - I prefer a conservative, elegant, traditional design to the wild and woolly look.

......and BTW I would NEVER consider buying a Volvo (so XC 90 is out) - because reliability and quality is my NUMBER ONE criterion in an automobile purchase this limits me to Honda/Acura, Toyota/Lexus and Nissan/Infiniti.....and maybe Subaru if I was looking in the lower end of the luxury spectrum.

 

[vicpai]

No luck here!!

GX470 sounds like a great vehicle, but it won't be on the market until January of 2003. that's too far away for me, but it's tempting to wait.

maybe they'll release it early...like fall of 2002?

BigSkyTL,

I would have loved an earlier release too, but I confirmed with the marketing rep and 2 other lexus personnel at the Detroit auto show that January is the definite release date (could be early or late Jan). I even wanted to put a deposit, but the local dealer (South Bay Lexus here in the Los Angeles area) said deposits will not be accepted till around October of 2002

BTW I notice you own a 2000TL?? you must love it!! I had a Monterey Blue 2000TL/Navi and absolutely loved it until it got stolen a few months back