I love my LX, my gold chains and my bomber jacket.
[/QUOTE]
well, you’re just an 80’s kind of person...nothing wrong with that. Weirdo!
LX570 #4 Worst Car of Decade
- Thread starter 99Cruiser
- Start date
This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate
links, including eBay, Amazon, Skimlinks, and others.
[/QUOTE]
well, you’re just an 80’s kind of person...nothing wrong with that. Weirdo!
The buthurt is so strong, I can feel its tremors way up here in the great white north.
Yeah, i have to use a extra thick donut now.
If you look at the 200 series platform from a non enthusiast's perspective, it is objectively pretty bad. It is ancient, gets among the worst gas mileage of any new car, has woefully outdated technology and a terrible user interface, has poorly executed front seat storage for cups and random junk, doesn't have much safety technology compared with modern vehicles, has much less storage overall than one would expect for a large SUV and a tiny 3rd row that doesn't stow flat (live axle when virtually everything else is IRS), it's slow, it's heavy, it doesn't handle well, and worst of all - it's insanely expensive yet doesn't offer much in the way of perceived prestige. These are all huge turn offs for the average shopper with a budget of nearly $100k, and the argument it's more reliable doesn't matter as much as it used to since most new vehicles (ignore the often compared Range Rover) are very reliable.
From an enthusiast's perspective however, it's an amazing vehicle in many ways, and I am glad it still exists. I'm a huge fan of it personally having owned 3 over the years and wheeled them all, but the use case of someone who uses it off road is exceedingly small in the general car buying population. A lot of the stuff that is a turn off to most people is often what makes it appealing to an enthusiast - old powertrain and technology usually means more reliability; heavy weight means robust "over engineered" parts; lack of storage means there's a ladder frame and solid rear axle; non flashy appearance means stealthy you fly under the radar; etc.
For a niche vehicle, and the Land Cruiser definitely is niche as they generally sell fewer LCs than Mercedes sells G wagons, it comes down to the target audience, and they are not intended for a price and eco conscious consumer with 4 kids who will literally never ever go off pavement. There are TONS of excellent vehicles that fill that need in the marketplace significantly better than any of Toyota's off road capable 4x4s like the Land Cruiser, 4runner, Tacoma, and Sequoia. I think a Kia Telluride fits the needs of most brilliantly in a very attractive package with loads of tech and luxury and literally costs HALF what a Land Cruiser goes for. Do I think the Kia is better? No, but it fits the needs of most better. Would I buy a Kia over a Land Cruiser? No, but that's because I am enthusiast who understands and appreciates what the 200 does. It's clear the author of the article doesn't "get it", but he's not necessarily wrong when you really look at the whole picture objectively. And I'm aware any forum of any nature will be subject to a decent bit of confirmation bias
From an enthusiast's perspective however, it's an amazing vehicle in many ways, and I am glad it still exists. I'm a huge fan of it personally having owned 3 over the years and wheeled them all, but the use case of someone who uses it off road is exceedingly small in the general car buying population. A lot of the stuff that is a turn off to most people is often what makes it appealing to an enthusiast - old powertrain and technology usually means more reliability; heavy weight means robust "over engineered" parts; lack of storage means there's a ladder frame and solid rear axle; non flashy appearance means stealthy you fly under the radar; etc.
For a niche vehicle, and the Land Cruiser definitely is niche as they generally sell fewer LCs than Mercedes sells G wagons, it comes down to the target audience, and they are not intended for a price and eco conscious consumer with 4 kids who will literally never ever go off pavement. There are TONS of excellent vehicles that fill that need in the marketplace significantly better than any of Toyota's off road capable 4x4s like the Land Cruiser, 4runner, Tacoma, and Sequoia. I think a Kia Telluride fits the needs of most brilliantly in a very attractive package with loads of tech and luxury and literally costs HALF what a Land Cruiser goes for. Do I think the Kia is better? No, but it fits the needs of most better. Would I buy a Kia over a Land Cruiser? No, but that's because I am enthusiast who understands and appreciates what the 200 does. It's clear the author of the article doesn't "get it", but he's not necessarily wrong when you really look at the whole picture objectively. And I'm aware any forum of any nature will be subject to a decent bit of confirmation bias
Looks like the article worked. The dialog is still going on.
Agree, also a '15 LX owner ('95 80 LC, '07 100 LX prior). Was in market for LX/LC a few years back and could not get past the '16+ LX exterior line. Felt like general package went too far into city-slicker realm, away from stealth wealth presence that had always surrounded LC/LX. Ended up buying low mile 2yr old CPO '15 LX as I was not a fan of the new 16-17 (att) LC interior. Yet '15 LX had clear faults..ie 20" wheel & what were they thinking with that stock size profile rubber? Upgraded to 33" Blizzak DM & K02 immediately upon purchase, which has ended up being acceptable. 13-15 LX exterior has better line than LC yr equivalent imo. 16+ LC >>> 16+ LX. With a few amendments, I'd love to have a 16+ LC exterior/bones mated with Lexus interior. I could care-less about AHC/no AHC. Not a big deal if it's a $3-4k fix at 100-150k miles in.
I'd never self-label as an off-roader, but I've hiked almost all of the 58 14ers here in CO, good amount of rough 4wd truck-trail approaches to get to remote mt biking/backpacking... storm hunt ski through-out CO, Utah, WY, Montana... and if I'm honest with myself, even this '15 more city-slick oriented LX is complete overkill for those needs. I really admire what some of the I8mud LC guys do to their trucks, look absolutely beautiful all built up and seemingly really run them hard. I'm often tempted to drop the LX off @ local Slee, but when push comes to shove, I'm driving this LX as my daily in and around Denver's crappy surface streets 90% of the time with two young kids.
If the LC is to be discontinued in US market next cycle, it's an understatement that I hope & pray that Lexus brings the LX back towards LC middle-ground. I'm kind of dreading what the transition towards the 300 will look like.
Last edited:
LMAO! “Left leaning”? WTF are you even talking about?? It’s a car site, dip****. And I have yet to read a good review of the 200 LX platform.
“Left leaning” I thought ALL cruisers lean. It’s a feature.
Actually, he is NOT wrong. Google that car site and Trump. Do the same but now use Obama. But this is expected by most in the media.
BTW, calling another member dip**** is NOT cool. It kinda makes you one.
Last edited:
The LX obviously has no place being on the worst vehicles of the decade list. As others have said, Lexus missed the boat in what many luxury consumers expect from a "luxury" SUV, and also missed some features a true off-roader would appreciate (long hangover of the bumper on the 16+ is no bueno).
That said, it is an amazing vehicle, that will provide years of RELIABLE service and is still amazing off-road, and the AHC is a cool feature, even if the approach angle was screwed up a bit. Get rid of that bumper and the 21" wheels and you have a good off-road rig.
The worst vehicles are the ones you can't count on to get you where you need to go on a regular basis. I grew up with Dodge, Chevy, Ford and Mazda. All it took was one Toyota to see the light.
That said, it is an amazing vehicle, that will provide years of RELIABLE service and is still amazing off-road, and the AHC is a cool feature, even if the approach angle was screwed up a bit. Get rid of that bumper and the 21" wheels and you have a good off-road rig.
The worst vehicles are the ones you can't count on to get you where you need to go on a regular basis. I grew up with Dodge, Chevy, Ford and Mazda. All it took was one Toyota to see the light.
Jalopnik list includes Bugatti, Tesla, Buick etc.. this is JUST for entertainment purposes folks. LX570 is a fine SUV -- go out and enjoy it! Cheers.
I don’t think the typical LX owner cares about off-roading or modding their rigs. I see the LX as misplaced by Lexus, as they do not have a true full size luxury SUV. They might be better served fancying up the next Sequoia for the Lexus crowd. My opinion is that Lexus customers go into the dealership and see what is offered for a full size SUV and are undereducated about the GX and LX. Definitely agree that the Lexus rigs are generally not kept as long as the LC. Either way the LX or Sequoia or whatever takes its place will need to be better suited for this type of customer, with better refinement and more luxurious features.
I would think the average LX is not kept as long as the LC because the vast majority of LXs are probably leased.
What is your source?
No source, which is why I said probably.
Most cars/Suv at this price range are leased, esp any brand that is considered "Luxury" No idea what the numbers are but my guess would be more than 1/2 of LX sales are leases (same with GXs) which is why dealers usually have a decent selection of late model, used LXs and GXs
I guess they didnt see the Nissan Y62/Amarda/Infinity QX80 then. Worse in every way possible
Majority of LX are leased as it is a nice tax write off for your business. Applies to all 6000lbs classification vehicles. Land Rover would not sell many if not for tax rules
Wats your source? I asked a similar question to local Lexus dealer in Northern VA, they said 8 out of 10 LX are purchases because there is no value in leasing ($$$). However they lease a ton of IS, RX all day long. I asked the same question to Land Rover folks, there answer was opposite, 8 out of 10 Ranger Rover was leased.
Just a data point.
Last edited:
