Lexus Certified, 1-owner, Clean Carfax, Touring Edition on 2040-cars

Auto blog

Lexus RX Luggage Test (2016-2022): How much cargo space?

This post has been updated from its original version to reflect new information provided by Lexus engineers. There's something seemingly funky going on with the Lexus RX spec sheet, or at least with the cargo capacity measuring method used to populate it with an official cubic-foot number. Basically, the specs say it has 16.0 cubic feet behind its raised back seat. That would be less than a Toyota C-HR, which is a notably cramped subcompact SUV. All you need are eyes to know something's fishy about that. Doing these luggage tests has revealed other car companies also report cargo capacity figures that sell their SUVs short relative competitors, but this is a new low, so to speak.  After a few back-and-forths with Lexus (and several months), plus a revealing glance at the extended length RX L's spec sheet, I came upon the answer: the 16.0 cubic-feet indicated is a measurement of the cargo floor to the cargo cover. The industry norm is cargo floor to the roof. Both numbers are provided for the RX L: 15.26 cubic-feet to the cargo cover and 23.03 to the roof. That's still not a lot for a midsize SUV, but assuming the regular RX is in the same numerical ballpark, it would make a lot more sense given how much stuff you can actually fit inside.  Speaking of which, let's see just how much stuff you can fit inside. It's definitely more than a C-HR. This is a wide, deep space. However, the current RX has a more radically raked roofline than its predecessors, which almost achieves a crossover coupe look. The result is less overall cargo space (and likely a less-than-stellar floor-to-ceiling cargo spec), but losing greenhouse usually effects versatility more. Basically, you can carry a comparable number of bags, but that 52-inch TV will be a tough get.  To begin, I left the cargo cover in place. As in every luggage test I do, I use two midsize roller suitcases that would need to be checked in at the airport (26 inches long, 16 wide, 11 deep), two roll-aboard suitcases that just barely fit in the overhead (24L x 15W x 10D), and one smaller roll-aboard that fits easily (23L x 15W x 10D). I also include my wife's fancy overnight bag just to spruce things up a bit (21L x 12W x 12D). Fitting only the four biggest bags isn't great, but it's also the result of keeping the cargo cover in place (I do this to replicate a situation where you can't just leave it behind in your garage). It also pretty much confirms that 16.0-cubic-foot number.

Lexus GS 300 disappears from 2020 lineup

The seven-strong Lexus GS lineup will enter 2020 with only five models in the lineup. Cars Direct found out the entry-level GS 300 will not ring in the new year, the discovery explained by a Lexus spokesperson with, "the GS 300 represented a small percentage of GS sales in 2018." That will leave the standard GS 350 and the GS 350 F Sport, both offered in either rear- or all-wheel drive. With the $47,885 GS 300 out of the game, the price of entry for the range goes up to $52,420 for the GS 350 RWD. That price represents a $150 increase over 2019, and an MSRP of $51,395 plus a $1,025 charge for destination and handling. Perhaps it's a sign of how much Lexus believes in the sport sedan credentials of the GS 350 that the rear-wheel-drive version currently on sale costs $330 more than the all-wheel-drive model. This is reversed for the F Sport trims, with the GS 350 F Sport AWD needing $1,745 more than version with a driven rear axle only. If pricing differentials hold across the range into 2020, that would make the GS 350 AWD $52,090, the GS 350 F Sport RWD would cost $53,785, and the GS 350 F Sport AWD $55,530. The GS F, charging along with a 5.0-liter V8 producing 467 horsepower and 389 pound-feet of torque sent to the rear wheels only, will run $86,035. That's a $560 bump over the 2019 model year. Since the GS F 10th Anniversary Edition celebrated the tenth anniversary of F performance this year, we don't expect the $89,350 sedan to continue into next year. The GS has been in the spotlight at Lexus HQ since last summer, when the brand's general manager told Automotive News "we're certainly evaluating both vehicles," speaking of the GS and IS. For next year, the 241-horsepower GS 300 slips off the scene, but one wonders how long even the 311-hp GS 350 can stick around when the entire lineup sold just 6,604 units in the U.S. last year. Sales are down more than 50 percent this year, down from a 2015 high of 23,117. The new ES is just nine horses down on the GS, $7,000 less expensive, and sold 50 percent more units in the U.S. in January than the GS has so far this year. With no news of an updated GS on the way and the ES rumored to add an all-wheel-drive trim for 2020, the GS could have a hard time standing up to business-case scrutiny.

Kia leads J.D. Power's Vehicle Dependability Study for 2022

For the first year ever, Kia leads J.D. Power's annual Vehicle Dependability Study with a score of 145 problems per 100 vehicles. Buick (147) and Hyundai (148) round out the top three. The highest premium brand on the list is Genesis, with a score of 148. It's common for so-called "mass market" brands to lead this particular study, according to J.D. Power, as "premium" brands "typically incorporate more technology in their vehicles, which increases the likelihood for problems to occur" and aren't necessarily built to a higher standard that less-expensive brands. The highest-rated single nameplate is the Porsche 911. It's the third time out of the past four years and the second year in a row that Porsche's quintessential sports car has taken top honors. Porsche as a brand sits in seventh place (162) just behind Lexus (159) and ahead of Dodge (166). At the very bottom of the list is Land Rover with a dismal score of 284; the SUV specialist held the same unfortunate distinction on last year's list. Ram (266), Volvo (256), Alfa Romeo (245) and Acura (244) also performed poorly. The overall industry average score sits at 192 — mass market brands average a score of 190 while premium brands sit 14 points lower at 204. While Tesla is unofficially included in some of J.D. Power's results, the agency says the sample size it has access to for this study is too small to include. As has been the case for the past several years, infotainment systems dominate the list of problems reported by owners. Popular (or unpopular, depending on your point of view) complaints include built-in voice recognition (8.3 PP100), Android Auto/Apple CarPlay connectivity (5.4 PP100), built-in Bluetooth system (4.5 PP100), not enough power plugs/USB ports (4.2 PP100), navigation systems difficult to understand/use (3.7 PP100), touchscreen/display screen (3.6 PP100), and navigation system inaccurate/outdated map (3.6 PP100). While problems with the car's infotainment and technology packages are indeed bothersome, it's important to remember that such issues aren't usually leaving owners stranded with an immovable vehicle like a broken transmission or blown engine would. Culling infotainment complaints from the results would reduce the average problem-per-100-vehicle score by a staggering 51.9 points. The vehicles included in this study are from the 2019 model year. That means owners have had three years to get to know their cars and trucks. It's the 33rd year that J.D.