Lexus Ls430 2006 on 2040-cars

Auto blog

2024 Lexus GX and Land Rover Defender numbers crunched

The 2024 Lexus GX finally brings the luxury off-roader up-to-date. And it does so in a boxy, rugged wrapper that makes comparisons to the 2024 Land Rover Defender, another luxury off-roader of similar size and capability. So we figured, let's make that comparison. We've looked at all the specifications available for the two SUVs to see how they stack up. Engines and Transmissions The GX keeps things simple under the hood with a single powertrain. It has a twin-turbocharged 3.4-liter V6 hybrid making 340 horsepower and 479 pound-feet of torque. That horsepower number only tops the Defender's four-cylinder engine, but the GX has the torque advantage even against the Defender's mighty V8 option. The GX's V6 is paired with a 10-speed automatic and full-time four-wheel drive. Full fuel economy numbers haven't been given, but Toyota is expecting 17 mpg combined. Unfortunately, that fuel economy is worse than all the Defender powertrains except the V8. As alluded to, the Defender is available with three main engines, an inline-four, inline-six and V8. The closest competitors to the GX will be the regular 110 four-door and the longer 130 four-door. The 110 can be had with the turbo 2.0L four-cylinder making 296 horsepower and 295 pound-feet of torque; the turbo mild-hybrid 3.0L six-cylinder making 395 horsepower and 405 pound-feet; or the supercharged 5.0L V8 making 518 horsepower and 461 pound-feet. The 130 gets two versions of the six-cylinder, one making 296 horsepower and 347 pound-feet and one making 395 horsepower and 405 pound-feet. The V8 is also available but just with 493 horsepower and 461 pound-feet of torque. All of the engines get an eight-speed automatic and full-time four-wheel drive. The four-cylinder 110 gets 18 mpg combined, the six gets 20 and the V8 manages just 16. Both 130 six-cylinder powertrains return 19 mpg combined, and the V8 doesn't have numbers yet. Towing and Cargo Towing capacity is pretty straightforward. The Lexus has a maximum capacity of 8,000 pounds, and the Land Rover tops it by 200 pounds more. Some trim levels of both SUVs have lower towing capacity, depending on the configuration. As for cargo space, Lexus hasn't shared details. It is available with up to three rows of seating and room for seven passengers. The 110 has similar seating available, and the 130 ups the ante with a three-across third row. And we've found that the 130's third row is genuinely usable by adults.

Pontiac Aztek enjoys rebirth thanks to Millennials

Apparently, Millennials – those between 18 and 34 – aren't afraid to look different on the road, and they like performance, too. A new study by Edmunds is discovering some surprising vehicle choices by this group. Among them, the long-derided Pontiac Aztek is getting a new day in the sun with 25.5 percent its buyers coming from this generation in the first half of 2015. For comparison, Millennials represent an average of 16.8 percent of used car purchases. The Aztek is slowly shaking its reputation as a styling abomination, which seems tied to its appearance on Breaking Bad. The show premiered in 2008, and the Pontiac has been on this list for four of the past five years, according to Edmunds. It even led the pack in 2010. A recent Retro Review from MotorWeek also showed that the crossover wasn't always so hated. While it's still a shock to see the Aztek on any popularity list, the awkward-looking crossover only ranks sixth among Millennials. The vehicle with the biggest portion of buyers from the generation is the Dodge Magnum with 27.6 percent. According to Edmunds, the bluntly styled wagon is especially popular in Detroit and Chicago. The Chrysler Pacifica comes in a close second at 27.3 percent. When it comes to used cars, value and utility appear to trump just about anything else for many Millennial buyers," Edmunds analyst Jeremy Acevedo said in the report. Young buyers aren't afraid of sporty rides, either. The Subaru WRX has 26.4 percent Millennial buyers to rank third place on the list, and the Volkswagen R32 takes fifth at 25.7 percent. Just a few points lower in seventh place is the Nissan GT-R at 25.4 percent, and the final performance machine in 10th place is the Lexus IS-F with 24.7 percent. Related Video:

2015 Lexus RC F Review

Every year, thousands of people buy two-door coupes that bear the badges of BMW M, Mercedes-AMG, Audi RS, and Cadillac V. These cars are powerful, fast, agile, and - if you believe the marketing - are made to kick ass on the track. But, and this is just my theory, only about 0.2 percent of these owners actually drive their cars the way the companies intended. Most buyers, I think, want the image put forth by an M4 or C63 AMG more than any dynamic abilities. These people just want to give the impression that they're out tearing up the local road course, and a $70,000 sports coupe and a pair of Pilotis are just the ticket. Which is not to say they don't use the performance of these cars, just not the full track-day capabilities. If this describes you, I recommend checking out the new Lexus RC F. This coupe is powered by a 5.0-liter V8, complete with 467 horsepower and 389 pound-feet of torque. These figures, while impressive in a vacuum, are troubling when viewed alongside the competition. The Mercedes-AMG C63 tops 500 in horsepower and torque in S guise, while the six-pot Cadillac ATS-V is nearly equal on power but offers almost 60 more pound-feet of torque. And while the BMW M4 cedes more than 40 horsepower to the Lexus, the RC F doesn't feel as potent from the driver's seat. The RC F doesn't even feel as potent as less-powerful competition. This numerical deficit translates to the stopwatch, where the RC F lags behind the force-induced competition. The C63 and ATS-V both hit 60 in 3.9 seconds, while the BMW takes 4.1 seconds (these are all manufacturer estimates, by the way). The RC F needs 4.4 seconds to hit 60 miles per hour. The only vehicle in this segment that's slower is the Audi RS 5, and that's been on sale longer than all its current competitors combined. And the Audi's charms (oh, that glorious engine note) help you overlook its lack of pace. The RC F doesn't have the aging Audi's charisma, making its lack of both perceived and actual pace more glaring. I'm placing blame on this car's overbearing induction sound. It was a neat trick on the original IS F – this car's predecessor – but over the years it's just become kind of played out. At the least the noise is real, piped into the cabin via a resonator, but it sounds too artificial. And the point at which it kicks in is entirely predictable. Neither of these traits contribute to an involving driving experience.