New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Questions on how we spend our money and our time - consumer goods and services, home and vehicle, leisure and recreational activities
Post Reply
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

Taking from another thread where someone mentioned that their old Lexus RX300 was the "right size", we too thought the new Lexus NX would be "right sized" as a future replacement for our current 2014 RX350 that we reluctantly bought last year. I say reluctant because we preferred the smaller RX330 (2006) that we had. Anyway, we now love the RX350 but I drove the NX anyway. Interestingly, I discovered that it gets 22 MPG city (AWD) versus our RX gets 18. BUT THE NX REQUIRES PREMIUM GAS. So it's essentially the same economy. I don't get it. Why would Lexus make a smaller vehicle and not make it more economical? That's often why people sacrifice size...for better mileage. Is anyone else surprised that the new "Small Lexus SUV" doesn't get better mileage than the bigger one?
livesoft
Posts: 85971
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 7:00 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by livesoft »

I would guess that Lexus owners on average do not care about MPG and are really unaffected by MPG that their cars get.

There is a subset who do "feel good" about the environment despite driving SUVs and perhaps having better MPG assuages some of the cognitive dissonance.
Wiki This signature message sponsored by sscritic: Learn to fish.
gbru316
Posts: 279
Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 10:59 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by gbru316 »

It does get better fuel economy

Might be location dependent, but in my area, the 22 mpg vehicle with premium gas would save a little over $200/yr over the 18 mpg vehicle with regular assuming 15k miles/yr and current local gas prices.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

Put regular grade in it and don't tell anyone.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
bberris
Posts: 2412
Joined: Sun Feb 20, 2011 8:44 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by bberris »

I think perhaps you are missing the point of driving a luxury car.
User avatar
mmmodem
Posts: 2628
Joined: Thu May 20, 2010 1:22 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by mmmodem »

The NX requires premium gas because it is a higher compression turbocharged engine. By my calculation 22 mpg is 18% better fuel economy than 18 mpg. Even if you don't run recommended premium gas in the RX, there is a savings at 22 mpg premium versus 18 mpg regular. Maybe not so much at $2 a gallon but definitely at $4 a gallon. That's $0.01 - $0.03 per mile savings on the NX or $500 to $1500 savings over 50k miles (Assuming premium is $0.20 more per gallon). It's not a lot of savings when you're talking about $40k vehicle but it is a savings, nonetheless. If fuel economy is important to you, that's why Lexus offers an NX hybrid.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

So, are you saying you actually like the way this thing looks? The kind of fuel you have to use in it would be the least of your problems. A bigger problem would be explaining to friends and family why you couldn't do any better with the $40K you spent.

Image
Huge pug-nosed fish must ply the cold waters off the coast of loopy L.A., sucking up sea life with mouths the size of big-screen TVs.

Some Lexus designer strolling among the wildly plumed natives in Santa Monica probably stumbled into the ocean and confronted said creature in the rolling waves.

Once the designer beat feet back to shore, wide-eyed and breathing wildly, that big maw probably stuck with him for a while.
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/colu ... waters.ece
Last edited by Browser on Sun Feb 15, 2015 5:54 pm, edited 1 time in total.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
User avatar
Doom&Gloom
Posts: 5398
Joined: Thu May 08, 2014 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Doom&Gloom »

Browser wrote:So, are you saying you actually like the way this thing looks? The kind of fuel you have to use in it would be the least of your problems.
Huge pug-nosed fish must ply the cold waters off the coast of loopy L.A., sucking up sea life with mouths the size of big-screen TVs.

Some Lexus designer strolling among the wildly plumed natives in Santa Monica probably stumbled into the ocean and confronted said creature in the rolling waves.

Once the designer beat feet back to shore, wide-eyed and breathing wildly, that big maw probably stuck with him for a while.
http://www.dallasnews.com/business/colu ... waters.ece
LOL! It sounds as if Terry learned to write reviews from Joe Bob Briggs.

The most recent car I purchased requires premium. I knew it before I bought it and accepted that I would have to use premium if I bought the car and didn't want to damage the engine. It's just part of the price of admission that one must consider along with the higher cost of insurance, tags, repairs, etc.
User avatar
htdrag11
Posts: 1261
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2011 9:22 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by htdrag11 »

I saw the NX when getting an oil change on my 2012 RX350 that runs on regular gas; found the front facade way too aggressive for my taste. A 2016 Totota RAV4 with a 4-cylinder engine also gets 22 mpg in the city but on regular gas, no turbo. Price of the new RAV4 has also gone north to $30k and up. That makes the Lexus a bargain, for a third more.

At the time, I would have prefer a 2012 Highlander but did not care the look either, or lack of. Never consider the mileage of either, knowing that they both stinks. Lexus is never a bargain anyway (especially 4-wheel drive), but I got mine as a CPO for a good deal when the parking lot was loaded with off-lease RX. Mine was sitting in the lot for over 60 days.

Have fun shopping.
sambb
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:31 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by sambb »

my friend's porsche gets even worse fuel economy, and stores less, and requires premium, and is smaller. And 3x the price. Clearly, it isnt a value? Or perhaps these are different cars with different populations for marketing and meant for different groups of people? I think it is likely that different cars are meant for differing groups of buyers, and there may be some cross shopping, but overall the buyers are different and someone who considers an NX wouldnt go for the RX, and vice versa.

I like the look also.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

mmmodem wrote:The NX requires premium gas because it is a higher compression turbocharged engine. By my calculation 22 mpg is 18% better fuel economy than 18 mpg. Even if you don't run recommended premium gas in the RX, there is a savings at 22 mpg premium versus 18 mpg regular. Maybe not so much at $2 a gallon but definitely at $4 a gallon. That's $0.01 - $0.03 per mile savings on the NX or $500 to $1500 savings over 50k miles (Assuming premium is $0.20 more per gallon). It's not a lot of savings when you're talking about $40k vehicle but it is a savings, nonetheless. If fuel economy is important to you, that's why Lexus offers an NX hybrid.
Premium is actually more like .40 more here in Pittsburgh. And you won't get 22 MPG if you don't run the premium. Yeah I get it that you don't buy a luxury SUV to squeeze buffaloes on gas. I'm just surprised that the real difference in cost per mile is so tiny versus the bigger vehicle.
angelescrest
Posts: 1728
Joined: Tue May 27, 2008 10:48 am
Location: West Coast

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by angelescrest »

Looks fantastic. What, you want all your cars to look the same?
A-Commoner
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:17 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by A-Commoner »

Probably should compare the NX to the RX 330 (not the RX 350) in terms of fuel economy...since the NX and 330 are the same size, while the 350 is bigger.
User avatar
zaboomafoozarg
Posts: 2430
Joined: Sun Jun 12, 2011 12:34 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by zaboomafoozarg »

Well, "economy" and "bargain" are both antonyms of "luxury", and Lexus is synonymous with "luxury", so I guess that's to be expected.
Pinotage
Posts: 611
Joined: Sat Nov 12, 2011 5:02 am
Location: Springfield

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Pinotage »

Browser wrote:So, are you saying you actually like the way this thing looks?
You betcha. Different strokes/different folks.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

Pinotage wrote:
Browser wrote:So, are you saying you actually like the way this thing looks?
You betcha. Different strokes/different folks.
It looks like an origami project to me.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

A-Commoner wrote:Probably should compare the NX to the RX 330 (not the RX 350) in terms of fuel economy...since the NX and 330 are the same size, while the 350 is bigger.
All the more reason it makes no sense that the NX gets the same economy as the larger, heavier RX350 (when adjusting for the .40 extra for premium gas)
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by randomguy »

Does anyone thing like ANY Lexus is an economy bargain?:) It is like talking about a cheap porsche.....
Johno
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 4:14 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Johno »

Browser wrote:So, are you saying you actually like the way this thing looks? The kind of fuel you have to use in it would be the least of your problems. A bigger problem would be explaining to friends and family why you couldn't do any better with the $40K you spent.
It probably depends on the person but also lifestyle. I recall living on a suburban block as a kid and somebody would get a new car and it was the topic of conversation and people 'explaining' what car they god, but where I live now the car isn't parked at the house (garage some blocks away) and we walk to the places to where we meet our friends, they don't know what kind of car we have. But just in terms of the car and what it does for the owner, I can see that some people don't think the extra you get from a luxury car is worth it. I do in general, not that I'm indifferent among all luxury cars, ie I'm also not a big fan of recent Lexus styling, or at least I'm not sure that's what I want to live with for years.

Although, I didn't terribly like the styling of our 2005 GX470 when we first got it either, or even the idea of an SUV, my wife wanted it. But the car's impeccable refinement, comfort and 100% reliability over 10 yrs really grew on me and I got to even like how it looked. But recent Lexus styling along with just trying something new was a reason though we went with a BMW, 328i to replace it. I can't be sure I'll like how that car looks in 10 yrs (and I know the reliability could be more of an adventure), but I love how it looks now.

We used to use 89 octane ('plus') in the Lexus, premium was only recommended and we couldn't tell any difference in any aspect of performance. I didn't view that as a contradiction to having bought an expensive car, but just not paying more for something and not being able to tell any difference at all. Again, anti-luxury car types might say that about the car itself v a Toyota 4-Runner SR5 (on which the GX was based at that time), but I don't agree. Even BMW only recommends 91 octane now, 89 minimum, in turbocharged 4 of the 328i, but we're putting in 91 or 93.
wander
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:10 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by wander »

I think you expect to trim performance switching to lower octane, but it is in the range that you cannot feel it. Usually, the car will adjust and should be fine with either regular or premium. But if it starts to knock when switching to regular, then you want to switch it back to premium.
It's personal choice, but I only use premium because I want to use that extra horse power whenever I need.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

wander wrote:I think you expect to trim performance switching to lower octane, but it is in the range that you cannot feel it. Usually, the car will adjust and should be fine with either regular or premium. But if it starts to knock when switching to regular, then you want to switch it back to premium.
It's personal choice, but I only use premium because I want to use that extra horse power whenever I need.
There's a choice in-between, called midgrade.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by randomguy »

wander wrote:I think you expect to trim performance switching to lower octane, but it is in the range that you cannot feel it. Usually, the car will adjust and should be fine with either regular or premium. But if it starts to knock when switching to regular, then you want to switch it back to premium.
It's personal choice, but I only use premium because I want to use that extra horse power whenever I need.
Some times you lose efficiency (your gas mileage drops by 5%) along with power. Personally this always struck me as one of those non issues. Imagine you driver 15k miles/yr *20mpg. We are talking 150 (.20 premium. Feel free to use your local difference)/yr. For someone buying a close to 40k car, this is in the noise of total cost of ownership.
User avatar
Crimsontide
Posts: 729
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 5:32 pm
Location: DFW Metromess

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Crimsontide »

zaboomafoozarg wrote:Well, "economy" and "bargain" are both antonyms of "luxury", and Lexus is synonymous with "luxury", so I guess that's to be expected.
+1 why would you think either term goes with Lexus in the first place?
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

Guess I wasn't the only one who thinks so:
Lexus LF-NX Concept: Automotive origami
Image

http://www.bbc.com/autos/story/20130904 ... gami-lexus
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

Browser wrote:
wander wrote:I think you expect to trim performance switching to lower octane, but it is in the range that you cannot feel it. Usually, the car will adjust and should be fine with either regular or premium. But if it starts to knock when switching to regular, then you want to switch it back to premium.
It's personal choice, but I only use premium because I want to use that extra horse power whenever I need.
There's a choice in-between, called midgrade.
For what it's worth, I've found midgrade to be a poor value. It's generally priced half way between 87 octane and 93 octane, but doesn't give the 90 octane that the price would suggest. It gives 89 octane. If you're really value conscious, you'd guesstimate how many gallons are needed to fill the car. And put in half that amount with 93 octane. Then do a whole new transaction and fill the rest with 87. To get the same volume as 90 octane for the same price as 89. Yeah, I know...getting a little crazy to save a few cents. :oops:
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

Leesbro63 wrote:
Browser wrote:
wander wrote:I think you expect to trim performance switching to lower octane, but it is in the range that you cannot feel it. Usually, the car will adjust and should be fine with either regular or premium. But if it starts to knock when switching to regular, then you want to switch it back to premium.
It's personal choice, but I only use premium because I want to use that extra horse power whenever I need.
There's a choice in-between, called midgrade.
For what it's worth, I've found midgrade to be a poor value. It's generally priced half way between 87 octane and 93 octane, but doesn't give the 90 octane that the price would suggest. It gives 89 octane. If you're really value conscious, you'd guesstimate how many gallons are needed to fill the car. And put in half that amount with 93 octane. Then do a whole new transaction and fill the rest with 87. To get the same volume as 90 octane for the same price as 89. Yeah, I know...getting a little crazy to save a few cents. :oops:
Chatted with a guy who drives an RDX, which is supposed to burn premium. He claimed that he got "optimal" mileage with midgrade and that's what he uses. He said he figured the per mile cost with all 3 grades and that midgrade was best. Hard to tell if he actually knew what he was doing. I always keep track of MPG and it varies enough tank-by-tank that it might be hard to tell. At least you ought to be able to tell the diff between regular and premium based on running several tanks of each. If there wasn't much difference in MPG (or not enough to make premium worth the extra cost) and if you don't notice a meaningful difference in performance I guess I'd go with regular.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
wander
Posts: 4419
Joined: Sat Oct 04, 2008 9:10 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by wander »

randomguy wrote:Some times you lose efficiency (your gas mileage drops by 5%) along with power. Personally this always struck me as one of those non issues. Imagine you driver 15k miles/yr *20mpg. We are talking 150 (.20 premium. Feel free to use your local difference)/yr. For someone buying a close to 40k car, this is in the noise of total cost of ownership.
+1. I don't pay much attention to how much I pay to fill up 23 gallon tank of my V8 LS. It is what it is.
sambb
Posts: 3255
Joined: Sun Mar 10, 2013 3:31 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by sambb »

wander wrote:
randomguy wrote:Some times you lose efficiency (your gas mileage drops by 5%) along with power. Personally this always struck me as one of those non issues. Imagine you driver 15k miles/yr *20mpg. We are talking 150 (.20 premium. Feel free to use your local difference)/yr. For someone buying a close to 40k car, this is in the noise of total cost of ownership.
+1. I don't pay much attention to how much I fill up 23 gallon tank my V8 Lexus LS. It is what it is.
+ 100. The difference between 20 mpg and 30 mpg in my financial life is utterly meaningless, including premium or regular.

I buy cars because i like them.

If I wanted to save 20 cents here or there (or even $50), i would eat at taco bell instead of a halfway decent restaurant. Or I would wear my 1990s ties instead of my 2010s ties. There are lots of places to save.

Nevertheless, gas prices seem to really get people going and get opinions flaring. There's something about them that really gets to people.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

So, if running premium in your luxo-mobile costs $200 per year more than regular, you'd have to invest $20,000 at 1% interest (if you could get that much anywhere) to earn that $200 in annual interest. If you are in the 25% bracket, you'd have to invest $27,000 @ 1% to earn that $200 after-tax. So, instead of buying one car that burns premium, buy one car that burns regular and then buy a second one with the $27,000 instead. It all depends on how you look at it. :)
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
A-Commoner
Posts: 371
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 7:17 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by A-Commoner »

sambb wrote:
wander wrote:
randomguy wrote:Some times you lose efficiency (your gas mileage drops by 5%) along with power. Personally this always struck me as one of those non issues. Imagine you driver 15k miles/yr *20mpg. We are talking 150 (.20 premium. Feel free to use your local difference)/yr. For someone buying a close to 40k car, this is in the noise of total cost of ownership.
+1. I don't pay much attention to how much I fill up 23 gallon tank my V8 Lexus LS. It is what it is.
+ 100. The difference between 20 mpg and 30 mpg in my financial life is utterly meaningless, including premium or regular.

I buy cars because i like them.

If I wanted to save 20 cents here or there (or even $50), i would eat at taco bell instead of a halfway decent restaurant. Or I would wear my 1990s ties instead of my 2010s ties. There are lots of places to save.

Nevertheless, gas prices seem to really get people going and get opinions flaring. There's something about them that really gets to people.
I agree. Buyers in this segment can still be price sensitive, but there are other considerations in play. The Lexus NX in its first full month of sales January 2015 has already overtaken the BMW X3 and the Mercedes GLK....both of which can be had in more fuel efficient (aka diesel) versions. The NX is only a few units shy of the Audi Q5, which is the second best seller in the small luxury SUV segment. I suspect in the next couple of months, the NX will also overtake the Audi to threaten the top seller, which is Acura's RDX.
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

A-Commoner wrote: If I wanted to save 20 cents here or there (or even $50), i would eat at taco bell instead of a halfway decent restaurant. Or I would wear my 1990s ties instead of my 2010s ties. There are lots of places to save.
TIES? Do people still wear them? :wink:
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by randomguy »

A-Commoner wrote:
I agree. Buyers in this segment can still be price sensitive, but there are other considerations in play. The Lexus NX in its first full month of sales January 2015 has already overtaken the BMW X3 and the Mercedes GLK....both of which can be had in more fuel efficient (aka diesel) versions. The NX is only a few units shy of the Audi Q5, which is the second best seller in the small luxury SUV segment. I suspect in the next couple of months, the NX will also overtake the Audi to threaten the top seller, which is Acura's RDX.
The NX hybrid is more fuel efficient (in general, the diesels get a few more on the hwy a lot less in the city). You also don't have to buy fuel that is 1/3 more expensive. New cars tend to always sell well. The question is what happens after that initial surge. I expect RDX sales to drop (new model is coming out in 4 or so months) but then I expect them to have a surge also.

I know people complain about the look. That is strictly because it is new. In 6 months after you have seen a dozen of them driving around, they will not be shocking.
User avatar
munemaker
Posts: 4338
Joined: Sat Jan 18, 2014 5:14 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by munemaker »

Leesbro63 wrote:Taking from another thread where someone mentioned that their old Lexus RX300 was the "right size", we too thought the new Lexus NX would be "right sized" as a future replacement for our current 2014 RX350 that we reluctantly bought last year. I say reluctant because we preferred the smaller RX330 (2006) that we had. Anyway, we now love the RX350 but I drove the NX anyway. Interestingly, I discovered that it gets 22 MPG city (AWD) versus our RX gets 18. BUT THE NX REQUIRES PREMIUM GAS. So it's essentially the same economy. I don't get it. Why would Lexus make a smaller vehicle and not make it more economical? That's often why people sacrifice size...for better mileage. Is anyone else surprised that the new "Small Lexus SUV" doesn't get better mileage than the bigger one?
Economy and bargain are not words I associate with Lexus. I would use premium and expensive.
Johno
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 4:14 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Johno »

Browser wrote:So, if running premium in your luxo-mobile costs $200 per year more than regular, you'd have to invest $20,000 at 1% interest (if you could get that much anywhere) to earn that $200 in annual interest. If you are in the 25% bracket, you'd have to invest $27,000 @ 1% to earn that $200 after-tax. So, instead of buying one car that burns premium, buy one car that burns regular and then buy a second one with the $27,000 instead. It all depends on how you look at it. :)
I guess that's a joke and I'm not taking it 100% seriously, but obviously the second car would depreciate to half or so of its initial value in relatively few years, the same money retained in bank account would only depreciate moderately (assuming low inflation). So you'd have to count that ($1,000's) real principal cost difference in 'saving' the $200 the two ways, besides insurance, parking (for me) etc.

In general I think a lot of people (I'm temped to say 'nowadays' but don't want to get too far into 'Get off my lawn!' territory, there are enough GOML posts on this forum already :D ) are quick to interpret the decisions of others as 'interesting funny human psychology' unlike their own strictly rational decisions. But I look at the 'gas saving in luxury vehicle issue' thus. Putting 89 octane ('plus') in our former (4.7L naturally aspirated V8) Lexus caused no performance change we could detect, including putting numbers of tanks of 91 and 89 through the car and closely tracking mileage, the way we drove. I've read that that engine loses around 10 of 270 peak hp by adjusting itself, though I don't recall now if that was 91 v 89 or 91 v 87. Anyway we're tame drivers and just could not notice it. So to us premium was extra money for nothing, same as paying too much for a cell phone plan with features we didn't use that amounted to a couple $100 a year. Why worry about overpaying for a cell phone plan if you bought a luxury car? That to me is the same (il)logic as saying you shouldn't pay any attention to gas cost if you drive a luxury car.

I agree it might be bit different if you're buying a particular luxury car (particular make/model or particular diesel or hybrid version of a make/model) to save gas. Pricing of hybrid versions of Lexus models particularly has not generally been aimed at actual lifecycle cost savings in typical driving conditions and likely US fuel costs. Some other luxury makers have offered price differentials (though perhaps as small volume loss leaders) where a hybrid or diesel could make economic sense. And if so again I don't see the logic in just saying 'forget that, it's a luxury car', if the hybrid/diesel performance and reliability is satisfactory* for one's own purposes, and if you'd attempt to save a few $100/$1k on anything. Some well off people take an 'it is what it is' approach to all their expenses, fine if you can afford it, also fine not to take that blanket approach even if you can afford it. And to me there's no contradiction in buying luxury cars and saving money on items less costly than luxury cars if it's not directly to do with buying a luxury car. What gas you put in the car is not directly related to buying it if you're not harming the car (meets manufacturers min octane) and isn't affecting your enjoyment of the car. And that's the reason I buy such cars, the extra enjoyment (v 'regular' car) is worth it to me.

*I considered BMW 328d before buying 328i recently: I prefer the bit higher performance of the gasoline car, BMW diesels have had some problems manufacturer blames on out-of-spec diesel fuel sometimes sold in the US, and a life cycle cost saving would be doubtful given our driving habits anyway. If I had bought it, it would have been just cause I like diesels, used to work with the kind of diesels where you can climb inside. :D
Topic Author
Leesbro63
Posts: 10581
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2010 3:36 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Leesbro63 »

randomguy wrote: I know people complain about the look. That is strictly because it is new. In 6 months after you have seen a dozen of them driving around, they will not be shocking.
+1 I remember when the first Nissan Murano came out...I thought to myself "Who would buy THAT?". Now I would (although I'm a Lexus/Toyota guy...but I wouldn't rule out the Murano because of looks as I did back then).
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

I guess that's a joke and I'm not taking it 100% seriously, but obviously the second car would depreciate to half or so of its initial value in relatively few years, the same money retained in bank account would only depreciate moderately (assuming low inflation). So you'd have to count that ($1,000's) real principal cost difference in 'saving' the $200 the two ways, besides insurance, parking (for me) etc.
Somewhat tongue in cheek, but makes the point that the "piddling" $200 to pay for premium fuel represents a surprisingly good-sized chunk of the income you can generate from your capital in these days of financial repression. And you have to consider that you could have been a two-car family by "investing" the $27K into a second vehicle, and what would that be worth? Maybe more than those crummy old greenbacks that just sat around drawing moths for several years. :happy
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
Browser
Posts: 4857
Joined: Wed Sep 05, 2012 4:54 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Browser »

Leesbro63 wrote:
randomguy wrote: I know people complain about the look. That is strictly because it is new. In 6 months after you have seen a dozen of them driving around, they will not be shocking.
+1 I remember when the first Nissan Murano came out...I thought to myself "Who would buy THAT?". Now I would (although I'm a Lexus/Toyota guy...but I wouldn't rule out the Murano because of looks as I did back then).
You ought to look at the new Murano. They finally went too far. It was on my list, but they made it easy to drop it off.
We don't know where we are, or where we're going -- but we're making good time.
randomguy
Posts: 11285
Joined: Wed Sep 17, 2014 9:00 am

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by randomguy »

Browser wrote:
I guess that's a joke and I'm not taking it 100% seriously, but obviously the second car would depreciate to half or so of its initial value in relatively few years, the same money retained in bank account would only depreciate moderately (assuming low inflation). So you'd have to count that ($1,000's) real principal cost difference in 'saving' the $200 the two ways, besides insurance, parking (for me) etc.
Somewhat tongue in cheek, but makes the point that the "piddling" $200 to pay for premium fuel represents a surprisingly good-sized chunk of the income you can generate from your capital in these days of financial repression. And you have to consider that you could have been a two-car family by "investing" the $27K into a second vehicle, and what would that be worth? Maybe more than those crummy old greenbacks that just sat around drawing moths for several years. :happy
I have a better idea. Instead of buying a 40k NX, buy a 20k civic. Now that is a 200k difference so your second car can be a Porsche 911 Turbo right and still have a little money left over.:)

It is all about reference points. 20k is a lot of money. But it is less than half the price of the car you bought. If you are interest in saving money, buy a RAV4 and pocket the extra 10k.
Johno
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat May 24, 2014 4:14 pm

Re: New Lexus NX Not an Economy Bargain

Post by Johno »

randomguy wrote:
Browser wrote:
I guess that's a joke and I'm not taking it 100% seriously, but obviously the second car would depreciate to half or so of its initial value in relatively few years, the same money retained in bank account would only depreciate moderately (assuming low inflation). So you'd have to count that ($1,000's) real principal cost difference in 'saving' the $200 the two ways, besides insurance, parking (for me) etc.
Somewhat tongue in cheek, but makes the point that the "piddling" $200 to pay for premium fuel represents a surprisingly good-sized chunk of the income you can generate from your capital in these days of financial repression. And you have to consider that you could have been a two-car family by "investing" the $27K into a second vehicle, and what would that be worth? Maybe more than those crummy old greenbacks that just sat around drawing moths for several years. :happy
I have a better idea. Instead of buying a 40k NX, buy a 20k civic. Now that is a 200k difference so your second car can be a Porsche 911 Turbo right and still have a little money left over.:)

It is all about reference points. 20k is a lot of money. But it is less than half the price of the car you bought. If you are interest in saving money, buy a RAV4 and pocket the extra 10k.
In seriousness, I would distinguish 'saving money' from 'seeking value'. To me there's value in my BMW over my son's Hyundai Sonata we borrow sometimes, fully worth the ~$45k I paid for the first v the ~$17k (albeit some years ago) I originally paid when the Sonata was new. OTOH there was no value to me in putting premium gas in our Lexus when we could tell no difference in the performance or mileage v 'plus'. Others can disagree about either judgement, that's what makes a market. But I don't agree that if one pays $20k more for a car than another car that would also get them from A to B (and of course a car worth less than 6 yr old Sonata could do that too, a bike might, the bus might), then they are somehow being inconsistent to make other judgments of cost v. value where the amounts in question are less.

OTOH if it's one of those threads that starts 'I don't make or save all that much and have a gazillion in student loans, but I want a Lexus, what does the forum think?' :D then of course it's reasonable to say 'ah, no', and in general to point to the biggest things first for people who *need* to spend less, housing typically, then car. I don't need to spend less, and I don't want a Civic. :D OTOH if there are two products each for a lot less than a car purchase (gas might be one) where I think I'm getting better value for money for one than the other, IMO it's irrelevant that I could 'save more' by buying a less expensive car.
Post Reply