saw this after the editing window on my prior post ended.

In this article they mention pricing is expected to be around 32k for the base model. Since they are targeting the X1 that may mean fully loaded will be around 40k. A BMW X1 AWD with the smaller engine starts around 32.5k without options. When I add options to the X1 it tops at 45k MSRP with invoice of $42k. I optioned up a 2015 AWD RX and it MSRP'd at 53k with invoice of 50k.

If Lexus can keep the price down it will definitely help sell vehicles. With the F sport having a better engine that may be where they distinguish the average person from the person who wants to spend for more details and a better engine. They may also be targeting this vehicle as an entry level SUV similar to the CT200, Audi A3, BMW 320, and Mercedes CLA which are all around 30k to start.

http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...ing-auto-show/

 

I just helped someone purchase a 2014 Lexus RX. It was pretty loaded but not fully loaded and the sticker was $52,180. She got it for $47,000 plus TTL. I think fully loaded would be about MSRP $55k. I'm sure the NX will be at least $45k somewhat loaded and probably $48k fully loaded. When I read that the NX is up against the X1, Encore, CLA cuv it makes me wonder. What is the size of this thing? Those are all a class smaller than the RDX. If the NX is based on the RAV4 you'd think it would be about the same size as the RDX. Confused????

 

The German are beginning their assault on the lower price segment ($30K) and I expect the CUV/SUV area to be their next wave so if Lexus thinks their low end SUV is $40K they will loose sales to the Germans. Fortunately for Lexus is many consider Lexus to be a top tier like MB and BMW so they can command some price premium, but they need to watch their backs.

 

I was looking at this earlier this morning. As everyone else said, it really will be dependent on price. If you compare this to the current RDX, the RDX looks ancient.

I have been debating an RDX for a few months (currently have a 2008 MDX), however the RDX just seems dated as compared to some. I have recently taken more interest in the RX350 F-Sport. Definitely in a different price level than the RDX.

 

I'm in the same boat as denm316a. I, too, have been considering an RDX for the last couple of months, but just can't seem to pull the trigger. Reading about the rear suspension issues in the RDX really makes me hesitate too. I've got an '08 TSX that I still enjoy, and I haven't done a thing to it other than routine maintenance & tires in the 4.5 yrs I've owned it. I'd hate to trade it for a new or cpo rdx and then have to deal with the suspension noises. That would really anger me. It would really take away from the new car experience.

I'll be VERY interested in the Lexus NX when more and more information becomes available and finally when it arrives on dealer lots. I know all new cars can have issues, but I feel as though maybe there's less of a chance with Lexus. That might be naïve of me to say, but we'll see. I like to recent pictures just released. reminds me of a mix between the IS and RX...two of my favorite Lexus vehicles.

 

The new Lexus will be 182.7 inches in length, 73.6 inches wide, and 63.4 inches tall and sits on a wheelbase of 106.3 inches.

The RDX is 183.5 in in length, 73.7 in wide, 66.1 in high, 105.7 in wheelbase.

So ever so slightly smaller, 2.7 in lower, but slightly larger wheelbase.

Lexus has their fair share of first year issues. Remember this NX has a brand new 2L turbo. That is probably the biggest risk area. I do like this car, but the TLX is still tops on my list. But depending on what I'll have to shell out for that, I may save money on something like the NX and have plenty of utility to boot. I hope there is an option for ventilated seats. If they do price this car in the low-mid $30's and topping out around $40K, it will steal some RDX sales for sure.

 

I think the interior looks nice, but the exterior is a bit too overdone. Too many lines, too many angles and not classy enough. Let's see how it looks in real life.

 

^^ I agree. It is so ironic on how Lexus went from being bland to almost "over the top"...But I agree with Ostrich, I like its interior but I just can't get past the exterior look. It may look better in person but I doubt it would be enough to sway my view significantly.

 

It has a nice side profile and interior (sans the popup nav screen). The grill is rough.

 

Actually, those plastic bits and trim and the "rugged" look remind me of Subaru.... OUCH. Don't get me wrong, Subarus are nice cars, but they are not in the same category that Lexus aspires to be, and Subbies are not known for their good looks either....

 

It doesn't look anywhere near the same size as the RDX from pics. If I had to guess (based on the limited pics I have seen) it's not based on the Rav4 but the CT200h. I will probably test drive one, but it is probably going to get a pass.

However, there allegedly is the new Buick CUV, and redesigned Murano to consider as well. . .

 

I don't know how anyone can tell by looking at pictures with nothing to compare to can tell how big it is. That's why I asked the question. It's been in the press that it is definitely based on the RAV4.

@rocketman
Where did you get the dimensions? Tks.

 

I like it. Would you like to read some funny comments about it?

check out this link:
http://jalopnik.com/the-2015-lexus-n...1562082610/all

 

Some info came out from the realease of the NX last night in China. It will be on display at the NY auto show starting today.

http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...ails-revealed/

Of note:
- very aggressive sporty lines
- a couple of inches shorter than the RDX is length and height
- Turbo has a 235 hp and 258 torque engine (RDX is 273 hp and 251 torque)

I definitely see this vehicle taking sales away from the RDX if the rumored pricing is right. The rumors have the base price in the $30-33k range. Plus they offer lots of features the RDX does not. The 360 degree cameras are not on any Acura yet.

**it should be noted that the Ford Escape is 238 hp and 270 torque while the Jeep Cherokee is 271 hp and 239 torque**

 

Yes but will it drive like an RDX? The RDX is a crisp and sporty little ride.

A lot of the comments here overlook this and how nice the V6 really is, IMO.

 

Lexus took a page out of Hyundai's book and over-styled the crap out of this thing, to the point where it will look dated within a couple years.

That wheel gap is horrendous.

 

Thanks for that. I thought that it was just me. I woudn't mind a floaty ride, and having driven the Lexus I found it to be a bit too firm (ditto the Q5 and XC60) contrary to everything that I had read and was expecting. On the other hand the ride on the RDX seemed quite good to me... but I was not expecting much.

 

To me one of the characteristics I think of in an "SUV" is more ground clearance than a typical sedan might offer. Not for serious off-roading, but for getting through the snow or handling some of the more rugged roads found in cottage country.

In this context, I came upon specs today that give the ground clearance of the RDX as a bottom-scraping 5.4". That compares to 6.3" for the first-gen RDX, and 6.3" for the current Honda CV-R. Even the RX350 has 7.3", while the Q5, X3, GLK and XC60 all have more ground clearance than the Lexus (with the Volvo at the top of the list with 9.1").

So yes, I think that the RDX could be regarded as a "hatchback" rather than an "SUV" (along with the Infinity which also has 5.4"... but a lot less space in the hatch).

 

Here is a video of the Lexus features. Very well done video. I am surprised Acura does not do something like this for the TLX.

http://lexusenthusiast.com/2014/04/2...es-video-tour/

It is obviuos to me that Lexus is marketing to a different audience than Acura right now.

I am an early adopter for features and technology so I may be more in the Lexus camp vs. the Acura camp right now.

 

In this context, I came upon specs today that give the ground clearance of the RDX as a bottom-scraping 5.4". That compares to 6.3" for the first-gen RDX, and 6.3" for the current Honda CV-R. Even the RX350 has 7.3", while the Q5, X3, GLK and XC60 all have more ground clearance than the Lexus (with the Volvo at the top of the list with 9.1").

Another Oldguy, Just curious where the 5.4" measurement came from? The "RDX Fact Sheet" lists it as 8+" , not saying your wrong just wondering...

 

To answer my own question the 8.1" is unloaded and the 5.4" is fully loaded. Do you know if your other numbers are all fully loaded?

Thanks

 

I wonder if Lexus is making the same mistake as Acura with its styling? I see A LOT of Lexus RXs in the southwest and 90% of the drivers have gray hair and drive in the slow lane. The 1st Gen RDX was way more sporty in styling, driving dynamics and power compared to the RX; but, sales sucked compared to the RX's conservative styling/performance. Now, Acura has gone conservative and the sales are way up. I would be curious to see how Lexus sells will be after the 1st and 2nd after the release.

 

I was expecting that someone would take issue with me on that (insofar as having considered the RDX myself I could not believe the number either).

I found the data here... but I now see that it says "Min" Ground Clearance (italics mine).

http://www.nadaguides.com/Cars/2014/...Tech-Pkg/Specs

I don't know about the others that I quoted, but I note that the 9.1 inches given for the Volvo is also "Min".

Thanks for clarifying this.

 

All these vehicles are similar in clearance as the manufacturers would not want to market something that was that far off the "norm" and still be competitive. So, when one finds a dimension that makes one vehicle look really strange or less desirable, it is best to do some further research before calling it a fail. People were all calling the new Lexus NX too small to compete with the RDX when in fact it is only about an inch smaller all around including wheelbase. Again, speaking before thorough research.

 

I like the NX from what I've seen. Its 2.0t will also be slapped into the IS next. From what I've read, the hybrid version will offer around 200 hp and possibly somewhere around 40 mpg.

 

It will be interesting to see when it is released, the actual pricing, and the initial sales numbers. If it comes out late summer / early fall then it may hurt the RDX more then if late Fall since the winter is a slower car buying period and the RDX being refreshed for next spring.

Worst for Acura RDX:
NX Summer release with an RDX April / May 2016 refresh release

Best for RDX:
NX late October release with an RDX late March 2016 refresh release

For pricing Edmunds is rumoring that the Base NX will be in the 30-32.5k range. Acuras tend to have more standard features but some buyers will buy the base NX just because it is a Lexus the same why people shell out 30k+ for a BMW 320 which has similar output as a Jetta which is 10k cheaper.

 

I personally think both RDX and NX are crossover, so they should have been categorized as CUV, not SUV. I'm not sure that either one is truck-based frame or all car-based frame. However, judging by the look, they are more like "raise-up station wagon" or taller hatchback to me.

 

Why do you think the RDX MMY refresh will be March-May 2016? The refresh will/should be for the 2016 MY, which will happen sometime in 2015, not 2016. Hopefully it is about a year from now

 

I think the OP meant that the "2016 model" will be released in spring of 2015. Not the year 2016.

 

The more I look at the pictures, the more I'm getting convinced that my wife will like it. I'll seriously consider the NX as the current RDX even though to my liking, is missing few upscale goodies and looks rather old fashioned.

 

Dude, wait until the 2016 MMY update

 

But that's another year away. I can wait a few months, otherwise I'll need another car in the meantime. I really hope the RDX will better be up-to date then. Cheers.

 

It will be interesting to see what's on the horizon...I'm wondering about a performance(hp-wise) CUV with maybe fewer bells and whistles to keep the cost down. Could be thinking of the NX; but driving these things with 270-300hp makes it hard to give up that performance. As I've mentioned before, we might just buy our '13 RDX Tech at the end of the lease in summer '15; but I'll be very interested in what comes along in the interim. A slightly smaller footprint would be just dandy with me!

 

We saw the NX at the NY autoshow. They would not let us sit in it but from the outside, the suv looks weird. It does not look like the F-sport prototype they have on the website. It also looks much smaller. My friend and I agreed that the RDX was better. Toyota have the best infotainment system though.

 

I was at the NY Auto Show too and agree the Lexus was "eh"... what DID impress me was the 2015 Audi Q3. Did you get a chance to look up close and sit in it? That was the vehicle that left an impression on me at the show. Just waiting on pricing. Though the lady said it may not be available until late fall or early winter. The downside is the 2.0T only has 200 HP - seems like it might be underpowered for the size, but depending on the transmission it might perform well. Time will tell.

 

I like the A3, but it sure is small. Much nicer than the CLA.

 

The Audi site list 220 HP and 258 LB/FT of torque...not a huge difference, but VW/Audi is also known to understate the real HP/torque numbers a bit. I can say the 2.0T is a great engine since I have one in my GTI. I would think in an A3 it would be more than adequate. Or just wait until they bring out a S3.

 

Yes, the A3 was VERY tiny. I was talking about the Q3 - the new SUV that should compete with the RDX and even the X1.

 

Indeed you were. Looks like I need to improve my reading comprehension.

Is the Q3 a lot smaller than the RDX?

 

I do not know the exact measurements, but standing next to it and sitting inside, it felt close to the same size. Part of me wants to say its SLIGHTLY smaller, but you are probably taking an inch or two? (too little to tell from the naked eye).