You're kidding...56 grand for a Rav-4 with leather seats???Is this still earth.....or is it the planet Nebulon, where nothing makes sense? Because nothing about this little vehicle does...Not bad looking though....Thanks Jackie
Have to agree entirely. The RDX is a CR-V, the NX-200T is a RAV4. I'm quite interested in the new Edge Sport with 2.7 twin turbo V6, which is a Fusion in disguise, a far more capable base vehicle than the proletarian stuff Toyota and Honda start with. It is supposed to be in actual fact, not opinion, QUIET, inside. And it's much cheaper and has actual cooled front seats, not just ventilated, and has all the toys. Unfortunately, the first 40,000 or so of the new model of all trims MAY leak water through inadequately sealed A-pillars. The resulting wet carpet apparently smells like an outdoor privy. Oops. Discouraging to read on the Edge forums. And the seats are meh.
Still, the urban professional will pay good money for a Lexus or an Acura, Benz GLC, Audi Q5, and BMW X3. So I suppose the artificial market divisions elevating these things above their actual performance station in every way except price are justified, simply because the status-conscious view them that way.
I've read some British and Australian reviews of the NX-200T, and since they don't seem to feel the need to anoint every Lexus as Triple A1 Fantastic, this 2 litre turbo gets decidedly lukewarm reviews. It's slow, folks. Five more horsepower in an X3 obliterates it. And the NX is hardly leading edge enough to warrant a $56,000 price tag even with F-Sport badges.
Autos.ca could perform a heretical service by pitting things like a Forester XT, Nissan Pathfinder, Hyundai Santa Fe V6 and Edge Sport directly against the NX and RDX and GLC in a comparison test. Head-to-head. PR types shudder in horror. It'd be like a blind beer-tasting contest with normal people judging, where the expected luxury makes may not triumph. So it couldn't possibly happen - a bridge commercially too far. Oh well. Back to the personal trenches of slogging through the lot myself on test drives. I have an uncomfortable feeling that a Mazda CX-3 might well suffice and look better than all of them.
From CAR UK:
"We actually had to make sure the NX200t is four-wheel drive – and it is – because the way it cuts power when driven briskly in the dry feels almost exactly like a poorly set up front-driver struggling in the wet. Perhaps Lexus doesn’t think its customers will push the NX hard enough to make this an issue, but even at a moderate pace it quickly became tedious for us."
From Autocar UK:
"Drive with some attitude, though, and it all falls apart. Swing briskly into a corner and you wouldn't really know that the four-wheel drive system is - apparently - sending up to 50 per cent of the drive to the rear axle rather than just to the front.
The NX understeers with gusto, just as if it were front-wheel drive only (which it is in steady-state driving), until you back off the throttle in order to point the nose back in the direction you initially hoped it would be heading.
There's little adjustability or playfulness, and while that steering weight and response is fine in everyday pottering, a string and a cup offers about the same sense of connection.
Added to this the fact that the engine feels strained and sounds unpleasantly whiney at high revs and that the gearbox struggles to respond promptly in fast driving, it's quickly apparent that the sports element of the NX is really only skin deep.
The ride doesn't help, either. It amplifies high-frequency bumps and ruts, so you get a constant fidget over coarse surfaces and thumps over expansion joints and the like; it's not overly harsh, but it rarely settles."
That's just two reviews. What I'd like to know is why this thing gets such good reviews here in North America.
