CR puts out don't buy warning on Lexus SUV

[Nick R]

Not that I normally put much stock in Consumer Reports, but for them to say this about their beloved Lexus vehicles...
http://money.cnn.com/2010/04/13/autos/consumer_reports_lexus_gx460/index.htm?hpt=T2

NEW YORK (CNNMoney.com) -- Consumer Reports has issued a safety warning on Toyota's 2010 Lexus GX 460 SUV because of an increased rollover risk during a turn.

The magazine says it uncovered the problem during routine tests, and is urging car shoppers not to buy the GX 460 until this problem has been remedied.

The special designation given to the GX 460 by Consumer Reports -- "Don't Buy: Safety Risk" -- is rarely given by the magazine. The last time it was used was in 2001, on the Mitsubishi Montero Limited.

 

[JHZR2]

hmmmm. Isnt that the toyota land cruiser? Isnt that a vehicle that has been the same for a number of years now? How wasnt it an issue last year, or the year before?

And it is a big SUV after all. It has a different center of gravity and handling characteristic than a passenger car, or a fake, car-based SUV.

Of course people arent aware enough of physics, and just mash the go pedal... so we have to remind them that big tall vehicles can flip.

 

[rjundi]

I believe it is built on a 4runner platform. However at least in appearance it appears narrower and higher stance but it be styling.

The LX 470 is the Land Cruiser.

 

[JHZR2]

aaah, OK, so it is something different.

Fair enough, but my comments about physics and SUVs still remain valid.

 

[Paul56]

Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Not that I normally put much stock in Consumer Reports, but for them to say this about their beloved Lexus vehicles...


And so it would seem when hey have something extremely bad to say you do put some measure of "stock" in them.

Thats ok... so do I.

 

[d00df00d]

I was ready to write this off as more CR tripe, but their account of the mishap doesn't sound entirely implausible. Can't wait to hear the Lexus response...

 

[opus1]

Originally Posted By: Paul56
Originally Posted By: rudolphna
Not that I normally put much stock in Consumer Reports, but for them to say this about their beloved Lexus vehicles...


And so it would seem when hey have something extremely bad to say you do put some measure of "stock" in them.

Thats ok... so do I.
Regarding CR, you know what they say about blind visually-challenged squirrels and acorns.

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: JHZR2
hmmmm. Isnt that the toyota land cruiser? Isnt that a vehicle that has been the same for a number of years now? How wasnt it an issue last year, or the year before?

And it is a big SUV after all. It has a different center of gravity and handling characteristic than a passenger car, or a fake, car-based SUV.

Of course people arent aware enough of physics, and just mash the go pedal... so we have to remind them that big tall vehicles can flip.


Ordinarilly, I would agree with you. however, consumer reports probably tests near every single SUV and car out there, and if they haven't had this problem with other SUVs, something is wrong.

 

[IntegraVT]

Here's a link to the video of CR's road test - http://video.consumerreports.org/services/player/bcpid1886192495?bctid=77022871001

 

[demarpaint]

Safety issues concern me. If CR bashes a car because they don't like plastic trim, cabin space, over all layout, or some other [censored] I tend to ignore them. If they say a vehicle is unsafe and not to buy it that grabs my attention. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
I was ready to write this off as more CR tripe, but their account of the mishap doesn't sound entirely implausible. Can't wait to hear the Lexus response...


Interesting use of the double-negative.

What I find interesting is that this vehicle is a skeletal twin of the new version of the Toyota 4-Runner. While there are certainly many differences between the two, I have a hard time believing that the main structure is so different that the Lex would have a rolo problem whereas the 4-Runner does not. I suppose it could happen that way, but still, it doesn't seem probable. And yet, not a peep about the 4-Runner? Maybe they haven't gotten to it yet?

Another factoid that might, and I emphasize might, have some play: the 4-Runner has two different drive systems, over and above the basic vanilla 2WD version. There's a more traditional selectable 4WD system available on the base and "Trail" models, and an automatically functioning AWD system on the Limited model. I would assume that the latter (AWD) is what's found on the Lexus model. Perhaps the mechanicals of that system, and their weight, location, and mechanical behavior, are involved. This is nothing more than brainstorming speculation, but if there's anything to this, that would imply that some 4-Runners, but perhaps not all, have similar dynamics.

 

[ekpolk]

Originally Posted By: demarpaint
Safety issues concern me. If CR bashes a car because they don't like plastic trim, cabin space, over all layout, or some other [censored] I tend to ignore them. If they say a vehicle is unsafe and not to buy it that grabs my attention. Should be interesting to see how this plays out.

An excellent point...

 

[01rangerxl]

More whining from CR, what a surprise.

Drive with a little sense and that Lexus won't flip.

I'd be perfectly happy if SUVs didn't have that ESC [censored] at all.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Interesting use of the double-negative.

I take it you caught my exploitation of the slight but crucial difference between "not implausible" and "plausible?"

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
What I find interesting is that this vehicle is a skeletal twin of the new version of the Toyota 4-Runner. While there are certainly many differences between the two, I have a hard time believing that the main structure is so different that the Lex would have a rolo problem whereas the 4-Runner does not. I suppose it could happen that way, but still, it doesn't seem probable. And yet, not a peep about the 4-Runner? Maybe they haven't gotten to it yet?

The alleged problem isn't structural or mechanical. It's with the stability control system. CR says it allowed the vehicle to get way too sideways during an emergency maneuver, which would make it more vulnerable to rollover.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I'd be perfectly happy if SUVs didn't have that ESC [censored] at all.

I'm pretty sure I agree with you.

 

[brianl703]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl

Drive with a little sense and that Lexus won't flip.


The average Lexus customer did not buy a Lexus because they want to think about how to drive it.

 

[Win]

I've had three real SUV's: Exploder, Expedition, and the little S-10 Blazer and never came close to feeling like I was going to roll one.

Vehicles, even SUV's are pretty hard to roll - I think you would have to work at it.

Wasn't it the little Suzuki Samurai that CR rigged to roll and ruined that car in the marketplace?

I wouldn't let CR dissuade me from buying that Lexus ( or anything else ) if that was what I wanted.

 

[d00df00d]

Originally Posted By: brianl703
The average Lexus customer did not buy a Lexus because they want to think about how to drive it.

True.

Still, that makes it hard to sympathize with them IMO. If they don't want to think about how to drive something with twice the weight and ground clearance of the tin can they took their driver's exam in, they shouldn't be driving at all. But I digress...

 

[Nick R]

Originally Posted By: d00df00d
Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
I'd be perfectly happy if SUVs didn't have that ESC [censored] at all.

I'm pretty sure I agree with you.



Because SUVs before it were SOOOO much safer. (think older expeditions, explorers, tahoes, suburbans)

 

[CharlieJ]

Toyota should enter that into the Formula Drift series. That SUV looks like an awesome drifter.