Lexus Based on 4runner
- Thread starter jwatson
- Start date
Register to hide this ad
PWD4R
New member
I guess I don't get it. Why get a Lexus 4Runner? The GX460 is close enough IMO. And the older GX470 is good enough again..
Maybe I just don't understand what you're wanting out of the Lexus?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
BlackWorksInc
New member
Considering that as far as I am aware the GX line has been axed... I don't see why they would. Not to mention that while the GX Series is a rebadged Prado for the most part, they share a significant amount of commonality with the 4Runner platform. You're thinking the wrong direction, Lexus would make it soggier, squishier, and more luxury; not more capable, sturdier, ect.
Oh yes, I understand that, but I almost think people would like the rugged looks but refined interior. Just something that came to my mind, not sure why. Where'd you hear they're axing the GX? Sells well where I live.
CookieRoe
Senior Member
The GX isn't being axed, however, the next gen GX will be unibody. Lexus wants a 3 row SUV (something lower in class than the LX). The 3rd row RX will be a joke as I'm pretty familiar with them. The room just isn't there. Stupid market. Anyway, the GX as a BOF design is finished (next year I think).......come to think of it....... The GX being axed isn't a far fetched statement. (manhood is being axed).............
BlackWorksInc
New member
Last I heard they were dropping the GX and replacing it with a slightly larger than a Highlander Unibody more than likely under a "TX" name.
JSparky
New member
Heard this as well, along with something about the potential for pilot seats in the second row as an option which would be interesting. That's a dealership salesman talking though (re pilot seats) so can't put much weight in it.
CookieRoe
Senior Member
I stand corrected.
You're absolutely right:
LEXUS TX
Looks almost identical to the RX.
True. Salesmen usually don't offer reliable insight, but doesn't look like he is far off.
You're absolutely right:
LEXUS TX
Looks almost identical to the RX.
True. Salesmen usually don't offer reliable insight, but doesn't look like he is far off.
Gecko
New member
"TX" was widely rumored to replace GX and Lexus does hold a "TX" trademark, but there are no associated numbers as Lexus usually does for new models. "TX 350" or "TX 400" would be much more telling that "TX" would actually become a viable model. Right now it seems very unlikely.
Next year, Lexus will release RX 350L - an RX with an extended wheelbase to accommodate a third row. This is a no-brainer solution and that vehicle will not be called "TX" but "RX L." Period. Unibody FWD-biased vehicle, three rows, V6/hybrid options -- it will look just like RX. We already have "RX 350L" and "RX 450hL" trademarks, illustrating that this is a viable model coming to market shortly, unlike "TX."
GX will fade out next year as RX L arrives, but there is no immediate plan for a replacement. If the GX name is to live on, it will take a hiatus and likely return around 2020 or 2021 and likely based on Lexus new GA-L RWD architecture. This vehicle would be similar to the BMW X5 in execution, and much less like an MDX. Unibody, yes, but not based on TNGA or FWD. Think Range Rover Sport/X5.
Lexus is probably holding the "TX" name as they consider 1) if a vehicle between RX L and LX is to be brought to market and 2) if it would be too different from GX to keep the "GX" name and 3) equity in the GX name itself.
Next year, Lexus will release RX 350L - an RX with an extended wheelbase to accommodate a third row. This is a no-brainer solution and that vehicle will not be called "TX" but "RX L." Period. Unibody FWD-biased vehicle, three rows, V6/hybrid options -- it will look just like RX. We already have "RX 350L" and "RX 450hL" trademarks, illustrating that this is a viable model coming to market shortly, unlike "TX."
GX will fade out next year as RX L arrives, but there is no immediate plan for a replacement. If the GX name is to live on, it will take a hiatus and likely return around 2020 or 2021 and likely based on Lexus new GA-L RWD architecture. This vehicle would be similar to the BMW X5 in execution, and much less like an MDX. Unibody, yes, but not based on TNGA or FWD. Think Range Rover Sport/X5.
Lexus is probably holding the "TX" name as they consider 1) if a vehicle between RX L and LX is to be brought to market and 2) if it would be too different from GX to keep the "GX" name and 3) equity in the GX name itself.
CookieRoe
Senior Member
Interesting , I never heard of the possibility of the stretched RX replacing the GX outright. I hate when manufactures stuff a 3rd row into a space that can not comfortable accommodate an adult. Anyway, the RX is fine, however the roof is a little low. A stretched chassis will help, I guess we'll see. The only other SUV does the 3rd row well is the Honda Pilot. Not even the current Highlander (to me) does it well. Very cramped.
Gecko
New member
It's more of a Lexus product conversation, but I think that having a stretched RX replace the GX all together is a terrible idea.
Lexus needs something in their portfolio that can span $60-80k, the area between a proposed "RXL" and the LX.
Future is very unclear right now though, and it will take a long time to figure out.
BlackWorksInc
New member
You'd be surprised what Toyota/Lexus is considering/ignorant/not interested in doing...
For example it appears that the new Toyota CH-R is dropping the diesel option and the representative they spoke with admitted that Toyota is considering reducing their diesel options as time goes on. Toyota/Lexus is more invested in hybrids than anything else these days, they don't seem to realize or care that they have really the only mid-sized BOF SUV left in the market and if they adjusted their planning and execution a little they could stand to take advantage of a niche market that will only grow as lack luster unibody crossovers pollute the market. Rather sad really.
Forgot about the RX-L, that I believe is what they decided to go with rather than start a new TX line if I remember the conversation I had last year with an FTS about it.'
I think when the new Supra comes out an ends up being a hybrid or similar concession like the NSX was it'll be further evidence that Toyota is... hasn't been an innovative brand in a long while.
Very true. It's sad because Toyota/Lexus could really kill the game if they could blend their reliability with innovation and listening to customer demands...
BlackWorksInc
New member
I've been meaning to write a letter detailing a strong plan to restructure their BOF vehicle line across all markets to essentially take advantage of them really being the only "mid-sized BOF SUV" in the market. The J150 platform that underpins the 4Runner, GX, and Tacoma are all derived from the Prado, while they have the Hilux, Fortuner, and the BOF Minivan Innova are built on the IMV platform. The Hilux's IMV frame is similar to the 3rd gen Tacoma's but is fully boxed and built a bit tougher; this falls in-line with where the Tacoma and Hilux split back in the 90's. The Tacoma became more "driver oriented" while the Hilux continued to be "Utility" oriented.
At the moment the Tacoma is maxed out at production in the US (actually the factory is running a bit beyond normal capacity to meet demand) which is part of why Toyota didn't do a diesel among other things, they just can't make them fast enough.
Setting that non-sequiter aside, the main point is that at the moment Toyota has 2 different BOF platforms that span the globe in a market segment that is somewhat dwindling (particularly in the US). Realistically Toyota's best bet is to take advantage of this and release a 6th gen 4Runner on the slightly modified J150 platform they underpinned the 3rd gen Tacoma and then use the time inbetween Tacoma and 4Runner generations to move the platform to either the IMV or a new hybrid platform.
Ideally they should meld teh IMV & J150 platform into a strong, robust contender and base all their BOF vehicles off this platform. This would greatly reduce design cost/effort as you're basing your existing 5~6 models on a common frame architecture (hell just making the Hilux and Tacoma the same truck with minor modifications for each market probably wouldn't hurt). The resulting parts commonality would easy the burden on production as there's less differentiating parts to deal with and there's less need for different production lines to produce different parts. Adapting the vehicles to fit global markets and US markets should not be an issue, both because European Regulations and US Regulations are both becoming equally strict and because it was done before with re-badging the 4th gen 4Runner as a "Hilux Surf".
The bottom line being that by consolidating the platform that the remaining 5~6 BoF mid-sized vehicles are built on and by capitalizing on that commonality; development, production, parts supply, and manufacturing costs would be reduced and better stream-lined allowing both a more flexible and potentially higher profit margin (while ideally bring base MSRP down), as well as the financial ability to lengthen the production run of BOF vehicles to appeal to more niche markets that typically would be difficult to profit from.
Post Note-
Toyota is already planning this with their unibody vehicles as most of their smaller sedans and CUVs will be built off of the new Prius TNGA platform as they continue to move forward. The thing is that I don't see Toyota taking full advantage of this idea by looking at the potential they could obtain by stretching the life of their BOF segment and bringing the price point down some. Realistically there's a lot of people who will be looking at their 2nd, 3rd, and even 4th gen 4Runners wondering if at 200~300k they should upgrade and having a relatively affordable more capable BOF offering to entice those people would be a good idea for Toyota since those owners will have little to no other offerings in the BOF Mid-Sized SUV segment to look at.
Last edited:
Toyota should hire you for crying out loud. A lot of basic logic, but definitely something they're lacking.
BlackWorksInc
New member
Well I mean technically they did since I am a technician. LOL
