Fsport

How less practical is CT vs NX

Recommended Posts

Thinking about buying an early CT200H for the wife.  She currently drives an RX300 but complains about its size which is not helped by her awful parking skills.

Whilst I know the CT will be less practical than the RX, how much less storage space does the CT have vs an NX.  Would prefer to get an NX but they are still £25k ish used vs £8-10k for a CT.

Is the CT storage capacity on par with the NX?

Should I hold out for an NX?

Car will be for her and our 2 kids. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
 

The boot in the CT200 is reasonable but it all depends what your wife's gonna be luging about, I get two large luggage bags in the boot without having to put the seats down. Its a flat floor job with storage underneath. mines the F sport so has a Sub enclosure on one side as well. 

I have two kids that still use boosters and there's plenty of room in the back for them.

No road tax and 50mpg on avg, make it practical enough for me.

 

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/lexus/ct/19458/lexus-ct-200h-third-report

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Simple answer is no chance. The NX is very practical in the sense it has a decent sized boot and plenty of space for 4.

With the CT, although you'd get them in, remember that its lower and if you're kids are very young and need strapping in their seats, its back pain waiting to happen.

The CT also has a very small boot compared to other hatchbacks on the market which I believe is a combination of the shape, and the hybrid battery packs under it. 

If I am perfectly honest, I found the CT a bit of a pain to drive compared to the NX and a few reasons for that:

1) rear visibility is the worst in class as the window is too small (probably not going to be a hit with your wife for this reason)

2) Its low so can scrape the doors on high kerbs or if the road is at a slight angle.

3) I found it very small inside - my son has a VW Golf, the MK5 which is smaller than a CT and its huge inside in comparison. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Spooky but mrsF and I have just compared the CT boot size to her mk5 Golf and the CT is larger.

I had the CT as a loaner and didn't find it any smaller inside than our V-dub. I'd say it was on par but we didn't have the CT for long.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rayaans right about it being lower and that might be an issue but I thought that was a given since one's a hatchback and the other an SUV.

No the CT's boot is not going to be as big as the NX however as I stated it depends what she is moving around on a regular basis and whether that is worth the extra £10 -15 grand.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I can get a weekly supermarket big shop in the boot easily if that helps.

Sent from my Nexus 6P using Tapatalk

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The boot in the CT is much shallower. Other things to consider, is that the car is low... very low: it is very easy to scrape the bottom of the front bumper and that of the doors. The NX is much closer in size to the old RX. Its main advantage is that it is narrower, which makes parking easier.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2017 at 6:08 PM, Farqui said:

Spooky but mrsF and I have just compared the CT boot size to her mk5 Golf and the CT is larger.

I had the CT as a loaner and didn't find it any smaller inside than our V-dub. I'd say it was on par but we didn't have the CT for long.

Very odd - maybe it just seems smaller then due to the higher floor and the shape.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No experience of the NX so cant compare, but the CT is quite tight on space IMO.  Its fine for me as its usually just me driving,  but its surprising how quickly a few shopping bags fill the boot.

If your wife is used to an RX then I would think the CT wold be a big change

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Very odd - maybe it just seems smaller then due to the higher floor and the shape.

I always found the Golf boot small, especially when compared to my old Civic - that gobbled up everything and more. The lack of a spare wheel was a winner for daily lugging duties. Fortunately we never missed the spare.

 

Anyhoo it's good to hear how the NX compares to others as my Mrs may be on the hunt for a replacement soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both in the household and my instinct is the CT would not be ideal but may suffice. 

There’s no clear-cut way to answer the question but in general the boot is ok on the CT - you can store some basic stuff in the (would-be) spare tyre compartment; I actually have the manuals in there, leaving the glove box entirely free. 

In general, you can ask yourself another question - could you buy a second-hand CT and then upgrade to an NX later if you found you had to?

Nice problem to have!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think it’s maybe that the boot floor on the CT is flush as opposed to having any depth to it.
4040ae83ea64ff88441960400b4b210c.png
I think it’s quite big for me and the wife. We can fill the boot and use the tray under the floor too.
When I had an NX as a loan car whilst the CT was having recall work doing I found it more claustrophobic inside and was happy to get the CT back. Also with no ML sound system it was terrible.
As said it is a low car and the front doors will scrape the pavement if it’s not dead flat. Also rear legroom is a bit restricted.
296a9762ed5de09493a82cbaee94b94d.jpg
A great car though and very economical.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I had a CT for 3 years and never realy loved it. Nice car but a big comedown from my previous RX300 which I still miss. Saved me a fortune in fuel though. Swapped the CT for an IS300H which was a massive improvement. Test drove an NX and IMHO it is significantly better than the CT (fuel consumption excepted) However if you have been used to premium nav and or Levinson sound system avoid the base model NX as sound system is truly awful. I also thought that the parcel shelf was a let down in the NX, cheap assed like from a ford fiesta LOL

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/10/2017 at 10:33 PM, chris_fletcher said:

I had a CT for 3 years and never realy loved it. Nice car but a big comedown from my previous RX300 which I still miss. Saved me a fortune in fuel though. Swapped the CT for an IS300H which was a massive improvement. Test drove an NX and IMHO it is significantly better than the CT (fuel consumption excepted) However if you have been used to premium nav and or Levinson sound system avoid the base model NX as sound system is truly awful. I also thought that the parcel shelf was a let down in the NX, cheap assed like from a ford fiesta LOL

^^ A bit harsh on the 'standard' sound system I think. From my perspective - having the standard 8 speaker set up in the NX Sport - it is no better and no worse than other standard in-car systems I've had over the years. Given the limitations of audio clarity and depth in any in-car situation, and then adding in the compressed nature of most signals these days - certainly with DAB and anything downloaded including Spotify - I think it does a reasonable job. At least it doesn't fall into the trap of adding superficial bass to everything in an attempt to fool the listener that it is in any way 'high-end' in nature.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, First_Lexus said:

^^ A bit harsh on the 'standard' sound system I think. From my perspective - having the standard 8 speaker set up in the NX Sport - it is no better and no worse than other standard in-car systems I've had over the years. Given the limitations of audio clarity and depth in any in-car situation, and then adding in the compressed nature of most signals these days - certainly with DAB and anything downloaded including Spotify - I think it does a reasonable job. At least it doesn't fall into the trap of adding superficial bass to everything in an attempt to fool the listener that it is in any way 'high-end' in nature.

To be fair, he was pretty spot on about the NX sound system on the base models. The 8 speaker set up doesn't sound great. Its similiar to the 6 speaker setup in the base IS and CT but I guess we're all used to much better sound systems - for example, the  8 speaker setup in my RX300 was great, the 12 speaker in the 3IS and 4RX are top notch and the 15 speaker ML setup in the 3RX is good too.

But the main thing is, if you're happy with it, then thumbs up!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, rayaans said:

To be fair, he was pretty spot on about the NX sound system on the base models. The 8 speaker set up doesn't sound great. Its similiar to the 6 speaker setup in the base IS and CT but I guess we're all used to much better sound systems - for example, the  8 speaker setup in my RX300 was great, the 12 speaker in the 3IS and 4RX are top notch and the 15 speaker ML setup in the 3RX is good too.

But the main thing is, if you're happy with it, then thumbs up!

I'm sorry, but anybody who thinks an in-car system can be anything other than adequate (to a trained ear, anyway) is kidding themselves. As I said, the standard system in the NX is neither any better nor any worse than other in-car systems I've had. Labels, brands and dominating bass are little more than a placebo in an in-car setting. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, First_Lexus said:

I'm sorry, but anybody who thinks an in-car system can be anything other than adequate (to a trained ear, anyway) is kidding themselves. As I said, the standard system in the NX is neither any better nor any worse than other in-car systems I've had. Labels, brands and dominating bass are little more than a placebo in an in-car setting. 

Totally agree.  After my hifi at home, anything in a car is mediocre at best.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I find the audio system ok with reasonable sound quality after adjusting the levels.However i previously had a Blaupunkt dab head unit which was superior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

I'm sorry, but anybody who thinks an in-car system can be anything other than adequate (to a trained ear, anyway) is kidding themselves. As I said, the standard system in the NX is neither any better nor any worse than other in-car systems I've had. Labels, brands and dominating bass are little more than a placebo in an in-car setting. 

Nobody said it was better a hi fi system.

But the point is that the 12 speaker systems and ML systems are better than the 8 speaker systems in the Lexus models. It's stupid to believe otherwise. 

There wouldn't be any point in having an LS with a 19 speaker ML reference sound system if an 8 speaker job would do.

The 6 speaker setup on the CT is genuinely awful and undoubtedly worse than other marques at the same price range. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, rayaans said:

Nobody said it was better a hi fi system.

But the point is that the 12 speaker systems and ML systems are better than the 8 speaker systems in the Lexus models. It's stupid to believe otherwise. 

There wouldn't be any point in having an LS with a 19 speaker ML reference sound system if an 8 speaker job would do.

The 6 speaker setup on the CT is genuinely awful and undoubtedly worse than other marques at the same price range. 

This thread has drifted off-topic I fear. An interesting debate though.

I don't agree with the premise that just because something is more expensive, or branded, or has more of something, that it is necessarily 'better.' If that were the case audiophile systems would all be multi-speaker a la Bose.

I don't doubt that the ML system sounds good, but in an in-car context you're likely fooling yourself if you think it is that much better than a more 'standard' set-up. My original point was that the post labelling the standard set-up as "truly awful" was a bit harsh. I stand by that, but if the placebo of expense or more speakers for the sake of more makes people happy, then who am I to judge?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem isn't your opinion it's the way you effectively say 'if you think it's better you are a fool'. Yet you don't really explain why. What I do know is that the ML in my car is the best I've personally heard in a car. I listen to music for probably 10x more hours in the car than home (unfortunately) and I want it to sound enjoyable, even if I am being fooled. But my wife's suzuki does a great job of fooling me it sounds like an 80's 1 speaker tape player if that's the case.

If it's a trick then I'm a happy fool with my car. :)




Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, Comedian said:

The problem isn't your opinion it's the way you effectively say 'if you think it's better you are a fool'. Yet you don't really explain why. What I do know is that the ML in my car is the best I've personally heard in a car. I listen to music for probably 10x more hours in the car than home (unfortunately) and I want it to sound enjoyable, even if I am being fooled. But my wife's suzuki does a great job of fooling me it sounds like an 80's 1 speaker tape player if that's the case.

If it's a trick then I'm a happy fool with my car. :)




Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk
 

I didn't expect this to be such a touchy subject! I haven't meant to offend anybody with the ML system, or any other system. If you re-read my posts, you'll see that I say I don't doubt that the ML system sounds better - the issue is by how much and whether in an in-car context it is worth it.

I also tried to explain about the nature of modern signals - very compressed. A comparison with a standard system in another marque is like a broken pencil - pointless...

Nobody said you were a fool. I simply said that people are often fooled into believing - or hearing - what they want to. I won't say anything else on the subject.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Original post: CTvNX.... wife + 2 offspring+ shopping= maximum paraphernalia potential . Go for the NX if wife is happy to negotiate parking it. At the end of the day, whatever the driver prefers to drive that suits the pocket  should win the day and often over-rules a lot of other practical considerations.

 Hah! sound system arguments! Which one drowns out the sirens of emergency vehicles, plaintiff cries of crushed cyclists and mangled pedestrians... its a car, not an auditorium! You are welcome to be as offended as you like by that comment, it doesn't stop it from being the truth. By the way, there is a( in my opinion misguided) lobby keen on removing audio systems as they are a distraction to drivers.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

I'm sorry, but anybody who thinks an in-car system can be anything other than adequate (to a trained ear, anyway) is kidding themselves. As I said, the standard system in the NX is neither any better nor any worse than other in-car systems I've had. Labels, brands and dominating bass are little more than a placebo in an in-car setting. 

Apologies, I did not mean to offend. Was simply stating an opinion based on comparison of the standard system against the Levinson (which is not bass heavy and in a car is spectacular at high volume but only good at normal listening levels) I had in the IS300H Premier and the 12 speaker system in the RX. When you get out of a car with the better system and get straight into one with the standard one it is poor. You do get used to it though as I found in my CT with standard audio when coming from the RX300 with 10 speaker and separate amp

I do however fully agree with the comment about proper HiFI set up being incomparable to in car audio being. I have a £5k Quad and PMC setup (which to some would be considered mediocre) if I want real quality listening :-)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, First_Lexus said:

This thread has drifted off-topic I fear. An interesting debate though.

I don't agree with the premise that just because something is more expensive, or branded, or has more of something, that it is necessarily 'better.' If that were the case audiophile systems would all be multi-speaker a la Bose.

I don't doubt that the ML system sounds good, but in an in-car context you're likely fooling yourself if you think it is that much better than a more 'standard' set-up. My original point was that the post labelling the standard set-up as "truly awful" was a bit harsh. I stand by that, but if the placebo of expense or more speakers for the sake of more makes people happy, then who am I to judge?

That's where you're wrong though.

Even in an in-car context, it does sound MUCH better than the standard setup. 

The sound of the 8 speaker in the IS is much better than the standard 6 speaker setup for example and it honestly is very noticeable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now