lee789

Lexus NX worst car in UK for real world fuel economy

Recommended Posts

 

We all know the fuel economy figures are not to be relied on, we buy our Lexus's for comfort, longevity desirability, customer service and more. If fuel economy is a major concern it's probably best to go for a smart car.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot of people go for the NX 300H knowing they are getting all those things, but also under the impression they will be getting the improved fuel economy of a hybrid as a bonus. There are many on this forum who are disappointed with the NX's fuel economy, and wondered if they were doing something wrong, The results of this survey indicate that it's not them, it's the official Lexus figures, which are wildly inaccurate. I know all manufacturer mpg figures are unachievable in the real world, but to miss them by nearly 54% is terrible. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, this is a bad result for Lexus and the NX in particular. Interesting to see so many SUV's feature in the top ten, I think they have all tried to tell the same porkies about MPG as the sector is very competitive. It is about time the manufacturers told the truth like they have to in the US or they are in trouble. In my opinion it is the biggest con in the motor industry right now. I knew the fact before I bought my NX, I had done my research, but anyone who does not and believes they will get the claimed figure will be very disappointed. The sales person told me to expect 40-45 mpg, which was still way off the mark. I am even down on the 36.2 figure, averaging 32.2! although in the summer I expect that will get to close the average. The two other cars I considered are also well down on the claimed figures and the difference between all three were negligible. It's still a wonderful car to own, despite the MPG issue. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

In fact car manufacturers cannot publish true mpg figures because of the reason below. Or at least that is what they say.

 

The prescribed EC test is a lab test carried out to simulate a mix of different types of driving and arrive at ‘combined’ CO2 emission and fuel consumption figures.Because vehicle taxation in Europe is now based on CO2 emissions, manufacturers naturally optimise their engines to achieve the lowest possible CO2 in the tests - this skews the true MPG.This gives a correspondingly low fuel consumption figure. Unfortunately the relevant EC Directives prescribe that this figure and only this figure can be publicized by manufacturers, even though it is unlikely to be achieved by the average driver in real life conditions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder how much of the mpg is actually down to electric power only. Probably minimal, and virtually cancelled out overall by having to lug the batteries around. That's why the similarly priced, but far less attractive top spec Outlander models outsell the NX by more than 3 to 1,  Obviously fuel economy matters more to some than quality, reliability and looks. I agree with Jason, and I am usually happy to sacrifice fuel economy for other benefits, What's annoying is being totally misled by Lexus. There is no way they achieved those figures unless they were driving and coasting downhill on a very very long mountain road.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, Goggy said:

Yes, this is a bad result for Lexus and the NX in particular. Interesting to see so many SUV's feature in the top ten, I think they have all tried to tell the same porkies about MPG as the sector is very competitive. It is about time the manufacturers told the truth like they have to in the US or they are in trouble. In my opinion it is the biggest con in the motor industry right now. I knew the fact before I bought my NX, I had done my research, but anyone who does not and believes they will get the claimed figure will be very disappointed. The sales person told me to expect 40-45 mpg, which was still way off the mark. I am even down on the 36.2 figure, averaging 32.2! although in the summer I expect that will get to close the average. The two other cars I considered are also well down on the claimed figures and the difference between all three were negligible. It's still a wonderful car to own, despite the MPG issue. 

I don't understand why the NX is so bad though. I can get an easy 35 mpg from our RX400h and the average over 30k miles since I've had the car is 32.5 mpg and that's from a far more powerful 3.3 v6. But still Lexus says it should average 44 mpg so not ideal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, stevet said:

I don't understand why the NX is so bad though. I can get an easy 35 mpg from our RX400h and the average over 30k miles since I've had the car is 32.5 mpg and that's from a far more powerful 3.3 v6. But still Lexus says it should average 44 mpg so not ideal.

Too much weight for it to carry IMO. Audi have realised this and switched to "smart sizing". In the test cycle the NX gets awesome MPG but it goes down drastically in the real world as they need working hard whereas they dont in the test cycle. The NX required a lot more throttle compared to my RX for example and over a few days of testing the MPG on my daily trip to work and back was 35mpg. My RX does 27-30mpg but has 2 extra cylinders and more weight so theres obviously too much weight for the 300h to carry.

I think it'd get better MPG or the same with a detuned 450h setup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As I change my car every 3 years on a lease, and am particularly anal about measuring mpg for tax reasons, I can confidently say that all the cars I have had get nowhere near the stated mpg figures and that the NX is certainly no worse than any of the others. I have done around 35,000 miles per annum for the last 35 years so can say that I get a pretty good mix of driving conditions and the average mpg for petrol cars has been mid 30's and diesels mid 40's regardless of cc...the latest tankful on my NX is currently at 41 which, given the current temperature, for a 2.5L petrol is quite frankly outstanding - BTW - I do not drive like a pussy when I have that amount of miles to cover but I do like the challenge the NX gives you in trying to maximise it's mpg.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Nelsthebass said:

As I change my car every 3 years on a lease, and am particularly anal about measuring mpg for tax reasons, I can confidently say that all the cars I have had get nowhere near the stated mpg figures and that the NX is certainly no worse than any of the others. I have done around 35,000 miles per annum for the last 35 years so can say that I get a pretty good mix of driving conditions and the average mpg for petrol cars has been mid 30's and diesels mid 40's regardless of cc...the latest tankful on my NX is currently at 41 which, given the current temperature, for a 2.5L petrol is quite frankly outstanding - BTW - I do not drive like a pussy when I have that amount of miles to cover but I do like the challenge the NX gives you in trying to maximise it's mpg.....

I think it does depend on the driving you do though. Akwardly Ive found hybrids to do better MPG on the motorway than they do in town, very weird and goes against the whole idea of a hybrid but thats how it is. Id assume that many customers are seeing "oh 51mpg", buying the car and doing short trips which result in low MPG anyway and they have the idea in their head that it'll be running on electric power in town, which we all know is not the case until the engine is warmed up properly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i imagine hybrids will become obsolete when more hydrogen cell vehicles start appearing, and prices drop. That's really dependent on the govt ensuring the facilities are available at filling stations nationwide, instead of the two or three there are at the moment. They haven't been that quick with recharge points, and the petroleum industry will probably lobby for years, and pay off the right people to slow it right down, or kill it off completely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, lee789 said:

i imagine hybrids will become obsolete when more hydrogen cell vehicles start appearing, and prices drop. That's really dependent on the govt ensuring the facilities are available at filling stations nationwide, instead of the two or three there are at the moment. They haven't been that quick with recharge points, and the petroleum industry will probably lobby for years, and pay off the right people to slow it right down, or kill it off completely.

Or even if electric cars become more accessible for people who park their cars on the road especially with those new street lights with built in chargers for use. They'll start taxing electric and hydrogen eventually though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, lee789 said:

i imagine hybrids will become obsolete when more hydrogen cell vehicles start appearing, and prices drop. That's really dependent on the govt ensuring the facilities are available at filling stations nationwide, instead of the two or three there are at the moment. They haven't been that quick with recharge points, and the petroleum industry will probably lobby for years, and pay off the right people to slow it right down, or kill it off completely.

Like petrol, hydrogen isn't a natural substance is has to be made. So I can see oil companies wanting to get in on the distribution, especially as the lower profit in crude now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes Steve, I'm sure the petroleum companies will be given the exclusive contracts for hydrogen supply, just as official approval, and the contracts for NHS supplied E Cigarettes has been given to British American Tobacco. That's our "honest" politicians for you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, lee789 said:

Yes Steve, I'm sure the petroleum companies will be given the exclusive contracts for hydrogen supply, just as official approval, and the contracts for NHS supplied E Cigarettes has been given to British American Tobacco. That's our "honest" politicians for you.

Even though there's no evidence of the long term effects of these e-cigs

Even kids are doing them these days - funny how companies won't tell you whats actually inside them, the way they smell it can't be much better than a cig really.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Nowhere near as bad as a cigarette, No tar or nasty chemicals, just propylene glycol, glycerine, flavourings  (all found in foods, and harmless), and for those who want it, nicotine, which is addictive, but not dangerous,. Most e cigs have no smell at all, and if you can smell anything it is likely to be from an e liquid the user has added something to. Basically what users blow out is condensation/steam from the burning process (the Battery heats a coil, which turns the liquid into vapour).  I can understand why the tobacco industry is so keen to spread stories of e cigs being harmful, or of unknown risk, but they are a huge threat to their business, with millions giving up in favour of e cigs. So they are trying to get legislation passed to either restrict, or ban them. Pretty rich from an industry still peddling a product which is known for sure to have killed countless millions, and which has many of our own politicians either lobbying for them for back-handers, or sitting in their boardrooms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An optimistic reading of yesterday's weather forecast prompted a 160 mile trip to and around the Yorkshire Dales, featuring horizontal rain, some steep climbs, and 40 miles of motorway, and returning about 41 mpg. For a near two-tonne SUV, I think that's impressive. Having said that, Rayaan has a point about larger petrol motors often returning better mpg since they can run at lower revs, and it's interesting that Toyota, with the Gen 3 Prius, took the petrol engine from 1.5 to 1.8 litres in search of better economy. With plug-in capability to take care of shorter journeys, a faster, 50+ mpg NX might be achievable. The NX400ph?

nxdales01.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
An optimistic reading of yesterday's weather forecast prompted a 160 mile trip to and around the Yorkshire Dales, featuring horizontal rain, some steep climbs, and 40 miles of motorway, and returning about 41 mpg. For a near two-tonne SUV, I think that's impressive. Having said that, Rayaan has a point about larger petrol motors often returning better mpg since they can run at lower revs, and it's interesting that Toyota, with the Gen 3 Prius, took the petrol engine from 1.5 to 1.8 litres in search of better economy. With plug-in capability to take care of shorter journeys, a faster, 50+ mpg NX might be achievable. The NX400ph?

nxdales01.thumb.jpg.cd11bff39d4643bde2f90f72fa7aa70e.jpg

That would be very interesting indeed. A great pic too.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that would be something. In fact if the NX was a plug in, it would be my perfect car. :rolleyes:

Great photo btw. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love the photo. Never understood why some hide the reg number though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We had the Nx for a year and really enjoyed it,MPG didn't bother us that much even though as we all know it was well below official figures,but the power did bother us.

We have had the Rx450h a few months now and just returned from the south coast and you really do notice that extra power from the 450 it really suits the car and the MPG figures are not far behind the Nx.Another thing which was great was the extra boot space in the Rx made all the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎21‎/‎02‎/‎2016 at 1:58 PM, Eame64 said:

We had the Nx for a year and really enjoyed it,MPG didn't bother us that much even though as we all know it was well below official figures,but the power did bother us.

We have had the Rx450h a few months now and just returned from the south coast and you really do notice that extra power from the 450 it really suits the car and the MPG figures are not far behind the Nx.Another thing which was great was the extra boot space in the Rx made all the difference.

Interesting post. I will be considering moving from RX to NX in a couple of years once son number 2 goes to uni, but I am concerned about the loss of power going from one to the other. I am guessing that, if I don't want to sacrifice performance, I may have to consider the 200T... I;m also guessing that, at the end of the day, petrol consumption of the NX200T won't be too far from what I have been used to in the RX450h and previously RX400h. Thoughts anyone (Rayaan, don't let me down :wink3:)?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would of thought the 200T will use a lot more fuel than the 450h.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My son in law gets 22 in town and 30 on a longer run from his 200T. He likes the car, but says he wished he had known how small the boot was before ordering it blind. I thought the boot on my 300H was OK, so expected the 200T would be considerably larger. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are the same aren't they? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.