Talk me out of buying 16/17 CPO Lexus RX350 vs a new CX5 GT Reserve

7eregrine

The man, the myth, the legend
:
Land of Cleve
:
2016.5 CX5
This*s in fact a short-term reliability test on a 2017 report to 2014 VW and Ford. I simply don*t believe a turbo would survive on my 1998 Honda CR-V with 185K miles. The replacement of a turbo charger would be costly to such an old vehicle.
And you are, in fact, the most pessimistic person on this site. :D
 

Kaps

Contributor
:
CX-5 Touring 2016.5
If the OP is very image conscious a Taurus / ES350 and MKZ are perfect candidates.
 

sm1ke

Work In Progress..
Moderator
Contributor
:
Canada
:
'18 CX-9 Signature
For what it's worth, my 1990 Volvo Turbo Intercooler was running fine and was about to hit 200,000 miles when Bambi's dad tried to tackle it one foggy night.

Regarding "more moving parts = more potential problems," I feel that way about:
-electric windows
-sunroofs
-electric seats
-folding side view mirrors
-electric door locks (although they're better than the vacuum ones on my '63 Lincoln)
-thermostatically controlled HVAC
-ABS
-everything that controls every function on a modern engine
Took the words right out of my mouth. Anything and everything has the potential to break. That doesn't mean that it will. Turbos are not wear items that need to be replaced every 50k or 100k miles. Just like an engine, if they are designed and maintained properly, they should last the life of the car.

The RX 350 V6 is the same engine/ same family 2GR V6 as you see in 2007-2018 Avalon, Camrys, Highlander, Tacoma, ES350, Sienna. This is Toyota's bread and butter. Each of these cars are bullet proof. You are putting 3 years of CX-9 against this? You are making Honda fanbois look rational.
This. The drivetrain in that RX is so proven it's not up for debate.
I am not disputing the fact that RX350's engine is reliable. All I'm saying is that the 2.5T has been in use for 3+ years with no turbo failures or engine recalls to report (aside from one CX-9 here on the forums that had a coolant leak). If it's been generally problem-free for 3 years, I personally think it's safe to assume it would be problem-free for the life of the car, assuming that the car receives regular maintenance. Will it be as reliable as the RX350? Nope. But that doesn't mean it'll blow up after 150k either.

At the end of the day, if comfort and reliability are paramount, get the RX350. It's as simple as that.
 

ColoradoDriver

Gen-1 Kodo Design
Contributor
:
Denver, CO
:
2014 CX-5 Touring
Just as an FYI, here are some numbers I was able to pull and posted in an earlier comment:



Trying to get data on longevity (#vehicles @ 200,000 miles) of any brand is tough.
Wow, that's interesting. Well consider myself schooled. I just assumed.
 

Kaps

Contributor
:
CX-5 Touring 2016.5
Please make this make sense.
Taurus - rides high almost as high as a CX-3 comfortable to get in and out. Come in SHO trim that is fun and has a huge trunk + if he doesn't like ladies' cars - it fits the bill.
Lastly - Ford sedan values are crushed now. Whatever 19s are left are sold with 30+% discounts. 25k for a 38K MSRP fusion and so on. Taurus is not much different.
 
:
2019 CX-5 White Pearl Sig
Isn't a Lexus just an overpriced Toyota anyway?
Following that line of thinking, isn't a Signature just an overpriced Mazda?

Some will say yes, some will say no. It's up to the buyer to decide what a vehicle is worth.
 
Last edited:
:
13' CX-5 and 16' Mazda6 both Touring w/Tech/Bose
An approach on a CPO is to research common known issues and inspect/repair anything while still under CPO warranty. I like to do my own inspection myself (leaks, weird sounds, vibrations, ect.)
 
Top