midwesterner

Yes, comes back to the argument that Lexus management has made a good assessment of the potential buyer. Those last few tenths of a second or skid pad ratings aren't apparent in normal driving. Given differences in tires, drivers, and conditions, I think most of the results come out within one standard deviation -- not discernible in real-world driving. David Coulthard's personal car was a M-B roadster automatic, and not a fire-breathing AMG. Guess he didn't need F1 performance on the highway, and he already had the bragging rights. I think the Lexus guys have concluded that (a) they aren't gonna get the guy who wants the bragging rights for the test-car 1/2-second lap time difference at Riverside, and that (b) they don't necessarily want that guy as a warranty customer. That doesn't mean I wouldn't like to see a somewhat leaner, lighter, sharper RC or GS, but for the practical difference, machs nix. Will be interesting to see to what extent the F-cars will drive sales.

Saw the photos on CNN or MSN the other day; they don't tell much. In an F designation, I'd be looking for some additional suspension tuning, and maybe a little more aggressive auto trans / shift pattern and some usable hp increase. I am guessing that a GS-F will be basically RC-F power and tighter suspension, with some interior treatment. Call it f-Sport writ large. I also guess that it's the Lexus throw-down to the Germans, so it will need to meet or exceed the best of Audi A7 and S-versions) and BMW (M-sport) and maybe challenge the M-B E-class AMG versions. So far, the RC-F appears to be well rated against BMW, winning in a few categories but failing to take the prize for absolute performance. Maybe seen as more civilized. Will be an interesting test for the GS. I will expect to see it at the Chicago Auto Show in Feb, if not at the dealership.

I think it's just a production GS, badge-engineered to sell "exclusivity." Remember the Hurst Olds? On later models, except for the shifter, it was just a Cutlass, and previous models of the regular 442 would have blown it away. These offerings seldom attract me, no matter which manufacturer. Seldom any mechanical substance to go with an expensive paint and trim job aimed at high unit profit. Guess what happens at trade-in time? Pssst! Wanna buy a Chevy Monte Carlo that says "Pace Car" on the side in tape? Make ya a real deal! I took another look at the photos; you are right -- wheels are probably OK. Maybe the designer visited central IL; got black mirrors and spotlights on the unmarked black police cars. I guess somebody likes 'em.

Well, I was trying to be diplomatic, but since the two of us agree ... ^_^ .

I looked at this on the Lexus site, or maybe it was in the overdone Lexus magazine (!). Not very compelling in my view; looks more like a marketing effort. Don't care for the black / white contrast. Would've worked better in my view in black exterior with tan interior, or something other than black and white. Door handles ought to be nearly invisible rather than contrasted, and I can go for the standard wheels. For the price, I'd opt for the standard car and put the dollar difference in features and options.

'55 Olds Super 88 Holiday Coupe -- my first car, first car I took drag racing; first car to win a trophy. '68 Olds 442 -- would melt asphalt and blow the doors off just about anything. '69 BMW 1600 bought new when BMW first arrived in the States; first car I took autocrossing and hillclimbing. I ran regular classes; wife ran ladies' classes, and we brought home lots of trophies. '79 Pontiac Grand Lemans, equipped to be basically a Firebird Trans-Am with four doors. Impressive acceleration and superb handling for the time, great highway cruiser; room for the family. '06 Saab Aero turbo V6 -- surprisingly fast and nimble; great ergonomics, seats, features; had personality. Would still be driving it if Saab hadn't failed. 300K - 400K miles not unusual on Saabs, and son-in-law still drives it as the in-town utility car. '13 Lexus GS 350 AWD probably owns the rights for serene, solid highway cruiser with performance to challenge the Euros. Not much personality. Jury still out, but car may win on basic capabilities and nearly peerless reliability. '03 BMW Z4 is still in the line-up, with about 25K miles. It's the fun car; I can take it and drift the corners, go full bore through the gears, or just cruise around town with the top down in good weather. Wife with a big hat makes it look good. Out of 40 or so cars in two countries, including most GM products, Audi, two BMWs, M-B, four Saabs, about 10 Hondas, and two Lexus, the above are a few of the standouts. Still lust for a Boxster S.

I haven't paid much attention to Scion. Always sort of regarded the line as aimed at boy-racer wanna-be's or the fanatically practical folks who like the idea of driving a car that looks like a breadbox (that's the "b" stands for, yes?). In any case, I see a number of them around our area in service as taxicabs. In the absence of a London cab equivalent in the States, the Xb seems to be a good choice: low-cost operation, good passenger and luggage space, and reliability. Maybe a way to re-route flagging sales; plenty of opportunity in Chicago, NYC, and Boston -- not to mention DC. Take it into the premium car realm? So who's gonna pay premium car bucks for an econo-box or a "sports car" that is well short of a Miata for more money? Aston-Martin has a mini luxo-coupe called the Cygnet, made out of a Yaris, I think. And the $30K threshold? That's hardly the luxury car breakpoint when nearly every well-equipped mid-range sedan you can think of approaches that figure. A nicely equipped Buick Regal goes easily into the $30s. St. called it right.

In my limited business experience with Japan, and two trips to visit our corporate joint venture company there, I found the Japanese to have an appetite for infinite detail, and an amazing ability to manage repetitive functions (e.g. manufacturing processes). These, coupled with the Japanese notion of harmony (everything working together and pleasing) are -- I think -- the explanations for Japanese excellence at quality. Part of the explanation, at least. It's not that other cultures can't do it. Other auto manufacturers have equaled or exceeded Japanese quality in some instances. But we don't seem to be able to do it consistently. Credit to Lexus for hitting the target. Our SUV, by the way, is sort of an accident. We were thinking of replacing my wife's Accord (about #5 or #6 in a series), when our son-in-law's dad died. He'd just bought the RX350 with AWD, 18" wheels, and trailer towing pkg. We bought it out of the estate a short time later, and my wife has learned to love it (mostly because of the high seating and visibility). We don't tow anything, and removed the hitch), but get the benefit of the HD radiator and transmission oil cooler that go with the pkg. It's just now at about 65K miles, and I suspect it will be around for quite a while longer. It's probably not a car we'd have picked out as a first choice. However, it's reliability and the quality of the dealership led to the GS acquisition. That's another place where Lexus shines. That customer care model and the professionalism of the dealer sales staff, along with product reliability, make a strong case for Lexus, even in the face of European competitors whose products are sometimes more likely to make my heart race. It's a good thing I don't have more money; my garage would look like Jay Leno's.

We are a couple of like-minded people. It's the cushy set-up you described, differentiated by Lexus reliability, that made it easier for me to put Lexus on the list. If I decide to back to the smaller configuration, which is sort my default choice, I would be looking closely at the C-class Sport. My wife's '09 RX350 can always be the long-haul vacation car, and frequently is. Cooler fits in the back, and load height is about perfect. And I'd still like to have a Boxster. Never can tell what we old guys might do.

I was prompted, after a couple of exchanges on this site, to re-think my evaluation my '13 GS350 AWD. One of the motivations was a discussion on the reliability of automotive journalists' reports. I often use certain sources, including CR, Edmunds, and a couple of the auto magazines as guidelines when considering automobiles, especially where assessments are consistent across several sources I regard as reliable. That's part of what led me to consider the GS in the first place. So, along with re-thinking my own assessment, I went back and looked at the various reviews on '13 - '15 GS models -- maybe 12 or 15 evaluations and comparisons, in print and on the 'Net. I also looked at some owner comments, including a number who'd departed the Germans for the Lexus. I found most reviews to be generally favorable to the Lexus, except where the writers were seeking the last ounce of sporting potential in the cars under consideration. I also found most of the views to be consistent with mine, which I had posted earlier on this site. Some of my findings for the GS, a less nimble and heavier feeling, were leveled at the Audi by automotive journalists -- attributed to the AWD. The standard 5-series gets hit with similar criticism -- "dumbed down" in catering to a broader, more luxury-oriented audience. In most of the comparisons, the conclusion was pretty much of a draw between the two finalists (in multi-car tests), with Lexus winning in about half the categories -- some variation depending on whether the test car was f-sport. In the customer-drive intro's by Lexus, where the GS and 5-series were driven back-to-back, I believe the acceptance level for the GS in handling and ride was pretty high. Simply put, I think Lexus management had a very clear idea about the target audience and the competitive choices (e.g. most people don't buy M-version BMW). And in that sense, I think they got it about right. In general, I think most of the automotive writers / sources that I trust came relatively close to my evaluation. I haven't driven a German direct competitor (though I probably will), but I'm guessing the GS is pretty competitive on driving engagement for standard models (e.g. M-B E-class, std A6 and 5-series), and maybe comes off a little better. The points I deducted earlier for the GS related to nimble handling and heavy feeling are, I think, really related to AWD, and would likely be the same in German cars with AWD. I knew when I selected AWD that I was sacrificing some of the driving behavior of RWD. Thus at 18K miles and 25 months, I'd elevate my earlier, generally favorable rating of the car by a notch or two. Given some of our road trips in bad weather, I am willing to take the AWD affect. If I really want automotive playtime, I can take the Z4 out of the garage and go scare my fellow citizens. Otherwise, the GS still makes the best long-distance highway cruiser we've ever owned. Note to Lexus management:Good job on re-offering power mirrors and trunk closing. Now, please put the headlight washer control on a steering-column stalk where it belongs, and move the cruise control stalk to the 3 o'clock position. While you're at, change the control to allow it to remain engaged, and not shut off every time the engine is turned off.

There are people on this site who have lots of expertise on LS400s, but my immediate question: why has the car been repainted? Body work underneath? Was there rust or damage? And if the paint shows orange peel, how good was any related work? At 248K miles, I'd walk away and not think twice.

Happy if I could help. Our '09 RX has been faultless. While it is mainly driven locally by my wife, we take it on long trips. With the two of us on board and a load of luggage plus cooler, it is comfortable cruiser that delivers 26 mpg, plus or minus, at highway speeds. I'm guessing that your '08 is like new, with no mechanical or electronic problems, and will probably turn out to be a fine bargain. You should be able to do 200,000 miles or so if you wish (some folks go much more), and put little money in the car other than routine maintenance. Regular maintenance, in my experience, is the key to long-term reliability. Hope you remain a happy camper with your purchase.

Agree. I probably should have noted that the financial benefits of leasing probably vary from state to state. I guess the main reason I did it was that I wasn't sure how much I'd like the car, and leasing seemed a good way to find out -- along with an exceptional offer from the dealer. My general strategy is to pay cash and keep the car for a long period. I am not sure I would lease it again, but not sure I wouldn't. One thing for sure, if it hadn't been for the tax credit, I wouldn't have done it. In IL, you pay the tax when you lease, and pay again when you buy out the car. Not a good deal at all.

I see the annual Lexus ads for leasing and special financing, and am reminded of the various arguments. The question of lease or purchase comes up in this forum from time to time. Leasing always seemed a last choice to me, as I felt I wanted to own the car. As I've grown older, it seems to me there are three options: Finance; pay cash; lease. Cash is usually seen as the cheapest option, but even that has a price: you are giving up both the interest you are presumably earning on the cash, and there is the opportunity cost foregone (you used the money to buy X rather than Y). Money advice people always argue against financing cars, especially at high rates. But if you can get subsidized rates (Lexus is offering rates of .9% - 1,9% on certain models), and are making more money from invested cash, this might be a good deal. For example, with inflation running at about 1.6%, financing at these subsidized rates might make sense. Leasing has its merits, and as one financial guru is quoted, buy things that appreciate; lease things that depreciate. Industry experts argue that you benefit from (1) more car for the money, (2) you are paying only for the use, and (3) you always have a new car under warranty. I leased a car for a daughter in college, and that worked out pretty well. I also got some experience with construction equipment leasing during during my corporate career -- basically same arguments as automotive. There is a money factor (interest rate) in leasing, but there's a money factor in each choice. So I was open to the pitch when Lexus offered subvented leases, similar to those now advertised, a couple of years ago. I had no trade, and I got a very good deal on the car -- which is the starting point for lease negotiations -- and a significant tax credit. I decided to try it and am happy with the result. I got a lower lease rate because our driving is split among three cars and I can stay under 10K miles annually. I haven't felt any angst over not "owning" the car. Legally, Toyota Corp and I are joint owners. If Lexus offers me an early out on the lease, which I understand is a not unusual practice, I can apply the higher residual value, as I understand, to the next lease. The dealer finance mgr told me he thought this was the best deal going. I'll have to do the math when the time comes, but the idea has some appeal. If I choose to simply turn in the car and go somewhere else, I've driven a new GS350 AWD for three years at about the price of a mid-range used car. Otherwise, I can simply write a check for the guaranteed residual at the end of the lease. That might not be the least expensive means of acquiring an automobile, but it's not a bad choice. Leasing required modest cash up front, and didn't require the savings.draw-down that would have been required by cash purchase. Lease payments come out of cash flow. So far, this is working out pretty well. What do I recommend? Not sure there's any one answer, but depending on your needs, and whether business use might make leasing attractive, leasing might be a good option. My sense is that in leasing, shorter is better (e.g. 27 - 36 months); that only subvented leases should be considered, and leasing should be considered only with cars that hold high residual value (otherwise you are paying for high depreciation). Not sure what I will do when the lease is up, but will report on the pluses and minuses as things work out. Next step will be to see if I get an early-out offer about mid-2015. Hope this helps somebody trying to make a decision. No doubt somebody on the forum has more experience / expertise on this than me, and can maybe add to my discussion.

One other thing ... I presume the Lexus tech checked your tires, but you need to double-check. It is true that mileage is low, but tires deteriorate over time. If there is no visible cracking or rubber deterioration and no evidence of sidewall failures or tread separation, you are probably OK. But you don't want a blow-out at highway speed. Plan to have tires rotated every 5,000 - 7,500 miles (I believe Lexus rotates every 5K service) and make sure the tires are inspected at each service. Chances are you can run 'em another 20K or more without trouble. At least, that's my recommendation. Otherwise, sounds like a good buy with the potential to serve you well for a long time with standard maintenance.

Generally agree w / Thomas. We bought our '09 RX350 out of the estate when our son-in-law's father died. It had very low miles, and had been maintained by the dealer. We continue to have it serviced by the book. The only caveat I would offer is that the car is seven years old and has only 10K miles, which means the brake fluid may have condensation in it, or have otherwise deteriorated. I've been a car guy all my life, and the general rule on low-mileage, older cars has always been to change oil and filters and flush cooling and braking systems. Modern manufacturing processes, lubricants and coolants, and technology have made that less critical, but it's good policy. If I were buying a car with such low miles vs age, I would probably do oil and filter changes, transmission fluid change, and brake and cooling systems flush. Probably not really necessary, but cheap insurance in any case The Lexus dealer where I live is price competitive and the service department is responsible. That is presumed to be the norm for Lexus dealers. It may be that the dealership was offering what the technician thought to be good counsel, and not an attempt to perform an unneeded service. You could raise the question with your Toyota dealer or a local independent shop that you trust.

Very nice automobile; hope you are able to sell quickly. I am full up on recent Lexus, but if I were in the market, I'd be interested. Good luck.

I think AWD vs FWD vs RWD is arguable. History is littered with drive configurations for luxury cars. Think of the Cord 810, or the Olds Toronado of the 70s -- an engineering tour d' force for its time, on a global basis. I think the Horch was FWD, and I think also the early Audi 100s. Premium luxury cars make me think of R-R, Bentley, Maybach. What differentiates those cars besides drive configuration? Materials? Exquisite detail in fit and finish? Isolation from road? Two doors or four? Phaeton? Chauffer-driven or not? Range Rover? I would also argue that sport and luxury are two different things. Sporting capabilities -- handling, acceleration, et al, may enhance luxury car qualifications, but they don't define it. An MGB is a classic sports car -- no luxury, and not super fast. But almost defines sports car in traditional terms. More modern example: Porsche 356, Boxster, any of the 911s; Mazda Miata, Corvette. And if that doesn't confound the question, I cite my example again of our local business owner who has a Bentley -- bought new 2 - 3 years ago. What else has he go? LS 460 which I think he bought last year. Has the same Lexus salesman as me, and the report is that the Lexus is held in higher regard than the Bentley. Both in one package? Please deliver the 911SC to my house. Whole deal may be in the eyes of he beholder.

About the only way the subjective rankings work is if you know enough about the writers' preferences and biases to be able to equate your own. There were some pretty consistent people over the years at R&T and Automobile, and I could use their opinions as a measure. I have seen writers contradict themselves in the space of a single story. Nevertheless, I've found many of the automotive writers to offer reliable evaluations. I recently re-read the R&T GS 350 vs Audi A7 comparison from May 2012. Besides thinking that the A6 would have been a more appropriate comparison, I thought the assessment was among the weakest I've ever seen. In the measurements, the two cars pretty much split their advantages down the middle, and in some cases were simply about equal. I though the road testers floundered in looking for points of departure, and wound up with a fairly shallow piece of work. The Audi won by a few points, but that was almost a direct contradiction to some of the real-world driving ratings that favored the Lexus. However, the guys I grew up with a R&T are gone, and I don't relate to the new editorial staff, same with Automobile, and I have dropped my subscriptions to both. Actually, I've come to have a level of confidence in the CR and Edmunds ratings, as I've found those testers tend to bring my values to their assessments. Both, incidentally, have been more willing to grant gains to Lexus than many of their enthusiast-book peers. So, the tests and ratings can give some insight,and maybe guide the reader on points to check when testing. But as you say, the only way to really know is to drive the cars, look at your own criteria and preferences, and make your own decision. That's how I chose the Saab a few years back, and pretty much how I chose the GS.

As a guy who has a journalism background and spent a good part of his corporate career dealing with the global press -- trade and general media -- I'd say the automotive journalists may not always suppress their biases, but I doubt they're selling their egos. I think most regard themselves as fiercely independent. Don't forget the highly favorable press ratings of the new IS vs Euro competitors, and the Road & Track test that put the IS350 f-sport ahead of the 3-series BMW. More relevant, I think, is your assessment of Lexus customers. As I noted in another post, I think Lexus management clearly sees the difference between the Lexus buyer and the dedicated maximum performance buyer who wants the last degree of performance engineering and measures the car by the extent to which it owns track performance rights or the ultimate road-test comparo. Having said that, if you produce a car that claims to compete with the ultimate performance leaders, you've got to be willing to take the results when the rubber his the road. It is not lost on me that the RC350 has pretty much the same technical specs and performance characteristics as my GS350, even the weight is not far off. Surely Lexus brought it to market knowing that. So sexy looks aside, how much of a performance car have we got? Will the RC-F make the average buyer select the RC350? We'll see, but I don't think it will steal many Porsche Cayman sales. Bottom line: I think Lexus has clearly targeted its market, and is operating on the assumption that it's strategy will gain more over time than it loses. Meanwhile, each generation improves.

Definition of luxury includes comfort or ease, and that beyond what is necessary (basic transportation). So in simple terms, a luxury car is one that provides comfort and ease (e.g. power seats) and appointments beyond the necessary (features like better seating, smooth ride, quiet interior). On that basis, a Chevy Malibu or Ford Fiesta could qualify as a luxury car in certain circumstances. Consumer's Report rated the top-line Chevy Impala as competitive with many luxury cars, as I recall. So I'd qualify the automotive definition and say a luxury car provides an above-average level of reliability, safety, comfort, convenience, and controls, plus above-average power and clearly differentiated interior appointments (upholstery, dashboard material, etc), and exterior fit and finish. We might also include an above-average expectation for dealer service, attention to detail, and customer response. For most of us, luxury may be better defined as sport-luxury, to which I would include the requirement for an exceptional level of acceleration, handling, and braking. The Lexus line covers the spectrum, in my mind from the more purely luxurious to the more sporting. Think ES, RX, and hybrids on one end, for example, and the IS/GS/LS f-sport-equipped models on the other.

Thanks. I had a new 1996 C-class 180 sport when I lived in the U.K. Could've used a little more power (anything over 2L is a big engine in the U.K.), but rock solid and great highway cruiser. I once drove from Aberdeen, Scotland to the English border without dropping below 90 mph; absolutely stable. Owned the car 3-1/2 years before moving back, and except for a failure with the alarm system (fixed in impressive fashion) the car required only normal service. By way of background: I have owned BMW (bought new 1600 in 1969 which I took autocrossing and hillclimbing), Audi, M-B, Saab, plus most American brands. Had high performance GM products (including a '68 Olds 442). Drove mostly Hondas in early - mid 90s (Accord for wife; Prelude for me). In addition to the two Lexus (Lexae?), I have a BMW Z4 roadster 3.0 with the touring suspension (staggered tire sizes). My "sweet spot" is a car that weighs about 3500 lbs, offers responsive, nimble handling and excellent braking, with good acceleration and strong mid-range throttle response. BMW 3-series / M-B C-class would be my normal automotive hunting ground. The '06 Saab Aero turbo V6 that I got rid of met those criteria, giving up a bit to BMW in handling because of FWD vs RWD. Otherwise, it was nearly the perfect road car. So with that as background, let's see what I can say about the GS. A direct comparison doesn't work because the Lexus is a different and bigger car, and is AWD which changes the feel a bit. I have not driven a 5-series, E-class or A6, so hard to make an evaluation relative to those. From what I've read in the reviews before and after I bought my car, I think the GS (no f-sport) compares favorably with the standard German offerings in the same size class, and may come off a bit better in some areas. Overall, I've found the GS to be quiet, rock-sold, and stable -- probably the best highway cruiser we've ever had. Seats are excellent, probably better than the Saab's, which were class-leading at the time. Braking is excellent, easily equal to the Saab, and maybe better. The GS is a bit too big and heavy to really feel nimble, especially with the AWD, but in aggressive driving it stays planted and goes where you point it. Can't quite hang the tail out on a tight curve because of the AWD, but then it sticks like it's on rails. Acceleration is impressive from rest, and I've surprised a few friends who've ridden with me. Does not quite have Saab's mid-range, part-throttle response, but that's function of weight and turbo-charged vs naturally aspirated. If you floor it, you get plenty of passing power. I let a Buick dealer friend drive it after I declined a turbo Regal, and his response on nailing the throttle at roadspeed was "Wow!" 6-speed auto plenty adequate and about as responsive as a non-dual-clutch transmission is going to be. Well designed interior except for stupid placements of headlight washer control and cruise control, areas where Lexus engineers need to take lessons from their Euro competitors. Maybe result of being based in a country where speed limits don't exceed 60 mph or so. Excellent materials and high quality throughout, as you would expect from Lexus. Reliability excellent except for a brake switch recall and touchy starter button / ignition / brake interface that sometimes requires multiple attempts before stating. Bottom line: Quiet, comfortable car that probably challenges or exceeds Euro competitors except in the last ounce or two of sharpness in high-performance driving. But even that is debatable. I can drive comfortably at light throttle, but when the urge or necessity strike, I can give you a pretty good impression of a sports sedan at full tilt. As a final reference, I drove a '13 IS 250 AWD prior to buying the GS. Liked the car; closer to the size I like. I was considering an IS350 but the combination of Lexus offers on the GS made it a better deal at the time. If the '14 IS 350 had been available, I might well have chosen it over the GS. Oh, and my wife likes the GS. A little long; sorry. Hope I addressed your question. I also did a post assessing the car at about the one-year mark. Don't know if it's still accessible.

Concur. Initial reviews on NX appear mixed, so maybe no home run there. A3-based SUV reviews also somewhat mixed, so the two are maybe close. The M-B GLA, however, seems to be garnering very favorable reviews, and looks like maybe the designers put one over the fence. If we were going to buy another SUV, we'd probably still be looking at an RX-size, so am interested in the successor. Acceleration is acceptable or better for an SUV, so give it a little firmer suspension and make it handle and give it some GS brakes. Finally, sharpen up the styling and maybe we'd be repeat buyers. Absent those steps, the decision would hinge on reliability only. I continue to believe Japanese management very deliberately targets the customer, and is willing to sacrifice the dedicated Audi, BMW, M-B buyer who might never become a convert anyway. How about a report on your new Merc before long?

Once again, agree.

The WSJ article quoted N.A. Lexus gen'l mgr Jeff Bracken. Not sure I ever saw the complete interview with the N.A. president, but I didn't think it was the same interview. I had also seen the sales by models data from Lexus, but have not seen a comparison with German competitors on a model by model basis. I haven't looked very hard, so it may be there and I just missed it (but a check of BMW numbers did not give me a break-out by model). Based on the article, I am guessing that if one deducts the X3 and GLK unit sales, the competitive comparison may look much more favorable to Lexus. Assuming Lexus hits the 40K sales objective for the NX, and sales in the other model lines don't falter, there should be rough sales parity between the brands by this time next year, and an opportunity for Lexus to regain its former title as the leading luxury car in the U.S. I tend to agree with St. that the NX has high potential, and that the styling is better than the RX. My wife's '09 RX was our first Lexus, and came to us via an estate sale resulting from death in the family. It was virtually new. We probably would not have seriously considered Lexus otherwise, and the RX styling would be one of the reasons.