Kyousuke

So I'm deciding whether to get the RX350 or the GLK350. Both are great cars, and the GLK looks much much better. According to MB Canada's website, it's got a V6 that pumps out 268 hp @ 6,800 rpm-- but wait! 6800 rpm? But the engine red lines at 6000rpm! Correct me if I'm wrong, but does that mean we don't actually get to use all 268 horses?

mr.mbenz

R U planning to race your G L K ?

ftttubrgcm

KY, we have had 2 RX's over the years and loved them. We were very close on getting a 2010 during the week of their release but decided at the last minute to test drive the GLK. We went with the GLK. Like other vehicles, newer model years continue to grow until they are barely what they were when originally designed. I loved my CR-V's but my last one's windshield would be fine in any minivan. That's how we felt about the new RX. The windshield and overall extra width over the older versions make it too large for us. As for the extra ponies, I will rarely ever go up to 5k, let alone 6.8k.

bobhammer

torque is what u need when u are at low rpm

NYCGLK

In this pic seems like 6800 is readline. Haven't redlined much, will pay attention next time how far rpms go.

And tourqe curve is really nice compared to RX. GLK gets max torque at 2k, RX doesn't get it till 4k. And GLK has 7 speed to make up for any deficit in power. Which one is quicker 0-60 (GLK)?

MercPlease

Redline is 6500 according to edmunds.com, and they also say it's 268 @ 6,000... I would think MB's site would be more accurate though..

Kyousuke

Yeah it's true that RX doesn't feel as fast as the GLK. The GLK pulls a LOT at low rpms while the RX takes a while to get the same sort of power. Guess that's the difference between a Lexus and Merc--Merc has power up front while the Lexus's power comes gradually.

As for 0-60, I think the GLK is faster by 0.1 seconds. Still going with the RX though because I have a family of 5, so we'll appreciate the extra room at the back. Also, the RX has better gas mileage, and it's genuine leather is much more comfortable than MB-Tex.

MtnMachine

I use three tests for how efficient an engine is and how well it is designed for application in a luxary car.

1. Closer the HP and torque numbers are the better. A sign of good engineering.
2. The lower the RPM level that produces 80+% of torque for the broadest RPM range, the more fun, quick and responsive the car.
3. Gas mileage comparisons.

GLK is outstanding for 1. and 2. and less than great in #3.

NYCGLK

you mean glk is faster 0-60 by 1.0 seconds, new lexus is slower than old one, and old one wasn't that fast.

To each his own, I think lexus is great, but new look of RX kept me away from even considering to test drive it. Also my friend's 3 year RX rattles as bad as our old 5 year matrix, but leather was nice indeed.

NYCGLK

I'd disagree on point 1. M3: top tq is 295, HP is 420, bad engine engineering?
Diesels have way more tq than hp. Bad engineering?

It's all about what you prefer, low torque or high revs.

ftttubrgcm

Ky, if you have that large of a family, you most definately don't want a GLK. My wife still complains about the rear seat and cargo room of her GLK after having those 2 RX's. I think the GLK is the perfect size vehicle for her now since one of our daughters will be leaving for university next year. That daughter is almost always in her vehicle so we only have to tote around the other one pretty much for now.

MtnMachine

NYCGLK,
Not sure I understand your supporting facts. Are you saying M3 has 293 tq and 420 HP, thus that is a good profile or was that a typo? Shouldn't a 420 HP engine produce 350-395 tq? Yes, diesels have a high tq vs HP ratio and that supports my point about efficient engines.

Talking diesel or rotary changes equation. I was talking about gasoline, piston engines. I think a tq and HP number that is close is a good sign for a gasoline engine.

Hey, I may be missing an important point and forum readers, me, can learn from you point.

NYCGLK

HP is function of torque and RPM, so while for everyday driving you would be correct to say that when RPM and torque are close and torque is available at low rpm you don't have to do as much shifting.

However, if V8 that can be reved to 8000 RMP it is quite an engineering achievement, which is why with only 295 lb ft. of torque M3 can produce 420 hp. All that means that you have to shift more to get more out of the engine. While 335 has 300 of both lb ft and hp, and torque comes in at very low rpm (1500 i believe), it's still slower than M3, because in M3 you car hold gears longer, so shorter gearing and higher rpms can make up for lower engine torque. Other examples would be honda S2000, Civic SI, Audi RS4, i'm sure there are others I'm forgetting that have similar engine profies, that those excellent engines out there. This type is more suitable for racing, it's easier to push car with less torque and more linear power than car with lots of torque. But for everyday driving, it's a different story.

EDIT: I think some Porsches (GT3 RS, ultimate Porsche for track one of them) also have relatively low torque/high rpm/high hp engines, which supports my point well.

MtnMachine

NYCGLK,
Great explanation. I understand your point completely and agree. I overstated or did not confine my statement enough. I did say "engines for luxury car application", but that would include some of the great high performance cars you mentioned.

NYCGLK

Spent countless time trying to understand the whole concept of torque vs power back in the days. There are so many other variables that go into equation (rpms, gearing, weight etc.) And I agree in luxury car you want balance and refinement.

reyoasian

Get Lexus if you want reliability.
Get GLK if you want great performance.
Lexus' are boring....

I think with 2 Lexus in the past, you should go for a change.