Harrier / Lexus 300
-
There are more and more Harrier 2.4 (converted to RX300) on the road now a days. Any owners care to comment how the car performance is. I am quite fond of the model but now sure if it is worth the price and also the cost of maintenance.
-
Trying sending message to member "Adriansim". He is my cousin who bought a black harrier recently.Originally posted by Toyota_supporter:There are more and more Harrier 2.4 (converted to RX300) on the road now a days. Any owners care to comment how the car performance is. I am quite fond of the model but now sure if it is worth the price and also the cost of maintenance. -
performance? Poor....and its hideous 2 behold
-
One man's meat is another man's poisonOriginally posted by AE86tofu:performance? Poor....and its hideous 2 behold -
harrier buyers are juz rx wannabes.. heh.. anyway, for a car that heavy, only a 3litre engine will do it justice.. else you'll be dragging metal and drinking petrol everywhere you go...Originally posted by tripp_4:One man's meat is another man's poison -
like i said...poor performance as In the engine is underpowered....look at the 0-100km/h times....this tells if the car is sufficiently powered or nt....of coz not outrageously high lar but look at the volvo....its good wad....safer somemore....well powered...
-
Oh boy !
All you folks are wrong.
The harrier is power packed.
only setback for the new 2003 model is that they have a lot of blind spots. Older model 1999 ~ 2002 is good man ! -
powerpacked? no way man....my car is only 2.5L...and it's faster...
I dun like underpowered cars...cos it'll result in excessive engine wear and higher fuel consumption..plus a more uncomfortable ride -
Originally posted by AE86tofu:powerpacked? no way man....my car is only 2.5L...and it's faster... I dun like underpowered cars...cos it'll result in excessive engine wear and higher fuel consumption..plus a more uncomfortable ride
Hey I understand from my friend that consumption is around 9-10km/ltr, not bad wat. A corolla 1.6 can only do 12km/ltr -
Hey, Can any harrier owner tell me the feeling driving this Car.
currently driving 2003 corolla, admiring those harrier owner on the road.the shape of the car simply turn me on. too shy to test drive this monster. -
ok if i even start commenting about this car, a lot of ppl wun like it. gonna be another "Volvo Cars - Check this out" thread.
-
Originally posted by HENG@:ok if i even start commenting about this car, a lot of ppl wun like it. gonna be another "Volvo Cars - Check this out" thread.
What do yo mean ?? as bad as the Volvo ??
The Harrier is now my dream car, like to shape and the ht of
the car, like king of the road. but not sure the fuel comsp and performance. -
hahaha dun mind me 4 saying this but thats really a joke....King of the road? No way man.....performance is only passable.....ok lar at least better than the hyundai santa Fe and the honda CRV....fuel consumption I heard is quite good thoughOriginally posted by Toyota_supporter: What do yo mean ?? as bad as the Volvo ??
The Harrier is now my dream car, like to shape and the ht of
the car, like king of the road. but not sure the fuel comsp and performance. -
uh, meaning i dun like the car. wheelbase too short, too tall, ungainly looking, and slow. but then there will be ppl who will say things like just because i don't own one or because i dun have a driving licence i am not entitled to an opinion.Originally posted by Toyota_supporter: What do yo mean ?? as bad as the Volvo ??
The Harrier is now my dream car, like to shape and the ht of
the car, like king of the road. but not sure the fuel comsp and performance. -
anyway sorry but that car sure ain't anywhere near king of the road. If its King of the Road, i have 3 contenders come to mind. Porsche Cayenne Turbo, VW Touareg and BMW X5.
Even against the Jap one, it has to contend with the CRV, RAV4, X-Trail and Airtrek Turbo R. -
U 4got something.....the land rover ravge rover,Disovery,defender.... and the jeep grand cherokeeOriginally posted by HENG@:anyway sorry but that car sure ain't anywhere near king of the road. If its King of the Road, i have 3 contenders come to mind. Porsche Cayenne Turbo, VW Touareg and BMW X5.
Even against the Jap one, it has to contend with the CRV, RAV4, X-Trail and Airtrek Turbo R. -
gd pt.Originally posted by AE86tofu:U 4got something.....the land rover ravge rover,Disovery,defender.... and the jeep grand cherokee -
You talking about my X-trail?Originally posted by AE86tofu:powerpacked? no way man....my car is only 2.5L...and it's faster... I dun like underpowered cars...cos it'll result in excessive engine wear and higher fuel consumption..plus a more uncomfortable ride -
btw, the XC90, on paper, is slower than it actually in real life. some motoring hacks tested it against some other cars like the RX300 a while back, their comment on the volvo was: Volvo must use the slowest and most inaccurate timing equipment to test their cars, because the XC90 is much faster than whats quoted on paper.Originally posted by AE86tofu:like i said...poor performance as In the engine is underpowered....look at the 0-100km/h times....this tells if the car is sufficiently powered or nt....of coz not outrageously high lar but look at the volvo....its good wad....safer somemore....well powered... -
yeah y? tis' faster than the RX300 wad....btu I dun really like the interior....RX300 wins in this aspect...better interiorOriginally posted by Thailand_Hero:You talking about my X-trail? -
k, let me give my opinions on the car, I HAVE DRIVEN IT BEFORE
i will compare it with the car's i have driven before, ( bmw 520i, nissan sunny 1.5(1999) nissan sunny 1.6(2004) proton wira (1.5), totoya altis (1.6) merc c200)
Off all of these, it was the most powerful car i've driven in terms of acceleration, torque and overall speed. I would say it wasnt the best ( that would go to the ultimate driving machine) but i would rate it 2nd best.
for those who say its underpowered, you got to be kidding me, 3.0L v6 lexus engine its not underpowered by any means, please state what car you drive that is SO powerful. 204bhp and 283lb ft of torque sounds pretty good to me. 9s 0-100 compared to the xc90 9.9 and 9.3 for the full turbo and the bmw x5 3.0 at 8.3s. ( all figures are from the cars offical website)
Another thing, keep in mind you are paying for luxury as well, not just power. Power seats for both front passengers, 7 airbags, 6 disc cd changer, 8 speaker audio system, leather all around, typical lexus quality, not the best, but much better than average.
thats all i can think of at the moment, i'll add more if anyone has any questions -
btw i'm comparing it with cars in it's category
its useless comparing it with the cayanne(sp?), bmw x5 4.6, these cars are off a diff class
or on the other hand, i'm not comparing it with the x-trial or the airtek or the hyundai..
again it's a different class
cant compare apples and oranges -
you say this, but in your previous post,Originally posted by trlnlty:btw i'm comparing it with cars in it's category
its useless comparing it with the cayanne(sp?), bmw x5 4.6, these cars are off a diff class
or on the other hand, i'm not comparing it with the x-trial or the airtek or the hyundai..
again it's a different class
cant compare apples and orangesOriginally posted by trlnlty:i will compare it with the car's i have driven before, ( bmw 520i, nissan sunny 1.5(1999) nissan sunny 1.6(2004) proton wira (1.5), totoya altis (1.6) merc c200)
not making sense lah you.
-
i mentioned the cars i've driven before mearly to state my experience.
e.g i felt that the lexus was the most powerful of all i've driven before
i wont say the that lexus was the best car among all of them because they are off different purpose -
uh 204bhp and 283ft/lb is pretty weak... for a heavy car like that.