Lexus RX 450h+ plug-in hybrid review finds a serene and thrifty luxe SUV
Remember when the Toyota Prius was blazing its own trail and even Hollywood A-listers were making a green statement by having one in the driveway?
Hybrid popularity has exploded in recent years, especially post-Covid. More than 70 per cent of Lexus vehicles sold here have hybrid technology beneath the skin, and by 2030 the brand forecasts its entire Australian fleet will be full electric, hybrid or plug-in hybrids.
Which explains the arrival of a new iteration of the RX, the large Lexus SUV, which has been pivotal over the past 20 years in luring luxury buyers away from the big German brands.
The RX 450h+ is a plug-in hybrid, which can run on pure electric power for about 65km but then also has the backup of a petrol engine with a 55L tank.
Priced from about $135k in your driveway, the new offering sits between two hybrid siblings – the base 350h at $105,300 and the turbocharged 500h F Performance that remains atop the RX heap at $142,670.
The plug-in hybrid realm is rapidly moving, while the nation's top three overall vehicles sellers last month were the Ford Ranger, Toyota HiLux and Isuzu D-Max, coming in fourth was the BYD Shark 6, which is indeed a plug-in hybrid with an electric range of about 80km.
Having recently driven the Haval H6 GT PHEV and Mitsubishi Outlander PHEV, the RX 450h+ is more likely to be shopped against the BMW X5 xDrive50e that has a range of about 100km ($170,500 drive-away) or the Volvo XC90 Recharge which is good for 77km ($148,320 drive-away).
What do you get?
Lexus typically excels in the standard features realm and the RX is no exception.
Riding on 21-inch alloys, the cabin feels and looks high-end with curved surfaces and leather trim.
The plug-in hybrid is only available in Sports Luxury specification, which includes an electric boot door with kick sensor, 14-inch central touchscreen, wireless phone charger, 21-speaker stereo system, panoramic sunroof, as well as wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto.
Ample room is available in the back for adults, with other luxuries including three-zone aircon, heated and ventilated front and rear outboard seats, heated steering wheel, sunshades in rear doors, along with power reclining and folding back seats. The seats can also be dropped via buttons in the boot – brilliant when loading sporting equipment or awkward-size items.
Colour options include white, black, titanium, grey, silver, red, copper, khaki and blue.
Six interior combinations to choose from, with browns combining with bamboo and black shades, plus white with bamboo or black.
Charging takes about 7.5 hours to completely replenish using a standard home power point and a 10-amp charger that comes with the car, or 2.5 hours using a 32 amp public charging system.
Capped price servicing is available for the first five, costing $695 each.
Lexus buyers are also given access to the Encore program, which entitles members to a variety of special events, as well as free loan cars during servicing and when travelling interstate.
How was the drive?
Shifting between electric and petrol power is done seamlessly, similar to what we've experienced with all Lexus hybrids.
The key differential with the plug-in version is the ability to lock the RX into pure electric drive and our test saw it travel 55km before the engine needed to supplement the power.
Typically Lexus-silent in operation, there is a gentle hum when the four-cylinder engine kicks into gear yet remains serene in just about all circumstances.
Despite its electric power the SUV isn't remarkably quick, with a respectable 0-100kmh time of 6.5 seconds.
Cornering is best undertaken with conservatism to avoid body roll, but the RX has always been a vehicle of luxury and comfort – and the plug-in version doesn't deviate from the remit. Those wanting extra punch and cornering ability would need to look at the F Performance derivative.
Buyers of the plug-in are no doubt chasing efficiency and that is best achieved by replenishing the battery. Many people aren't travelling more than 60km a day in their commute so using electric power primarily is conceivable.
The petrol engine does push power back into the battery while the electric motors can also chime in for extra acceleration prowess.
With a full battery you could get close to achieving the official fuel consumption figure of 1.3L/100km, but after depleting its reserves we saw 6.1L/100km on one highway journey. That's still pretty thrifty for a big SUV.
The plug-in does have the smallest fuel tank of the RX range at 55L, but the battery ensures it's the heaviest of the four-model line-up at 2200kg.
Would you buy one?
Kel: While I loved the quiet and serene ride, I felt like it was an old man's car. That's being stereotypical, but it was sensible and luxurious without much excitement factor. The luxury plug-in hybrid space isn't super-popular yet, and I would probably side with a full electric model for some extra pizzazz.
Grant: The RX 450h+ does what it says on the tin. Buyers wanting an efficient SUV and don't undertake long daily travels will love the thrifty operating costs. Lexus has an excellent reputation for longevity and reliability so it's a safe option for those shopping for a luxurious plug-in.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
ABC News
an hour ago
- ABC News
Jim Chalmers treads middle path between unions and business on artificial intelligence
It was only last week the prime minister stood in front of three grieving parents to announce YouTube would be included in his social media ban for kids. One father was cradling an urn as he blamed social media for the loss of his daughter. It was a powerful example of a government, with bipartisan support, scrambling to catch up after the horse bolted on a new technology. Another was the News Media Bargaining Code, introduced by the Morrison government to force Google and Facebook to cough up for news content driving clicks on their sites. Leaving aside arguments about the effectiveness of both moves, they represent attempts at retrofitting regulation to put the social media genie at least partly back in the bottle. Which brings us to the current debate around how to regulate — or not — artificial intelligence. If the treasurer's reform roundtable kicking off in two weeks achieves nothing else, it has at least sharpened a long overdue debate about what role government should play in setting the rules of the road for AI. This technology is already upon us. AI is involved whenever we use search engines, digital assistants (think Siri or Alexa), streaming services (think Netflix), and social media. Banks, big tech, and cyber security firms are all racing to roll it out. Even the care sector is quickly developing ways to harness the opportunities. The Brotherhood of St. Laurence, a social justice organisation that provides aged care, disability and other community services, recently ran an eight-week trial of an AI tool. The results were overwhelmingly positive. Staff involved found AI saved them about an hour a day, which could then be spent focusing more on teams and participants. The technology also improved accessibility for staff with language barriers or neurodiversity. "AI has great potential to help community organisations work smarter, reach more people, and tackle long standing barriers to access and equity — if it's done right", Executive Director Travers McLeod told the ABC. "Used responsibly, AI can free up human time in a way that can generate impact for the communities in which we work and support." The benefits are clear, but McLeod also notes the importance of "strong ethical guardrails and a clear framework for lawful and ethical AI use, along with its environment impact, especially in the care economy". "AI must be used as an accelerant of equity and better outcomes for all, not in a way that grows inequity and poverty," he said. This is where the role of the government comes in. Some of these AI "guardrails" already exist in the care sector. Some exist in other sectors too. There's a federal Privacy Act, some states have a Human Rights Act, some industries have professional guidelines. There is, however, no single set of rules for the entire economy governing the "ethical" use of AI or how it can be used to replace human workers. This is the debate now raging ahead of the treasurer's roundtable. At one end of the spectrum sits the ACTU, which wants a national artificial intelligence act, and a new national AI authority to oversee "mandatory enforceable agreements" in every workplace, to ensure staff are consulted before technology is rolled out. At the other end of the spectrum, business groups and the Productivity Commission want as little additional regulation as possible. They argue existing rules are enough and don't want to slow down a technology viewed as crucial for Australia's future success. Treasurer Jim Chalmers is pitching himself as something of a Goldilocks on this. He says he wants to find the right balance "between over-regulating and under-regulating". This "sensible middle path", as Chalmers calls it, charts a course on AI regulation between those who want to "let it rip" and those who want to "pull the doona over the head". This sounds perfectly reasonable, but notably, it still represents a rejection of the union movement's position. Before this roundtable has even begun, the treasurer has said no to one of the ACTU's biggest demands. Indeed, the treasurer is openly siding with the Productivity Commission on this. "The PC's broad directions are largely consistent with the directions that I set out on the weekend." That is, that AI should be treated "as an enabler, not an enemy." This fundamental difference between the union movement and the Labor government over AI could become a bigger point of friction beyond this month's roundtable, given we're only at the start of the AI transformation. AI will increasingly change the way we live and work. There are bound to be jobs lost. Hopefully, new roles will also be created. Where this transformation leads to is difficult to predict, but the path is unlikely to be smooth. Having put its stake in the ground, the ACTU will now be there whenever jobs are lost, demanding much tougher AI rules than the government is willing to accept. The government is trying to strike the right balance between preventing mass redundancies forced by AI, while also preventing Australia falling behind those countries rapidly embracing the technology. Chalmers is optimistic the benefits will ultimately outweigh the risks. He won't want to be a prime minister 10 years from now trying to retrofit regulation after the AI horse has bolted. David Speers is national political lead and host of Insiders, which airs on ABC TV at 9am on Sunday or on iview.
The Advertiser
an hour ago
- The Advertiser
Electric cars pull up short in road test of range claim
Some of Australia's best-selling electric vehicles fail to meet their advertised range and consume significantly more power than manufacturers promise, on-road tests reveal. One popular SUV performed particularly poorly, stopping short of its advertised range by more than 100km. The Australian Automobile Association released the results on Thursday after testing five electric vehicles as part of its $14 million Real-World Testing Program. The findings come one week after the program revealed 25 out of 30 petrol and hybrid vehicles tested had consumed more fuel than their lab results showed and more than three in every four vehicles examined had failed to meet expectations. The motoring body road-tested five electric vehicles in its first trial of the technology, using a 93km circuit around Geelong in Victoria in damp and dry conditions, and measuring the vehicles' energy consumption. BYD's Atto 3 SUV produced the worst result of the models tested, falling short of its promised range by 111km or 23 per cent, and using 21 per cent more power than advertised. Tesla's entry-level electric car, the Model 3, also failed to meet its promised range by 14 per cent, or 72km, and used six per cent more electricity than lab results showed. The Tesla Model Y and Kia EV6 SUVs also failed to meet their range by eight per cent, or just over 40km, while the Smart #3 electric car came the closest to its lab test results, falling within five per cent or 23km of the advertised range. The results could help families and fleet managers make choices about their next vehicle purchases, association managing director Michael Bradley said, as research showed range anxiety remained a significant concern for buyers. "As more EVs enter our market, our testing will help consumers understand which new market entrants measure up on battery range," he said. An electric car's range could be affected by a number of factors, Australian Electric Vehicle Association national president Chris Jones said. These include high or low temperatures, headwinds, steep terrain, and the use of air conditioning and heating features. Car makers should seek to "under-promise and over-deliver" when it comes to vehicle range, he said, to allow buyers to make informed choices about the models that will suit their needs. "It is frustrating that manufacturers are inflating the values when they really ought to be a bit more conservative," Mr Jones said. "I would have thought a 10 per cent difference was reasonable but 20 per cent is pretty bad." Electric vehicle range is typically tested in Australia using the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) laboratory test, but this will be replaced by the more accurate Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) from December. The Australian Automobile Association's vehicle-testing program, funded by the federal government, has examined 114 fuel-powered vehicles since it began in 2023 and found 88 models, or 77 per cent, failed to meet their advertised energy consumption. Some of Australia's best-selling electric vehicles fail to meet their advertised range and consume significantly more power than manufacturers promise, on-road tests reveal. One popular SUV performed particularly poorly, stopping short of its advertised range by more than 100km. The Australian Automobile Association released the results on Thursday after testing five electric vehicles as part of its $14 million Real-World Testing Program. The findings come one week after the program revealed 25 out of 30 petrol and hybrid vehicles tested had consumed more fuel than their lab results showed and more than three in every four vehicles examined had failed to meet expectations. The motoring body road-tested five electric vehicles in its first trial of the technology, using a 93km circuit around Geelong in Victoria in damp and dry conditions, and measuring the vehicles' energy consumption. BYD's Atto 3 SUV produced the worst result of the models tested, falling short of its promised range by 111km or 23 per cent, and using 21 per cent more power than advertised. Tesla's entry-level electric car, the Model 3, also failed to meet its promised range by 14 per cent, or 72km, and used six per cent more electricity than lab results showed. The Tesla Model Y and Kia EV6 SUVs also failed to meet their range by eight per cent, or just over 40km, while the Smart #3 electric car came the closest to its lab test results, falling within five per cent or 23km of the advertised range. The results could help families and fleet managers make choices about their next vehicle purchases, association managing director Michael Bradley said, as research showed range anxiety remained a significant concern for buyers. "As more EVs enter our market, our testing will help consumers understand which new market entrants measure up on battery range," he said. An electric car's range could be affected by a number of factors, Australian Electric Vehicle Association national president Chris Jones said. These include high or low temperatures, headwinds, steep terrain, and the use of air conditioning and heating features. Car makers should seek to "under-promise and over-deliver" when it comes to vehicle range, he said, to allow buyers to make informed choices about the models that will suit their needs. "It is frustrating that manufacturers are inflating the values when they really ought to be a bit more conservative," Mr Jones said. "I would have thought a 10 per cent difference was reasonable but 20 per cent is pretty bad." Electric vehicle range is typically tested in Australia using the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) laboratory test, but this will be replaced by the more accurate Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) from December. The Australian Automobile Association's vehicle-testing program, funded by the federal government, has examined 114 fuel-powered vehicles since it began in 2023 and found 88 models, or 77 per cent, failed to meet their advertised energy consumption. Some of Australia's best-selling electric vehicles fail to meet their advertised range and consume significantly more power than manufacturers promise, on-road tests reveal. One popular SUV performed particularly poorly, stopping short of its advertised range by more than 100km. The Australian Automobile Association released the results on Thursday after testing five electric vehicles as part of its $14 million Real-World Testing Program. The findings come one week after the program revealed 25 out of 30 petrol and hybrid vehicles tested had consumed more fuel than their lab results showed and more than three in every four vehicles examined had failed to meet expectations. The motoring body road-tested five electric vehicles in its first trial of the technology, using a 93km circuit around Geelong in Victoria in damp and dry conditions, and measuring the vehicles' energy consumption. BYD's Atto 3 SUV produced the worst result of the models tested, falling short of its promised range by 111km or 23 per cent, and using 21 per cent more power than advertised. Tesla's entry-level electric car, the Model 3, also failed to meet its promised range by 14 per cent, or 72km, and used six per cent more electricity than lab results showed. The Tesla Model Y and Kia EV6 SUVs also failed to meet their range by eight per cent, or just over 40km, while the Smart #3 electric car came the closest to its lab test results, falling within five per cent or 23km of the advertised range. The results could help families and fleet managers make choices about their next vehicle purchases, association managing director Michael Bradley said, as research showed range anxiety remained a significant concern for buyers. "As more EVs enter our market, our testing will help consumers understand which new market entrants measure up on battery range," he said. An electric car's range could be affected by a number of factors, Australian Electric Vehicle Association national president Chris Jones said. These include high or low temperatures, headwinds, steep terrain, and the use of air conditioning and heating features. Car makers should seek to "under-promise and over-deliver" when it comes to vehicle range, he said, to allow buyers to make informed choices about the models that will suit their needs. "It is frustrating that manufacturers are inflating the values when they really ought to be a bit more conservative," Mr Jones said. "I would have thought a 10 per cent difference was reasonable but 20 per cent is pretty bad." Electric vehicle range is typically tested in Australia using the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) laboratory test, but this will be replaced by the more accurate Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) from December. The Australian Automobile Association's vehicle-testing program, funded by the federal government, has examined 114 fuel-powered vehicles since it began in 2023 and found 88 models, or 77 per cent, failed to meet their advertised energy consumption. Some of Australia's best-selling electric vehicles fail to meet their advertised range and consume significantly more power than manufacturers promise, on-road tests reveal. One popular SUV performed particularly poorly, stopping short of its advertised range by more than 100km. The Australian Automobile Association released the results on Thursday after testing five electric vehicles as part of its $14 million Real-World Testing Program. The findings come one week after the program revealed 25 out of 30 petrol and hybrid vehicles tested had consumed more fuel than their lab results showed and more than three in every four vehicles examined had failed to meet expectations. The motoring body road-tested five electric vehicles in its first trial of the technology, using a 93km circuit around Geelong in Victoria in damp and dry conditions, and measuring the vehicles' energy consumption. BYD's Atto 3 SUV produced the worst result of the models tested, falling short of its promised range by 111km or 23 per cent, and using 21 per cent more power than advertised. Tesla's entry-level electric car, the Model 3, also failed to meet its promised range by 14 per cent, or 72km, and used six per cent more electricity than lab results showed. The Tesla Model Y and Kia EV6 SUVs also failed to meet their range by eight per cent, or just over 40km, while the Smart #3 electric car came the closest to its lab test results, falling within five per cent or 23km of the advertised range. The results could help families and fleet managers make choices about their next vehicle purchases, association managing director Michael Bradley said, as research showed range anxiety remained a significant concern for buyers. "As more EVs enter our market, our testing will help consumers understand which new market entrants measure up on battery range," he said. An electric car's range could be affected by a number of factors, Australian Electric Vehicle Association national president Chris Jones said. These include high or low temperatures, headwinds, steep terrain, and the use of air conditioning and heating features. Car makers should seek to "under-promise and over-deliver" when it comes to vehicle range, he said, to allow buyers to make informed choices about the models that will suit their needs. "It is frustrating that manufacturers are inflating the values when they really ought to be a bit more conservative," Mr Jones said. "I would have thought a 10 per cent difference was reasonable but 20 per cent is pretty bad." Electric vehicle range is typically tested in Australia using the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) laboratory test, but this will be replaced by the more accurate Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) from December. The Australian Automobile Association's vehicle-testing program, funded by the federal government, has examined 114 fuel-powered vehicles since it began in 2023 and found 88 models, or 77 per cent, failed to meet their advertised energy consumption.
Perth Now
3 hours ago
- Perth Now
Electric cars pull up short in road test of range claim
Some of Australia's best-selling electric vehicles fail to meet their advertised range and consume significantly more power than manufacturers promise, on-road tests reveal. One popular SUV performed particularly poorly, stopping short of its advertised range by more than 100km. The Australian Automobile Association released the results on Thursday after testing five electric vehicles as part of its $14 million Real-World Testing Program. The findings come one week after the program revealed 25 out of 30 petrol and hybrid vehicles tested had consumed more fuel than their lab results showed and more than three in every four vehicles examined had failed to meet expectations. The motoring body road-tested five electric vehicles in its first trial of the technology, using a 93km circuit around Geelong in Victoria in damp and dry conditions, and measuring the vehicles' energy consumption. BYD's Atto 3 SUV produced the worst result of the models tested, falling short of its promised range by 111km or 23 per cent, and using 21 per cent more power than advertised. Tesla's entry-level electric car, the Model 3, also failed to meet its promised range by 14 per cent, or 72km, and used six per cent more electricity than lab results showed. The Tesla Model Y and Kia EV6 SUVs also failed to meet their range by eight per cent, or just over 40km, while the Smart #3 electric car came the closest to its lab test results, falling within five per cent or 23km of the advertised range. The results could help families and fleet managers make choices about their next vehicle purchases, association managing director Michael Bradley said, as research showed range anxiety remained a significant concern for buyers. "As more EVs enter our market, our testing will help consumers understand which new market entrants measure up on battery range," he said. An electric car's range could be affected by a number of factors, Australian Electric Vehicle Association national president Chris Jones said. These include high or low temperatures, headwinds, steep terrain, and the use of air conditioning and heating features. Car makers should seek to "under-promise and over-deliver" when it comes to vehicle range, he said, to allow buyers to make informed choices about the models that will suit their needs. "It is frustrating that manufacturers are inflating the values when they really ought to be a bit more conservative," Mr Jones said. "I would have thought a 10 per cent difference was reasonable but 20 per cent is pretty bad." Electric vehicle range is typically tested in Australia using the older New European Driving Cycle (NEDC) laboratory test, but this will be replaced by the more accurate Worldwide Harmonised Light Vehicle Test Procedure (WLTP) from December. The Australian Automobile Association's vehicle-testing program, funded by the federal government, has examined 114 fuel-powered vehicles since it began in 2023 and found 88 models, or 77 per cent, failed to meet their advertised energy consumption.
