umm... can anyone say rip-off?

this is pissing me off, all these crappy look-alikes are dragging the VX down.

get your own ideas!

technocoy
link:

It looks like they studied the VX-4 pretty closely. Nothing like an SUV built on a korean car platform. Anyone remember YUGO??? LOL

Never fear - be positive and just smile knowing it's the most sincere form of flattery. If anyone with one of those things says anything to you about your VX, you can remind them who was first (and still the coolest)! And it's supposed to be cheaper than the Santa Fe... that thing isn't competition for us. :-)

It doesn't look nearly as cool as the drawing either! It's no VX; that's for sure!

http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/20...how/index.html

http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/20...-tuscon03s.jpg

You know, I hate those digital images that get you all excited about something (or mad because it is taking our VX on a Hyundi) that it isn't... I have to admit, the picture reminds me of the VX-4... But as the pic shows about, its nothign but another foreign bubble that is made on a budget (which is fine, I like inexpensive cars) and not up to par with the real deal....

VX'rs have nothing to fear... As I have seen by many people who have posted messages about their purchases, people still think we drive a futuristic vehicle... Like the commercial in the superbowl with kids getting their mouths washed out with soap for seeing something really cool.... it should have been the VX...

Anyone think that almost all current SUV models have ripped off our headlight design? Other than that horn lights I mean. Some have integrated the turn signals into the same unit, like all the cars are doing too. But I mean the overall look with the bulbous triangle that stretches back aways.

Maybe cars were doing something like that already and putting them on an SUV just means scaling them up bigger than on a car, but I can't think of a single SUV (or a car) with this style of headlights predating the VX.

Now they all look like us.

http://www.motortrend.com/autoshows/...s_hyundais.jpg http://www.cardesignnews.com/news/20...-tuscon03s.jpg

The car and the drawing are the same except for one thing... the proportions of the body to the glass area to the wheels. That's why the VX looks so cool and so different from all the other SUVs that have copied it's various details. You could wrap the VX styling around an Explorer and give it big rear doors and three rows of seats and cargo area with good visibility out the rear with a V8 option but then it would have never become an icon... it would just be a normal truck with odd styling and no carmaker now is going to sacrifice utility for sport the same way that Isuzu had the balls to when our babies were conceived. There is no danger of anyone else copying the VX. They can copy the little details, but they will never copy the larger concept (unless VW does that Concept T thing)

...Just got new floor mats and people looking in swear my 1999 VX is a 2005 "thing" LOL. Let the auto industry try to copy the VX, in the mean time we'll continue to drive the most unique yet capable SUV ever built for under $35k :yes:

What really gets me is that despite superb characteristics and inovative design the VX received lousy reviews by the automotive press especially Consumer Report. Then some other manufacturer comes up with something like this Tucson and it gets high rating.
Credit sshould be given where credit is due.

Actually most of the automotive press gave the VX relatively high marks (I own over 25 industry publications that I've thoroughly read and all but one really liked the VX - the one exception was an Aussie issue of Wheels - Feb 98). They only complained about rear visability and back seat access for the most part, plus a "plain" dash. There was also a love it/hate it attitude about the looks/styling.

The 1999 was ranked in the top 10 in the May 99 Motortrend with "Most Unique Styling" featuring a cover shot. The VX also was described as "The World's Sexiest SUV" on the cover of Sport Utility Magazine in Jan 99. The 2000 ranked 2nd in the top 10 in a Fourwheeler article:

http://www.fourwheeler.com/roadtests/5034/index.html

In all, most of the reviews rather favored the VX rather than bashing it. I've never seen the VX in Consumer Reports (and I've looked through most of the auto reviews for 99-01). I'd like to see what they had to say - do you have a copy you can quote from?

-- Best, John

I dunno if CR ever looked at the VX, but if they did I'm sure they would not have liked it for the following reasons:

1) Over-priced
2) Fuel-hog
3) Small cargo area
4) Bad rear visibility

In short, CR is always about the most practical cars. Coolness is not a factor in their evaluation. That applies to *everything* they evaluate, not just cars, which is why you always hear enthusiasts bitch about how CR is so off-base - be it car enthusiasts, music enthusiasts, computer enthusiasts. If there were refrigerator enthusiasts, you can bet they would be unhappy with CR's evaluations of fridges too.

Thx John, very good web site.

Consumer Guide Road Test Ratings ( "1" is the lowest rating and "5" is the highest rating.)
2000 Isuzu VehiCross Ratings
Performance 4
Fuel Economy 2
Ride Quality 2
Quietness 2
Interior Room 2
Cargo Capacity 2
Insurance Costs 3
Total 17 CR

WyrreJ id right in how they evaluate cars. but I still believe that Performance should be 5 unless they compare it against McLarren F1.

Now I got ya. That site is actually Consumer Guide and not Consumer Reports. It explains why I've not been able to find any information about the VX in CR.

I think if you read their review I don't think you can consider it a "bad" one:

Quote:

---

Road Test Evaluation

Although the VehiCross might look unorthodox, it's among the better-performing SUVs, delivering good acceleration, accurate steering, and good grip and balance in turns. Better yet, you get those benefits without excessive body lean. Ground clearance close to 8 inches helps enhance its offroad capabilities, too.
On the down side, the V6 engine sounds coarse under even moderate throttle. In addition, a test model suffered plenty of intrusive gear whine, as well as a wind leak from a driver's window. Fuel economy in early testing averaged 14.7 mpg.


Although the VehiCross suffers from a choppy ride over uneven pavement, most bumps are easily absorbed. Braking performance and pedal feel are satisfactory, but nothing special.


High step-in and a low roofline translate to difficult entry/exit, though seats are comfortable--especially the Recaro-brand front buckets, which are emphatically a rarity in vehicles of this sort. The cabin is roomy enough, too. Shared with Isuzu's Amigo, the dashboard has hard-to-reach audio and climate controls. The rear bench splits 50/50 and folds flat, but cargo space is tight.


Visibility is dangerously obstructed over-the-shoulder. Worse yet, the slotlike rear window and intrusive spare-tire shell conspire to hide virtually all objects behind the vehicle.

---

They basically jam it for the rear visibility, noise, choppy ride and entry/exit. Ther 1-5 numbers are skewed because they are a comparison of all classes of vehicles. If you do a search by any other SUV from the period, you'll find the VX actually rates higher than most or at least as comparable (SUVs in general are ranked lower - how can you compare them to a car?).

Considering that this site and Consumer Reports in general are geared to the average consumer, they really aren't publications geared to the automotive industry exclusively, such as Motortrend, Car and Driver, Automobile, etc. The VX stands its own ground in these real trade publications and was rated above average in SUV-specific publications.

Unfortunately for VX sales, I think the average consumer reads more publications such as CR than Car & Driver. I think this increases the VX's appeal, rather than decreases it. Would you love your VX as much if there were 10 in your neighborhood, or if they were as common as Muranos?

-- John

Mini-Rant:

Consumer Guide is a rip-off.

They exist solely to capitalize on people confusing them with Consumer Reports (just like you did). CG sells their endorsements - particularly for cars - you see them all the time on certain (usually domestic brand) car commercials "Rated a Consumer's Guide Best Buy!!"

My wife's 1st year Neon had one of those endorsements and it was a piece of shit.

Consumer Reports never takes money from any company for anything. They do everything they can to avoid even the chance of companies biasing their reviews. They actively prosecute companies that try to use a good rating from CR to promote their products. They always outright buy anything they evaluate and they make those purchases through "average joes" so the seller doesn't even know that it is headed for a review (and so can't cherry-pick or otherwise provide better-than-average quality units for the review).

Anytime I see a Consumer's Guide endorsement for a product that I am thinking about buying, that brand goes to the bottom of my list (if not completely crossed off).

Automobile magazine dismissed the VX as "an automotive novelty act" That one stung a bit as I really like that publication. As for no one having the balls to make a suv that isn't too concerned with utility... a bud just brought home the FX45 -WOW- what a car!! (what a price tag) 330 plus H.P. fits like a lambskin glove, very little room for cargo, a real Buck Rodgers skin, crappy gas milage...Of course I love the thing--- a sports car with a backpack. That is what we all love, isn't it??? Now where do I park it (the garage is full of other loves) after I figure out how to come up with 46,000 George Washingtons. :goof: :goof: :goof: :goof: :goof: