Let’s talk tail fins for a second. From slightly awkward beginnings on the 1947 Cisitalia 202 CMM by Vignale, to soaring relevance and height on the 1959 Cadillac, to global influence on Heckflosse Mercedes-Benzes and Trabants, tail fins defined an era. Sure, this styling highlight of the jet age faded quickly due to increased concern for public safety, but that hasn’t stopped car designers from trying to re-interpret tail fins. In fact, there’s still a car you can buy in America that has a pair of tail fins, and there’s a good chance it’s not the sort of car you’d expect.
Now, this claim comes with a bit of an asterisk, as we’re really going for the vaguest interpretation of tail fins. Structural purists may pine for ferrous fins, but as far as I’m concerned, so long as multiple fins exist on the back of a car, those are plausibly, by definition, tail fins. With that in mind, take a close look at the taillights on the Lexus UX. They have fins! How gloriously odd is that?
Granted, it’s a bit hard to see the fins from the press photos Lexus has released, but thankfully, we have different pictures. In the words of Lieutenant Arcot Ramathorn from Super Troopers, “Enhance.”
See? Fins! Relatively prominent ones by the standards of 2024, at that. It’s the sort of styling element you’d expect from Cadillac rather than Lexus, but it just fits in the context of the UX. Plus, Lexus claims these fins have an actual aerodynamic benefit, so they’re a functional choice along with an aesthetic one.
Now, there’s a chance you forgot the Lexus UX existed, and you might be wondering if it can cash the checks its tail fins write. Well, I recently got behind the wheel of the updated UX 300h at AJAC EcoRun, and I’m pleased to report some surprisingly good things. For 2025, the model gets a new hybrid system that boosts combined power output to 196 horsepower from 181, and even with a claimed zero-to-60 mph time of 7.9 seconds for the all-wheel-drive model, the updated Lexus UX is as quick as you’d realistically need. Now, a well-tuned chassis certainly helps, and it feels downright eager to change direction by the standards of the segment, even if featherweight steering doesn’t tell you much about what the front tires are doing. The damping strikes a nice balance between control and ride comfort, the spring rates and anti-roll bar rates pair nicely with a stiff body structure, and it all adds up to a vehicle that’s remarkably chuckable for a so-called crossover. It’s no hot hatch, but it’s unexpectedly engaging, and that’s a brilliant little surprise.
On the inside, there’s also plenty to like. That shiny, dust-magnet black plastic so prevalent in modern cars is kept to a relative minimum, with Lexus primarily trading on textiles and subtle matte plastics. Plus, there’s a little bit of LC 500 to several touch points, from the artfully integrated interior door handles to the HVAC controls to the Shrek ears on the sides of the instrument cluster. While not everyone can daily drive a gorgeous V8 Grand Tourer every day, a few borrowed touches are nothing to sneeze at. Just to add some sprinkles on top of this compact luxury crossover sundae, the upgraded F Sport seats are genuinely all-day comfortable, the driving position is nice and low, and Lexus’ own ten-speaker stereo is better than the upgraded Burmester option in the Mercedes-Benz GLA. It all adds up to a package that feels so liveable, especially with the new touchscreen-based infotainment system that abolishes Lexus’ controversial trackpad.
Speaking of competing subcompact luxury crossovers, the GLA certainly doesn’t feature the Parthenon solidity of the UX, for this thing feels well screwed together in Lexus tradition. No creaks, no squeaks, no rattles, just a cabin that feels well-made. As a bonus, fuel economy is off the charts. While the UX 300h AWD is rated at 44 mpg city, 40 mpg highway, and 42 mpg combined, I averaged 50 mpg without even trying.
Despite the UX’s entry-level status, you don’t exactly get shortchanged on must-have features. Eight-way power heated and ventilated front seats? Wireless Apple CarPlay and Android Auto? Hands-free power liftgate? A reasonably vivid color heads-up display that doesn’t completely wash out when viewed through polarized sunglasses? All of this kit is available, and it all works well.
However, the UX 300h is a lot of money, especially since the new Toyota Prius is, well, actually quite nice and about $10,000 less expensive. The UX I drove stickered for $54,587 Canadian, and an equivalent U.S. model stickers for $49,545. While that’s still less expensive than a less economical Mercedes-Benz GLA 250 4MATIC, normal cars these days are so good that you have to occasionally wonder if a luxury model is worth it. Oh, and the cargo area in the UX features a high liftover height, but that’s a minor demerit in the grand scheme of things.
Still, what we have here isn’t just the last car sold in America with tail fins, it’s a well-made, well-appointed, economical small car. Sure, it has the price tag to match, but for the right person, it could very well be worth it. In fact, once you balance every factor, it might be the best truly small luxury vehicle on sale today. How about that?
(Photo credits: Eamonn O’Connell)
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
The New 2023 Toyota Prius is Sleeker, Bigger, Quieter and More Powerful, So Why Am I Bummed Out?
-
The 2023 Toyota Prius Prime Is A Champion At Never Using Gas
-
A Reader Gave Me This Incredible Old Book About Taillights And Fins By George Barris: Cold Start
-
We Need To Talk About The ‘Saddle Fins’ On Australia’s Chrysler Royal
-
What Lost Styling Cues Would You Like To Make A Comeback? Autopian Asks
Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.
How is it possible that a human being could create something this ugly?
That’s what I’ve been asking my mother for decades.
I had one of these for an Uber ride and I was pretty underwhelmed. The inside was tiny considering the vehicle’s footprint and it honestly felt kinda cheap.
I guess if you have to have a luxury badge it works but you’re making same serious compromises.
IMO the ’11 Caddy SRX had the last fins, since they were a continuation of the body line.
https://www.gravityautosmarietta.com/imagetag/2679/3/l/Used-2011-Cadillac-SRX-Luxury-1568373872.jpg
Also, you could consider the lights on the back of the new Le Mans Hypercars tailfins, like on the Cadillac, Toyota, and Porsche
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Fi9SOyQUoAI7d96.jpg
I had an SRX as a rental and noticed the vestigal tailfins. Liked it and thought it was a subtle connection to Cadillac’s past in their art and science design language. Adrian probably disagrees.
To paraphrase a certain Aussie, “that’s not a tailfin, THIS is a tailfin”
https://www.carrozzieri-italiani.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/BAT-7.jpg
They were a remarkable series of aerodynamic studies done by Bertone for Alfa Romeo in the 1950s, with one of the cars achieving a drag coefficient of 0.19!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alfa_Romeo_BAT
These three cars together sold at auction in October 2020 for well over 14 million dollars: https://rmsothebys.com/auctions/so20/lots/r579d-alfa-romeo-berlina-aerodinamica-tecnica-579d/photos
Fun fact: the tallest tailfin as measured from ground up on a production car was not on the ’59 Cadillacs but on the German amphibious Amphicar Model 770 from the 1960s at one inch higher than the aforementioned Cadillacs: https://www.lanemotormuseum.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/amphicar_770_1964_web8a.jpg
These are functional vortex generators on the Lexus!
That was my take when I saw them.
Car hating Ralph Nader would tell the story of asking someone at an auto company why their cars had such ridiculous fins. He was told, “Aerodynamics.” Then Ralph would continue, mockingly, “But now there are no fins. What happened? Did the winds change?”
Time to drop the GR engine in that UX and triple the size of those fins!!!!
One of the things I hate about this vehicle UX250 is that there is no spare. They MUST run run-flats. Not a fan of that bit.
I hate to break it to you, but a lot of cars no longer come with spare tires. Sometimes they don’t even give you run-flats. Usually it’s just a can of tire sealant and the phone number for roadside assistance.
My daughters 2018 Ford Fusion Hybrid had no spare or run flats. The batteries took up the spare tire space. When she totaled it a few months back (Not lack of spare tire related) and decided on a replacement, she was happy to learn there was a donut spare tucked under the trunk.
That’s kind of ridiculous. Yikes on cost savings.
I mean in hybrids it’s either batteries and no tire or batteries and tire and no trunk. Even some early plug-ins with no tire still had practically no trunk because the batteries were there. Turns out batteries need a lot of space.
Since the E9X, many BMWs have had no spare. Some had a well for a donut, but you would have had to order the tire extra. The E93 (convertible) didn’t even have a well for the spare. The pump, hydraulics and infotainment equipment occupied that space. I run conventional tires and carry my AAA card and a cell phone. 2X in 10+ years and 75k miles have I been inconvenienced. In 60 years of driving, I have not had a flat more that 10 miles from home.
I lied, I once got a flat w/in a week of buying a new set of tires, as I approached the driveway to work (33 min from home). It was a piece of sheet metal that ruined the tire.
Some past versions of rhe Prius had horizontal fins.
Isn’t that just a really small wing?
What would you call the things on the rear of a ’59 Chevrolet? I’ve always considered them fins but you might be right about wings.
On the other hand, all the protrusions from a fish are called fins, regardless of their orientation. Top, side, bottom, tail — all fins.
Fair point. I suppose in my head I always equated the fins to styling from early jets and rocket ships in science fiction, never fish.
Good article but my opinion at least is that these don’t count as fins since they’re all taillight…the classic fins are part of the body style (there could be some that I’m not aware of that are different) Either way, especially since this is a new car and new cars suck…just sharing my opinion that the classic 50’s cars with fins are awesome and can never be replaced w/ new ugly junk
What if there had been a car in the 50s with Caddy/Chevy/Dodge/Plymouth/DeSoto sized fins that were mostly taillight lenses?
Ok, yeah since I mentioned that there may be some like that which I wasn’t aware of; and as mentioned here (by Citrus) the ’48 Caddy had lens like that, at least 50% (as mentioned by Ranwhenparked) so to me at least, it mostly doesn’t count since the new ones are all taillight + on top of that since it’s a new car=100% No Dice/Crackpipe
See late 50s Mopar iron.
These are actually vortex generators!
Ok yeah, in the technical sense…
Now that I think about it, I guess to clarify I was talking about what I would say is just a matter of opinion: These aren’t “real” fins compared to the ones in the 50’s, at least to me
What about the mid-2000s Pontiac Grand Am, with its finned spoiler? I make that as the last domestic with ’em.
I consider those 3D tail light lenses as opposed to tail fins, since they’re not part of the actual bodywork, but maybe it’s splitting hairs.
I set the last finned car in North America as the 1999 Cadillac Deville and the last one, period, as the 2014 Hindustan Ambassador
Where do you classify the BMW i8?
Flying buttresses with horizontal black plastic trim
Not just flying buttresses
I think they invented something new, a sideways spoiler or something
But there are fins!
The 1948 Cadillac’s fins were mostly taillight.
Mostly, but not entirely, maybe 50% or so. Notably the peak of the fin was painted sheet metal
I contend that these days the lights are as much bodywork as any other part of the car. They aren’t generic sealed-beam headlights or parts-bin taillights. They are specifically shaped to conform to or add to the overall appearance of the car.
Taillights never were generic sealed beam or parts bin the way headlights were, they were always custom designed for the car. In most cases, Cadillacs, at least
Lots of cars used generic taillights. Open the British Leyland catalog for a good example.
Look at American cars from the ’50s and ’60s and tell me taillights weren’t used as distinctive styling elements in the era of proper tail fins
Doesn’t really count much when you can’t get even one of them to work half the time, though.
Yeah, an easy joke, but don’t y’all tell me you weren’t thinking it too.
I am curious if I fit in it. I suspect the answer is “probably not.”
Do the Cadillac XT4, XT5 not also count?
For the XT4 or XT5 to be considered, we would have to remember they exist. So few remember these that there’s probably fewer people that remember than the number sold, since they seem so bland and forgettable, I assume half of their owners don’t even know which model they purchased.
I honestly forgot they existed until just now. I basically only think Cadillac makes the Escalade. That’s 99% of the Cadillacs I see on the road. Every once in a while I’ll see a Lyric (If they’re not going to pronounce it correctly I’m going to spell it how it sounds) or CT4/5 on the road
I was always a fan of the fins, these are more vestigial finlets, but I will still allow the association.
I’ll allow it, it’s a fin.
I’m in the “Massive Metal Murder Fin” camp when it comes to tail fins. These are nice, but not enough to exite me.
Seems fishy.