New Rc300h And Rc200t

[rayaans]

I ordered a RC a month ago for delivery mid January. I've decided on the 200T this time, as I'm not happy with the mpg I'm getting on my I.S 300h.the space is on the website for the RC and I've been told the brochures should be about before xmas so I would hazard a guess it will appear on the website in the next couple of weeks, maybe Tuesday . being 1st December.my main dealer is getting their demonstrator mid January but the order book has actually been open from September.

The campaigns for the new RX haven't started either yet and that's arguably the most important model they'll be releasing until the new CT

Just received a marketing email from Lexus about the new RX, must say looks really good indeed.

I got one a while ago and the brochures were posted to me end of October.

[Vista]

The new pages are now live http://www.lexus.co.uk/car-models/rc/rc-300h/#Introduction

http://www.lexus.co.uk/car-models/rc/rc-200t/#Introduction

Not sure when these went live, but its the first time I've seen the new models on the official site, so thought I would post them in case anyone is interested.

[para999]

its ok to get an idea but there are a few mistakes on there 1 being foot operated parking brake on the sport (yes there is one not as it says not available) mpg/ litres is the wrong way round for urban. sport does not have stop/start system fitted standard ( its only fitted on premier model)

it also appears from some of the pictures that it has a full hatch opening it doesn't it has a boot with folding rear seats but not full height access from the boot. looks a bit odd but it does keep the lexus originality alive.

[pmsr26]

I'm a owner of one is300h f-sport but I love this rcf ! https://youtu.be/KkEN5oqGVgU

[Adammas]

The UK press reviews are now starting to appear. Ive kept an eye out for these RC as a possible replacement to my IS when its due. The UK press in the main as normal seem to favour german rivals, and put a premium on the performance or lack of.

I feel Lexus really need to of taken a closer look though with the wieght saving, given the RCF being slated for being heavy ( no matter if its a good car ). A Years extra development time they should of got the 10% weight saving to match the BMW etc. Even if they charged an extra grand or two, or made it part of the F-Sport pack. Thinner seats, light components, lighter wheels etc or chassis modificatiosn for aluminium or carbon panels (like the RC F carbon - as the learnings from the LFA were to bring in to the mainstream and reduce the price).

Many of the magazines suggest the 420i a better choice at the same money ( However when specced to the same level it is actually a lot dearer (5k) and still doesnt have some trick bits the RC does- so I dont really know where the magazines get their figures from) but the general public wont know and just take their word for it.

However its leaves a decent amount of cash for lighter parts to be fitted, if for a facelift they can focus on weight savings for this and the other versions its win win for all dynamic abilities.

[wendle]

i think you no all the answers, you own a Lexus, i really don't think you would notice the weight difference under normal driving conditions unless of course your one of the 1% of Lexus owners who track there cars. you have a choice you can own a luxury chesterfield field sofa or go to dfs.

[Adammas]

Yes agreed, I totally pefer A Lexus to a BMW for driving and owning day to day. and with the IS its not so important, and for a GT car as i would class the RCF or RC coupe luxury and comfort with enough oomph is all you need.

I would just like to see what the magazines would say if everything else was equal, since value for money its right on top, distinctiveness, and individuality definately, and its handling and ride is every bit a match for the best of them.

I think the main cars stick to the current principle, but a performance spec in each model that matches the germans would be nice to see, if not neccessarily what i would personally buy.

[rayaans]

Yes agreed, I totally pefer A Lexus to a BMW for driving and owning day to day. and with the IS its not so important, and for a GT car as i would class the RCF or RC coupe luxury and comfort with enough oomph is all you need.

I would just like to see what the magazines would say if everything else was equal, since value for money its right on top, distinctiveness, and individuality definately, and its handling and ride is every bit a match for the best of them.

I think the main cars stick to the current principle, but a performance spec in each model that matches the germans would be nice to see, if not neccessarily what i would personally buy.

Just driven the RC300h F-Sport today. I have an IS300h F-Sport so can compare to that.

Well its not a good start - the RC feels a lot smaller inside, Im 6 ft 1 and the seat had to be pushed all the way back leaving the rear seats useless. In the IS, I dont need to have the seat all the way to the back. The dash is the same with slight changes but whatever you do, don't go for black interior because its so bloody dark in there.

It doesn't drive great either. Its not IS that's for sure. Whilst the RC-F feels good in that it has a lot of power and feels smaller than it is, the RC300h feels somewhat fat and bulbous from behind the wheel. It feels EXACTLY like the GS300h, a car which I think is great as it gets you from A to B in absolute comfort and you never feel like you want to smash the throttle as its a luxury cruiser.

The RC makes you want to drive it hard but when you do it feels uncapable of delivering which is a real shame. Its just a rubbish feeling. The IS handles better and the rides is about the same but the RC feels so much bigger than the IS even though its not. Basically if you like the GS300h and are going to drive it like the GS300h, then buy one. If you're wanting handling then the IS is still better

The only thing the RC has going for it is the looks IMO, for some thats probably enough. The weight can be felt on the road around the corners even at a leisurely 40mph and its quite nose heavy.

Its an odd car and I cant really see who it appeals to. If you want handling then the IS would be the one to go for and if you want comfort the GS would be the one. The RC is trying to be a jack of all trades but it ends up being neither a great handler or has GS levels of comfort and refinement. Odd

[Adammas]

A good honest comparison is good to hear.

I am hoping i can test drive one some point soon, I do like the looks, and as i have a small child who will still not be too big when i look at swapping again its an option. However from your views i think i will try to RC200T, if thats also not so good ill have to look for another IS or a second hand RCF.

[rayaans]

A good honest comparison is good to hear.

I am hoping i can test drive one some point soon, I do like the looks, and as i have a small child who will still not be too big when i look at swapping again its an option. However from your views i think i will try to RC200T, if thats also not so good ill have to look for another IS or a second hand RCF.

It's just a confused car. It doesn't really know what it wants to be. The IS had a clear goal which was to beat the 3 series. The GS was supposed to go against the 5 series and the RC F against the M4

The RC is more of a competitor to a 6 series in the way it drives and feels and almost feels the same size even though it's not. It's to do with the weight I'd assume

Hmm need to get hold of an RC200t now. It's lighter and faster so maybe is the better buy

[para999]

Quote

at the end of the day not everyone's choice is the same car. my advice to you Adammas is to try one for yourself and not go on someone's opinion off a forum that has only test driven the car for a short time.i've actually owned one now for just over a month and its great.i've owned several audi TT's Porsche etc etc,no its not a true sports car but the driving experience comfort etc is very acceptable for a "coupe". yes there is few slight things I would change but not many compared with the i.s. I owned an i.s 300h and have gone to a RC200T simply because the mpg figures on the i.s were nowhere near the 62mpg quoted.yes the 200t is slightly thirstier but I'm getting 30 mpg with only 500 miles on the clock so this will improve as the engine beds in.so in conclusion if your not bothered about the hybrid and want a bit of excitement whilst spirited driving I would go for the 200T.i would also like to address some of the issues pointed out by the previous poster.firstly the interior colour depending on the outside colour you would be going for I would say I have a blue one black interior is fine the poster failed to mention that whilst he thinks black looks very dark it doesn't during daytime hours and during dark there is a subtle strip led panel set in both doors which gives ambient lighting to the cabin (which of course can be switched off if required) secondly seating position I myself am 6ft 3 and I find I don't need the seat all the way back I just have the adjustable steering wheel further towards the dash.as a police trained driver the important feature for driving is the arms to be straight not necessarily the legs so by doing this it leaves room in the back albeit not the same as a 4 door but it is a coupe afterall.oh and don't forget the 200t comes with a spacesaver as standard:-)these things are only my opinion of course.

 

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, para999 said:

 

Still need to get hold of an RC200T, the RC300h is just average - down to the powertrain lugging around too much weight. Lets not forget the 300h weighs way too much for what it is, its like an SUV. Id be expecting the RC200T to handle better simply because of the 150kg less weight and the MPG doesnt sound too bad but hell, its still cramped compared to the other coupe's.

Would be interesting if they made a RC200t 4 door hatchback thing.

[stevet]

On ‎19‎/‎01‎/‎2016 at 9:31 PM, rayaans said:

Just driven the RC300h F-Sport today. I have an IS300h F-Sport so can compare to that.

Well its not a good start - the RC feels a lot smaller inside, Im 6 ft 1 and the seat had to be pushed all the way back leaving the rear seats useless. In the IS, I dont need to have the seat all the way to the back. The dash is the same with slight changes but whatever you do, don't go for black interior because its so bloody dark in there.

It doesn't drive great either. Its not IS that's for sure. Whilst the RC-F feels good in that it has a lot of power and feels smaller than it is, the RC300h feels somewhat fat and bulbous from behind the wheel. It feels EXACTLY like the GS300h, a car which I think is great as it gets you from A to B in absolute comfort and you never feel like you want to smash the throttle as its a luxury cruiser.

The RC makes you want to drive it hard but when you do it feels uncapable of delivering which is a real shame. Its just a rubbish feeling. The IS handles better and the rides is about the same but the RC feels so much bigger than the IS even though its not. Basically if you like the GS300h and are going to drive it like the GS300h, then buy one. If you're wanting handling then the IS is still better

The only thing the RC has going for it is the looks IMO, for some thats probably enough. The weight can be felt on the road around the corners even at a leisurely 40mph and its quite nose heavy.

Its an odd car and I cant really see who it appeals to. If you want handling then the IS would be the one to go for and if you want comfort the GS would be the one. The RC is trying to be a jack of all trades but it ends up being neither a great handler or has GS levels of comfort and refinement. Odd

The RC is based on the GS so probably why it drives like the GS and the weight of the GS! I've only driven the RCF and it does feel heavy but actually hangs on in there on the limit. I need to get in a RC200T but would of loved to see one with the GS450h running gear. But then again the Mustang 5.0 at the same price as the RC200T is tempting :)

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, stevet said:

The RC is based on the GS so probably why it drives like the GS and the weight of the GS! I've only driven the RCF and it does feel heavy but actually hangs on in there on the limit. I need to get in a RC200T but would of loved to see one with the GS450h running gear. But then again the Mustang 5.0 at the same price as the RC200T is tempting :)

Yes but you'll find a lot to nit pick with Ford's interior quality on the Mustang after driving the Lexus. Its a decent cabin and has some chunky metal (or metal effect, couldn't really tell) switches. Havent driven one but saw the interior in York when Stratstone had their Red GT out to show off in the middle of Picadilly

[Chafford1]

Yes the Mustang GT is tempting but (1) the build quality is nowhere near the RC's (2) less than 20mpg in daily use and £500 a year road tax (3) the waiting list is very long - you'll probably have to wait at least 12 months. 

I'm considering a RC200t/RC300h as my next purchase - the 5.0 Mustang is too expensive as a daily driver.

[rayaans]

On 14/02/2016 at 7:17 PM, Chafford1 said:

Yes the Mustang GT is tempting but (1) the build quality is nowhere near the RC's (2) less than 20mpg in daily use and £500 a year road tax (3) the waiting list is very long - you'll probably have to wait at least 12 months. 

I'm considering a RC200t/RC300h as my next purchase - the 5.0 Mustang is too expensive as a daily driver.

But that'll be offset by the rock high prices of them. I predict you can use one for a year and sell it for hardly any loss