Commuting in a CT

[DanD]

I am thinking of buying a 2/3 year old CT for my daily commute, which varies between 80 and 100 miles each day, 70-75% of this being on motorways. I appreciate that hybrids make more sense in town, but on the other hand, I do not want to buy a diesel... and would like to stick to the Lexus brand.

Having driven a CT many a time as courtesy cars, I am not too concerned about the performance - I would be on my own in the car most of the time - or about the firm suspension. I am, however, more concerned about the road noise.

Would CT owners recommend it for this type of commute?

Would I be better off with an older IS of similar value? (bear in mind that I like my toys and would go for a F-Sport or possibly a Premier for the better audio and premium navigation)

Do running costs vary greatly between the CT and the IS?

Thank you.

[colin79666]

Well I commute 75% dual carriageway on a 50 mile round trip commute each day in my 2014 CT200h. Engine noise isn't an issue and road noise is less than most other hatchbacks I've been in. The Yokohama OEM tyres aren't the quietest but switch to something else and it helps. 

IS would be more refined but expect less mpg and higher servicing/maintenance costs.

If you are comfortable in the CT and ok with the performance then it makes a fine car for commuting if you really don't want t a diesel. 

As with any car you are considering get a test drive and be sure to go on the kinds of roads your commute would cover. 

[Wass]

Depends upon how you choose to drive on the motorways and dual carriageways. If you drive to stay out of everyones way and keep your stress levels low IE the same speed as lorries,  you don't need to overtake and so there is no need for sudden bursts of power and braking becomes largely un-necessary since lorries on the inside lane dont brake,  the CT can return some good motorway results despite hybrids being more suited to urban driving. If you drive at 70-ish come what may, look at a non hybrid. I have always driven autos this century and found that the best tool for motorways and dual carriageways is a DIESEL....  there ... I've said the dreaded D word! ( they still arent selling a lot of electric or hybrid lorries for tramping up and down motorways by the way... can't think why this is...).

[chris_fletcher]

The IS300H is a much better car all round than the CT. I had a CT for 3 years and it did save me a lot on fuel compared to the 20mpg of my RX300 but ride quality is rather firm and road noise is very noticeable. I went from the CT to the IS and on exactly the same commute I got ~44mpg vs ~55mpg but I was more than happy to take the hit as the car was so much better.  The CT is a fine car taken on its own or compared to other similar sized compacts but having been given one twice recently whilst the RX was in for some work doing its shortcomings are more apparent

 

[Mikeyb999]

I use my CT for my daily commute - about 30 miles, 75% on the motorway.  I find it quiet and I'm getting mid to high 50's mpg.

Negatives are the slightly poor ride quality (and mines on 16" tyres) and it can struggle a little if you need to accelerate on a hill.  Other than that its a fine commuting tool, cheap to run, good seats, nice sound system (I have premium nav).

All that said, I wouldn't replace the CT with another, I'll be looking for an IS next year as its a more refined package, but that's the same if you go up the range with most manufacturers 

[rayaans]

Go for the IS - its better in almost every area and running cost differences between each are negligible.

[noby76]

On 20/10/2017 at 12:49 PM, DanD said:

I am thinking of buying a 2/3 year old CT for my daily commute, which varies between 80 and 100 miles each day, 70-75% of this being on motorways. I appreciate that hybrids make more sense in town, but on the other hand, I do not want to buy a diesel... and would like to stick to the Lexus brand.

Having driven a CT many a time as courtesy cars, I am not too concerned about the performance - I would be on my own in the car most of the time - or about the firm suspension. I am, however, more concerned about the road noise.

Would CT owners recommend it for this type of commute?

Would I be better off with an older IS of similar value? (bear in mind that I like my toys and would go for a F-Sport or possibly a Premier for the better audio and premium navigation)

Do running costs vary greatly between the CT and the IS?

Thank you.

You can pick up a low mileage 1 owner  IS250 SE-L for half the price of a 2-3 year old CT and money saved can be used to run it. the IS will cruise better on the m'way as the CT is more of an urban city car..

[Ian J. Parsley]

Yes, would agree it depends somewhat on the type of commute. 

I think the CT is a fine commuting car and for an urban commute it’s a good call. But if much of your commute is motorway and an IS is a viable option, I’d go for it over the CT. 

Take a good extended test drive in both. They are markedly different cars, despite being of the same brand. 

[Linas.P]

@DanD - you kind of answered your own question - hybrid is designed for urban commute, not very good for motorway. I share your sentiment - diesel would be ideal for 75% motorway journey (especially the long one you are doing), but same as you I would not be very keen getting diesel. IS300h seems to be more sensible option, but on motorway the gains over IS250 would be  minimal and difference in price would by you few years worth of fuel. There are mk3 IS250, but sadly they are rare and sells at premium even over IS300h.

[Finzky]

I did drove 4 day`s in the row: London - Manchester - London and Few times to London - Plymouth - London in two days and London - Skegness - London several times (+ other motorway runs to airports etc), so you can imagine I have really good feeling about how CT perform on motorway. All of us know how we are driving on motorways: always obey highway code and  depends on weather/road conditions. Sometimes we can be a bit cheeky and increase speed limits if road is empty (I`m not proud to say this, but I did floored pedal few times until cars electronic brains won`t let me go any faster). CT is not highway banger for sure and will loose to any other petrol 1.8 engines or diesels in relatively high speeds, acceleration will be slow and noisy, but the actual cruising 70-80 mph is absolutely perfect and I personally find it very good and economical. I found big difference between A and M roads. M roads and some of the A roads require quick acceleration especially overtaking on A roads - I done few when I was sure there is no oncoming traffic, otherwise I did miss extra power to finish with manoeuvre quicker and one time it was quite scary: driver who I intended to overtake floored pedal deliberately when I was next to him and won`t let me overtake him, so I had no extra power to outrun him and had to push on brakes and pull back behind him and then w****r pulled off the road in next junction (If I would have a chance I would give him couple of slaps for sure).

Conclusion: If you want to go with traffic flow and increase speed a bit sensibly when necessary it will work out absolutely fine even on motorways, but if you looking for that extra power reserve just to have for any A road overtaking occasion go for IS 100%.    

 

Sorry forgot to add: CT is noisy... unfortunately. 

 

 

 

[200h]

i used to have a CT that averaged around 58 - 62 mpg i've had a courtesy IS250 only returned 27mpg but my current IS300h returns a steady 48mpg

if you can afford an IS300h then i would go for it if not the CT would also be a good comutting  car

[stormchaser]

Never had a problem with my CT on long distance drives. As said it gives you great economy and a quiet luxury ride. Since I’ve changed my tyres it’s so much quieter now(Goodyears were terrible). It can keep up very well on motorways with traffic if driven right. Use Sport mode for quicker getaways and back into Normal mode. I haven’t found any excessive engine noise when building up speed if you drive a hybrid correctly.
If you want bigger with lots of grunt then an is300h is perfect. I wanted one of these first but it won’t fit in my garage so I got the CT instead.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[DanD]

Excellent comments from all of you, thank you. I have some time before I make a decision, but will bare your feedback in mind.

I have to say that I am not sold on going for a IS250 though. Maybe a 200T may make more sense as I expect the 4 cyl would be cheaper to run than the 6 cyl version. However, I would think that insurance and road tax may be high. I also believe that the 200T is pretty difficult to find these days, and it could be that rarity pushes the prices up.

Thanks again.

[rayaans]

2 hours ago, DanD said:

Excellent comments from all of you, thank you. I have some time before I make a decision, but will bare your feedback in mind.

I have to say that I am not sold on going for a IS250 though. Maybe a 200T may make more sense as I expect the 4 cyl would be cheaper to run than the 6 cyl version. However, I would think that insurance and road tax may be high. I also believe that the 200T is pretty difficult to find these days, and it could be that rarity pushes the prices up.

Thanks again.

The 200t won't be much cheaper to run if anything compared to the IS250. The price difference would be a lot more in favour of the IS250. Having said that, an IS300h would give you the benefit of lower used prices than the IS200t simply because there's more to choose from and they were introduced earlier, and the benefit of good fuel economy. On a motorway run it would be around the 45-50mpg mark.

Have you thought about the bangernomics approach? 

[stevet]

Can’t see the 200t being any cheaper to run than the 250.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[colin79666]

21 minutes ago, stevet said:

Can’t see the 200t being any cheaper to run than the 250.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

200t actually costs more for some service items as it has a timing belt, cheaper for brake component however.

CT200h major service is £50 cheaper than the IS 200t/250/300h and £10 for a minor so not much in it in the grand scheme of things. I'm very happy with my CT 200h as a commuting car, as said above, but now that I'm doing more miles these days I might consider the 300h next time round as it is more refined out of town.

[doog442]

1 hour ago, colin79666 said:

200t actually costs more for some service items as it has a timing belt, cheaper for brake component however.

 

I believe it has a chain.

 

1 hour ago, stevet said:

Can’t see the 200t being any cheaper to run than the 250.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Unless an IS250 can get nearly 50mpg on a run I'd beg to differ .

Add on a sub 7 second 0-60 and 240 odd horses and its actually a very underrated  car...luckily I have one

 

[Linas.P]

If you say so:

On 12/8/2016 at 9:44 AM, lex3 said:

And to throw another spanner in the works re petrol consumption here's my dash from my IS250 SE-L!

I must say that is bit of exception, but 44MPG is standard for motorway cruise. 

I understand that OP is looking for newer car so mk2 IS is out of question, but considering car price and potential fuel cost difference.. there is potential for 3 years of free motoring.

[colin79666]

2 hours ago, doog442 said:

I believe it has a chain

 

My mistake, was looking at Lexus website but on IS 200 not IS 200t. 

[noby76]

12 hours ago, Linas.P said:

If you say so:

I must say that is bit of exception, but 44MPG is standard for motorway cruise. 

I understand that OP is looking for newer car so mk2 IS is out of question, but considering car price and potential fuel cost difference.. there is potential for 3 years of free motoring.

agree with Linas... most look for economy ways to run a vehicle but only factor in fuel, servicing and road tax cost...whilst forgetting the initial cost of the vehicle its self.  e.g. a £15,000 2 year old CT200h wont be cheaper to run over say 3-4 years than a 1 owner 7 year IS250 SE-L costing £7500 which is essentially half the CT's price tag.  

[DanD]

23 hours ago, rayaans said:

Have you thought about the bangernomics approach? 

It could well be an option, but not one I have looked into as yet. I am keen to stay with Lexus, so an early CT could do the trick... or I would need to look elsewhere. I recently drove a Peugeot 308 and was actually rather impressed. Downside is that it may have to be a diesel for the economy.

5 hours ago, noby76 said:

agree with Linas... most look for economy ways to run a vehicle but only factor in fuel, servicing and road tax cost...whilst forgetting the initial cost of the vehicle its self.  e.g. a £15,000 2 year old CT200h wont be cheaper to run over say 3-4 years than a 1 owner 7 year IS250 SE-L costing £7500 which is essentially half the CT's price tag.  

Surely road tax and insurance would be much higher for the IS250? - Also, after 7 years, despite the car's reliability, I expect that some components will start failing and need replacing?

[rayaans]

21 hours ago, doog442 said:

I believe it has a chain.

 

Unless an IS250 can get nearly 50mpg on a run I'd beg to differ .

Add on a sub 7 second 0-60 and 240 odd horses and its actually a very underrated  car...luckily I have one

 

The 200t can't get 50mpg on a run unless its going at 50-60mph. It only gets about 30mpg on a good day and about 35-40mpg on a run at a decent pace. 

If we're talking outright economy, I know the IS300h can get over 65mpg if going at 50-60mph and its cheaper to buy like for like.

[noby76]

4 hours ago, DanD said:

 

Surely road tax and insurance would be much higher for the IS250? - Also, after 7 years, despite the car's reliability, I expect that some components will start failing and need replacing?

£7500 buys a lot of tax insurance fuel and suspension parts...

[Linas.P]

5 hours ago, DanD said:

Surely road tax and insurance would be much higher for the IS250?

Also, after 7 years, despite the car's reliability, I expect that some components will start failing and need replacing?

You are correct, but do calculations and see for yourself, there are many variables and based on your circumstances one car can be cheaper than another.

In my circumstances insurances is equally high, road tax and fuel cost itself are minor costs.

In terms of failing parts... my car done 172k now, bough it at ~112k, have full service history from new and over nearly 10 years not a single thing has fallen off - only standard service items.

Here would be my estimate for IS vs. CT, Annual miles ~18000. Urban 50%, Motorway 30% and 20% EU (120MPH+, CT doesn't even reach 120MPH) ~ finger in the air estimate 32MPG for IS vs. 45MPG for CT. Fuel costs say £1.15. Insurance £680 for IS vs. £610 for CT. Road tax £295 vs. £0. Car value of reasonable second hand IS £6000 vs. CT £10000 (pretty much just set <60k miles + SE-L, IS starts at £3800, but that is unreasonable so I kind of thrown spanner in my own calculation and I set it for 2009+ cars so you have some face lift). Servicing £345 vs. £245 +£49 MOT for both. Finally, after 3 years re-sale £4500 vs £7000.

Total cost of ownership:

IS £14052

vs. 

CT £11971

Now that makes CT £2080 cheaper to run over 3 years... yet I would get IS250 any day over CT as IS is nicer car to be in (I know ) and on this bombshell .. 

 

[Linas.P]

14 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

IS £14052

vs. 

CT £11971

Small recalculation if you use "Lexus essential care" would make it £13600 vs. £11800 or difference of £1800

Again it is possible to get IS much cheaper than £6000, CT both cheaper and more expensive than £10000, so really it comes to personal preference. But as @noby76 said difference in car cost can give several years of free motoring + depreciation will always going to be higher on never cars... and as I understand we are talking about run-about car, so new is not necessary a good thing if you going to get dings and scratches all over it.