Commuting in a CT

[doog442]

3 hours ago, rayaans said:

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.

An economical run for me is 60mph...and probably the rest of the world. I  couldn't get an IS300h cheaper ..like for like. 

[Linas.P]

That is personal circumstances, if you look to used car market today IS300h would be much cheaper like for like.

At constant 50MPH IS250 would do high 40's as well and at 60MPH that would be low 40's, I do get ~37/38MPG @70MPH. I would doubt you can get real 50MPG @60 MPH in IS200t. Additionally, contrary to mk2, mk3's tends to exaggerate fuel efficiency, so only real measure is brim to brim. What I found on mk2 is that stated MPG is +/- 0.9% from brim to brim, whereas at least based on IS300h owners it could be anywhere between 5-10% difference on mk3. I cannot say for IS200t, but I highly doubt your 50MPG @60MPH claim.

as for my calculation, I guess I missed the plot:

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

I am thinking of buying a 2/3 year old CT

Based on that I am 100% with @noby76 - 2/3 years old CT is £13000 car + it cannot benefit from Lexus essential care, which twists all calculation around. Still makes CT cheaper to run after 3 years and resale, but by mere £800 and after 2 years IS would work out cheaper.

[doog442]

Today wasn't when I bought my car Linas and trust me at the time the IS200t was cheaper than an IS300h...like for like.

I cannot say for IS200t, but I highly doubt your 50MPG @60MPH claim.

So why say ?.  You are basing your opinion on what exactly ? Dont forget that I own one and trust me I didn't buy it for the economy

[Linas.P]

It makes complete sense that when you bought your IS200t new or nearly new you got better deal on it, because IS200t never was popular car so dealer would understandably be keen to make better deal on it, than say on IS300h which would sell by itself.

What I am saying - it is irrelevant what you paid for your car when you bought it, because OP is looking for a car now. Now IS300h would be much cheaper to buy and would better value simply because of share numbers to choose from and as such would win hands down in terms of total cost of ownership calculation.

I am not basing my opinion on anything... last time I was behind the wheel of IS200t, the dash indicated 22.8MPG, but that is not representative of anything. Same goes for you 50MPG, maybe under certain circumstances you can achieve that number, but it is not representative of the car. I am just saying that mk3 tends to exaggerate MPG numbers in comparison to mk2. As well I am saying that in real life you not going to be cruising at constant 50 or 60MPG all the time... and even if you do, then IS250 would not be far off with MPG.

 

[doog442]

19 hours ago, Linas.P said:

 last time I was behind the wheel of IS200t, the dash indicated 22.8MPG, but that is not representative of anything. Same goes for you 50MPG, maybe under certain circumstances you can achieve that number, but it is not representative of the car. 

 

My 'certain circumstances' as you state, are driving an IS200t on a semi regular basis up the M27 /M3/ A31/M40. The trick is eco mode, cruise control and nothing above 60mph.

Please not that I actually own this car and am not basing my opinion like you on a quick stint blasting a courtesy car around the block.

For your information at 60-70mph I can average up to 45mpg, at 80 it naturally drops probably due to the turbo cutting in to keep me at those speeds but 40mpg isn't wide of the mark over several hundred miles. If I drive it like I stole it then its 36mpg. 

The car suffers around town but I've never had anything below 30.

I'm not married to this car, I'm looking at an RCF. However I can fully understand now why Lexus launched it as a bit of motorway mileage cruncher with semi decent fuel economy, yet with acceleration when you need it (which the IS250 and IS300h never really had)  It really is a jack of all trades and ticks a few boxes the main one being its Lexus.

 

[rayaans]

4 minutes ago, doog442 said:

My 'certain circumstances' as you state, are driving an IS200t on a semi regular basis up the M27 /M3/ A31/M40. The trick is eco mode, cruise control and nothing above 60mph.

Please not that I actually own this car and am not basing my opinion like you on a quick stint blasting a courtesy car around the block.

For your information at 60-70mph I can average up to 45mpg, at 80 it naturally drops probably due to the turbo cutting in to keep me at those speeds but 40mpg isn't wide of of the mark over several hundred miles. If I drive it like I stole it then its 36mpg. 

The car suffers around town but I've never had anything below 30.

I'm not married to this car, I'm looking at an RCF. However I can fully understand now why Lexus launched it as a bit of motorway mileage cruncher with semi decent fuel economy, yet with acceleration when you need it (which the IS250 and IS300h never really had)  It really is a jack of all trades and ticks a few boxes the main one being its Lexus.

 

Seems like you're getting above average MPG for the 200t then

I had one as a loaner for 3 days as I needed the IS300h servicing, MOT, full valet, recall and a bulb sorting out (they couldnt find the holder so had to take door panel off). It only just got 27mpg. Wasn't hugely impressed by the acceleration though, didn't feel much faster than a 300h in the mid-range and had a lag from a standstill at the traffic lights - dont know if youve felt this?

[doog442]

Just now, rayaans said:

Seems like you're getting above average MPG for the 200t then

I had one as a loaner for 3 days as I needed the IS300h servicing, MOT, full valet, recall and a bulb sorting out (they couldnt find the holder so had to take door panel off). It only just got 27mpg. Wasn't hugely impressed by the acceleration though, didn't feel much faster than a 300h in the mid-range and had a lag from a standstill at the traffic lights - dont know if youve felt this?

I've noticed a massive improvement in fuel consumption now that I'm approaching 10k. I've started doing longish trips on football away days around the country so I guess I've adopted a more economical mindset ..usually on the way there and I guess the engine is now loosening up a bit. I'm not sure how the ECU is interpreting things either.  On the way home its a different story, I enjoy the car and what it has to offer hence my differing fuel figures

As for the lag - oh yes, its there. Sports mode and some revs negates it if you need to but its probably the worst feature of the car. Its as if they produced this wonderful engine and then did everything they could to try and make it conform to EU regs and perhaps the economy figures I'm bleating on about . 

[Linas.P]

20 minutes ago, rayaans said:

had a lag from a standstill at the traffic lights - dont know if youve felt this?

Exactly my feeling, so "better acceleration" comes solely from 0-60 figure... but how often do we do 0-60?! I am much more happy with 0-30 in IS250 than in IS200t or 300h and NA engine feel much more natural, linearly accelerating. An when you say revs solves initial hesitation - it is exactly when I start calling it trashy, or "needed to be trashed to work as intended".

Again, I am not denying that IS200t is more fuel efficient car overall, but it is not massively more fuel efficient. Maybe 3MPG difference at say 60MPH, more at 50MPH, but less over 80MPH.

@doog442 - equally, I am not denying that in those circumstances it is achievable, but that is not representative MPG. If I would be doing long miles on rural roads, my average MPG would maybe 40 as well, but it doesn't mean IS250 is close to 40MPG car as IS200t is not close to 50MPG. Maybe more telling would be to compare your average MPG over last 10000miles, but even then I am living in London spending 30 minutes everyday in stand still traffic and you live in country side... so it is all apples vs. oranges.

[doog442]

26 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

 

@doog442 - equally, I am not denying that in those circumstances it is achievable, but that is not representative MPG. If I would be doing long miles on rural roads, my average MPG would maybe 40 as well, but it doesn't mean IS250 is close to 40MPG car as IS200t is not close to 50MPG. Maybe more telling would be to compare your average MPG over last 10000miles, but even then I am living in London spending 30 minutes everyday in stand still traffic and you live in country side... so it is all apples vs. oranges.

Yes I live in a rural area, I also don't commute. There is no common denominator and I accept that anyone living in a city or travelling during the rush hour will have wholly different consumption figures so yes we are probably singing from a different hymn sheet.  

That aside..the OP (original poster) is on about commuting so I will leave things be. Not sure how we ended up here/.

[Linas.P]

My only point was that for comparison reason you need to put two cars in same conditions.. and I guess we agree on that. Second point was that if you put IS250 vs IS200t on a straight road and set them to run at constant speed, the MPG figure would not be massively different. As for OP I don't think it really makes difference - IS300h will be just fine and given current market conditions makes more sense than IS200t. IS250 is just too old I guess and not exactly an option if the goal is to have 2/3 years old car. As for CT - I am getting to drive it with increasing frequency and hating it more and more every time. I guess if it comes as choice between 1.4l diesel fiesta or golf, CT can be considered rather nice car, but against other Lexus/luxury cars it is not very inspiring.

[stormchaser]

£610 for CT insurance [emoji15]
That’s miles out.
Mine was £320 last month.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[rayaans]

On 01/11/2017 at 9:14 PM, Linas.P said:

My only point was that for comparison reason you need to put two cars in same conditions.. and I guess we agree on that. Second point was that if you put IS250 vs IS200t on a straight road and set them to run at constant speed, the MPG figure would not be massively different. As for OP I don't think it really makes difference - IS300h will be just fine and given current market conditions makes more sense than IS200t. IS250 is just too old I guess and not exactly an option if the goal is to have 2/3 years old car. As for CT - I am getting to drive it with increasing frequency and hating it more and more every time. I guess if it comes as choice between 1.4l diesel fiesta or golf, CT can be considered rather nice car, but against other Lexus/luxury cars it is not very inspiring.

The new 1.5l Golf is a brilliant vehicle though. More accomplished in every area than a CT IMO and the engine is painfully efficient but goes well too. 

[noby76]

managed to get decibel noise levels from this site and seems the IS300h is quieter at most cruising speeds than the IS250 and CT200h not by much but still enough to make a difference

http://www.auto-decibel-db.com/index.html

 

 

[Linas.P]

3 hours ago, noby76 said:

managed to get decibel noise levels from this site and seems the IS300h is quieter at most cruising speeds than the IS250 and CT200h not by much but still enough to make a difference

That is very interesting, thought there are so many variables e.g. rim size, tires etc. Original OE Potenzas or Firanzas are dreadfully loud tires on IS250.

@stormchaser.... yes in Dorset mate and you are probably not 27 either. Year before I got IS250 (for £2600/year insurance) I was desperate enough to quote on CT200h and the price was something like £3300 where IS250 was ~ £3600. I was 23.5 back then though. Now almost any car for me is ~£650 +/- 100. As already discussed in other topics insurance in UK doesn't make sense (and not only because it is expensive), but because the price seems to be completely random e.g. I paid £678 for my IS250, RC-F would be £640 most of other modern cars around the same money, but BMW e46 and e90 ~£900, e92 or even e92 M3 ~£750... looked to some classic cars - BMW 850Csi... completely randomly £480, BMW635 (e24) £320.

Anyway back to the point - I said it is the costs based on my circumstances (and for me CT insurance would be almost the same as IS), they will vary widely for every single member of this forum. 

[stormchaser]

@Linas.P
I didn’t realise your age.


Sent from my Iphone using Tapatalk

[doog442]

On 01/11/2017 at 7:50 PM, rayaans said:

Seems like you're getting above average MPG for the 200t then

I had one as a loaner for 3 days as I needed the IS300h servicing, MOT, full valet, recall and a bulb sorting out (they couldnt find the holder so had to take door panel off). It only just got 27mpg. Wasn't hugely impressed by the acceleration though, didn't feel much faster than a 300h in the mid-range and had a lag from a standstill at the traffic lights - dont know if youve felt this?

I did a run to Portsmouth yesterday from Bournemouth. Two adult passengers and a boot full of golf clubs. 51.4mpg. 

We tonked it home (fast lane with Audis up my chuff) so 80 ish and we got 42mpg

I'm still pleasantly surprised .

Strangely enough I had a CT as a loaner a few weeks back. This was a car I so wanted to be the real deal but It left me feeling slightly empty. Its a basic get from A to B mode of transport with a Lexus badge. I can understand the reasoning, less weight / padding / soundproofing and it serves a purpose .....with bombproof Lexus reliability. It rattled a fair bit mind and I guess that was my major disappointment compared to years in an IS200 and the IS200t. 

 

[Linas.P]

Did 3000 miles in EU in September, average speed 102MPH 1500 miles one way and 109MPH on the way back. 3People with fully loaded car one way, 4 people with fully loaded car back. Average consumtion one way 31.3MPG, average consumtion back 29.8MPG. Did another trip back in July to Scotland and around ~1500miles, 4 people fully loaded for 4 days hiking... British speeds... would say averaged 70MPH, the consumtion varied based on road and traffic between 38-44MPG, overall was something like 39.2 over 1500miles, taking few exceptions out e.g. there was ~ 120miles stuck in mountains between like 80 caravans from Netherlands on single track road and car averaged like 24MPG, because it was literally like you stop to let caravans through, then get up to 50MPH up-hill and then rapidly brake for next lay-by to let other group trough, and then repeat all other again for 120 miles.

In summary:

29.8MPG @109MPH

31.3MPG @102MPH

 38 MPG  @ 80 MPH

 44 MPG  @ 60 MPH

[DanD]

AVERAGE 102mph and 109mph over 1,500 miles? And that's including being stuck behind caravans and up mountain passes?

AVERAGE 70mph over 1,500 miles in the UK?

Really.

I would suggest your speedo needs recalibrating.

[Linas.P]

My speedo does need re-calibrating as every other modern car (as discussed in GS450h topic), but speedo or odometer for that matter were not used and are irrelevant. 

The average speeds I claimed above are calculated based (GPS) miles vs. time: In total it took 22h door to door,  but it took ~4 hours to refuel, change drivers and rest, then ~4h in the ferry + boarding.  ~14 hours to drive ~1500 miles. If you want me to be very precise it was 14h and 12 min for 1523 miles (GPS), but we missed 1 turn in Belgium and it was ~16 miles to turn around, so that makes 1539 miles or ~108.38 MPH on average. If I exclude that missed turn it would be more like 109.43... have I mentioned that I am interested in Endurance racing?!... anyway...

6 hours ago, DanD said:

AVERAGE 102mph and 109mph over 1,500 miles? And that's including being stuck behind caravans and up mountain passes?

AVERAGE 70mph over 1,500 miles in the UK?

... you mixed up everything - caravans from Netherlands were in Scotland, just a large group of numbered caravans.. Highest number was something like ~150, and they were everywhere that weekend.. we have definitely overtaken probably 80 of them. As I said above I do not count that 120 miles, because we averaged maybe 35MPH @22MPG.

EU speed was literally non-stop overnight "flight", almost all the time at or near the top speeds. Funniest thing that the only place where I got photographed by speed camera was in Germany on autobahn.. a.k.a paradise of unlimited speeds. I was doing maybe 95MPH in temporary 82MPH zone (never got the fine thought, the flash was fitted just to check contentiousness I guess).

70MPH average in UK ... yes indeed. I am not going to boast how it is achieved, but you can figure out yourself if you ever been in outside lane or seen motorway.

Finally... all above is irrelevant. I was challenged on MPG. Tried to prove the point.... but you are not in the market for 9.5 years old IS250. If you somehow choose to get one it is cracking car...

I really dislike CT... like many hybrid Lexus'es it could have been great, but it just isn't - it is just not great or competitive. I am not saying it is bad car, but definitely not the best in the market or that segment. IS300h is better car, still not the best in the market and mediocre in it's segment... and if you leaning more towards CT.. then why not Prius - it is basically the same car just doesn't pretend to be a Lexus, if you want literally the same car just with different badge then Toyota Auris-hybrid it is. And if we talking about running cost Toyota will win hands down - same reliability, just all services -30% cheaper (parts not that much). And you even visit same dealership.. most likely.

[DanD]

Yes I did get mixed up.

I lived in Germany for 9 years and you are right: autobahn are brilliant when unrestricted, but if and when there are speed limits, better stick to them!

I agree that the CT is bettered by many, and also that it has many good points: it is extremely reliable, relatively cheap to run, has plenty of toys and I love its go-kart attitude. I also agree that an older IS300h is most probably a better buy for many reasons. The reason I am/was looking at the CT is that I will be on my own in it 90% of the time.

Maybe I should wait a little longer and treat myself to a RC300h instead. And before you start, I know you can get better for the money :-) ...but I do love the looks, especially in Ultra Blue or Sonic White.

[Linas.P]

I love RC (including 300h) looks, seats and driver position is brilliant as well, interior is mostly good... but sadly that is where the love ends... And it is not even about "better for money".... it just could have been maybe perhaps better full stop. Without comparing to anything else... Lexus simply have know how and technologies to make it, but it seems they chosen not to. 

[Ala Larj]

On 03/11/2017 at 4:43 PM, noby76 said:

managed to get decibel noise levels from this site and seems the IS300h is quieter at most cruising speeds than the IS250 and CT200h not by much but still enough to make a difference

http://www.auto-decibel-db.com/index.html

 

 

Interesting but I'm not sure how reliable this data is. I love the quietness of my GS, but quieter than a Rolls???

[DanD]

Maybe the RR's huge tyres and cavernous interior make noise insulation more of a challenge?

Interesting also that the GS300h shows as being quieter than the GS450h. I would have expected it to be the other way around. In fact, according to the above table, the GS300h is quieter than all listed models by some margin.

Bet you feel rather smug hey, Alan!

This is an interesting article that blows away some myths... albeit rather biased towards German cars I feel: Most other "quietness" tests list the LS600h somewhere.

https://www.bksv.com/en/about/waves/WavesArticles/2014/in-search-of-the-worlds-quitest-car

 

[Ala Larj]

To be honest I rarely hear how quiet it is due to the quality of the ML system!

[dutchie01]

cheapest solution would be to purchase a second hand skoda diesel with 100k miles on it. give it a big service and it will be the most reliable and cost effective way to go from A to B.

However, if that does not sound attractive just buy the car that you really want and screw the mpg. 

Life is too short