2021 Lexus UX 300e

[EvilRacer329]

9 hours ago, rayaans said:

Should mention I've been driving it in eco mode exclusively. 

The throttle response is slightly too much in normal. And it's undriveable in Sport to the point where it spins the wheels on junctions with a tip of accelerator pedal

Huh, interesting! I test-drove one a couple of weeks ago and loved it in sport mode, and found eco mode irritatingly lethargic. But then I am more used to riding hair-trigger motorcycles! I guess that's why they give you all three options - everybody is different!

Nick

[rayaans]

6 hours ago, EvilRacer329 said:

Huh, interesting! I test-drove one a couple of weeks ago and loved it in sport mode, and found eco mode irritatingly lethargic. But then I am more used to riding hair-trigger motorcycles! I guess that's why they give you all three options - everybody is different!

Nick

I found it difficult to drive smoothly in Sport. Normal was OK-ish but I found ECO the best for overall smoothness 

[ganzoom]

21 hours ago, rayaans said:

Very happy with it. Range is fine for us to be honest. Again it's a second car so we're using the RX for long trips.

The car has no nav. When you connect your phone using usb to the car it comes up with Android auto or apple carplay when pressing home button. It's really simple. 

I'm making a trip on Tuesday with the UXe. Will report back. On the motorway it's getting between 3 and 3.6 miles per kWh. 

In town it seems to dip. Gets about 2.3-2.5. Not particularly sure why. 

It'll be interesting to see how you get on, I've never seen any EV been more efficient at 70mph versus 30mph purely based on the physics of air resistance as speed builds up.

Last weekend I did 160 miles in our Tesla, a bit of traffic slowed us down but otherwise it was 70-75mph all the way.

You can see even managing over 3kWh with a 75kWh (66kWh usable) Battery its just over 200 miles of range. So if you are getting 200 miles range from a sub 50kWh Battery at 70mph that really is class leading efficiency - which none of the reviews of the UXe has submitted, most have found the opposite.

[rayaans]

So i put in 29.2kwh today. It went up from 59 mile range to 157 on the app. So its estimating a consumption based on previous usage at 3.3 miles/kwh as it stands. Not sure why because my last trip was 2.7miles/kwh 

[rayaans]

Okay so Ive just done a 42.2 mile trip in ECO mode. Approximately 38 miles were motorway at 75 mph adaptive cruise control. AC running the whole way and temperature outside was 18-23 degrees. Started off with 157 miles and pulled up at home with 118 miles remaining. 

I reset the miles/kwh reading at the beginning. It was doing around 3.6miles/kwh  when I got to the motorway. When I got home it was on 3.2 miles/kwh

[ganzoom]

1 hour ago, rayaans said:

I reset the miles/kwh reading at the beginning. It was doing around 3.6miles/kwh  when I got to the motorway. When I got home it was on 3.2 miles/kwh

So it looks like in summer at 70mph you are getting around 3 miles per kWh. The usable pack size of the UX e is around 50kWh, so essentially around 150 miles M way range in summer. Thats not far off what reviews show.

[Tel]

It is clear, as proved on my 50 mile Use road test, the Range is significantly reduced @ National Speed limit & above & in cold temperatures.

There is a long way to go for E-cars to be established.

Tel

[rayaans]

12 hours ago, ganzoom said:

So it looks like in summer at 70mph you are getting around 3 miles per kWh. The usable pack size of the UX e is around 50kWh, so essentially around 150 miles M way range in summer. Thats not far off what reviews show.

75mph w/ short bursts of 80mph to overtake vehicles that couldnt maintain a constant speed! The range went down by 39 miles, yet the odometer went up by 42 miles lol.

The Battery was not fully charged. I put in around 29.2kwh and stopped it at 90%. So on a full charge I would expect around 175 miles showing on the range-o-meter. The Lexus Link app gives two different ranges. One with AC and one without. Without AC, at 90% it was showing 176 miles. I understand no one would drive without AC on but its just interesting to know

3 hours ago, Tel said:

It is clear, as proved on my 50 mile Use road test, the Range is significantly reduced @ National Speed limit & above & in cold temperatures.

There is a long way to go for E-cars to be established.

Tel

I havent experienced cold temperatures in the UXe yet so cant comment

However, from my experience, the range in the UXe remains relatively consistent despite journey types.

[Tel]

Just to be clear the Winter reference was from 2 Tesla owners  I chatted to after a 5 mile drive in a Belgium UXe supplied by Lexus UK in February 

Tel

[talaipwros]

6 hours ago, Tel said:

It is clear, as proved on my 50 mile Use road test, the Range is significantly reduced @ National Speed limit & above & in cold temperatures.

There is a long way to go for E-cars to be established.

Tel

Nissan leaf 62 tekna at 28K 0% pcp.

Looks like a very good way to get E-cars established ( hopefully will not end up on an AA platform like the ID3)

[Tel]

Since the mid -70s to early 2020 my cars needed to be luxurious bulletproof Continental cruisers & I still cling to that need.

E-cars are perfect for 2021 & the UXe is the best I have driven on the pot-holed UK congested roads.

We were a 2 car family but now have 1,

Tel

 

[Chris UXe]

Hello All,

This is my first post on this forum. It's been really interesting to see all the comments about the UXe- especially about how it drives and the Battery range.

I have a Takumi Pack model on order (as a company car) and decided on Mercury Grey with a black interior in the end. There were many other EV's available but I went for the Lexus because of their reputation for quality and excellent dealer service.  

I'm currently investigating a home charger and will post some pictures when it arrives, which will be another 4-6 weeks.  

Best wishes,

Chris

 

[ganzoom]

Am looking at a second EV for the house hold the range and price of the UX E is actually OK. Pretty much every half decent EV starts at £40-50k these days.

The problem is the IS300H that it be replacing is simply proving to be TOO RELIABLE!!!

Its done just 34k in coming up to 7 years, I've started to skip the annual oil service as its used so little, but even than its not using a drop of oil/coolant/brake fluid between 2 year services. Still returning 45-50mpg, and with petrol prices at a very stable £1.25/l, its costing less than a few hundred £ per year to refuel + VED is only £10/year. Its simply so cheap and hassle free to own/run, spending £40-50k on ANY new car to replace it seems crazy.

So because of Lexus build quality and reliability we simply cannot find any reason why we need a new car to replace the IS......at this rate even by 2030 I don't think there would be a 'logical' argument to replace the IS!!!

 

[Phil xxkr]

Agree entirely, and as I forecasted in an earlier piece this will be an unintended consequence of the Lexus Relax programme. The same resistance to change is being seen in the smartphone market. Vendors are touting their latest model iteration as "game-changing" when in fact, the user, sees them as being not significant enough in either functionality or economically to warrant a change. And when you add the mantra word "sustainability" to the debate the argument not to change is even more compelling. Just because you have money doesn't mean you have to spend it does it? 😎

[EvilRacer329]

I genuinely think that this is all good news. The idea that we need to relentlessly manufacture new things to replace perfectly good things for the sake of ever-decreasing improvements in real-world functionality is a sickness that pushes people ever-further into debt and wastes natural resources at an alarming rate. The one glimmer of hope is that consumers seem to be getting tired of this race, with an increasing movement towards longer-lasting and better-quality products.

I've been avoiding buying anything with less than a 5-10-year warranty for a while, and lifetime guarantees can often be a deciding factor on whether I purchase a product or not. I bought a Lexus because I wanted a car where long-term reliability was a top priority for the manufacturer, and I was prepared to pay a little more as a result.

An awful lot of product areas have been engaged in a race to the bottom on quality and price for a long time - anyone remember when Tesco started selling £5 kettles?! Kia's 7-year warranty beat out Toyota's 5-year guarantee, and now Toyota/Lexus are fighting back. This is the kind of 'war' I can get behind - a race to see who can build the best, longest-lasting products in pursuit of long-term customer loyalty, rather than a battle to see who can make the biggest profits this quarter, and letting next quarter and beyond be a problem for another day.

Now if only Lexus could solve the bloody rattles in my UX250h I could go back to intending to still be driving it in 2030...!

Nick

[EvilRacer329]

On 6/12/2021 at 6:18 AM, ganzoom said:

Am looking at a second EV for the house hold the range and price of the UX E is actually OK. Pretty much every half decent EV starts at £40-50k these days.

The problem is the IS300H that it be replacing is simply proving to be TOO RELIABLE!!!

Its done just 34k in coming up to 7 years, I've started to skip the annual oil service as its used so little, but even than its not using a drop of oil/coolant/brake fluid between 2 year services. Still returning 45-50mpg, and with petrol prices at a very stable £1.25/l, its costing less than a few hundred £ per year to refuel + VED is only £10/year. Its simply so cheap and hassle free to own/run, spending £40-50k on ANY new car to replace it seems crazy.

So because of Lexus build quality and reliability we simply cannot find any reason why we need a new car to replace the IS......at this rate even by 2030 I don't think there would be a 'logical' argument to replace the IS!!!

 

Also...that is a reaaaaal nice-looking car. In the end it was the more modern interior that swayed me towards the UX, but I much prefer the exterior styling and saloon layout of the IS...to say nothing of the superior rear-wheel drive!

[flookyk]

I have currently got a UX300e as a curtesy car today and tomorrow while my RX is in for MOT and big service.

There are a couple of things I like on it that my RX does not have, heated steering wheel and HUD but also a few things it does not have .. memory seats, etc.

I prefer the size and interior of the RX and the limited range let's EV's down for me.

I am pleased I am just working from home as I have nowhere to recharge it so the 165 miles has to cover the two days driving including 30 miles each way to Lexus Teesside.

[ganzoom]

13 hours ago, flookyk said:

I am pleased I am just working from home as I have nowhere to recharge it so the 165 miles has to cover the two days driving including 30 miles each way to Lexus Teesside.

 A lack of home charging is a killer for EV adoption, unless the government forces councils to spend money on putting in local charge points next to pretty much every lamp post its going to create a massive inequality between those who have the luxury of a home driveway and those who don't.

Essentially you go from a car that is MORE convenient to own than a combustion car because you can refuel at home versus wasting time finding a petrol station, to one where not only is it harder to find a refuel station it also takes longer - loosing time I would say is a far bigger penalty than any thing else!!

Ofcourse other EV option certainly for commuting is actually much more practical and accessible. 70% of my commutes to work in the last 18 months has been on this, I love it just as much as any car I have owned. The fact you can 'park' it literally at office door is simply fab.

Instead of building one UX e, for the same amount of Battery you can build 216 of these!!

If the government is serious about EVs been green, its not more cars we need on the road its more alternatives to cars. EVs are nice cars to own (if you have a home driveway), but they really aren't an answer to anything.

[EvilRacer329]

2 hours ago, ganzoom said:

 A lack of home charging is a killer for EV adoption, unless the government forces councils to spend money on putting in local charge points next to pretty much every lamp post its going to create a massive inequality between those who have the luxury of a home driveway and those who don't.

Essentially you go from a car that is MORE convenient to own than a combustion car because you can refuel at home versus wasting time finding a petrol station, to one where not only is it harder to find a refuel station it also takes longer - loosing time I would say is a far bigger penalty than any thing else!!

Ofcourse other EV option certainly for commuting is actually much more practical and accessible. 70% of my commutes to work in the last 18 months has been on this, I love it just as much as any car I have owned. The fact you can 'park' it literally at office door is simply fab.

Instead of building one UX e, for the same amount of battery you can build 216 of these!!

If the government is serious about EVs been green, its not more cars we need on the road its more alternatives to cars. EVs are nice cars to own (if you have a home driveway), but they really aren't an answer to anything.

I'm afraid that you're right. One of the things no-one is willing to come out and say is that transitioning away from petrol also means challenging the assumption that almost anyone can own a new car. It's only been in the last couple of decades when it's been possible for even those on very modest incomes to afford a brand new vehicle and rely on it to support how they move around the country.

I'm certain that we're faced with moving first to a point where only the more well-off can afford new vehicles, followed - as the petrol/diesel fleet ages out - by an era where only the well-off are able to even run one. Those living in cities will need to adapt to using bicycles (e-bikes especially) or public transport. Those living in the countryside will have space to install home chargers and will either run new or used electric cars, depending on their budget. Those caught in the middle, with longer commutes but nowhere to charge will be stuck, either dealing with longer bicycle/public transport commutes in an inconvenient spoke/hub public transport system, or will move house or move jobs to accommodate a more local commute.

There will be advantages to this; safer cities, less traffic overall. But it will also mean fewer sales for car manufacturers, leading to consolidation of brands and higher prices as economies of scale collapse. Cars will continue to get more expensive, further shrinking the pool of sufficiently-wealthy customers and therefore sales. The cycle continues.

Or maybe I have no idea what I'm talking about, and this is all just total speculation. 🙂

Nick

[royoftherovers]

I think you are making a good case for Hydrogen, Nick.

[flookyk]

2 hours ago, ganzoom said:

 A lack of home charging is a killer for EV adoption, unless the government forces councils to spend money on putting in local charge points next to pretty much every lamp post its going to create a massive inequality between those who have the luxury of a home driveway and those who don't.

Essentially you go from a car that is MORE convenient to own than a combustion car because you can refuel at home versus wasting time finding a petrol station, to one where not only is it harder to find a refuel station it also takes longer - loosing time I would say is a far bigger penalty than any thing else!!

Ofcourse other EV option certainly for commuting is actually much more practical and accessible. 70% of my commutes to work in the last 18 months has been on this, I love it just as much as any car I have owned. The fact you can 'park' it literally at office door is simply fab.

Instead of building one UX e, for the same amount of battery you can build 216 of these!!

If the government is serious about EVs been green, its not more cars we need on the road its more alternatives to cars. EVs are nice cars to own (if you have a home driveway), but they really aren't an answer to anything.

It all depends on the public transport and that seems to depend on where you live.

Its OK if you live in a city with plenty of of it but there are villages here that dont even have one bus a day never mind something regular.

As far as cycles are concerned, I definitely am not going to cycle 17 miles each way to get to work.

As for councils installing power charges in lamposts that will just open up a big can of worms in litigation for people tripping over cables, kids stealing the cables or vandalising them and electrocuting themselves and others with them.

The thing that will improve it is the solid state Battery systems that Toyota is close to releasing with a 500 mile range and full charge in 10 mins.. as long as it is at a price that the majority can afford.

[EvilRacer329]

49 minutes ago, flookyk said:

It all depends on the public transport and that seems to depend on where you live.

Its OK if you live in a city with plenty of of it but there are villages here that dont even have one bus a day never mind something regular.

As far as cycles are concerned, I definitely am not going to cycle 17 miles each way to get to work.

As for councils installing power charges in lamposts that will just open up a big can of worms in litigation for people tripping over cables, kids stealing the cables or vandalising them and electrocuting themselves and others with them.

The thing that will improve it is the solid state battery systems that Toyota is close to releasing with a 500 mile range and full charge in 10 mins.. as long as it is at a price that the majority can afford.

You're not wrong, and technology *might* solve this problem. If my £15,000 electric car can do 400 miles to a charge and be topped up to full in ten minutes at my local charging forecourt, then my weekly fill-up is no more onerous than it is today. If those electric city cars get stuck at 100 mile ranges and 30-minute charge times then we've suddenly got a problem.

Basically, I think that we - society - and our lifestyles are going to have to change in order to adapt to the new reality that's being presented. I still think that the government is being a little blunt in its insistence that we move 100% electric because wheel-to-well/lifetime emissions of some modern hybrids probably aren't far off those of pure electrics. But petrol really did buy us incredible convenience and freedom, but at a truly deleterious cost to the environment and civilisation (oil wars, turning a blind eye to oil-exporters human rights abuses etc.). We're facing a reckoning and may have to accept that the good times are over and things are going to be a little less convenient in the future.

Nick

[ganzoom]

14 hours ago, royoftherovers said:

I think you are making a good case for Hydrogen, Nick.

There is zero case for hydrogen for personal transportation, its a massive waste of time and resources. 

[ganzoom]

14 hours ago, flookyk said:

The thing that will improve it is the solid state battery systems that Toyota is close to releasing with a 500 mile range and full charge in 10 mins.. as long as it is at a price that the majority can afford.

Solid state batteries isn't even out of lab tech, and decades away from commercial production volumes.

Sony released the first mass production consumer level lithium ion cells in the 1990s, and its only now the costs of production is dropping.

[EvilRacer329]

9 hours ago, ganzoom said:

There is zero case for hydrogen for personal transportation, its a massive waste of time and resources. 

The case for hydrogen is that it can be stored and transferred to vehicles in a similar manner to petrol. The problem is that creating hydrogen from electricity isn't a 100% efficient process, so it's another link in the fuel production chain that introduces energy loss. Like petrol, battery-electric, and other forms of propulsion, hydrogen isn't perfect. But I think that labelling it a "massive waste of time and resources" is a little reductive.

Nick