IS/CT/RC Discontinued in UK (and Europe?)

[royoftherovers]

56 minutes ago, Mincey said:

I must admit that I'm a very bad passenger and will go out of my way to drive rather than be driven. Putting my faith in the driving abilities of another human who can at least tell the difference between a softer hedge and a solid wall (see earlier post re James May) and a computer which can't, I'd prefer the human option. 

I think you are spot on James.

Didn`t the computer (HAL) rebel in 2001 A Space Ody... ?

[Mincey]

2 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

I think you are spot on James.

Didn`t the computer (HAL) rebel in 2001 A Space Ody... ?

I believe you are right there John! I wonder if we'll ever see a Basil Fawlty-esque character, beating his Tesla with half a tree after it refuses to boot up....

[Linas.P]

7 hours ago, ganzoom said:

Ah I see you guys have moved on to panel gaps and cannot understand the concept of paying for software......

its almost like some of you guys are about 3 years behind how the real world thinks. Those 'debates' on Tesla have been going on for a while now, but why not write to Bill Gates and ask him why people should pay for software at all, or Adobe why they moved to cloud based subscription model :).

You saying it as if that is not an issue... well I guess it may not be issue for you?

Paying for software is fine, have no issue with it. However, paying for software to enable hardware features you have already paid for is not. Simply said, there are things which works in software world, but could not work and should not be introduced in hardware world. This is nothing new either - yes you have Adobe software on the cloud subscription basis, but when you buy 1TB hard drive (or more likely SSD) it is not like you get only 500GB and then manufacturer charges you £1.99/Month if you wanted to use remaining 500GB. Again as I said when it comes to hardware the software updates can go only one way - that is to improve how hardware works. This is again common in hardware world e.g. when you buy new graphics card often there are bugs and issues with drivers at first, but over time manufacturers optimise the drivers and you can get more performance then you initially had (this is not considered good practice, but it does happen). It never works the other way around, it is not like one day it works well and next day 1 out of your 2 HDMI ports are disabled unless you pay £2.99/Month to use both. This is just ridiculous!

7 hours ago, ganzoom said:

Going around parked cars and cyclists is now clearly part of the code...

Ohhhh WOW... that is amazing! And what it would have done previously? Just mowed down cyclists and crashed into parked cars? Surely, that was not ready to be used on the road if it could not even overtake cyclist or parked car. In other hand I may have liked the "feature" - just let your Tesla to clean the roads from the cyclists and blame it on Mr. Elon beta software.

On the serious note, parked cars and cyclists are not even what is considered "novelty", this is literally most basic of the basic features - I am amazed Tesla allowed these cars to be on the roads without having it. This just shows how terrible and dodgy the company is - for any other company that would have been absolute showstopper putting such car on the road without feature to overate cyclists. This is perfect example why Tesla autopilot is the only one for sale - because it is not fit for purpose! Making system fit for purpose is much more difficult, the simple difference is that unlike Tesla, other companies have at least basic common sense and some integrity not to kill their customers or other road users.

[javadude]

On 11/1/2020 at 1:35 PM, Martin J said:

I also think the Tesla approach is ergonomically poor. This case got some attention a little while ago:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-53666222

I wonder whether the Tesla dash design philosophy is driven by minimalist aesthetics or cost - is it cheaper to stick an iPad on the dash?

The auto wiper setting on the model 3 is pretty good. If you want an extra wipe you can press the end of the left stalk and if you really want to change the speed then there are voice commands for it so you don't actually need to touch the screen for the wipers. If you do decide to then they are bottom right on the screen and closest to the steering wheel, no menus to navigate. Perhaps they were once not there but the user interface and features continually improve.

Ooops reaslise now I was commenting on quite an old post. Just ignore me 🙂

[ganzoom]

4 hours ago, Linas.P said:

On the serious note, parked cars and cyclists are not even what is considered "novelty", this is literally most basic of the basic features - I am amazed Tesla allowed these cars to be on the roads without having it.

So are you saying you have an IS that can do more than what the current Tesla FSD software can do!! 

No wonder you're not impressed by Tesla, you must have the most advanced car ever built 🙂

I'm glad you love Lexus so much and hate Tesla so much. Good luck with what ever happens inthe future, I cannot wait to sell our IS and I doubt I'll ever even look at another Lexus. 

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, ganzoom said:

So are you saying you have an IS that can do more than what the current Tesla FSD software can do!! 

No wonder you're not impressed by Tesla, you must have the most advanced car ever built 🙂

I'm glad you love Lexus so much and hate Tesla so much. Good luck with what ever happens inthe future, I cannot wait to sell our IS and I doubt I'll ever even look at another Lexus. 

There is key difference - Lexus does not claim to have "automation or self-driving capabilities" - because "self-driving" means your car can actually drive itself and not mow down cyclists, trees, pedestrians and simply crash into parked cars. That is not driving itself and not ready to use. So the issue here is not what Tesla does, but what it wrongly claims to do, but actually doesn't.

However, that said simple LSS+ will prevent you from crashing into parked cars, cyclists or pedestrians as well. Which just proves my other point - Tesla autopilot in current form is no better than simple safety and driver aids fitted to other cars and anyone saying otherwise are simply mistaken or lying.

And I am not hater - there are things which Tesla does well and there are things which Tesla could not do and will never be able to do (e.g. level 5 automation with simple DL/ML algorithms). I am simply just realist and not brainwashed fanboy dreaming about impossible things which car neither does at the moment nor could do in the future.

[Overland]

https://lexusenthusiast.com/2020/11/17/2021-lexus-is-offered-with-zero-percent-financing-in-the-usa/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+lexusnews+Lexus+Enthusiast

[shafque]

If only they had this in the UK with that kinda offer! 

[Overland]

52 minutes ago, shafque said:

If only they had this in the UK with that kinda offer! 

I would be happy just if the allow me to buy the car!!!

[Las Palmas]

On 10/18/2020 at 4:39 PM, Linas.P said:

Loss leader doesn't have to be a bad product and argument is that LS wasn't true "loss leader", because in the end of the day Lexus made profit over few years after introduction. Even if they lost money in the first year - that is not unusual for introduction of new brand, setting-up dealership network, training mechanics etc. But the point remains - they have never done that in Europe and one has to pay premium to get into Lexus here.. which makes it hard sell considering brand does not have much recognition yet.

I wonder if Lexus being so successful in US made mistake by considering themselves an established brand when they started sales in Europe? Felt, like they didn't need to discount their models to get traction in the beginning. Whereas reality is that they made a move on the stronghold of European makers. Or did they realised that they will have uphill battle and never really bothered to really compete with BMW and MB? Who knows.. 

Believe you have high thoughts about built quality when it comes to BMW and MB. I do not.

Have had 2 BMW and 3 MB, plus a Smart Roadster Coupé, which was actually better built than both BMW and of MB's a 250S and a 350SE. Do not speak about the 300 6.9, that was faultless.

Our Lexus CT 2016 has a far better finish in the interior than both BMW (1800 and 2000) and the 250S MB.

With regard to the training mechanics I do agree with you. They leave it to people that know very little about the car here where I live. Service is expensive and low quality.

If Lexus wanted, they would have no uphill against BMW and if comparing cars with same price level MB is no better than BMW.

[Linas.P]

2 minutes ago, Las Palmas said:

Believe you have high thoughts about built quality when it comes to BMW and MB. I do not.

If Lexus wanted, they would have no uphill against BMW and if comparing cars with same price level MB is no better than BMW.

Not sure where you got that impression - I said that BMW, MB, Audi and rest of German makes have "acceptable" build quality. This means they are not as good as Lexus, but the quality they offer is not a deal breaker for most of people. And if you consider that majority of sames are for 2-5 years leases, these cars definitely last at least the first 5 years. For majority of buyers it does not matter if car can last 20 years of 200k miles. As well I must say that MB in particular has improved since ~2014 and both their build quality and materials are now much better than they were - not as good as Lexus, but relatively good overall. BMW always had decent build quality, I just find their interiors too basic most of the time. In other hand Lexus build quality has declined since 2013 - it is still one of the best, but I consider IS mk3 a step down from mk2.

One other thing which I noted in my post - Lexus is just not known brand in Europe. I have several friends who are as well "car guys" and when I say Lexus is most reliable car brand they don't believe me... yes we take it here as a fact and one could assume that everyone knows it, but general public does not know it. I even had discussion about that at work and the answer was along the lines "where do you take this BS statistics from"... So if you assume it is public knowledge that Lexus is the quality leader - no it isn't!

With above in mind - people cannot justify paying more for Lexus in Europe, because hey neither knows about Lexus quality nor appreciates it. On top of that they are not even motivated financially, Lexus in US costs less than comparable BMW/MB - in Europe is the other way around.

[Las Palmas]

6 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Not sure where you got that impression - I said that BMW, MB, Audi and rest of German makes have "acceptable" build quality. This means they are not as good as Lexus, but the quality they offer is not a deal breaker for most of people. And if you consider that majority of sames are for 2-5 years leases, these cars definitely last at least the first 5 years. For majority of buyers it does not matter if car can last 20 years of 200k miles. As well I must say that MB in particular has improved since ~2014 and both their build quality and materials are now much better than they were - not as good as Lexus, but relatively good overall. BMW always had decent build quality, I just find their interiors too basic most of the time. In other hand Lexus build quality has declined since 2013 - it is still one of the best, but I consider IS mk3 a step down from mk2.

One other thing which I noted in my post - Lexus is just not known brand in Europe. I have several friends who are as well "car guys" and when I say Lexus is most reliable car brand they don't believe me... yes we take it here as a fact and one could assume that everyone knows it, but general public does not know it. I even had discussion about that at work and the answer was along the lines "where do you take this BS statistics from"... So if you assume it is public knowledge that Lexus is the quality leader - no it isn't!

With above in mind - people cannot justify paying more for Lexus in Europe, because hey neither knows about Lexus quality nor appreciates it. On top of that they are not even motivated financially, Lexus in US costs less than comparable BMW/MB - in Europe is the other way around.

Got the impression from your mentioning of "up-hill battle".

Sorry if I misunderstood.

[Linas.P]

Just now, Las Palmas said:

Got the impression from your mentioning of "up-hill battle".

Sorry if I misunderstood.

Yes "uphill battle" - I mean it terms of lack of recognition in Europe and as well in terms of Lexus price not actually being competitive at the moment "feature for feature". As well it was meant to be to be contrasted with how Lexus does in US - where they are not only very recognised, but as well cheaper. Unless European Lexus branch takes same approach as US one, then I think it is "uphill battle".

[royoftherovers]

2 hours ago, Linas.P said:

Yes "uphill battle" - I mean it terms of lack of recognition in Europe and as well in terms of Lexus price not actually being competitive at the moment "feature for feature". As well it was meant to be to be contrasted with how Lexus does in US - where they are not only very recognised, but as well cheaper. Unless European Lexus branch takes same approach as US one, then I think it is "uphill battle".

I am certainly not convinced it is an "uphill battle". I think it is "steady as she goes", until such times as Toyota/Lexus is ready (if ever) to do battle.

And please remember, as I have said several times on this Forum that "the minority is the best informed", so do not expect the wider motoring world to know anything about Lexus values.

[Linas.P]

41 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

I am certainly not convinced it is an "uphill battle". I think it is "steady as she goes", until such times as Toyota/Lexus is ready (if ever) to do battle.

And please remember, as I have said several times on this Forum that "the minority is the best informed", so do not expect the wider motoring world to know anything about Lexus values.

That is all good and for some even preferable (if you want to stay exclusive), but it does not translate in large sale volumes, which I generally would consider to be a goal of "for profit" organisation - like car maker. As well just from my perspective - I would rather have decent car options like RC350 even if it is 10 times more common, rather than have exclusive RC200t which sucks.. Or mk4 IS rather than ES.

I am not suggesting Lexus cars are not good, but rather my argument is based on logical gap in Lexus proposition. In Europe Lexus is challenger and not market leaders, thus challenger is expected to be aggressive if they want to expand their business by either undercutting leaders on price, or by offering better value for money i.e. more features than leader for same money.

In Lexus case they don't do either - Lexus baseline price is de-facto more expensive than German rivals and Lexus equipment is not as diverse, nor as modern. And yes, there is difference between the cheapest car you can get, best equipped car and the car you get on average. I still think that on average, for the equipment it has Lexus is good value for money, but that is not how marketing works.

Marketing simply takes 2 extremes and runs with them - one one hand "preces from" is going to be heavily advertised and you can get poverty line BMW 3-Series from £33k - you just can't get Lexus for that price. So win for BMW... Same goes for all bells and whistles edition - you can have more equipment, more options, more engines and more features in MB C43AMG or BMW440i.. sure at that point they are £55k where Lexus ends at £43k, but that is not the goal here - Germans wins yet again in "top trumps game". .. same goes for 0-60 times, handling, engine noises, tax saving etc.

So I guess what I am saying German car manufacturers just understand the market better and understand what they need to do to sell vehicles, they understand what features matters for buyers as far as making sales goes. That does not mean they make better cars, or that features they have are important - but they make cars which sells and adds features which makes cars "marketable".

[royoftherovers]

6 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

That is all good and for some even preferable (if you want to stay exclusive), but it does not translate in large sale volumes, which I generally would consider to be a goal of "for profit" organisation - like car maker. As well just from my perspective - I would rather have decent car options like RC350 even if it is 10 times more common, rather than have exclusive RC200t which sucks.. Or mk4 IS rather than ES.

I think my argument is based on logical gap in Lexus proposition. In Europe they are challengers and not market leaders, thus challenger is expected to be aggressive if they want to expand their business by either undercutting leaders on price, or by offering better value for money i.e. more features than leader for same money.

In Lexus case they don't do either - Lexus baseline price is de-facto more expensive than German rivals and Lexus equipment is not as diverse, nor as modern. And yes, there is difference between the cheapest car you can get, best equipped car and the car you get on average. I still think that on average, for the equipment it has Lexus is good value for money, but that is not how marketing works.

Marketing simply takes 2 extremes and runs with them - one one hand "from" is going to heavily advertised and you can get poverty line BMW 3-Series from £33k - you just can't get Lexus for that price. So win for BMW... Same goes for all bells and whistles edition - you can have more equipment, more options, more engines and more features in MB C43AMG or BMW440i.. sure at that point they are £55k where Lexus ends at £43k, but that is not the goal here - Germans wins yet again in "top trumps game". .. same goes for 0-60 times, handling, engine noises, tax saving etc.

So I guess what I am saying German car manufacturers just understand the market better and understand what they need to do to sell vehicles, they understand what features matters for buyers as far as getting sales goes. That does not mean they make better cars, or that features they have are important - but they make cars which sells and adds features which makes cars "marketable"

Lin  zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

[Mincey]

Did someone mention self-driving cars?
 

 

[Linas.P]

and that is just a track, no pesky cyclists or parked cars to worry about... but hey that wasn't Mr. Elon or Tesla... so I guess we don't know anything.

At the same time UK just announced they will ban petrol cars by 2030... the only problem - I am yet to see how they planning to bridge the estimated 40GW extra peak demand on estimated 25% of fleet being EV and I am not even talking about distribution, charging points and all that.

It seems that we should not waste any time and grab as many petrol and DERV cars, because anyone who don't have car by 2030 will end-up pedalling the pedocycle or worse just walking.

[ganzoom]

8 hours ago, Linas.P said:

because anyone who don't have car by 2030 will end-up pedalling the pedocycle or worse just walking.

You do realise the bottom line for the 'green' agenda is exactly that?? No car regardless of how its powered or driven is the answer to future personal transportation.

My daily commuter tools is this....Still has a Battery inside but much more fun to ride than any car, and I get to keep fit. There is no better way to clear the mind heading into work.

 

I also have an non electric one, which comes out when its not wet/muddy/cold. Its coming up to 10 years old and still rides like new. Interms of sustainable transport my bikes are far far far better than any car.

[ganzoom]

8 hours ago, Linas.P said:

and that is just a track, no pesky cyclists or parked cars to worry about... but hey that wasn't Mr. Elon or Tesla.

Or Waymo. It shows you how far ahead of the pack these companies are. Whilst others struggle to go around a programed empty track, these companies have products that works in real life.

I can see a future very soon private car ownership will be hobby than need. A combination of government legislation to push for less car usage and emerging tech to deliver driverless automated transport will change how people view and use cars.

To be honest its hard to see how any of the current car manufactures competing with these tech giants. The 'car' will become the superficial bit, who cares how its powered or even the brand, the nuts and bolts will be the software.

 

[Mincey]

Seems like a little fine tuning is required: https://insideevs.com/news/454383/massive-crash-teslacam-safety-questions/

[javadude]

12 hours ago, Linas.P said:

At the same time UK just announced they will ban petrol cars by 2030... the only problem - I am yet to see how they planning to bridge the estimated 40GW extra peak demand on estimated 25% of fleet being EV and I am not even talking about distribution, charging points and all that.

According to the National Grid (from https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/5-myths-about-electric-vehicles-busted)

"Enough capacity exists  With the first of these, the energy element, the most demand for electricity we’ve had in recent years in the UK was for 62GW in 2002. Since then, due to improved energy efficiency such as the installation of solar panels, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16 per cent. Even if the impossible happened and we all switched to EVs overnight, we think demand would only increase by around 10 per cent. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002 and this is well within the range of manageable load fluctuation."

[dutchie01]

12 hours ago, Linas.P said:

but hey that wasn't Mr. Elon or Tesla... so I guess we don't know anything.

 

Mr Elon, Mr Elon..... Not sure but is this thesame Mr Elon that thinks Covid is a joke, forces his employees to show up at work regardless of whatever on risk of beeing sacked? takes no measures to prevent Covid at his factories forces people to work 60 hours a week, sacks staff in the moment. Thesame Mr Elon that allows staff to stay at home for a maximum of 80 hours that then will be subtracted from own holidays? thesame that thinks a shutdown is a fascist measure, denies a covid outbreak at the US plant? Is this the guy that created a cult following around the world? 

[royoftherovers]

39 minutes ago, javadude said:

According to the National Grid (from https://www.nationalgrid.com/stories/journey-to-net-zero/5-myths-about-electric-vehicles-busted)

"Enough capacity exists  With the first of these, the energy element, the most demand for electricity we’ve had in recent years in the UK was for 62GW in 2002. Since then, due to improved energy efficiency such as the installation of solar panels, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16 per cent. Even if the impossible happened and we all switched to EVs overnight, we think demand would only increase by around 10 per cent. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002 and this is well within the range of manageable load fluctuation."

 "Even if the impossible happened and we all switched to EVs overnight, we think demand would only increase by around 10 per cent. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002 and this is well within the range of manageable load fluctuation."

 

What an extraordinary statement to make. The authors of this statement do not even know who will win the FA Cup this season,yet feel able to make such a statement!

He/they must be on the shortlist for the next DG of the BBC !

Go to this Post

[Linas.P]

6 hours ago, ganzoom said:

 No car regardless of how its powered or driven is the answer to future personal transportation.

Yes... sorry that is not future for me. I don't think that I don't like cycling - I love cycling, I grew up cycling, I even did that competitively (thought I was 12 years old) and I did cycle to work when I was 15-16. And this exactly describes my view very well - the only reason why would anyone use bicycle for commuting is if they are kids and cannot have driving license, are too poor to own a car or you doing it for leisure. I still cycle for leisure and I love it, but commuting on bicycle is (in my opinion) retarded, it is backwards, it is not progress and certainly it not future. It is actually more outdated than riding a horse (which I love to do for leisure as well), because when you ride an animal of any sort that is already a progress as you using somebody else muscle strength to move you along, preferably somebody on 4 legs as they are better suited for long distances. Using your own muscles to travel that is stone age level retarded, we are better than that. 

What is next? no food unless it is grass? 

2 hours ago, javadude said:

Even if the impossible happened and we all switched to EVs overnight, we think demand would only increase by around 10 per cent. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002 and this is well within the range of manageable load fluctuation."

I appreciate you providing this article, but do you really believe what it says? Have you tried considering the numbers present?

Let's brake it down... so he says that if everyone will switch to EVs the increase going to be only 10% or ~6GWh. Now I would say at very minimum one needs ~22KWh charger to properly charge fully electric car at home. Yes more common home "fast chargers" are like 7KWh, but they are ridiculously slow... even taking EVs with outdated technology like BMW i3 it will take 8hours to charge it with such charger. With improving batteries in EVs and improving chargers 22KWh will be the bare minimum one needs at home and I am think that by 2020 even 150KWh will be realistic.

So let's just assume technology does not improve somehow and by 2030 we are somehow stuck with only 22KWh chargers. First of all 99% of homes cannot support 22KWh chargers... and what exactly they are proposing for this issue? Secondly, let's come back to that 6GWh figure... so extra 6GWh could only charge ~ 272,000 cars @22KWh... somehow that seems like "little bit less" than 40 million cars which are currently on the roads (and increasing). Even if we go back to 7KWh chargers that only charges ~900k cars... So no... this figure he is giving cannot be right!

Ok...let's look into what it could actually charge, so 6GW/40million = 1.5KWh... Accidentally, my computer power supply is 1500W, that is computer not a car! Seriously, that is not enough for average microwave, never mind car. Just for fun... how long that is going to take to charge aforementioned BMW i3 (which is already very generous as majority of EVs have much larger batteries even today)... it will take just 37.3 hours or 1.5 days. I am sure going out every other day is fine! They probably expect COVID to last forever 😁

So this guy is day dreaming at best, but most likely is simply fraudulent because "national" (private) grid is benefactor of electric revolution.

Now obviously I am exaggerating an issue a little bit, because not every EV will need charging every day and at the same time, but I am sure that you can agree the previously mentioned 40GWh figure for 25%EV fleet is closer to reality. Meaning that it could provide ~ 5million slow charging points 7KWh or 1.8 million fast charging points @22KWh , so this is sort of realistic if we consider that from 10 million vehicles not every single one will need charging every day. I still-think this is conservative figure because Battery capacity should double few times in decade.