noby76

why not a gen 2 GS300/430? I have seen some good looking ones with less mileage for around your budget range. LS400 is ok but boot space is smaller than Gen 2 GS300/430 and the GS will feel more 'sportier' than the LS400. 

give the cataclean a shot before you start anything picked it at eurocarparts for about £14. chances are the cat might need cleaning.

sounds like your Oxygen sensor needs replacing. you can test this by swapping the working sensor from Bank 1 to Bank 2. if the message registers on Bank 1 after the swap then you know you have a faulty/dead oxygen sensor. if you still get the fault on Bank 2 after the swap your Bank 2 catalytic converter might be faulty. most of the time it might need cleaning using a product i used called Cataclean. although this did not clear my check engine light most reviews i read confirmed it did in their case. i had to replace my sensor and the check engine light cleared.  if you need a new Denso sensor order from rockauto.com worked out £35 for the part and £13 import duty for royal mail = less than £50 Lexus wants over £100 for the same sensor. took about 2 weeks for econo delivery.

nice smooth cars definately better than the 200 in terms of grunt. owned one for 3.5 years before my GS..engine and gearbox well built. things to get done if not already changed by previous owner is cambelt and most likley water pump. drive belt. also check condition of radiator as they are now ageing and also exhaust mainlyh mid to rear section all these are due to age.. calipers on most if not all lexus models tend to seize after a while so worth checking if car is pulling to one side when braking. besides above cant think of any common issues with these models. pick one with decent service history and you wont go wrong.

I did consider Valvoline MaxLife 5W-30 as mine is at 150k..but went with Petronas... a litre in 2000 miles is reasonable but you can switch to sightly thicker weight fully synthetic oils like 10W-40. i will be switching to 10w-40 for my next oil change maybe valvoline max life as its said to  help recondition aging engine seals.

18 hours ago, Dblock said:

At 40mpg I can live with that. I would have the power and it's decent on fuel. Also you guys seems to forget bigger cars generally cost more on insurance, tyres, tax and depreciation. But at 40mpg again I could live with that as I would intend to keep the car for 3-5 years. A Prius is better on fuel and does everything cheaper but it's ugly and a lot slower than the other things. That's fine though since it gets much better mpg.  

 

I can understand you not knocking Lexus nor the GS450h. what Iam struggling to undersatnd is the "need" to own and run two or more cars if you trying to cut back on vehicle running costs? sure buying and running say two cars capable of returning 35 & 50mpg does not necessarily translate to saving on running costs when compared to buying and running 1 car returning say 25mpg? if anything buying and running two cars at 35 & 50 mpg might work out the same or even more than 1 car at 25mpg? since there are 8 sets of tyres to change, 2 lots of servicing to be carried out, 2 mots to be carried out, 2 vehicles to be insured, 2 vehicles to be taxed,2 vehicles to change brakes & discs if and when due and the list goes on.. 

Played around with some figures and this was what i came up with. unleaded is currenlty sold where i live at 101.9pp litre  and lets say you averaged 1000 miles a month this equates to 12000 miles a year if you had two cars. car A (commute car) returning 50mpg and car B (weekend car) returning 35mpg. to fuel car A  for 10000 miles works out £925 to fuel car B weekend car for say 2000 miles since its only a weekend car works out £265. total cost of fuelling two cars over 12000 miles £925 + 265 = £1190

lets say you only owned 1 car which averages 25mpg which is used for both commuting and weekends if you traveled 12000 miles would have cost you about £2225 in fuel cost. 

so £2225 - £1190 = £1035 thats the extra cost of running a car returning 25mpg over 12000 against 2 more fuel efficient ones over the same period.. but by the time you have factored in the initial investment cost of purchasing car B, insuring and taxing it would have already exceeded the extra cost incured of £1035. without forgetting the other running cost of tyres, brake discs/pads and servicing car B will incur during your ownership aswell.  lets say car B cost say £3500 to purchase in the first place that means it would take you about 3 years in order to have broken even and that's just the cost of buying the car

am I the only one who thinks this might actually be false economy on your side?
 

2 hours ago, Dblock said:

Fantatsic. I've been looking quite hard at the prius. An e92 is much better looking but these Priuses seem to be bulletproof. 

Just a shame the gs450h will only get around 30ish. 

I think you might be contradicting your self a little bit here.. reading your previous posts you say you dont want a diesel but in another post you say you would buy a diesel 2.2 cdti fn3 civic or a 335d BMW... sure if you have taken a liking to an fn3 civic why rule out its petrol version? when both the 1.4 and 1.8 petrol versions on paper achieive 40+mpg on combined cycle driving which is more than the mpg you were looking to live with also with the benefit of not having the clutch issues of the diesel version. and the notion of having to rev the living day lights out of honda's to get them to 'GO' is false. I drove my friends 1.6 LS Coupe Civic automatic few years ago and it never lacked torque at either 1500rpm nor at 6000rpm. the 1.8 fn3 makes around 175nm torque at 4300rpm and hits 60 in mid 8 secs thats an engine not lacking torque. and I am guessing you own a 350Z Nissan that makes its max torque at around 4800-5000 rpm so if anything you will find the honda drivable at lower to mid speeds as its not a heavy car.

you say your nissan 3.5 can achieve 28-30mpg which you could live with so why is it an issue to live with a GS450h achieving the same mpg?

you say you prefer to drive cars that are more powerful as it saveS them being thrashed but aside the GS the other two cars you mentioned which were of interest to you was a 1.5 Prius and 1.8 Auris which can't be classified as powerful cars.

i think you might be making a big mistake by trying to compare the prius to the gs450h one is built to be an economical city run around and the other a performance hybrid for both city and motorway cruise not that a prius is not capable of motorway cruise but you kinda get what i mean.. on paper the prius beats the GS450h by an easy 35mpg but what you loose in mpg you make up in other aspects like smooth driveabilty, more sound proofing, more toys, better sound system, and a power difference of around 260bhp on tap when compared to the prius for if and when one bothers to use it thats why the GS450H looses 35mpg against the Prius.

difference between a car returning 30mpg and one returning 40mpg over 1000 miles is around £40-£45 extra in fuel cost not trying to offend or anything as i dont know you but if you have been able to afford and run 3 cars at the same time sure £50 extra in fuel cost a month to drive a car returning 30mpg against a 40mpg one wont break the bank..
 

there is not a lot of savings to be made between a car returning 26mpg compared to one returning 30mpg. based on your driving i worked it out as roughly 1000 miles a month. the saving is around £25 betwwen a 26mpg car against one returning 30mpg at 1000 miles.  powerful cars are never fuel efficient when driven like they are supposed to be driven. 

I think the word 'decent mpg' could be interpretated differently by different people. e.g i think any car which returns 30mpg is decent mpg but someone else might think thats not fuel efficient so it all depends.

i do about 250-260 miles a week which is just over 1000 miles a month so not that different from you and at the current fuel prices costs about £210 - £225 a month in fuel it might sound high to someone else but considering it still works out cheaper than me paying on monthly finance on say a CT200h/IS300h  starts making sense. 

if you dont want to spend any more for commuting than its worth then have you considered an 06 onwards Honda civic in 1.4/1.8 they return between 40-50 mpg and cheap to tax it Japanese, they look futuristic and being non hybrid means less to go wrong even on high mileage ones

40 minutes ago, rayaans said:

OK . Going by your definition, the IS300h is automatically better then as its probably faster than the 250 on a track anyway (like I said before, it has huge mid range acceleration and a 50:50 weight distribution).

 

mmh not quite Hybrids have that mid range upper hand when batteries as quite charged up. without that the RC300h will only make do with just over 180bhp from its engine and with a weight of over 1700kg will not perform well against an IS250. if anything, it will loose when running only on engine power once Battery power is used up but not by much.

yup i can see lots of situations/incidents which could cleanly be avoided but one wouldn't because one might say "well its my right of way or i had priority"  etc..and would rather it occurred because its is all being recorded. having a webcam in ones car does not make one safe on the roads. a mate of mines home got burgled sometime ago and it took the police over 24 hours to turn up and investigate what makes us think they would investigate an incident where say a 911 driver crossed one off? 

I am not saying police does not take traffic/road incidents seriously but it will cost them £££'s if they had to investigate each and every road/traffic incident videos sent by members of the public.  They will certainty be interested in major accidents captured on video though.

if a reckless driver cuts me off i always have two options either ignore them and carry on with my driving or take my place back if its safe to do so. I will invest my money else where rather than dashcam videos to send to the police saying look at what this Audi driver did to me on the M1.

if one feels the need for a dashcam then by all means invest in one. 

you right Rayaan. i think the f-pace pic I posted might have been concept/non production design. but  I still prefer the interior of the production F-pace in the video you put up. saying that its one thing seeing these interiors in the flesh so the RX might be better looking since you obviously own one. i think Lexus should watch out for Jag as they have released some good looking premium cars lately and they are on the rise in markets like US/China. 

i much prefer the looks of gen1 SC300/400 compared to the 430's but saw one in the flesh at a garage and the interior and seats looks better than an LS430 of the same era to be honest. and the LS430 was meant to be the flagship model at that time. i agree with the article below.

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/2016/02/reader-review-2002-lexus-sc430/

unless one will be tracking their cars most of the time, i reckon the ford mustang is the winner here. its on paper performance is actually not far off the quickest car M4 which is the most expensive at about almost £40,000 difference in price . for day to day driving and occasional blast the M4/RC-F wont be giving out any other drivers experience which the Mustang wouldn't. i will save my money and have the Ford to be honest.

 thats why I said its all down to taste. Jag might have gone for the bling factor when compared to the RX but it does look futuristic in my eyes.

yes £16,000 for 100 miler is a tad bit too much but considering the reliability of Lexus engines in general one can put another 100 miler on it with no fuss and being a big lump V8 its less stressed anyway. considering a new ford fiesta ST cost around £17,000 it makes £16 grand for 420bhp V8 a bargain even with 100 miler ok it might have lost a few ponies over the years but still a powerful car all the same.

http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Lexus-IS-F-PETROL-AUTOMATIC-2008-N-/291658181201?hash=item43e82eaa51:g:JboAAOSwFqJWlLXu

This has over 100,000 on the clock and still worth £16,000 so why would some one sell a 70,000 miles one for less than £10,000,  That IS-F in your post has no information about service history less photos and generally not a good advert. that is a lemon.

I think its all down to taste and what one looks for in an executive car. for starters the XF Jaguar has a recorded reliability index of 144 when compared to the 3GS of only 41 based on the reliability index website 100 is the average anything higher than 100 is less reliable. I personally prefer the design and interior of the XF Jag its looks simple/neat its designed with more 'classier' side in mind with wood effects and the likes  where as the 3GS more spottier side in mind less wood effects more plastic/buttons.  

not every one prefers wood trims in their cars as it makes it feel like an 'old mans' car but I like it and am mid 30's I recon Lexus should have provided wood effect trims as an option for those who prefer it.

to be honest I think Jaguar has upped their game in recent years and I read an article a while back that they are actually selling more cars than Lexus world wide mainly US. the XE sport looks well built and handsome not very aggressive and sporty looking like the IS but looks like and manly car. same as the RX rivalling F-pace. looks similar to the new Volvo XC90 which is another good looking car but where the Jag wins in my opinion compared to the new RX is its interior same view I hold about the XF and 3GS interior. but for reliability Lexus

I also do not see the relevance of having dash cams. regardless of how you look at it there were always fool/reckless drivers before dash cams and will always be. ones insurance premiums may rise even if you were not at fault which is known to be pretty much the case if one is unfortunate to be involved in an accident.  and most of the you tube videos are more about idiot drivers than people catching crash for cash fraudsters.

save your money.  

thing is there is not much of a difference if any between the manual IS250 and Auto 250 paper figures confirm the manual is about 0.3 seconds quicker to 60 compared to the auto. thats not even a cars length hence i recon most opt/prefer the auto.nothing between them in top speed either.

Cheer Garry.. i did run a search on the site but nothing came up. Thanks again and Merry Christmas :hohoho:

Hi all,

I have just read my error code due to check engine light coming on and the code was P0135 O2 sensor heater circuit Bank 1 Sensor 1. so standing in front of the car is Cylinder Bank 1 the passenger side(right side) or driver side (left side) and where is sensor 1 located? before cat or after cat? Thanks

by cleaning fuel system and internal engine compartments saw a shell video a while back testing this.

But what is actually been 'cleaned'???

Petrol is a highly refined liquid that is brunt at stupidly high temperatures. Which part of the fuel/ignition system is been 'cleaned' and too what effect??

I don't mind paying extra for things which are worth it. I tell you what I can source you some 'premium' water which will hydrate you better than any other fluid. I'll even send you a video of how amazing it is, just send me £10/month (forum rates) and I'll arrange for the water supply in your house to be upgraded ;)

from what i gather gunk and carbon build up in fuel injectors, valves and pistons. over time engine develops carbon and premium fuels contain a higher percentage of cleaning additives to tackle these. all fuels are not the same and i have played about with a few to see slight characteristics between them. extra performance gained in terms of bhp on a non turbo charged car or lower compression ratio lesser revving engines wont be much but there are still some benefits like internal cleaning, smoother running, quieter idling and peak performance (i.e the highest bhp your engine can make based on its condition) could be gained from running these fuels subject to the type and condition of car of course.

by cleaning fuel system and internal engine compartments saw a shell video a while back testing this. the IS300h booklet says minimum '95RON or higher' I never run supermarket fuel in my car. I have run both 95, 97 and 99 from various fuel station like BP, Shell and Esso and can confirm they are not the same.

I noticed Esso fuels makes the engine run and idle very quietly but noticed car takes a few second or two to start in colder mornings when I run them in my previous IS300 but don't experience the start up issue in the GS. the 97 esso definitely makes the car more punchy from low to mid acceleration but noticed it burns quicker.

Shell 95 fuel save was the worst fuel in terms of performance as it makes the engine rev slowly and performed quite sluggish so I avoid it. shell V power is responsive and I noticed my interior lighting on my dash board bights up more when I am using this fuel than BP or Esso. and I also get up to £10 of voucher from shell every 2-3 months which is better than super markets offer of spend £50 and get 1p off every litre. so to get £10 off supermarkets fuel I would have to fill in 1000 litres which is impossible.

BP 95-97 runs quietly compared to Shell v power but I hardly use BP fuels to see their pros as they tend to be quiet pricier than shell and esso where I live.

I had the IS300h as a loan car few months ago and though it didn't feel like a 220bhp car when compared to say a ford ST220 it wasn't slow during rolling acceleration found it a bit disconnected when accelerating from a stop might be due to the hybrid batteries kicking in to move the car but did drive quite nice and felt like it handles better then older IS300.

a 2012 325d auto will out accelerate the IS300h by almost 2 secs but then again the BM is about 130KG lighter which is a lot of weight but I recon in gear acceleration will be quite close. a 640d out accelerated the GS430 from a stop but there was no difference when we accelerated from about 40mph in 2 gear so 0-60 times doesn't always tell a full story of a cars true real life performance.

only way is to test the various fuels out there and make up your mind about which one runs best for your car.

the 4 litre is of course more powerful than the 3 litre from factory if you dont have plans of turbo charging then go for the 1UZ if you have plans of turbo charging then 2jz thats not saying the 1UZ cannot be boosted but the 2jz block is known to be quite bullet proof in terms of boosting. so all boils down to what plans you have for the car.

how come you changed an LS was the GS too harsh?