matt-c

There's a massive list of wheels that fit; the ideal is not going below a 16" wheel (1- for getting as close to the stock rolling radius as poss and 2- so as not to get tyres with a lesser load rating and higher wall size) but try finding some for a decent price. I wouldn't pay more than £35-£40 for a set of steels, especially when I can (probably) get a set of grotty standard 17" alloys for £50-£100. I'd go for the S model 16's, but again I won't pay the extorionate amounts people want for them (ie, £200) since 1) they are a lesser wheel than I've got now, 2) they don't look even half as good and 3) I'm only going to have them on for 2, maybe 3 months of the year anyway

2 is my limit for driving, as thats about the legal limit

As said, you need to push and hold the button on the remote to pop the boot. If it still doesn't work then the remote probably needs programming for it (there's a thread with the instructions here somewhere for that) As for unlocking with the key - what does your key look like? Is there a ridge down each side of the blade, or is it smooth? If it's smooth, then you're using a valet key, which won't unlock the boot, or the glovebox, with the key blade. If it's got a ridge down both sides it's the right key, so maybe the lock has been changed as Jay said (most likely the tailgate itself has been changed, possibly if it got dented or similar)

Steel wheels from Toyota are FAR too expensive for what they are - about £300 (probably + VAT) over here. I can get a set of standard IS 17" alloys for £50! And 205/50's are cheaper than 215/45's here too. I don't mind going either 205/50-17 or 205/55-16, depending on the cost of the wheels; the 17's would look better than the 16's (spoke design; SE/Sport vs S wheels)

Welcome! Post up in the 200/300 forum and I'm sure someone will able to help :)

Never heard of it, but maybe! Probably not three though, haha

Not far away, Harlow

That doesn't make sense. The IS has an 8 speaker system, and nearly all aftermarket headunits only have a 4 channel on board amp. The stock Lexus amp also has the crossovers built in for separating high and low frequency signals. The only two ways I can see to do it, is to 1) use an amp bypass cable to eliminate the Lexus amp, run RCAs from the aftermarket HU pre-outs to a pair of 4 channel amps, and cross over units (either onboard on the amp or separate), and power the speakers from them, or 2) you need a harness cable to plug the Lex amp into the aftermarket HU, allowing the stock Lex amp to provide the power and crossover functions - much like an ISO cable you'd get from autoleads etc.

I'm just gutted I didn't see it first! Where in Essex are you BTW?

Lucky b******! Sounds like you've got exactly what I'm after - 2004 (or 5) IS300, 52k, csh, Platinum Ice, with aero kit and wheels (I want one with the TTE front and rear, and 18" six spokes), and paid more or less what I paid for my 200 (£2500) !! And sounds like you changed for the same reasons I want to too - I'd rather have the 5sp auto/tiptronic over the 6sp manual (although I don't hate the manual, it's actually quite nice, if a little notchy; I just want the laziness of the auto, which from what I've seen, are a pretty quick shift too) and the lack of power. The full leather, auto dip mirrors and other few "extras" aren't that much of a lure for me; be nice to have but I'm not that fussed - it's just the 'box and power I'd really be after for a trade up. I probably overpaid for my 200 - but to be fair to it, other than a few surface scratches here and there (bush rash mainly) it's been so well looked after (servicing, seems it wanted for nothing as far as parts etc go) and the fact all four wheels had a full refurb and 5 (yes, 5) brand new tyres, the extra £500 over my budget seemed worth it (considering the tyres are worth that alone)

Way I see it, if it's bright enough that you can't see regular sidelight bulbs, then it's bright enough to see the actual car; which completely negates the need for DRL's. And we've all got automatic light sensors anyway, so when it get's dark enough to need lights on, they come on all by themselves...

Well, the more I look into it, the more it makes sense; increased traction (with most reporting "night and day" difference in moving off from stand still); increased stability while moving and cornering; increased braking and deceleration. I know what will happen though - I'll spend £300 on wheels and tyres, and then we won't get any snow!

Get a nice Audi A6 Estate - just as many toys, lovely auto/semi auto in the Avant, spacious, comfy, MUCH better mpg than the IS - makes sense!

Standard IS200 (S, SE) vehicle height is 1420mm, while the IS200 Sport and the IS300 are 1405mm. Not sure what that has to do with gear ratios tho...

More or less nothing, except possibly change the sound. Used to do this all the time back in the day on XR3i's and RS Turbo's - even go so far as to cut half the airbox section way on the "cold side" to aid airflow. But you're talking about a mechanical fuel injection car there, as opposed to an EFI. And even so, it did pretty much bugger all back then except change the rasp of the intake. The only real ways of benefitting the intake are a good quality air filter, such as a cone filter or the like (more surface area and 360º air flow), on the end of a cold air intake tube (ie, a longer tube designed to allow the air filter to sit in a cooler part of the engine bay, away form the hot air that accumulates in an engine bay), or a ram air design - typically a scoop or letter box port at the front of a car (grille or bumper) that catches the air directly - the idea being that the air is forced in, rather than the filter sucking it in (the faster you travel, the faster the airflow is onto the front of a vehicle). Back in the ay, I built my own for an XR3i I had, which had the regular MFi airbox and metering unit. I used a letterbox shape funnel, mounted in the gap in the bumper (where a grille would be) in front of the rad, which funnelled down to a 3" port, and ran a ducting hose directly from it to the entrance of the airbox lid. Because air was being forced in, flowing faster than it normally would with the airbox simply sucking from atmosphere, which meant more air was getting into the airbox, it was getting in faster, and that put more pressure on the metering unit flap - which meant more air + more fuel = goes faster. However, it didn't make a whole lot of difference! Ran a little smoother at higher speed maybe, but power and acceleration wasn't noticeable affected. Looked pretty cool though...

No Dave, you've missed the point. Of course you have to look at a sat nav or speedo to know what speed you're doing - that's a given. My point was 1) you need to look at a speedo (or sat nav) to know you're speed - which was in answer to Chris saying about driving purely on speedo makes you a worse driver, and 2) the idiots that do drive with their eyes glued to the speedo (ie, in an average speed camera section, like on a motorway where there are lane roadworks etc) are in fact more dangerous as they spend more time looking at the speed reading than the road. Glancing down to the speed reading from time to time isn't a problem - just as glancing to a clock, or the stereo, or iPod, etc. But fixating on it, for example to make sure you are doing bang on 50 all the time in an average speed camera section, is more dangerous. When will people learn that if you travel a couple mile below the speed limit, you will only arrive 3 or 4 mins later than you would if you traveled bang on the speed limit. Is 3 or 4 mins worth the extra risk of staring out the speedo to make sure you aren't "loosing time by going slow" ???

Why not just put some brighter side light bulbs in? Like these SMD's - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/ERROR-FREE-CANBUS-SUPER-W5W-T10-501-5-SMD-HID-LED-SIDE-LIGHT-BULB-INTERIOR-/130693982695?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item1e6df7e9e7 Or if on an IS (I don't know about RX, but I guess there's a kit for it?) split the headlights, fit a pair of halo rings and wire in place of the side lights - http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/LEXUS-IS200-IS300-CCFL-ANGEL-EYES-8000K-BEST-IN-WORLD-/170843575028?pt=UK_CarsParts_Vehicles_CarParts_SM&hash=item27c71212f4

Thanks Dave - I think I read something somewhere about dates on tyres, but didn't know it was 5 years. So forgetting the part worns - which I think I am, because if tread is down from 10mm to 4, that's a 60% decrease, effectively making them 60% less effective than new, which is kinda the whole point really - I've a choice between £180 worth of retread tyres, using Dunlop tread pattern, or £188 worth of budget Asian market tyres. Both are a bit of an unknown quantity really... Question remains though (apart from the above); will a 205/50 17 be good enough in the snow? The rolling radius of a 205/50 17 is more or less the same as a rolling radius of a 205/55 16 - and the width section is the same, with both at 205. So I guess the question really is, is a 50 profile tyre that much less effective than a 55 profile tyre...?

30 years old, only 2years NCB (lost previous NCB due to not insuring a vehicle in my name for over two years) (license held for 12 years - clean for the majority of that time, lol. No bans, just a couple speeding tickets). I'm guessing postcode also plays a part in it, and I'm guessing since your dad owns esure, that plays a part in it too!

On a different line of thinking, what about retreads? Not remoulds, retreads; Retreads are signficantly cheaper than new tyres, but still more expensive than part worn. For example - http://www.ebay.co.u...=item4d01effd3f What's got me thinking about them though is the 10mm tread depth, over part worns that are going to be 4-5mm, 6mm if you're really lucky My wondering is how long they will last. I'd only have them on when the temp is steadily below 7-10deg and come off again when the temp is steadily above 7-10deg, so probably only 3 months (4 max) of the year. I do about 2000, maybe a little over, a year, so I'm expecting to only do 600/700 miles in that time. So I'd expect winter tyres to last YEARS (the Dunlops I was looking at had real world life results of as much as 16k - at 600 miles a year that'd be 26 years before they wore out (ok, so I know tyres won't last 26 years, but you get my point!) So question is, £135 for 4/5mm part worn "proper" tyres, or £180 for 10mm "retread" tyres? For comparison, brand new, cheapest I can find is £47 each (inc del) from mytyres - http://www.mytyres.co.uk/cgi-bin/rshop.pl?details=Ordern&cart_id=52515289.110.6010&typ=D-119446&ranzahl=4&Breite=205&Quer=50&Felge=17&weiter=0&Ang_pro_Seite=10&Transport=P&dsco=110&sowigan=Wi - so £188 for 4 brand new tyres (although the brand is completely unknown to me, so no idea if they are that good or not)

Thoughts on running 205/50 17" winter tyres? Initially, I wanted to run 16's (ideally the Harrier wheels as pic'd above) but they seem to be an expensive option! Found a couple sets second hand, and the cheapest, even without tyres, are over £200! Plus tyres, plus fitting and balancing, makes them an expensive option! I've spotted a set of standard IS 17's, in not so great condition, for a bargain £50 (no tyres) and potentially found a set of (I hope) half decent, part worn (thread looks good, says all are above 4mm) winter tyres, so with those two, and another £40ish quid for fitting and balancing, I could have an identical looking set of wheels with winter tyres for not a whole lot more than just buying the Harrier rims without tyres (I reckon total should be about £265 - still a lot of money for only a couple, maybe three, months use - but on the other hand I don't have to possibly ruin my nicely refurb'd standard rims, and should have a lot more traction, and thus safety) So will there be much more difference between 205/55 16s and 205/50 17s, in terms of driving, grip, etc? Tyre calculator suggests that 205/50 17's would be a good match to standard, but I'm more thinking on what's best for the snow...

I agree that driving on the speedo isn't ideal - I often do less than the limit, when the conditions deem it so, and on roads I don't think it's safe to drive the limit on (for example, little windy, almost single width country lanes might be national speed limit, 60, but I think 30 is a more appropriate speed), and more on roads I know well and know can handle it. Fact of the matter is though, most of the time the speedo is the only indication of what speed you're doing (unless you run a sat nav all the time - I do in the van, but not often in the car) - and yes, people should spend more time looking at the road than checking the speedo, which is why I disagree with average speed camera's; because people spend more time constantly checking they are doing 50 on the nose and not watching what the traffic is doing. Wish I was paying £44 a month FC - mines £88 a month TPF&T!

I think auto dimming was only on the 300's, although it might have made it onto the later LE 200's...

IS speed's over read by about 5mph at those sorts of speeds (80 on the clock will be 75, 70 on the clock is about 65ish), so to be doing 75 you're speedo must have been reading 80. Trouble is, the car is so quiet even at those speeds, it is so easy to creep over! I just got back from an airport run up the M11 - half of it spent doing 60-65 and then when it finally declogged and I was able to pull out and overtake I accelerated upto an indicated 80. Next thing I know, I look at the speedo and it's reading 95! 95 in my Rover felt like I was trying to take off; 95 in this feels like 60! Oops...

The ones that annoy me are the ones that do 50 through the 40, then continue to do 50 through the 60/70 section too