Rabbers

Odd. I thought all RC300h F-Sport models since launch, including UK spec ones, had ACC or, more recently, the + version thereof. Obviously I was mistaken. Anyway, stay on the ball and drive safe.

Roger: I don't know which ACC version you have, but mine is the one which cuts out with an acoustic warning when your speed, like that of the vehicle in front, drops below 40kmh (= 30mph), and not the newer ACC+, which automatically brings you to a full stop. I have had the latter on loaner cars and not found it better in normal use - though I imagine it might well be in high-speed situations when your own reaction times may not be good enough. I believe the radar can be turned off by a specific series of twiddles on the control stalk, thus leaving only the classic constant-speed function, but I see no point to ever doing so. I almost always use the ACC on motorways and often on fast roads with light or light-ish traffic. Like most other features of the Lexus safety package, and not being prone to a sense of false security (or so I like to think), I find it well-nigh indispensable. Since I believe that all road users except myself are idiots (and am probably not alone in this) I regard any safety device as a welcome form of self-protection. This does not mean I don't find some of them irritating, especially when they primarily consist of an acoustic warning. The worst offender in this regard is the lane-change alert (which, in Canada, I was once amused to hear described as an LLV, or "Lexus Lane Valet"). There was a time I thought the strength of the beep might have proved sufficiently startling to counteract possible dozing off and off-course drifting on long and boring motorway drives, but it would so frequently sound off after misreading lane-markings, or perhaps reading residual traces of old ones, especially in the damp, as to represent a danger in itself. So it has now become the device I probably use least.

Paul: Thanks for pointing out my mistake relative to the Honda warranty, for which I apologise. I really don't recall where it came from, but suspect my superficial reading of an ad or review. Please scrub the reference from my post .... Fortunately, the Koreans were more important to the gist.

Having experienced corrosion in at least one wheel of each of three of my first four Lexus'es, all pre-2011 and bought new, I can understand Paul's thinking. However, having seen no similar issues with a 2013 IS300h and a 2016 RC300h, I thought, wrongly to judge by Les' experience, that Lexus had finally fixed what had become an embarrassingly serious quality problem. Strange though it may sound, despite my irritation every time the corrosion appeared, Lexus' unvarying promptness in honouring the warranty and replacing the alloys ultimately had the effect of strengthening my loyalty to the marque. Maybe I was lucky with the two dealerships involved - in fact I'm sure I was - but, measured in terms of courtesy and decisiveness, Lexus' behaviour in warranty situations could not have been more favourable when compared to BMW, Audi and Lancia - which were the houses with which I had most recently had dealings, usually with a lot of hassle over even the smallest issues. That Lexus, with its reputation for quality and reliability, should offer a warranty of only three years is absurd, especially when every dealer I have spoken to claims that the number of issues seen during the fourth and fifth years of a car's life is very rarely higher than during the first three. Lexus supposedly bases its three years on the fact that the majority of its customers outside the US (where I believe you get four) are corporate and not private and therefore less worried about longer-term reliability. Its main competitors, moreover, don't offer longer warranties, though we can be sure that if any one of the big Germans were to break ranks and extend theirs, Lexus would quickly follow suit. Conversely, the majority of Toyota customers are private and not corporate and, for this reason - and despite the company's good reputation for reliability - there must be growing pressure to bring the present five-year warranty closer to the seven or eight years offered by some Japanese competitors, notably Honda, but most enticingly by the Koreans, who seem to be basing much of their promotional activity on it. year warranty

Apart from it being nobody's business but your own that you chose the same colour for your new car because you like it, I find it admirable that you didn't change just for the sake of it as many people do. It's also a good thing that people know you have a new car. I once changed a BMW325i for a new 328ix in the same silver colour, and, since these were the days when it was fashionable to order a car without identifying the model on the back, almost nobody noticed for several months. Rather perversely, I must admit, I would chuckle to myself whenever someone commented, as often happened, on how I kept the car looking so new. When they finally found out, I was accused of all sorts of things, especially about how I had been taking the p**s, but hopefully without having damaged too many long-term relationships.

Nice car, looks like the twin of mine 😍! In the absence of reliably precise times, I'd largely agree with the above statement, certainly in terms of driver impression, though my own observation would be that, in Sport or Sport+ with the accelerator floored, the rate of acceleration tends to stabilise about halfway to the 100kmh mark, and does not perceptibly start to dip away do until you reach somewhere around 140>kmh. As well having sometimes done so myself, I have had passengers time me with the stop function of their wris****ches, and while the results have inevitably been distorted by inconsistencies if pedal pressure, personal reactivity etc. the RC has always clocked 0-100kmh times nearer to 8' than 9'. But although I think I have come close, I have never broken 8'. I should add that, in the interests of sparing the tyres, I've never tried to launch the car from a standstill with the loud pedal floored, preferring to roll for a few metres before stamping on it. I don't know what method or techniques Lexus and other manufacturers adopt for their declared results. Be all this as it may, my liking for the RC derives less from the quantification of performance, which is far from inadequate, than its nature, which is never less than pleasant. To this day, even though logic tells me that the IS300h declaredly beats the RC300h by 0.2' to 100kmh because it is a lighter car (a fact also reflected in better fuel consumption), I have not ceased to be amazed by the impression of superior dynamism and balance the RC transmits to the driver.

I found all three generations of the IS in their 200, 250 and 300h versions to be equally reliable mechanically and, by and large, electronically. After three years’ ownership/75000km I came to regard the 300h as the best in terms of overall build and materials quality insofar as I experienced none of the more serious issues - all quickly resolved under warranty but very irritating at the time - affecting its predecessors, e.g. condensation-prone headlights, flaking body chrome, worn gear-knob in the 200, and corrosion-prone wheels in both of my two 250s. The only major problem (at least I considered it to be such) I had with the 300h was the marked tendency of the padding of the door-side bolster of the driver’s seat to flatten and sag and the leather to crease. This finally became so irritatingly unsightly as to lead me to bring my change of car forward by a few months. The only other issue I ever had with the 300h regarded a faulty tyre pressure sensor when the car was practically new. Because a replacement was not immediately available from stock I was obliged to leave for a month-long trip with the tyre warning permanently lit. This was extremely irritating but gave me something to curse at during periods of motorway boredom while at the same time discovering the car to otherwise be as predictably solid and reliable as any Lexus I had previously owned, and probably more pleasing.

Never having had more than one adult passenger at a time in the back of the RC, and then usually only for short drives, I have rarely given the question of back-seat comfort much thought. And, of course, had rear spaciousness been a major issue I would not have bought the car in first place. However, the other day I was unlucky enough to be one of two back-seat passengers for a ride of about 20km in a C-Class coupé, and, without needing to analyse and compare Lexus' and MB's declared leg- and head-room measurements, which I would guess to be very similar, I quickly came to the conclusion that it would be best, unless they are below average in height and girth and blessed with an uncomplaining nature, to avoid carrying any passengers at all in the back of either car. My experiences in current-generation coupés that more or less compete with the RC had previously been limited to the Audi A5, which I found almost as cramped, and the E-Class which, on the other hand, I found to be almost as spacious as any normal four-door saloon - and which, if the price of optionals did not risk putting it beyond economic reach, would have to be the coupé of choice for any prospective owner who needs to carry passengers more than just occasionally. In this regard, I hate to admit it puts the RC very much in the shade.

I have seen some amount of camber-related inner wear to the rear tyres in all generations of the IS, it having been sudden and severe (blistering and patches of exposed metal) only on one unexplained occasion with the 300h in the case of summers on their second seasonal stint at about 38000km (=24000 miles) into the car's life shared, until then, about 50/50 with winters, namely after about 18-19000km (=11500 miles). The wear on the summer rears of the RC after two stints totalling 31000km (19000 miles) certainly seems to have developed more slowly than I ever saw in any IS, and the winters that have just now entered their third stint after 18000km (=11000miles) were, I'm glad to say, showing no unevenness of wear whatsoever. Tread depths at the time of this last seasonal change were Summers (Dunlop SportMaxx) F 6mm/R 5mm and Winters (Pirelli Sottozero) F 7.5/R 7mm. Allowing for comparative mileages, these treads are in line with those reported by Peter, and I would think the very good result for the Pirellis is attributable to the largely dry and ice-free last couple of winters with temperatures favouring the tyres' maximum efficiency.

I changed to winter tyres this morning and, noticing slight wear to the rear inner treads of the summers, had a four-wheel alignment done at the same time. Hopefully this will keep the problem at bay until I need to get new tyres. This was the first alignment in the car's two years of life/49000km (=30500 miles). I saw no wear at the time of the last seasonal change 12000km (=7500 miles) ago and none was reported when the car was serviced not long afterwards. Unless their car is going to be put on a lift sometime soon, it may therefore be a good idea for RC owners with similar mileages to mine to take a closer look at their tyres. Possible inner-tread wear is difficult to see because of the car's low clearance, so a pressing of cheeks (facial ones) to the ground might be required.

Driving through Switzerland earlier this week I noticed what might be considered a flaw, albeit a very minor one, in the RC's fuel measuring/monitoring system. Seeing I had time to spare before an appointment on the other side of the Gotthard, I decided to indulge in a bit of nostalgia and take the steep and winding old road over the Pass instead of the customary quick but boring route through the Tunnel. As I neared the top of the climb, the low-fuel warning light came on - which I had been expecting. Then, when I was crossing the flat central section of the Pass some 1000-1200m later, it went out again - which I had not been expecting. I supposed this to be the effect of the fuel in the tank settling at a detectable level after sloshing about during the climb. I was thus reminded of past times when the fuel-gauges of cars that were far less sophisticated than those of today tended, as the tank gradually emptied, to twitch and tremble with every change of gradient, and especially in hairpin bends. The light came on again some 3000m further on during the descent, and remained on until I refuelled 25km later. I thought this episode worth reporting since it was the first time I ever saw the light go off - and stay off for an appreciable distance - after first coming on. I otherwise only recall similar but less extreme steep-gradient situations in an IS300h when the light may have flickered a few times before finally staying on. As a postscript I'll add that this was the first time I had done this sort of long climb and descent in the RC. I was not expecting the car to disappoint, and nor did it. While not aiming for tyre-squealing levels of speed, I did sustain a brisk rate of progress favoured by long stretches of well-nigh empty road. The car remained unruffled throughout. Uphill acceleration, usually in Sport+, was seamless; the steering was responsive, precise, and felt perfectly weighted; the stability in the numerous bends and curves was beyond reproach despite the amount of body-roll being not unexpectedly greater than I had previously experienced. The brakes may have begun to fade somewhat during the long descent, not dramatically but enough to dictate slower speeds and, had there been more of them, a longer distance from cars in front. Really, my only quarrel was with the PCS, which sounded off with disconcerting frequency because, before corrections of trajectory in tight bends, it would naturally identify high side-walls as collision risks. My initial intention to exploit what was a perfect opportunity to use the paddles more than I usually do was short-lived, for although I did occasionally favour downshifting on long downhill straights in order to spare the brakes, I generally preferred to look at the scenery and let the car do all the work.

I used to be a bit irritated by the amount of attention the RC gets and must confess that to some extent I still am. But then again, I have noticed that it is the sort of car that puts a smile on the faces of its admirers, silent ones and talkative ones alike. I have rarely come across the sullen envy or reverse-snob dismissiveness that nice cars sometimes inspire. I suppose this is because people know that it is not a wildly expensive car despite its looks. Perhaps they regard it as an example of champagne on a beer budget while acknowledging that the beer is obviously a premium one.

Great choice, and welcome to the sub-Forum. To judge by my own experience you are going to spend a lot of time just gazing at her sleek lines. I notice you wisely gave other cars in the park plenty of distance.

I believe this is a much prized component in the bouquet of a Sauvignon Blanc, but perhaps it’s not wholly appropriate for a screen wash. Personally, I haven’t owned a BMW for upwards of two decades but I still buy their brand of screenwash because of its great smell and effectiveness.

Yesterday I took my car to the local car-wash (where I use the highly effective plain-water jet wash and, no doubt like all Lexus owners, avoid the rotating brushes like the plague). As I do every 2-3 washes or so - and have done with every car I have ever owned - I opened up the bonnet in order to remove spots and splatters, vacuum dust from the screw cavities, and wipe the plastic surfaces. To my surprise the people in the adjoining bay, who had been eyeing me somewhat shiftily, came over and congratulated me for doing such a thorough job. It was obvious, however, that they actually thought I was being over-zealous to the point of neurosis. While agreeing that it is rare to see people cleaning under the bonnet - at least in public car-washes - I maintained that is perfectly normal and natural and necessary thing to do. Surely I’m not alone in this?

So, then, in relation to your OP, did you look at the range forecast after the second fill to see if it more or less came in line with the actual miles you achieved with the first? I must say that your mileage based on my own experience with two IS250s, the last of which was MY2010, is pretty good. I used to think I was doing well if I could squeeze 650km = 400miles out of a tank on long motorway drives.

I was trying to make a point about possible lapses of objectivity that tempt one to pay premium prices (as I myself often do) without benefits that are guaranteed or immediately obvious or demonstrable. At the risk of labouring the point, I would say that purveyors of branded fuels and pet foods both characteristically target, perhaps not always scrupulously (although my own usual tendency is to initially give them the benefit of the doubt), customers who are open to exploitation because of a possible no-expense-spared attitude towards items of property - cars and pets respectively - that not only inspire fondness but are also often realistically capable of repaying it when treated well. It could be argued, however, that many of these would more than adequately repay such fondness even when treated less well and less expensively. My analogy between oil companies and pet food manufacturers and their respective products and customers/end-users extends no further than this.

Whether the prices asked for Premium over Regular are justified in terms of measurable benefits have occasionally been discussed on LOC Forums without much consensus of opinion. As regards my own view, I remember being taken to task for suggesting that putting Premium in your car is a bit like expecting premium-priced pet foods to deliver wetter noses and glossier fur when you may really be letting the natural desire to pamper the object of your affection get the better of you. Not that there is anything wrong with this, far from it, but, much as I have tried over the years to put a positive spin on the possible advantages in terms of mileage or power and performance of using Premium, I have objectively found none or very few - and although the advertised claims of some brands may well be accurate, they presumably derive from testing in controlled conditions that have little to do with real life. The 10% premium typically asked over Regular in the UK mentioned by Matt is well above the norm of most other European countries, where I would guess the average to be more like +5-6%. Be this as it may, even if, as Peter would reasonably maintain, you end up laying out the same cash for ten tankfuls as you otherwise would for eleven, few of us will notice the difference within the economics of owning and running our types of car. Really, the only thing that irks me somewhat about the price of Premium is the oil companies' reluctance to narrow the gap between it and Regular, which they could probably do without reducing their margins too much if one is to judge by their expenditures on Premium-specific advertising, forecourt displays, and promotions such as double loyalty-points etc. My own practice, based less on conviction than force of habit, is to fill up with Premium only occasionally, say every 6-7 re-fuellings, thus supposedly and desirably "flushing out" the fuel system (and keeping in mind the unpleasant and probably not wholly accurate comparison with clogged arteries resulting from an unhealthy diet), even though I'm aware that the same result could be achieved with judicious squirts of injector-cleaning fluid. I should add, however, that I recently heard that flushing-out by either of these methods could, if you're unlucky, have the dire effect of not removing deposits and encrustations but of merely shifting them to other possibly more critical locations.

You’ve put it more correctly than I did. If the tank has just been filled to the top the forecasting basis can only be the last known mpg, which until the variables such as style and types of road come into play, as they almost immediately will, is what the OBC believes you will maintain.

The range forecast by the OBC is based on the total distance travelled with the amount of fuel contained in the tank after the previous re-fuelling. In order for full-tank forecasts to be realistic or near-realistic, re-fuellings should, in my experience, preferably be fairly substantial one to the next. Unless something is wrong, you'll almost certainly find the forecast range reading satisfactorily higher after a second successive full tank.

I just saw this invitation to stray totally OT when re-reading the thread, and apologise for not ignoring it. I believe the question, or something like it, is often addressed and earnestly discussed on advertising courses because, uniquely in the case of a product like cakes (and bread), the normally conflicting concepts of "hotness" and "freshness" are actually synonymous, i.e. hot cakes are fresh cakes. Therefore, the advice given to aspiring copywriters is to describe products as "oven-fresh" rather than merely "hot", thus confirming to customers what they already know.

Lexus replaced my alloys under warranty, no questions asked, a few months from new on an IS200, because of discolouration due to incipient corrosion, and on each of two IS250s (MYs 2008 and 2011), because of corrosion-related bubbling and flaking. I had no such issues with the 18" rims on an IS300h (MY2013) and the diamond-cuts on my 2013 RC are also still looking like new. Regardless of whether or not they were to blame and despite claims of harmlessness I stopped using specific wheel-cleaning products (I latterly favoured Meguiars Ultimate) after my experiences with the 250s, and have since used normal shampoo or sometimes just plain water over protective wax applied every three months or so.

Could be a slightly loose door pocket, which can transmit its vibrations upwards or sideways. Empty the pocket, and then next time you hear the vibration, put your hand on it and see if the sound stops or resumes when you take your hand away.

I use a signal-blocking pouch to stop the doors locking & unlocking and the mirrors folding & unfolding when I wash the car, this being the purpose for which I originally bought it. I find the pouch marginally more convenient than de-activating the key itself, which is a simple enough operation but requires the key’s removal from its own protective zip-up case.

That’s right. The reading steadies at 14.5 during driving, and is around 12.2-12.5 in Accessory mode. The “instructions” accompanying the gadget state voltages of 13.2 to 14.8 with engine running and 11.9 to 12.8 with engine off as good. I was given the same estimated delivery dates as you, and on past experience they seemed to be normal for small jiffy-bag type mailings from the PRC, so I was pleasantly surprised by delivery on 4 Oct. I might even give the seller a high star rating when Amazon asks.