Rabbers

iPhone and iPod recharging-as-you-drive via, respectively, 30-pin-to-USB and Lightning-to-USB cables is something I take for granted and not really thought about until I read this thread. Although I nowadays almost always prefer my iPod (6th Gen Touch) to the iPhone (ancient but trusty 4S model) for playing music on long or longish drives, I thought I'd try, out of interest, to see how quickly the latter charges with a normal (for me) volume setting of 30 and the Bluetooth turned on for the phone function as it always is. Starting out with a 62% charge, I drove 15km and saw it increase to 73% and then to 85% by the end of the return journey over the same distance, no calls having been made or received. Not having any points of comparison with other brands of phones or car systems, I don't know if this rate of recharging is good or bad but would conclude that it is more than adequate for any practical need I may ever have.

Paul: If, as in my case, your problem is reaching the corners without contorting yourself, try and get hold of a U.S.-made product called Invisible Glass Reach & Clean Stick, which consists of a swivel-headed stick designed for the specific purpose of getting into awkward corners and angles.

Ever tried plain water applied with one cloth and then immediately and energetically wiped off with another, repeating if necessary?

This is unfortunately true, simply because there is no universally understandable way of formally defining what constitutes light or heavy fog or rain, though I believe that most police forces adopt a visibility of <50m as a guideline for switching on rear fogs.

The single rear fog-light on the 300h can be an issue in terms of driver-confidence in any part of the world where fog is frequent (e.g. the Po Valley in Italy, Zurich Canton in Switzerland), not to mention the car's reduced visibility in heavy rain at night on badly-lit roads, especially motorways, as the result of spray kicked up by the rear wheels. Two would certainly be better than one, and the fact that some owners may be fortunate (or careless or thoughtless) enough to need to switch the fog-light on only rarely does not seem any kind of justification for one of Lexus's few unsatisfactory design decisions, no doubt dictated by corporate bean-counters at the costing stage. However, as rear fogs go, it must be said that it is quite a powerful one. As regards the single reversing-light, I also feel that two would be preferable, but am less concerned with the safety aspect than my irritation at occasionally being approached by someone telling me that "one of my reversing-lights isn't working".

Phil: Try and get hold of the Optimum No-Rinse Wash & Shine mentioned in my post of 24 July, the problem you are having sounding similar to the one it solved for me.

Tom: What audio source were you using? If it was a cable-connected iPod or iPhone, the event could have been caused by something as simple as a defective or loose cable.

Having always had ML as integral to top-spec IS models, I never previously gave much thought to whether it represented value for money in respect of the system or systems in lower-spec packages. But now, because it will be offered only as an optional with a current list-price of €1250 were I to replace my present 300h with another (as one day I probably shall), I thought it would be useful to try out the 8-speaker system I would otherwise be getting. And, on the basis of a same-car, same-device, same-music and same-environment comparison, I concluded, quite emphatically, that I would still go for the ML. This is not to say that I would be overjoyed to pay the high asking price. It means, rather, that I am satisfied that the ML justifies a premium figure. Whether or not this is excessive is a question for individual customers, and raises the broader issue of why anyone should want premium car audio in the first place, especially when the standard system on offer is in itself an acceptably good one. My own justification for wanting premium car audio in any car I might ever own rests on the availability of 10,000+ titles imported to iPod from a library of 950+ CDs collected over many years and which itself represented a not insignificant investment. The music ranges from early Blues and Rock (mostly remasterings of original recordings of primitive quality) through modern Jazz and "quality" Pop (mostly excellently recorded) to various types of Classical (almost all of it superbly recorded). And, if the selection were not heavily weighted towards the latter areas, I would reckon that just about every car stereo I have ever heard would be good enough. As far as my own repertoire of tastes and desires is concerned, the selection is pretty much definitive, meaning that I very rarely add to it (typically by iTunes or Amazon download when I do) and then only if tempted by rave reviews of new performances of what I usually already have. Therefore, in effect, I view my iPod purely as a means of carrying what is almost my entire music collection from my house to my car and back again. And while I acknowledge that this amount of content is ridiculously large for anybody's needs in a car, I nevertheless find its availability "on tap" to be strangely comforting (especially when supplemented by a good number of automatic podcast downloads which, fortunately, are self-limiting in number since my discovery of the delete-after-listening setting) and, as such, deserving of as good a system as I can afford in order to play it.

Waiting for my car at the dealer earlier today, I asked to try the 8-speaker audio system in another 300h, not having heard one before and being intrigued by some opinions that it performs almost as well as the ML. After playing an iPod via BT and then (better) via USB in a quiet showroom, I quickly concluded that the system might well be good enough to satisfy customers who have not heard the ML but is so inferior in terms of detail, clarity (especially in bass-heavy music), range and power as to make the comparison almost unfair, so much so that the thought crossed my mind that any opinion to the contrary might be based on hearing the ML with the Surround feature turned off - which, of course, some people may prefer, though I would imagine these to be few. My own habit is to always leave it on except in the occasional case of vocal music when I want the voice(s) "to the front", and, generally, it seems to me that the main merit of the Surround - and therefore the ML system - is to exploit the greater number and quality of the speakers to yield highly realistic and undistorted sound (even to ghetto-blaster levels if so desired - though most of us thankfully do not). Therefore, unless road and traffic and other unwelcome but unavoidable noises justify the belief that any or all premium car audio systems are a waste of money, the ML is worth a premium price. And while I can understand and even admire the desire of some particularly refined and demanding audiophiles to seek out customized high-end upgrades to the 8-speaker system from third-party suppliers, I personally don't see the need when Lexus has already accommodated them with the ML.

This is absolutely right. Unless your speed is low, say <30km/h, downshifting on snow or ice or any other seriously slippery surface whether or not you are gently applying the brake can cause a disconcerting rear wobble signalling the risk of the 300h going into a tailspin. In such conditions I find it safest not to make the next downshift until the braking effect of the previous one is complete. And, incidentally, in this kind of scenario the paddles are preferable to the stick because they allow you to keep both hands on the wheel.

Near where I live is a long and steep hill with a speed camera at the bottom where the limit, preparing you for a hairpin bend, is 30km/h. It can be difficult to observe this limit using the brake alone but, once you have slowed to 40km/h or so, flicking the paddle down to #2 enables you to get past the camera with impunity and safely negotiate the hairpin. As a matter of fact I look forward to using this bit of road because it is one of the very few where I get to use the paddles and appreciate them. Occasionally I also use them on stretches of twisty road because, at the back of my mind, I still harbour the thought that they were put there in order to enhance driver involvement rather than as a mere image- booster, but, alas, I am always disappointed.

I have had ML systems in every Lexus I have owned (the 300h is my fifth) and always been satisfied compared to most other premium systems I have experienced as a passenger or hire-car customer. Zayd's post reminds me that when I first had the 300h, my choice of optimal setting after various attempts to find one was - and has remained - one notch towards the passenger and two towards the back. It is important to find the positional setting that best suits you and your tastes.

I once had a strong smell of mildew from the aircon vents of a month-old BMW 328ix. The problem was diagnosed as stagnating water, and resolved by hot air being blown into the vents simultaneously with the heating system itself being set to maximum. This was more than twenty years ago when systems were less advanced, but the technique may be worth a try.

My 300h is Pearl White (Code #077), and therefore characteristically opalescent. Viewed at a distance when parked in sunlight or even under strip lighting in underground car-parks, the whiteness is quite accentuated but gradually becomes more attenuated as you come closer. I have grown appreciative of this feature in relation to most other white cars I see.

Richard, it seems to me that such wisdom as might be gleaned from this thread is to the effect that if you are unconcerned about potential scratches, be these real or imagined or invisible except under strong light or, depending on the colour of your paintwork, made more visible by the spreading of a special black powder, then you should go ahead and use a waterless wash. If, on the other hand, it is not too difficult or inconvenient for you to add a capful of product to a bucketful of water, pass it over the car and simply dry it off without rinsing, then a rinse -free wash could be a better alternative insofar as the risk of scratching is reduced by the lubricatory action of the water itself.

I have for some years owned a Michelin key-fob consisting of the Bibendum figure incorporating a tyre-pressure gauge. I don't remember where I got it, but it must have been given to me when I had some Michelins fitted. It's a bit of a naff object so I keep it well hidden deep in my glove-compartment, but, on the evidence of several comparisons made with professional gauges, its readings are infallibly accurate. And - who knows? - it may one day become a collector's item!

I had an encounter about rust on a Lexus only the other day. I was unloading my 300h in a hotel car-park in Freiburg, Southern Germany, when a CT200 pulled up in a nearby spot. A lady got out and, noting that I also had a Lexus, approached me. Without any preamble, she asked if I had a rust problem. Replying that I did not, she then pointed to the door-sills and wheel-arches of her own car, which, indeed, were quite seriously spotted with rust despite the car being only two years old. Apparently this resulted from extensive winter salting of the roads in the the part of the Bavarian Alps where she lives. Her specific complaint, however, regarded the fact that other brands of car owned by her friends and neighbours were far less seriously affected. She may be right or she may be wrong, but to judge by the extent of the rust, she certainly had cause to be unhappy.

This is all profoundly fascinating. My knowledge of the uses (and abuses) of powder on car bodies had hitherto been limited to a neighbour's attempt to discourage cats from sleeping on the hood of his Jag by sprinkling "sneezing powder" on it. Much to his disappointment, the result was to add copious globs of cat-snot to the paw-prints.

I suppose spreading talcum powder on a black car would be equally edifying, especially if you've just washed it.

Sorry, Richard, but I have no before-and-after pix to show you. Just visualize a fairly dusty car with customary minor summertime cosmetic blemishes, a few insect splatters, small amounts of dirt-spray and brake-dust behind and inside the wheels, all quickly and effortlessly removed (the brake-dust last) with a capful or so of product diluted in a bucket of water, and resulting in satisfactorily glossy, scratch-free (at least to the naked eye), and streak- and smear-free surfaces. Although I have not tried the product on a very dirty car , I would guess that the application and drying steps may well need repeating with a second bucketful to get a perfect result.

Personally I have never gone in for convenience products such as waterless washes, preferring conventional shampoos followed by rinsing and hand-drying with cloths. Recently, the water in my neighbourhood, apparently because of modified sourcing during the summer months, became so hard that my paintwork, despite being white, showed streaking in direct sunlight. When looking around for a suitable water-softener, I was recommended a U.S.-made product called Optimum No-Rinse Wash & Shine, and have been very impressed with it. Depending on the degree of dilution, it can have various uses including that of a quick detailer or clay-bar lubricant, but if you add a small amount to your normal wash-bucket, it works as a rinseless wash. You pass a soaked cloth over the car one section at a time and then immediately dry it off with another clean cloth. In order to dry off the entire surface of the 300h you will need to wring out the drying cloth maybe five or six times. The result would probably be less good with a very dirty car but, given a normal amount of dry-weather dust and dirt, I strongly recommend the product.

Although I've not owned a BMW for the past fifteen years, I still buy their Windscreen Washer Concentrate because it's highly effective and smells good. The dilution ratio is 1:100, so a 50ml bottle gives you 5 litres, which is good for at least two sprinter-tankfuls and can be stretched further in summer. It contains no antifreeze, but is still OK most winters unless temperatures go very low. It costs around €3 per bottle - presumably the same in the U.K. - and once used, there is no substitute.

I agree that 38000km is acceptable for a rwd car. It is approximately the distance at which, as a general rule, I would have been starting to think, unhurriedly, about getting new tyres for any car I have ever owned. On this occasion, however, the wear to both rears was dramatic, with small patches of exposed metal within what looked like burst blisters and the innermost tread pattern worn smooth. It being inconceivable that this amount of wear occurred suddenly, I was left wondering just how long I had been driving with unsafe tyres and why it had happened. Sure, I was aware of the pronounced camber, though I did not consider it particularly out of the ordinary. My first thought was that, not ever having had different-sized rear tyres before, I had not had the four rotated as I had always done in the past when changing to summers every Spring. Another thought was that the Bridgestones (I have never been a fan of this brand from the standpoint of durability) were a poor-quality product, and, indeed, there is no way I would want them again. But, then again, it is probably unfair to so utterly condemn them within the premium UHP segment. I asked myself if they had perhaps been over-inflated, but, since I regularly check my pressures, I doubted it. Had my driving style become more aggressive? I didn't think so insofar as I had hitherto been congratulating myself on how I felt it to have improved with my ownership of the 300h. So, I really don't know what happened and have to be content with laying the blame on the angle of camber. To be on the safe side, I now regularly palpate the inner treads from under the wheel-arches and occasionally lay out a cloth and press my cheek to the ground thus supplementing my groping with a visual check.

"Serious" in the sense that I would have preferred a car with a potentially longer tyre life and less of a need to constantly monitor it. Not "serious" in the sense that even if I had been aware of the issue, my fondness for the car and original decision to buy it would have been unaffected.

Wear to the rear tyres of the 300h is a serious issue. I was forced to discard the OEM Bridgestone Turanzas after 38000km because of wear to the inner treads of the 235/35-18 rears and, judging by its severity, would have needed to do so much earlier had I noticed it. In the event, the wear was first discovered in the course of routine servicing and explained by my dealer (after checking with Lexus HQ technical people) as the "regrettable but normal" result of the camber, an opinion subsequently confirmed by an independent tyre specialist. Given this situation, I was worried when recently switching to summers from my 245/45-18 (all four) Yokohama Blizzak winters but was glad to see that, at 26000km, they had worn perfectly evenly front and rear, probably by virtue of having been rotated with each of two seasonal changes, and look to have at least one more winter ahead of them. Anyway, given that the rear camber is a problem with no solution, my advice would be to check the rear treads with ever-increasing frequency as the tyres age, maybe even as often as every 2000km after 20000km.