Linas.P

Cannot agree with that... Yes BMW and other German cars have quite a few minor issues, but none of them are as terminal as ones of IS220d and there are no single issue which applies to all cars or isn't maintenance related. Whereas on IS220d all the issues are inherent and not related to how well the car is maintained and each means end of life for the car. Sure - diesel related issues like DPF applies to all diesel cars, not only Lexus, but Lexus IS220d have myriad of specific issues which are not specifically due to it being diesel. So no - it is not just bad compared IS250, it is bad even in comparison with german diesels.

I call that "adapting the message for the people listening" 😁

I don't go to pubs...

Sorry, my sentence wasn't really the best and conflated everything in one place (politicians an maniacs fits well together) - I meat to say: "All these shouting maniacs have no clue what they are talking about, no understanding about science and many of them don't have formal education of any sort. Prime example our dear Greta, who during her now famoust speach ("how dare you") had Primary Education as the highest level of formal education. To be fair to her she since have completed secondary education, but I am not sure that qualifies her for position of "global climate change expert". Most of our politicians, have no clue what they are talking about either, nor understanding about science. And when such people start making decisions we all end-up in very bad place... " And probably upon further reflection - it is not a matter of politicans understanding the issues... it is a matter of them wanting to address them. Sometimes it is simply easier and more politically beneficial to simply find the scape goat (i.e. motorists) instead of focusing on real solution. So politicians with STEMM edication may actually understand the issues, but that doesn't mean they will move a finger to do anythign about it.

Now that you explained it... I don't think we disagree. You just said "climate change pseudo science" and without any other explanation I thought you mean - climate change is not real. Whereas you meant "pseudo science for climate change solution"... and that is basically what I said as well and where I agree with you... All these shouting maniacs have no clue what they are talking about, no understanding about science and many of them don't have formal education of any sort... most of our politicians included. And when such people start making decisions we all end-up in very bad place...

I don't have accurate current stats, the last time I seen proper global industry pollution chart was like 2012 or 2016 (need to find it again). Transportation was 10%, manufacturing was ~40%. What is important that Transportation includes everything (planes, public transport, ships, trains etc), the private vehicle part of it was 2.4%, 0.3% petrol/hybrid and 2.1% diesel. Most experts currently agree that life-time emissions reduction by average BEV are around 30% compared to average ICE. In conclusion, if we replace every car from ICE to BEV overnight, we will reduce private vehicle emissions by 0.7% and total human greenhouse emissions by ~0.007%. If you ask that doesn't sound like massively important thing to me...

I think you have described politician and TFL point of view very accurately (having labour Mayor doesn't help either), however you probably meant to put "fantastic" and "comprehensive" public transport in quotes. I mean you are right, it may be better than one in Birmingham or Derbyshire, but that doesn't automatically makes it good service... as in that order we may as well compare it to public transport Mumbai or Baghdad... Synthetic fuels are a bit of joke to be honest. It means still burning high carbon juice, but simply the production of it is "carbon neutral" - rather than extracting it from the earth, it is made by capturing carbon and recycling other otherwise wasted fuel sources. As such it does not address city centre pollution... cars with synthetic fuel will pollute almost as much (15-30% reduction due to cleaner burn), but in theory helps with greenhouse gases/global warming. Now just looking at the stats - it is actually interesting as it is claimed BEVs will reduce emissions by ~30%, so if synthetic fuel can reduce emissions by as much as 30% then you right - ICEs can be as green as BEVs. However, we need to be clear what issue we are trying to address: City "kerb-side" pollution linked to health problems - this is where ICEs are real issue and where BEVs are actually good solution. Synthetic fuel doesn't help here. Global warming - this is where synthetic fuel would help, but by itself I would argue that private vehicle contribution to global warming is so minute... it is literally irrelevant. So why bother about it.

Interesting opinion... I would not call climate change "pseudo science", I think by now all scientist who are worth that name agrees that there is climate change... however I still have not seen convincing argument whenever that is bad thing and what is causing it. The assumption is that it is caused by human produced greenhouse gases, despite it being ~1-2% of all naturally occurring gasses... That global temperature is rising that is fact, but global temperature raises and falls all the time... so what? Obviously, the second argument is that this is specifically linked with human produced greenhouse gasses - ok... it may be true... so what? Why over billion of years this planet existed it was fine for all forms of organisms and events to emit the greenhouse gases to change the climate, but suddenly human greenhouse gasses are the issue. Now sure we can say Netherlands will be under water in 200 years if we do nothing about it... Do I really care? They build the wall once, maybe they will do it again... In short one thing is a fact of climate change, but completely another - what does it mean precisely and what we should do about it precisely. Banning ICE cars is certainly not even close to important... replacing them with BEVs is even less important. That is because motoring is such a minor contributor that this change would makes no difference. Should we do it where we can e.g. banning unsafe and heavily polluting vehicles - yes absolutely, but current crusade against all ICE vehicles is step to far in my oppinion. As for wearing the masks... that may be small help although I would like to see evidence suggesting they do more harm... must be from flat earth magazine.

Many good points, however I think EVs are as much of an issue (probably even bigger) in metropolitan areas. Simple matter is that metropolitan areas will have highest ratio of flats and terraced houses with on street parking, leaving the owners unable to charge. The incentive is not there either, and we should recognise difference between "de-incentivising " ICEs, from the EV. The incentive there is makes no meaningful difference e.g. charge point grant (I simply can't use it), tax saving on EV/PHEV (only works on brand new cars), free entry into congestion charge zone (what is the point - there are no parking anyway). Whereas if we look at ICEs - there are loads of very "punishing" rules like high tax, congestion charge etc. which actually works and makes them no longer viable (this is part where I agree EVs are being forced onto people). On on the surface it looks like goverment is promoting EVs, but realistically they are still not a choice for average person - one has to have house with off-street parking and be one of few people who buys brand new cars to benefit from that... and that is what we see looking at current EV owners. That is the same reason why sales of EVs have plateaued as well - it simply reached the demand - everyone who could have EV already has one and there are very few people who can switch left. Sure there are still group of people who can actually afford EVs and would benefit from them, "just needs their mindset changed", but it is small. Most of sales now are EV upgrades - meaning people are moving out of first generation EVs or PHEVs into newer EVs.

I want to eat sandwich when I want it and where I want it, not necessarily in petrol station whilst trying to kill time waiting for car to charge... so 10 minutes for 30% charge is still unacceptable. That things are changing is true, but not every change is good change. Some changes are outright better and there are no discussion about it, but some others are just compromise. Now obviously, there will always be people who can compromise or for whom the weaknesses are just not a problem so they don't even need to compromise. Even myself, if I could have 3 cars and charge at home I can easily see myself driving EV to London and keeping ICE car for weekend or longer drive... sadly that is not the case for me and for most people... and if you really have to have one car EV is far too compromised at the moment. Phasing out ICEs with climate change excuse just doesn't make sense, car are just far too small source to matter overall... so this is more of just finding scapegoat and diverting attention from real issues. So in summary for me there are 2 fundamental issues: there are no benefit of EVs outside of city centres, where tailpipe pollution matters and therefore I don't see them as solving any problem EVs themselves are very compromised in terms of what they can and can't do... and infrastructure is not there yet.

very hard to say ... but are you confident your battery charger actually charges the battery (could it be that some settings are wrong and it discharges it?)... and secondly are you sure dealer replaced the battery i.e. maybe they just charged it and put it back in? I would say if battery is in good order, then even after 1 month of car being locked it should still be fine to go.

Same could be achieved by simply planting the foot all the way down straight away instead of progressively pressing the pedal. And you right - car doesn't mind high revs from time to time.

I think you are right here - if you could work around charging time, then that is not a problem for you. So it is all about mindset and perspective. However, saying "only needs to change the mindset" is a slippery slope - how far we changing our minds? Maybe we should change our minds right into walking? With certain mindset "sitting in the bus with stinky people" isn't an issue either! So I think it would be fair to agree what people could and should have their red lines - 20 minutes charge time is red line for me and I won't plan my day around refuelling, nor I am happy to drive without heater/AC/lights and music at 50MPH just to reach my destination. Further - you will be small minority of population who could charge their EV at home making your circumstances less than representative for the most. As I stated many times before complete replacement of ICEs with BEVs would save on 0.7% of global emission, so certainly does not justify the current urge to change.

It is still going to be like 50% in 20 min or something, but there is another issue - fast charging degrades batteries far quicker.

Yes.. the best I have seen in IS250 was ~44MPG, but somebody managed 48 or 49... maybe a run downhill. As much as I liked 4GR-FSE - happy engine, which liked to rev, was reliable, light, compact, sounded good and delivered decent power for it's size... by the time Lexus put it in GS mk4 and IS mk3 ins 2012/2013... it was effectively obsolete. Sadly, Lexus never updated 4GR-FSE which as you said was first introduced in 2003 Toyota Crown. I think it still had life in it if Lexus would have added Dual-injection (both port and direct) like 2GR-FSE and Atkinson-cycle, maybe paired it with new 8speed gearbox as they did for 350. This probably would have added 15-20hp and 5-10MPG making it a viable engine for few more years. I think what actually killed 4GR-FSE were stupid emission regulations and fundamentally wrong testing methodology which is easy to abuse with Turbochargers. What is sad that they had all the tech already available, both Atkinson cycle and injectors were in other engines and development would be minimal. No... instead they spent 100s of millions developing new smaller turbocharged engine to abuse the testing methodology and make artificially low emissions test. The reality is that 8AR-FTS is terrible engine and in any practical conditions consumes much more fuel and likewise pollutes much more... but on paper it has lower CO2, hence lower tax and that is why car manufacturers all downsizing and turbocharging.

Actually, interesting video for consideration... I think what many people still don't understand is how tiny the EV market really is. It is less than 10% of new cars and less than 1% of all cars on roads - so it is not large by means. That is I am sure EU, US and Japan does not mind Chinese imports - for now! Actually, I think EU is trying to catch the China in it's own game... you see China had no auto industry, Europeans (mostly) got there and created the industry, likes of Volkswagen, BMW, MB and GM are what created China auto industry. However, Chinese were smart - you see... you can't own business in China outright and you must be in shared partnership with Chinese person at the maximum shares ration of 51% to 49%, meaning Chinese partner will always have final say. What this means all these big automakers by now have been scammed out of their know how and technology and have no way out of China after spending billion on building their automotive industry. Sure that allows them to sell the cars in the biggest market and they made most of the money back, but the infrastructure and technology they have built is there to stay. It think EU is playing the same game - for now it allows Chinese companies to build factories and invest into EV technology, but once ICE bans comes in and EV market becomes major market, they will lock Chinese companies in. Meaning that all IP, technology and the factories will be locked in the EU and it will be Europeans making EVs for Europeans out of Chinese factories in Europe... and then Europe will have more leverage about business terms European businesses are subjected in China. Now that is my guess assuming Europeans are not stupid (which is big assumption) and that they/we will have political will to follow truth with this plan.

Gen 4 has Atkinson-cycle engine, so in theory it should be more fuel efficient when cruising, I just don't know how much impact that makes. I think generally all the cars get's better MPG on motorway than in town, except of very small hybrids (like Prius or CT I guess). Even smoothing like NX300h will get better MPG as long as you don't go past ~65-70MPH, but it simply not going to be as good as one would expect from non-hybrid car... i.e. lets say normal petrol car will do 26 in town and 40 on motorway, where hybrid may do 35 in town and 40 on motorway. If one is expect same increase from hybrid, then hybrid probably should do 50, but they don't and that is why people say are no good for motorways. It doesn't means consumption is worse than in the city, just that it is not as high as one would expect.

It certainly doesn't hurt the engine as long as everything else is in good order i.e. oil level is correct and car is regularly services. 4GR-FSE likes to be revved and the higher it goes the better it sounds... so as far as hurting the car I would not be concerned. However, it just feels wrong when you cursing along after lifting the accelerator and car just revs itself for no reason... feel literally like gearbox fault/stuck in gear. Further it has effect of engine braking, meaning the car slows down much faster after letting off the accelerator - again not entirely desirable if one just wants to cruise along after overtaking.

Honestly... it was just too good value. I was mainly servicing my car in Lexus, because I could not get cheaper service anywhere else. I think for IS250 2 year plan was something like £390 (275+115?) but often discounted further... I think I paid like £285 last time. Compared to awful places like Kwik-scam and Halfrauds, it is not much more expensive (both costing ~£320), just without risk of being defrauded. I would never trust those places to even look at my car never mind touch it. I would trust ATS Euromaster or Toyota for service, but they both actually charge more than Lexus (~400-500). And finally with Lexus you can always choose to take brand new Lexus as courtesy car... instead of being stuck in something silly like Toyota Aygo and even that one for extra £30 charge. I think original idea was to use it as a marketing tool for customers with car between 5-10 years old i.e. bring owners in give them new Lexus to drive, find £2000 worth of issues on their old car and then upsell them with upgrade. In reality it mostly attracted customers like me with 200k 12year old cars i.e. people who you can't get into your new cars and who simply ignore astronomical bills and just sticks with whatever is included in the bill.

It adds no power, but makes accelerator more sensitive. Apart of that, not much change just that instead of needing to press accelerator all the way to the floor you could get same result by pressing it half way. Generally not a bad thing, but sadly it as well unnecessary keeps gear very low for long time... so for example if you overtook the car, the engine will stay in 3rd gear/5000RPM for excessive amount of time instead of shifting back to more reasonable 5/6th gear at 60MPH. I personally left it on ETC (in some car called Normal) as I could achieve the same thing by simply pressing accelerator further, but without downside of gearbox getting stuck in too low gear for too long. On normal mode it shift-up as soon as you release the accelerator and I much prefer that.

Yes, it could be the case... but as I said there is always an option to inspect car next day after initial excitement wears out. Obviously... as I and other said, ask all the questions before delivery and have everything in writing. Even open ended questions like "are there any imperfections on pain/leather/dash", "any stone chip on windscreen" or "any other mechanical problems you know of" can work. If they say no and there are imperfections that crates perfect reason to reject the car or to ask for it to be addressed.

Mine one was with non-existent brakes where after less than 3000 miles rear pads were already metal on metal and front ones were ~1mm left. As well discs themselves were worn past minimum recommended thickness. I must say that after little bit of arguing Lexus gave in and replaced all brakes and pad for free + did free MOT. However the key part in the story was that I had all discussion in e-mail so they could not argue much. In my opinion 150 points check is little bit of a joke, because it is Lexus scoring themselves, so it is not independent and clearly has some conflict in interests. I would assume margin on used cars sale is low, especially on ex-lease cars, so fixing every detail would make dealers unprofitable. All in all, I would not be afraid buying car distantly, but I would keep all discussion in writing and would inspect car very carefully after deliver, even better during delivery. If anything a miss I would reject the car on the sport or would ask dealership to commit to fixing all the issues free of charge. Actually, distant buying is even better when it comes to statutory rights - because if you missed something during the test drive when you are under pressure and excited it could be argued it wasn't broken as you would have seen it. Whereas when you buying distantly, that is further reason for your to say - "it was there, I just could not notice, because I bought the car distantly". This leaves you more time to carefully inspect the car without any pressure from sales person and at the time and place convenient for you. Statutory rights still applies even if you test drove the car as all fault are considered to be pre-existent up to 6 month after purchase, but it may be harder to argue some wear and tear items. Whereas on distant sale you could reject the car and don't even feel bad about it. As simple as - if it wasn't in the description, then you could not know about it.

That is because you are in west midlands 🙂 When I was 25 my insurance was like £3800 on IS220d... so I kind of averaged for UK... in the cities very expensive, in the smaller towns not so expensive. Yes IS220d could be dangerously appealing for somebody not very familiar with the brand or particular model. On paper they are well equipped and modern looking cars and Lexus has name for reliability. However, IS220d could be real disaster, I even argued at one point - Lexus should buy them back and crush them. Problem is that every other Lexus model are amazingly reliable, easily in top 3 most reliable brands there are, but in particular IS220d could let down people massively and leave wrong lasting impression about the brand. IS220d deliver reasonable MPG when they work... sadly most of them don't work by now.

GS300h is ~£15-£25 cheaper to service than GS250, whereas GS450h is £15-£25 more expensive. Strangely, it seems that extended warranty is same £1095/24 Month on all 3... making GS450h (and especially GS-F) very attractive with warranty. Insurance will be more expensive on more powerful car, but that is anyone's guess how much it will be. In terms of fuel consumption GS300h will be best as well... whereas between GS250 and GS450h there are load of variables - I reckon if you drive them hard GS450h will be much less efficient, but that is because it is more powerful car. But if you drive them very carefully then GS450h will be on part with GS250 in the city, but GS250 will be more economical cruising at constant motorway speed... maybe (not sure what is impact of Atkinson cycle on GS mk4). In conclusion - GS300h will be cheapest by far to run over 5 years, GS450h will be second and GS250 probably on part or even little bit more expensive. But if one does not take warranty, does not service car in dealership... then GS250 in theory is the simplest car which needs least maintenance and lest likely to go wrong. And the thing is - I would not risk GS450h without warranty, but I would be fairly comfortable running GS250 without one.

No... I just took prices quite literally oldest/cheapest GS300h vs. oldest/cheapest GS250. GS mk4 generally being very rare car it is difficult to find like for like, franchised dealers cars with 1 owner and under 60k miles and make comparison. If we set-up conditions in a way that there are only 2 cars in the market which fits the conditions, then yes - I am sure it could be set-up in a way that one or the other car gets more expensive. Further complication is that car were not made/sold on the same time and with same equipment. But whichever way you look at it, the mostly same price at lower end of the market. Actually, I decided to do prove my point numerically, but conclusion is kind of mixed - there are total 18 GS250 for sale and I compared them to 18 cheapest GS300h. Turns out average GS300h in that category is mid-2015 with 70k miles and costs ~£14k and average GS250 is mid-2012 with 57k miles and costs ~£12k. So not much between them, considering 300h are on average 3 years newer and only has 13k miles more... I think the price difference of ~2k could be justified by cars simply being newer and mostly FL models. If we adjust value based on age, trim and FL then this is what would look like: Sorry, I know it is rather small, but overall GS250 turns out to be same value "like for like" as GS300h. Obviously, it all depends on criteria e.g. I have removed £200 for each better trim level, £500 for each year newer and £2000 for FL - basically to distil the difference engine makes and trying to account for those variables. Now some people may say "FL is ugly and I rather prefer NFL...) at which point NFL GS250 will become better value.