Linas.P

Somebody intercepting/repeating signal ? Lexus immobiliser can't be intercepted in RF method, but it doesn't mean some scum not going to try it anyway.

Especially not allowed near cars... almost as bad as bird poo itself 😄

Again really depends... I assume you had your car coated or at least sealed, so whatever little etching you get may be taken out with heat gun/hairdryer. Golf has hard clear so maybe that helps as well. Lexus in particular is known for having soft clear, so it is much easier to scratch and etch - bit of nightmare to get paint work perfect and keep it that way. Although theory is that softer clear should not chip as much.

Hair dryer method may work if it was left overnight maybe (the poop I mean). Depending on the paint and depending on how long the poop was left there even polishing may not be enough. It may even depend on what bloody flying rat was eating, because different stains requires different methods to remove. For example my old IS was left under the tree by new owner for whole year because of covid and there were literally year old crap on it. I thought bonnet was shot and will need repainting, but to my surprise it was just a matter or removing previous ceramic coating (basically it only stained the coating), however there was long shot going from the mirror down the door and I had to wet sand the paint to get it out. As in all car detailing work - start from least aggressive method and work your way up... was the car with pressure, contact wash the car, cleanse the pain either chemically or with say cay bar (although I consider that car must be polished if clay bar is used), if the stain still there then next step machine polishing using finest compound/pad... still not coming out - harder pad + courser compound... if polishing does not help - final step is sanding. And after that ... well repainting. If you not doing detailing yourself, then I guess all the steps after contact wash will require detailer. Now I would not expect bird etching to require repainting, but as I said I seen stains bad enough, that wet sanding was the only way. Finally, sometimes there are defect in the paint which are simply not worth getting out if they compromise rest of the panel too much. For that reason best stain prevention is preventative - keep car waxed, sealed or coated and clean. Mine always had ceramic coating and it never got stained as long as I washed the crap in few days... although bird shots I always tried to remove asap, if not for the panel... at least to protect the coating.

I guess technically they were right, if it was not offered in UK at the time. However, if you have any evidence in writing i.e. if they said Relax is not available via e-mail... then I would raise it with them. However, as other people have said - Lexus extended warranty seems to cover more items than new "relax" policy. Not sure how relevant it is for your car being just 3 years old, but maybe these products cannot be compared.

No it says that warranty is not part of the service - that is all. No full Lexus service history required... however it says to look at T&Cs and perhaps if car was never serviced all the way to 60k miles there may be some conditions. That is not strictly true - extended warranty was as well for up-to 10years/100k miles... however if extended before deadlines one could have it for longer i.e. you come day before 10 years old or at 99k miles, get another 2 years warranty and it would last irrespective of mileage age for another 2 years. I remember some people had extended it twice for 2 years in theory giving 14 years of warranty past 100k miles, but importantly you could not get say 9 years old car with 130k miles and get warranty for it, you could only get it if you extending existing policy.

That's is barely run-in... I bought my last IS250 at almost that mileage! 😁

Or dodgy headlight... I mean seriously... how somebody could drive with dodgy headlight and not notice it. I guess some people don't care about failing MOT, don't understand anything about cars and importantly don't want to understand anything. So they take car into the MOT "as is".... if it fails, they simply fix bare minimum to pass and go for re-test. This is not helped by re-test being free and if I am not wrong - during re-test MOT centre could only check the parts which were fails previously - meaning you have almost guaranteed pass unless it is emissions related. I always have basic pre-MOT check, like tyres, pressures, lights, indicators, even just cursory look at brake pads and whatever obvious suspension components I can see without removing wheels or going under the car - basically just look around the car if anything amiss doesn't even take 5 min. Fair enough sometimes it fails for something like crack in anti roll-bar bushing rubber, but that is something you can't see without getting under the car and inspecting it, unless it was previous advisory.

This sounds too good to be true! Doesn't this make Lexus extended warranty (which in itself is amazing deal) obsolete? I guess maybe Lexus Relax will not cover as much as extended warranty does? I guess one limitation I can see is that Lexus extended warranty applies for entire year and you have a little bit more flexibility whenever it is 8k miles or 12k miles. Whereas here it will be valid for 10k miles after service... not an issue in itself as car should be services at least every 10k miles (and arguably more often). Obviously, Lexus figured out this could be a great way to ensure service centre income, but Lexus service itself being good value + now basically including warranty which cost just as much as most services this just sounds far too good deal... but I cannot find any catches! What?!

I have replaced side lights with matching colour "temperature" (6000k) Osram LEDs:

Would be interesting to know where you got the spare compressor and overall costs of fixing it?

BMW330e does exactly that it is Turbo 2L + hybrid, Volvo goes even further - SuperTurbo Charged 2L + hybrid. I don't know how ze Germans are doing it... BWM 530 and MB 300E are both 2L turbo cars, but they are both much faster and somehow doesn't suck to drive. Even economy is not terrible. Either way, V6 is just so much better in real driving conditions. Instead of turbocharging rather boring 2AR-FXE, they could have used 4GR-FSE as a basis for 300h... same like they used 2GR-FSE as a basis for 450h. Hybrid would complement V6 nicely with little bit of torque low down in the rev range where it is lacking.

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.