Linas.P

Hybrids are primarily for city driving and are good in traffic, if you don't want anything else from the car.. then it is perfect. As above, even CT200h seems like a good option.

If I catch your reference then... no. I always liked RC, with sole issue being engine choice... as for ES I hate pretty much every single part of it, engines, drivetrain, driving wheels, design... I cannot name a single thing about the car which is either good or it is important for me. So for RC there was rationale and I considered car for long time, ES - never considered and will never consider. @wharfhouse - I appreciate that as simple car to get from A to B, there isn't really any difference if that is Golf or Small SUV e.g. CT or UX, I don't like either, but at the same time don't see much difference. If I would be in the market for CT and the only option available is UX, I would not cry too much or vice versa. However, when it comes to more interesting driving and cars - I will never have SUV, ever... Proper offroad 4x4 yes - there is place for them, but for FWD based SUV -definitely not. When I look into comparison between say mid-size saloon and same size SUV, there are no single thing which I consider to be better on SUV - saloon would be more planted on road, lower center of mass, better fuel consumtion, cheaper tyres, all components last longer, faster and more agile... People by SUV for reason which I cannot comprehend or appreciate, like sitting higher?! "feeling" safer?! - probably the are more similar to reason why people buy coupes - like look... In short less realistic factual reasons, but more "lifestyle and choice" reasons. Clearly those relevant to SUVs does not match with my values...

I am pretty confident IS will be gone - currently it just don't make sense next to ES, why would Lexus had 2 similarly priced models?! The only reason to have something in between GS and IS in Europe, is to get rid of both. I only got interested in the brand because of their models created to compete european cars - that is specifically IS and GS and think this is the reason why I hate ES so much. That is - realisation of what this means to Lexus brand and line-up going forward. It was clear from the beginning that it will be replacing 2 "European oriented" models with a single american oriented model which is ugly and bad to drive. And if you say I am wrong about ES, look at sales number - even in the year when it was introduces it was outsold 4 to 1, by end of life GS. So despite what people are saying it is not a massive hit in UK or Europe and will never be, however it does makes sense for Lexus to rather have one niche model, than 2. Further with right price, for right demographic it could sell... that is fleet buyers like executive taxis, drivers who care more about luxury and less about driving dynamics, older customers in general and at the same time less competition - they won't need to compete neither 5 series which they literally can't not 3 series, because ES is effectively larger and more comfortable and luxurious. BMW GC-4 or MB CLA/CLA are not really that big anyway, so perhaps Lexus just took "easy" route to sell in niche where traditional European brands are not that strong. Further, we need to understand why LS and ES were created and continue to exist, where GS and IS were never core products. That is because ES and LS represent mid-size and large car segments in US. In Europe we have different segments with distinctive characteristics which do not exist in US - these are so called "D and E" segments, but they are not like US mid-size and there are no real overlap. Lexus IS and GS were exactly made to compete in these European segments during temporary growth in overall sedan segment in US between mid 90's to mid 00's. Because they are distinctively European that is why we got these cars in Europe as well, but Lexus remains US focused brand - this means all the decision they make are primarily to satisfy US needs. That said with overall declining sector it makes sense for them to axe few models which were never native in US and replace with something which continues to sell and represents recognised segment. SUV's are popular worldwide so they continue to expand on this segment. So really, unless they would be very serious about European sales (which they are not) there isn't much more reason to keep large line-up in dying segment. This is sadly end of the road for me with the brand as I am neither in SUVs nor in moring american sedans... As well it is probably the same case for anyone looking for alternative to 3-Series or 5-Series. There will be one less competitor to choose from, but at least Volvo and Jaguar are still kicking, Maserati downgrading and making more affordable cars, but in few years time Lexus will be gone from this segment. European focus provided temporary spark in Lexus line-up, making few sporty and driver oriented models that seems to be end of it.

I think that is called Vauxhall Insignia... is it 3.6L AWD?

Actually, I think this is exactly represents what are 200t and 300h engines to RC body 👎

You should not take it out of context. This only applies for comparison between mk3 IS and RC. Further I have already explained that actually I haven't spend more on RC than it would have costed me to get comparable IS. I do agree your question have merits, but the question you should be asking is "why not GS450h?" - this would be better question. Answer for it is fairly simple - because I wanted coupe. As well you basing your argument on assumption that I wanted car with 4GR-FSE, which is not correct. I mentioned 4GR-FSE in the historic context to justify criticising Lexus for not improving their product for over decade and then replacing it with even worse product. That does not make 4GR-FSE satisfactory choice today, it just makes 8AR-FKS even less satisfactory..

hoo-ha above is that having 2 less doors is reason good enough for many people to get a different car. Further, if I would apply the same logic, then Lexus ES and LC are the same car - because both are based on TNGA and I further ignore the fact that there are significant variations within the platform. Even applying same logic on TNN would render bizzare conclusion - basically GS and IS is as well same car.. it must be right because they are both TNN?! In short - you are wrong, barely being built around same platform doesn't make the car comparable or the same... for many reasons, although the only one important for me in this instance is purely looks...

That would have been true if not for bizarre limitations not to allow to select certain options between F-Sport and Premier. As such - if you want LF-A dials you have to go to F-sport, but if you want RTCA/BSD and even DCC you have to go Premier, which for some strange reason cannot be equipped with mentioned dials, not rose leather interior. Basically, by going Premier one has to make sacrifices to something quite important (at least for me), which kind of defeats the goal of making people to upgrade?! I do agree that they have solved this logical issue in face-lift where you can go for Luxury>F-Sport>Takumi>Fsport+Takumi and get best of both cars without actually sacrificing anything (except some cash).

I think, the 5 annoying things are really least of my issues and for most I just mentioned them for fun.. Re seats - when fold the seat forward it retracts and when you fold it back it will automatically go to the last position ( so it is kind of 1 memory setting). However, if you fold it with engine on and then turn it off before folding it back, then it will return to sort of "middle position" which is rather cramped and certainly unnecessary unless you have somebody in the back. Again, I think I am more surprised that cheaper IS has it and RC does not, especially considering the rest of interior is almost copy/paste. Admittedly there is like a "crease in lining", but it is not distinctive handle, boot at least on my car definitely needs good slam - as gently pressing it won't do. I know Lexus included LSS+ in facelift and this is exactly what is strange... it seems they kind of got on the way to include something, but forgotten what they were about to do half way - what exactly is benefit of LDA if it does not auto correct.. and where RTCA is kind of more modern thing the BSD was standard on most car for at least last 10 years. It seems one would include BSD for free instead of LDA? Again, I cannot say it really affects anything, except of making guide useless as if you clip the belt there (as you say for easy access) then it makes it actually less easy to access, because you not only need to reach for it but as well twist it into correct orientation. Small thing, but it does makes user guide warning rather hilarious: Yes I know that, but you cannot argue that functionality of the screen could be enhanced 10 fold - it is actually already there, there is just no option to configure it the way you want. It is like not being able to arrange icons of the apps on your smartphone - that would be clear oversight by design team.

That is also true... which brings me to 5 annoying things about RC: No passenger memory seat, which honestly I have rarely used on IS. It actually makes more sense for RC to have it, because when you let somebody out of the rear seats and don't immediately put the seat back before turning the engine off it won't return to last position. Boot springs-up in your face far too violently and has no handle, nor button to close it, requiring good slam to do so - cannot be weight saving measure when car already is as heavy as tank Car has lane departure system and electric steering, but only beeps without correcting the car - further for some unknown reason it doesn't have RTCA and BSD? makes no sense - most cars are opposite and RTCA with BSD are much older technologies than LDA. The seatbelts seems to be twisted (and I confirmed that in user guide) and the added "guide" is literally pointless, because it would just hold on the twisted belt. General lack of configuration on both main screen and instrument cluster - what is the point of digital cluster if you only allow few options?! They are not the same platform, but it is not what matters. It is all related to looks and design, which to be fair is completely arbitrary measure... If people would apply same logic as you do, then coupes would not exist, because almost for every coupe there is 4 door equivalent which, if not cheaper, then certainly is always more practical. But coupes do exist, because there are people for whom less doors matters and they are willing to pay extra for it. Not that I did pay extra at all.. For the same reason I find mk3 IS more comparable for me with mk2 IS, but not comparable at all with RC. Even if you say - "well but they share many of design cues!", so do Shuanghuan CEO and BMW X5, does not make them same car thought: Much better argument can be made about mk4 GS450h - which I have repeatedly compliment for the engine and power in particular, and which would be indeed much better than both IS250 and 200t... and even arguably 350. Problem is ... it is 4 door saloon and not 2 door coupe. And yes - the number of doors is apparently that important!

I think that is the point - LC Convertible concept wheels are beautiful. I would call them "striking and fitting other design elements of the car", whereas current LC Sport and Sport+ wheels are ugly in my opinion. Non-sport ones are just boring...

Well... Not exactly - the difference between the cost of cars is realistically £1000 which is exactly the cost of sunroof on my car, further IS is 2.5 years older, does not have dark rose interior... and has 2 more doors. So realistically, despite being cheaper, the car you have linked is arguable a "worse" deal. In fact I do not even consider mk3 IS to be that much different or "an improvement" over mk2, so in my mind buying it for any money would be "£13,500" just for looks. If I would go for IS I would just get something like this: https://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/201911104223176 or just stick with mine... or... indeed IS-F. In some imaginary world were I would have choice between two identical RC's and one would have 4GR-FSE and second 8AR-FTS - yes indeed I would choose V6, but we don't live in imaginary world. Further, I know it might sound confusing, but I don't think IS250 mk3 is that great - yes in my opinion 4GR-FSE is better engine than 8AR-FTS.. but it is not that simple as "just an engine". If it would be that simple, then again you don't need to spend £13,500 to get car with this particular engine, actually one could get car for £2000 and as far as drive-train goes have the same experience. In 2005, 4GR-FSE was as good as the engine could be, it was massive improvement over previous generation and better than competition, however in 2020 it is just not that appealing anymore. I think in summary I am just disappointed that Lexus spent 10 years and probably £100's of millions developing new engine... and not only it is not better, but arguably it is outright worse (bar some fake emission figures). It is just disappointing and hard to understand - what Lexus were doing in that decade?! They could have done nothing at all and we would arguably be in better place. Different story on 350 (2GR-FSE), they did make some minor improvements and kept engine relevant (2GR-FKS) and even adapted to new applications (8GR-FKS/FXS). In later models it has Atkinson cycle as well as minor tweaks on timing and although it rather old, it is not yet obsolete. Further they linking it with AA81E (or even AWRHM50) which is much better and faster gearbox than A960E and this overall makes it appealing option. I cannot say the same about 4GR-FSE - they have literally fitted it since 2005 until 2015 without any changes and then discontinued when it got obsolete - like in mk3 IS250.

It just makes sense I guess ... Not sure what new you going to tell me thought - I know exactly how under-powered FWD car feels to drive.

mk2 IS was notorious for calipers issues and the caliper design stayed the same in principle so I would not be surprised if mk3 with the age and mileage will start showing similar issues.

Well... generally in any car with AC fitted you should have you AC all the time, this is not specific to your car or Lexus. This is because AC needs to be ON to stay lubricated and working. Considering time of the year, I would not be surprised if you car is steaming up without AC - it is wet outside, you car interior gets humid, you turn on the heating in the car and warm humid air hits the cold windows - what will happen next is simple physics... it condenses. Actually, I keep seeing people doing this all the time - turn on AC, wait until windows clears-up and then turning it off.. congrats - just dumped all the humidity which AC collected back into the car (you can even smell it) and windows will instantly steam-up again. Thinking about it, I never had a car without AC, so I don't actually know how it is to drive one, but since my very first car I have AC all the time, never turn it off... further I almost never use "fresh air" from outside, unless I am driving on the mountain road in Scottish highlands.... even then it doesn't take long to catch-up with some coal rolling diesel and car instantly stinks like burning rats + outside air is usually humid, so no good in winter and does not help with windows steaming-up So overall, you need to dry out the car and just keep using AC. I suggest next time after longer journey keep the car running for good 15 minutes with all windows closed and re-circulation+AC on Max heat, then for another 15 min on re-circulation+AC and Min heat.. cycle 2 times like that and you will get most of humidity out of the car. If for any reason you don't want to use AC, then the only other option is to put ventilation to windows at high setting, heat above normal (say 24-26C), "fresh air" and open rear window a little bit - this will eventually pull out the humidity with the heat, but it will take forever. In short you do not have any issue, just need to use AC more often. However, if you have AC on and car still steams-up you might have another issue - like leak or blocked AC drain.

Pretty much + it is as well noticeably newer and more modern, has sunroof, ML and phone integration... so others appreciate it more. I guess the thing I liked most was the price, I have actually said that before that I would buy 300h/200t "if the price would be right". I am not sure it really made me happy, but it was "good purchase" based on logic. I wish politicians would actually say in advance before making bad decisions... You know... I think you are right - I cannot think about more negative opinion "on own car", but it is honest - "mask off" opinion, without pretending "how cool" my new car is. I actually waited over 4 weeks hoping that car will "grow on me", but overall I just feel like "mehh - just a car". Actually, my girlfriend is rather sad that I am not excited about it, because she is and she could not understand why I am not happy. Keeps saying that maybe I will start liking it with the time. But don't get me wrong - I am not "actively hating it" - I just think that with all Lexus assets and R&D this is shame that this cars exists (and 300h, and ES, and 200d!) and that they chosen to sell it instead of RC350. Further, now that you mentioned it... I realised I have done full multi-stage detailing on the car and ceramic coating myself and don't even have any "beauty shots of it" or even crazy "lotus effect" ! Probably says a lot about my excitement. There are other things which I cannot appreciate yet - like sunroof which was always very important for me, but as you guess it is not much use in January. I am sure in summer it will give back some positive feelings if I keep the car that long. You do realise that IS is not RC, right? Further, it probably would be true if I would have paid a lot for the car. Just to save guessing - I paid £15,500 + negotiated 2 years warranty and service, so realistically £14,500. This was amazing deal in mid-December, however recently there was another white RC for £15,800, but it was not via Lexus, more miles and no options... + it is gone now, so I reckon I still did alright. Yes it kind of does... on paper RC-F is much less practical car and cheap ones could cost a lot to revive. After driving it for some time, I have actually started looking into option to trade it to something else... like RC-F. Will see how it will go. However, Insurance totally screwed me over even on 200t (I hate those fraudulent s****) - I reckon I would not be able to get insurance on RC-F... I mean like at all! I guess I should have made "leap of faith" and just go for it... but I have discussed this issue in detail. Lexus range does not have natural progression - one does not make leap of faith from 2006 IS250 straight into 2016 RC-F. However, 3 years ago I would have had courage to go for RC350 and by now I probably would not be scared to go for RC-F - it would be more natural progression.

They should have at least fitted the new wheels from LC convertible, instead of standard gore ones...

Basically, boring and confused... it is like sports car dialled for economic driving, but not good for anything in the end. I have argued to hell and back about it and to be honest I cannot pretend to be surprised - I knew exactly where I am going and just hoped I will be able to live with it. I have dropped more detailed opinion on my new purchase in RC section:

As many would know - I was considering the model for over 3 years and in the end I concluded that I cannot justify RC-F, so I would go with either 300h or 200t whenever right spec. comes around. There were reason why IS pushed me back into upgrade (Cat-N). As it happened, the right spec. came around for very reasonable price - it is Graphite black F-sport with dark rose interior and every single possible option - in RC there were not many options, but it has everything - ML, sunroof, premium sat-nav, live updates and protection pack. First problem is that it seems never in right gear - I am kind of learning it now... In IS250 the foot action on the pedal directly correlated to acceleration of the car, but with 200t it is basically either on or off and nothing in between. It is wrong engine and gearbox combo - gearbox is short ratio and high gear overlap whilst engine is very narrow power band. This results in total lack of sense from drive train - your leg does something and engine and gearbox does what they like. Using shifters doesn't make sense either because in best case scenario one would need to downshift like 4 gears - car goes into 6th @30MPH! It is just bizarre set-up, but I know what Lexus tried to achieve with it - fake Co2 figures, because in artificial test car has right gear for every 10 miles and on paper runs very efficiently, in real life not so much. I had many arguments about overall dynamics and I remember somebody saying that "IS200t would leave IS250 in the dust and I would not even know which way IS200t went"... This is total BS. I would almost argue opposite - in IS250 you gets instant torque at any speed, whatever is the situation you can be sure there will be torque. On 200t it is literally scary, press the pedal and guess when will it wake-up. Yes in straight line 0-60 200t wins, but even then I guess the crossover point will be around 40-50MPH. The only real strong point is acceleration between ~40/50 > ~90/110, which isn't really that practical with exception of joining the motorway on slip road. I heard it is possible to remap the gearbox to "map-out" the hesitation on first gear... but there is hesitation basically in any gear so not sure it is worth it. Further, by the time you get to 70 it's already running out of gears - actually final ratio is higher in IS250 because it would do ~2000RPM@70 whereas RC does like 2600. The one thing which I did not expect, although common sense tells me I should have expected... is that fuel economy is unbelievably poor. And yes - what a surprise?!. Turbo is never there to save fuel, if IS250 makes 208hp and 200t makes 240 this means fuel consumtion will be in the ballpark with power figures. I am driving it as gingerly as I can now ... I am still getting like 19MPG on my trip to work. Average of first tank was 19.2 and second tank 23.5... Towards the end my IS250 would do 24-26 and I was considering that to be poor. Some might say - if economy is the problem for you, then you should have gone for 300h - there are some truth, but first of all I was not impressed with economy of 300h either, it is even slower and in the end I am talking about "reasonable economy" - RC-F can justify poor economy, perhaps RC350 can justify it (5.6s to 60), but 200t just isn't fast car and has fuel economy close to much faster cars. I attribute this economy issue to "on/off" acceleration of 200t - in situations where I would use 1/3rd of pedal in 250 and car would not even change gear, in 200t I start with 1/3rd then I realise the accident is about to happen, because car literally ignores anything but "pedal to the metal" and by the time I press it 2/3rd of the way it suddenly goes into second gear and revs all the way until it blips off the rev limiter... then I obviously need to suddenly brake as it was "unintended level of acceleration". This as well gives very unrefined "push-pull" driving experience. It is actually nice and quiet ~40-60MPH on say A-road, but terrible in the city and surprisingly not great on motorway either. First of all, it is thirst at any speed over 60 and it keeps playing between 6th and 8th gear on the smallest incline. I went to Cornwall for New Years eve and IS250 did 37MPG at average ~73MPH, in 200t I went to airport twice now and both times at night - set it exactly to 70MPH (~65real) and it would barely reach 36MPG - I literally drove for miles without even touching brakes or accelerator. I can see that previous owner has achieved something like 75.8MPG once so car in theory is capable of good economy, but not in any sort of practical everyday situation. Perhaps doing steady 55 on empty and even road... The chassis is kind of funny as well, I can literally feel it is hybrid between IS-C and GS.. it feels bigger than it is, AVS does great job keeping it level in corners so it does not feel like a barge, but I would compare experience with E-Class merc. In certain perspective this is probably a good point - you feel like you are in bigger and more luxurious car. It definitely feels like class above 4-series, C-class or IS... I personally prefer more agile and sporty IS, but I do appreciate that some people would actually like this part of RC. Surprisingly, I actually don't mind weird touchpad "thing" for sat-nav, but overall infotainment system and even "show-piece" LF-A style cluster lacks sense. And I don't mean it is not as good as other cars, but there are options which do not make sense and others which would make sense are not available. There is plenty of real estate to show more valuable info on all displays, but they are not being used for anything. It doesn't sound well (at least compared to v6, even the muted one like IS250), but I realised it is small issue for me with exception of showing off in supermarket car park - I usually listen music to loud to hear anything anyway. It is however, noticeably rougher engine when pushed and does not compliment you for pushing it to the limits. Ss I guess I much more appreciate it at least has ML. So finally, what is good about it - I really like the looks, I think it looks amazing and it is rare car to see (for some reason there was one parked next to me in Tesco on the day I bought it and now I see one every day on my way to work.. both 300h thought). It is 10 years newer than my old IS and it makes it feel more modern - as much I as don't like how it drives I probably would not go back in mk2 IS - just feels morally obsolete now. Either way I got it for such a low price that I reckon I will be able to sell with little loss (if any at all) in say 3 years time, or maybe trade for BMW i8 or LC 😁

Is the car manual? If automatic - then oil change is not needed unless you have some sort of issue - gearbox error code or lazy gear changes. For engine - I have always used Castrol Magnatec 5w30, preferably A5... however the best results were Mobil1 FS 0w40.. it was as clean as on the day I changed it and didn't burn any over 6k miles.

I was looking to get my IS250 to 200k miles, but as it happened I got a new car just 8k miles short. It was amazing car and I am rather sad changing it... It was time thought, in summer old guy bumped into me (his fault) and insurance decided to write-off the car. Considering, mileage and age it would have been stupid to fight the offer and I ended-up taking it and keeping the car as well. However, knowing the car is Cat-N I was not willing to spend and keep-it in perfect shape, like before the accident. Eventually, I came to terms it has to go! Recently, picked-up fully loaded RC200t ... yes the same one with trash can engine - I stand by my comments... please hold the slack (I can almost hear @doog442 laughing in far dark corner)! it was just too good deal to miss... so I didn't. Still furious that Lexus screw everyone up in UK and never introduced 350...😫 Anyway, my IS journey was well documented and I wanted to share some interesting statistics about the car: Summary of all faults: 49k Wheels replaced by Lexus under warranty due to excessive corrosion cost £0 122k I suspect the battery was replaced to halfrauds one - cost unknown 149k AC compressor reconditioned £310 (OEM parts dealer work would have been ~£900) 152k replaced the battery £72 (Bosch S4) 177k Front anti-roll bar links replaced - to be honest total waste of money because there was only tine hole in the rubber ball-joint cover, but it was MOT fail @162k £100 (dealer part labor would be £160) 177k Lower ball joints replaced - again same reason, hole in ball-joint cover... could have lasted another 100k, I didn't want to fail another MOT, only needed one but replaced both sides £160 (I think OEM would have been ~£300) 182k Steering inner/outer track-rod £40+£16 (OEM), nothing wrong with them, but needed wheel alignment and bolts were just rusted together due to excessive heating in the past. 182k AC pressure sensor - £14 (apparently OEM). That is all for 13 years and 192k miles!! works out~ £702 for faults or just £54/year or £36/10k miles. In the same time car has 15 Lexus service stamps (not quite FLSH...) with £6315 spent in total - average of £415 per service in some cases including overpriced tyres, discs, pads and 2 sets of calipers.... that is not bad for luxury car and dealership service. This must be cheapest luxury car to own in terms of maintenance. Some other statistics: I have covered ~71k miles in 5.5 years and I reckon about 65% of miles were done in city. Burnt ~11244.7L of petrol for total of £12,256 which equates @ average price of ~£1.09/L or ~2228/year MPG (always did brim-to-brim calculation) stands at AVG-28.3, MAX-48.9, MIN-19.0 (it was getting lower towards the end due to suspected "lazy" o2 sensor/MAF or airflow meter, but for first 4 years stood around 29.2MPG) Oil has been replaced in total 13 times and I reckon it has burnt ~4.5L or 5W30 oil (or ~0.64L/10k miles), except once when I used 0W40 and it did not burn any between services. Changed front discs twice, 4 pairs of front pads, 4pairs of rear pads and never replaced read discs. Refurbished all calipers once Replaced the halfrauds battery to Bosch Changed 3 sets of tyres - car came with Dunlop SP Sportmaxx, then changed to set of Dunlop Sportmaxx RT which lasted me 37k miles (highly recommended) and finally the set of Michelin Pilot Sport 4's which were still in good shape last time I have checked (~6.5mm) after 23k miles. In summary, it still felt more powerful, more nimble and more enjoyable to drive compared to new 300h or 200t Lexus cars, the only downside - it was getting old...

Where did you read that IS250 has bad fuel economy as well bad compared to what 1.0l Fiesta? My late 250 which had nearly 200k miles was still fairly fuel efficient (more more efficient than my new RC). My all time average MPG was 28.3 over 70k miles, which I consider very decent.. and I was hammering it all the time. I have owned both IS250 and BMW328xi... how they compare - Lexus is much more comfortable, much better equipped and has better materials inside, more fuel efficient too. BMW is outright faster, much sharper on steering and seems like riding on wooden barrels not wheels (bare in mind that was on RunFlats).

It would be interesting to know what make OP think the IS220d is what they need? The reason I am asking is that most people assume V6 petrol is by default going to be "gas guzzler" and diesel is more economical. First of all on average IS250 auto is far more fuel efficient than people think, secondly when adjusted for repair costs it works out much cheaper + much better to drive. The only exception is if you doing big miles ... and I mean big big miles like 30k a year. In such case there is rationale in getting diesel, just maybe not Lexus IS220d. The other thing about IS200d (the updated engine) - many fail to realise that Lexus has detuned the engine to keep it more reliable (from 175 to 152hp), IS200d is noticeable more slower, but more reliable - obviously if the power is not a issue then perhaps good choice, still the gearbox remains weird and unsuitable for UK driving.

That is unfortunate reality we are living in. On the other hand I have only ever got one fine for 2MPH over the limit which was on motorways at 4AM. I was doing 52MPH in 70MPH motorway with roadworks limit of 50MPH... and you guessed it - there were not a single worker on the road and barely any cars. This is off-topic, but for limits to be respected they need to be justified... 30MPH limit next to the school during it's open hours - fine, 30 MPH in narrow residential street.. fine. 70MPH in 4 lane motorways at night - sorry but that is ridiculous. Actually, recently on my way from airport around midnight and I was driving on M11 at 20MPH... - that is what we now get on "smart motorways".. One thing with these overstated speedometers which bugs me are on A roads in UK you are often in situation where there are no opportunities to overtake or you just want to cruise along at 60MPH... suddenly you catch-up with multiple cars doing 50MPH, for one because their speedometers are indicating higher and their drivers thinking "limit is the limit not target". This is not helped on motorways either by non-existent lane discipline and the attitude "I am doing the limit so I don't need to move over", whereas actually they are in the 4th lane doing 62MPH.

Any car with decent driving dynamics, steering feel, balance... I think I should give credits due - ES is great passenger car...