Linas.P

Good find regarding splash shields. I am not saying Rotinger are bad, nor I am saying Brembo is good... just more "recognised" brand. In principle - as long as they are straight and machined to the right dimensions I can't see how discs themselves could make any difference. In the end of the day they are just piece of pot metal. I kind of trust most of the brands they can achieve the most basic dimensions. Sure there are high performance cars with two or even 3 piece discs, carbon discs etc.... and at that point it may be important. But for cast iron discs I agree with you, I don't think there is much of the difference. Coated discs are nice, because they don't rust as much on the "other" surfaces that are not touched by brake pads, makes no difference in performance, but looks more tidy. In my experience drilled discs tends to warp under heavy braking, slotted discs are just more noisy, slotted + drilled.. have disadvantages of both. So internally vented without any fancy holes are the safest bet. I was told "j-hook or c-hook" designs are apparently beneficial, but again... that maybe is important for off-road and I doubt makes any difference on the street. Apart of that just get right size discs and it should be fine.

Absolutely NO CHANCE! That is why I would argue the testing methodology should be significantly tightened and testing should be centralised and run by government. This would at very least ensure that all tyres are tested equally. Now obviously, If punters come with an attitude and demand "the cheapest tyre", that doesn’t help either! But even if they ask for a recommendation, it doesn’t improve their chances much. I don’t want to delve into conspiracy theories, but tyre shops don’t have an incentive to recommend good tyres... they just don’t! I’ve heard of shops pushing Avons and Falkens, which are decent tyres. But they’re not being pushed because they’re decent, they’re being pushed because the shop has a larger stock of them or because they got a discount from the sales manager and have a higher profit margin on that brand for a period of time. I realised this when I was maybe 22 and had to replace the first set of tyres on my then new IS250 (at around 12,000 miles rears were giving-up). I went to the tyre shop and asked for a recommendation and they recommended Nexen N6000 or N1000. At the time, Nexen was considered a budget tyre and now they’re more "mid-range". But to be honest, I still don’t trust them. I can’t remember the exact model, but they were horrible. So horrible that I nearly spun out three times in three miles. I went back to the shop and told them to take them back. They obviously weren’t keen on it, so we reached a compromise: I paid around £120 and they upgraded me to a set of nearly new Pirelli P-Zeros (they had them for display or something). Since then, I’ve thought that if you want tyres, you have to do your own research and tell them what to fit. Never ask - they’re just not on your side! Only makes ~£3 difference, but in principle the same applies. Cheapest tyre is £36 instead of £39, but at £53 one can already get Kuhmo. So total extra cost £68/set. And if one would buy such tyres today on blackcircles, they could get £10 off for 2 and £25 off for 4... making the difference of mere £43 between death wish and decent set of tyre. Mark my words - one day chinese will put "DeathWish - QuickDeath 1000 Turbo" tyres on sale and people still going to buy them 😄

Yes, it is same site as per video I have posted. That said sometimes it is worth reading what people have to say, because sometimes rating all over the place. I have seen guy giving 1 start review because he run over the nail near the side of the tyre and was told he have to replace the tyre... how is that tyre fault?! Likewise there are loads of good reviews for budget tyres... Davanti DX640 - "im well impressed stick like glue even in the wet top marks" ahahm... yeah sure, sticks like a glue in wet... and we have seen how it sticks... stops 10 meters behind Premium tyre! So I find people perspective is always based on their own experiences... if one is coming from bald mismatched budgets, then set of brand new tyres may be improvement, but if one is coming from set of premium tyres they would rate them differently. I think most valuable are review where they say "I had this and I moved to this, and now that is better and that is worse"... so then it is easy to follow how it compares with other tyres on sale.

That is expensive, I have paid £28 front, £38 rear Brembo (at some point there was 40% discount)... so there is no way it is worth paying £99 for rear OEM Lexus. Check Autodoc, they as well have EU site and warehouses, so it will be quicker/cheaper than buying from LPD UK. https://www.autodoc.co.uk/brembo/7280090 If these diagrams are to be trusted then IS/GS300, IS/GS350 and IS/RC/GS200t all have same front brakes set-up. I do believe GS450h as well should be part of that list. Heat shield P/N adds-up - 47781/82 are used across all models. And all the discs seems to be 43512, but here you need to be careful - both GS and RC has same size disc, but GS disc looks like this https://lexuspartsdirect.co.uk/product/lexus-gs-phase-3-front-brake-discs/ and I know from my RC200t, the disc looked like this https://lexuspartsdirect.co.uk/product/lexus-lc-front-brake-discs/ (two piece design). As well I have never heard of Rotinger (first time somebody mentioned them in this thread), not saying they are bad or that they are good, but is not the brand I recognise. Cannot see Autodoc selling them, but there is quite a bit of choice from other reputable brands https://www.autodoc.co.uk/car-parts/brake-disc-10132/lexus/gs/gs-grs19-uzs19-gws19/18773-300?criteria[100][0]=VA

I find it strange that people do not consider it, and I don't mean you... I mean how often one can see expensive cars with 500HP being fitted with budget tyres! I can go now on Autotrader and every second premium car with a lot of power are sitting of some horrible chinesium ditchfinders. What is the logic there? I guess the goal is flipping the cars for cheap and fitting what is barely legal... I have argued about this with sellers few times and they think it is me who is unreasonable... "mate these are nearly new 'road legal' tyres, what do you wants?!"... (in this case the car was 550HP Supercharged Jaguar XKR-S). That is why I was arguing they probably should be "road-illegal". I think they need to change testing methodology and really tighten what passes as "road legal" tyre. But what I am talking about - in UK you can even fit different tyres on the same axle, which is death-wish regardless what tyres we are talking about. That said, I can look past budget tyres on literal shoe box for £500 and 1.1L engine... There are still concerns, because even the smallest car can still reach motorway speeds (eventually), so they still might find themselves in the situation where good grip is required, but at least I can see the owners perspective... if they only drive locally, never go past 40MPH, are really really careful and do 2000miles per year, then perhaps premium tyres for £500 would be overkill. I would still insist that at least mid-range tyres should be fitted and they are probably available for £10 per tyre more, but overall it is less of a crime. Now - I would not do it myself, but at least I can see rational reasoning here. The way I personally adjust the tyres for the car... UUHP like Pilot Sport Super (Super is what S stands for) and similar are for very powerful and fast cars, say 300HP+ and for people who planning to drive very fast on dry roads. So I see them as optional. The UHP like Pilot Sport (non-S)- that is for most other cars and drivers who like spirited driving and occasionally drive fast, I kind of see them as requirement for any car 200HP+ and they are more universal, better for wet roads etc. Touring tyres like Primacy are for rest of the cars and maybe occasionally acceptable on more powerful/faster cars if driver is not planning to be going fast e.g. I see them perfect fine fit for 500HP MB S-Class which is probably being driven by chauffeur and just cruises around. But that is only "tyre type", I don't even consider anything outside of premium brands, or occasionally very good mid-range tyre (well reviewed and performing well in tests). At no point I consider budgets acceptable... and if not for their handling, then simply because they likely do not save any money over their lifetime. Tyre ratings (speed and load) has no relevance to the handling... and it is seems like all the budget chinesium tyres have correct ratings... they claim they can go 300KMH 😄 These ratings have to be met by law, but one needs to be careful interpreting them... For example load rating of 100 means tyre can handle weight of 800kg... on a stationary car. The speed rating likewise only means that tyre marked as Y should not disintegrate spinning at speed equivalent to 300KMH. The test methodology - they spin the tyre in 10KMH increments for 10 minutes each, at the last increment where tyre didn't explode they mark that it is rated at that speed. Spoiler alert - most modern tyres can exceed 300KMH free spin, so instead manufacturers simply test up-to desired rating. Usually UUHP and UHP get's full test, but cheaper, Touring tyres, winter or off-road tyres are not tested past desired speed, so they just mark them as Z, V or W, when they reach 240 or 270KMH. But then again - I trust that Michelin, Continental, Goodyear, Toyo, Yokohama, Avon etc. do these tests... I am not so sure I trust DoubleCoin testing methodology when they claim their tyre is rated as 100Y - who is there checking what they testing and how? But here is the kicker - tyre ratings (including fuel economy, noise, wet and dry grip) are all self-claimed. Basically, tyre companies don't need to go trough some sort of centralised laboratory test to prove it, sure there are standards and expectations set, but they are no enforced... pretty much what so called "EU label" says is "trust me bro" type of stuff. Now sure Premium and maybe even mid-range tyre brands have incentive to do their own internal testing to make sure the tyres meet or exceed the specifications, because they care about their brand image, but do you think brand which calls itself "hit-pis" cares about bad publicity?!

Avon being owned by Goodyear is rather new development, I must admit I have missed it. Bought it in 2021 and right away closed the factory! To be honest I suspect Goodyear is just buying ailing tyre companies and runs them into the ground to get rid of competition. Dunlop is a brand with a lot of pedigree and under Goodyer management has not released new product in 9 years... how can premium tyre company survive on 9 years old semi-premium tyre? It can't... As well do not mistake other Dunlop brands owned by dodgy Mike as being part of the group, it is part of Sports Direct empire and sells literal trash, has nothing to do with tyre company anymore.

I think in UK the cheapest upgrade would be from GS300 mk3, many of them being broken apart, so should not be a problem getting the parts and it being UK model, getting disks/pads etc will be simple. Agree with John - Lexus disks not great for wear, seems to last almost just as long as pads, but as far as I know GS/IS350 combo still last a bit longer, normal IS250 front disks barely lasts 40k, and pads lasts 20-30k. Perhaps just indicative of heavy car+auto.

5mm hole would not be fault, but potentially advisory. For the sound likewise - would just sound like exhaust has a hole. I mean it is sound advise, as exhaust indeed rusts more from inside than it does from outside, however the compromise is quite obvious as well. Besides one should do it when they fit exhaust, by now it is kind of late.

There was comparison between premium and I believe mid-range... and premium was worse at 3mm than new mid-range... but when they compared premium 3mm to mid-range 3mm, the performance drop-off on mid-range was far greater than premium. And I agree with second point - budgets are dodgy when new... imagine how bad they are when worn... and it is made so much worse by the fact they wear much quicker as well. Form me it always seems like disaster just waiting to happen. As for the numbers I think it has more to do with marketing, like they all want to have highest number, and then sometimes they all skip number just to look like they are ahead... but yeah strangely many decided to skip 4. Although Michelin skipped 3 and went for 4 - Pilot Sport S 2 > Pilot Super Sport > Pilot Sport 4 S and now Pilot Sport S 5... And then I don't know whatever Dunlop does - because they haven't released any tyre for nearly 10 years now. Kind of weird considering they are still to this day considered Premium brand.

Well remoulds are exactly that - remoulds... so they could be anywhere from very good if they done on the base of premium tyre, to very horrible if they were made on budget tyre. In principle car tyres are not designed to be remoulded (some truck and heavy equipment tyres are made for that)... So I would say they are inherently unsafe and should not be legal to use (but sadly are legal) and performance is hit and miss. Certainly nowhere near even mid-range, but if one is lucky can be slightly better than budget tyres. If I ever needed to get tyres for very cheap, then I would rather go for just a set of good used tyres. Plenty of tyres with 5-6mm of thread left (that is like 70%) and for 25% of the price.

Just a name of the tyre - Dunlop used to make SportMaxx RT and later RT2, both are obsolete now, but at the time (~2014-2016) they were my favourite UHP tyres. RT2 itself was basically identical to Goodyear Asymmetric 3, but Goodyear later replaced them with Asymmetric 4, 5 and now there are 6. So by that regard RT2 would be good UHP tyre, but 3 generations old. Goodyear owns - Dunlop, Sava, Debica, Cooper and few more brands... Specifically Sava UHP 2, Debica Presto UHP 2, Goodyear F1 Asymmetric 2-3 and Dunlop SP Sportmaxx RT-RT2 seems to be nearly identical tyres, with just different names stamped on them and maybe some purely cosmetically differences to the thread pattern. I know for a fact - Sava and Debica makes Dunlop and Goodyear tyres in the same factories, just maybe on different lines. It would be fair to assume that Debica and Sava maybe do not get very best of the best compounds, so despite being launched around the time of say RT2, they maybe lack in performance slightly and are more comparable to RT, but then there was little difference between RT and RT2 anyway. But at the same time they still benefit from latest technology and know how, so maybe they won't beat best premium tyres like Continentals and Michelins, but they are strong mid-range by performance and definitely miles better than budget tyres in terms of safety. Same can be said about Uniroyal - it is owned by Michelin and will be similar with last gen Michelin Products. So let's say Rainsport 5 I would expect to perform like Pilot Sport 3, and Rainsport 3, like Pilot Sport 2 (there was no Rainsport 4). Same for Gislaved - owned by Continental. I guess you get the point by now... Oh... and if it wasn't confusing enough, then Goodyear and Sumitomo has a deal which allows them to use each other brands... so some of Dunlops in Asia are made by Sumitomo, whereas Sumitomo and Falken could be made by Goodyear in US... and Europe from time to time can get tyres from both!

Well, Debica is made by Goodyear and as far as I am concerned Presto UHP should be a copy of Dunlop Sportmaxx, somewhere in between RT and RT2 in performance. I guess the reason why it may be more expensive than some brands is that they have no good suppliers in UK or Ireland. Actually surprisingly expensive tyres considering Prius runs R16/195/55... and more difference then I expected: But then again, I am not saying everyone should go for Michelin. £110 (even with £40 discount per set) is quite a lot more than £39, but there are still Kuhmo and Toyo tyres for £56 and £65 respectively.

I would not like to find out if I am lucky or not, certainly not when the price is almost the same... I honestly would rather drive without insurance than on budget tyres. Because basically in my experience that works out better. As mentioned I do not drive carefully, more like "aggressively" if I say so myself and yet I still never had crash which was my fault, nothing I can do about other people crashing into me, but I have never crashed into anyone myself. Now my calculation is that over 16 years I have paid £20,110 for insurance and got absolutely £0 in return, even if I count 3 instances where other people crashed into me and assuming they were uninsured and somehow I needed to pay for insurance myself, even then I could not perceivably be better off as total I have paid for my cars was £19,500, so even if all cars were total write-offs (which they were not) there is still no way insurance was worth it for me. On other hand as mentioned I paid £150 extra for 3 set of tyres which 3 times saved me from crashing and the difference over cheaper tyres was ~£10-15 per tyre. When I mean tyres saved me, I mean there was nothing else - brake pedal planted to the floor and car in full emergency stop... and it stopped on the dime basically. Few times to be fair it wasn't extremely close, say 2m still left over 50m of breaking distance from 70MPH, but once it was 2cm left from the bumper of another car... so much so that we both got out to see if I crashed (in fact the other guy was obviously scammer and he jumped out shouting that I crashed into him and that his neck hurts, just to look like total bell-end when he realised there was that tine 2cm gap). Any by the way that is nothing to say about the fuel saved, the comfort, the handling of the car which I am sure was more pleasant to drive on good tyres etc. I would say if budget tyres would at leas be true budget e.g. if Premium tyre was £200 per tyre and Budget £25 per tyre, then perhaps there is discussion to be had, but now when the difference is like £88 vs £65 I just really can't see the point... over 3 years that works out as £3/per month difference... you can't even buy a pint for that! I guess when it comes 22" wheels perhaps there is larger gap, but then I would assume that any car on 22" wheels should be rather expensive and powerful, so not exactly Prius which can get away with budget tyres.

Falkens are now considered Premium. The discussion here not about different options for premium tyres, and not even mid-ranges... It is about the tyres like "double-coin", "triangle", "run-fast", "good-ride" and similar bottom of the barrel trash which is technically road legal, but provides no grip or safety. Pirelli and Bridgestone, despite being considered premium are not great value for money in my experience, but remember they still fit within 2% in terms of performance, now imagine how much worse the tyre has to be to trail 8-16% behind the premium tyres.

I have always believed that tyres are the most important safety feature in a car. Luckily for me, every time I’ve had an emergency, my car’s tyres have saved the day. Based on my own experience, I paid an extra £150 over three sets of tyres, which has saved me from at least three accidents where it probably would have been my fault regardless of someone cutting me off. Investing £150 for a potential saving of £10,000 is not bad at all. It seems the video below conclusively proves that there are no good budget tyres! Even the best budget tyre stopped 6.5 metres further in the wet than a premium tyre. Even in dry conditions, one would still be travelling at 20 MPH on a budget tyre by the time a premium tyre has already stopped. Just imagine stopping 6.5 metres beyond where the car in front of you stops or hitting it at 20 MPH! And then remember that crash tests are done at 15, 18 and 35 MPH, so you probably won’t die, but it will still be a huge crash… all to save £15 per tyre! I can look past handling tests because it’s possible to argue that people on budget tyres can drive more carefully and not throw the car into corners. However, this doesn’t work when it comes to braking. It doesn’t matter how careful one is... they can’t control what other drivers do, and it’s always possible that somebody will cut in front of you and there will be nothing that careful driving can do in that moment. That said, I think one part that’s still missing from the video is tread-life. I think this is what really makes “budget” tyres a false economy. The truth is that most premium tyres can last 20-30k miles (some lasted even longer in my experience, and that’s on a heavy RWD car with staggered set-up, meaning rotation was not possible and I was definitely not driving carefully). Most budget tyres only last about 10k miles, so taking an average of 8k miles per year, one only needs a set of premium tyres once in three years, but would likely need three sets of budget tyres in the same period. Many people do not realize this, but budget tyres are not only less safe but also not even cheaper!" Finally, note that despite testing dozens of tyres, these were only the “most popular” budget tyres, and he didn’t test real gems of horror that can be found when browsing budget tyres. Note: as mentioned in the video, the second best premium tyre was 1.5% behind 1st place and then 8 of them fit in 0.5% spread. So 9 Premium tyres fits in 2% spread in performance... the best budget tyre was 8% behind and worst was 16% behind, so the difference is not minor! My conclusion, which will not surprise anyone, would be - why are they even legal? If it were up to me, I would honestly them!

Yeah... that is unfortunate - not really that common on Lexus. Any normal contact adhesives should work although sprayed ones would make a mess of it, I guess if you careful it should be alright, just don't oversaturate it. Little bit on the trim piece, little bit on the cloth, wait 60s and stick it on. If there is tension, then it would be good to have some sort of clip ready to keep it in place for some time.

Most of the checks nowadays provides pictures of the "damage", it depends whenever it went trough the auction or if the car was sold privately. If it gone to the auction, then you will get auction pictures, but if it was say bought back by owner, fixed and then sold, then you won't get pictures. Sadly insurance companies are not compelled to release them, so all of available pictures are always skimmed from public domain e.g. auctions like copart. Usually category does not increase the insurance price, could even reduce it - that is because for insurance it is not considered higher risk. However, as a rule of thumb insurance consider Cat-N as 20% and Cat-S as 40% value reduction, so if you ever get into accident and your car get's written-off the insurance will deduct that from pay out e.g. in this case insurance may consider car worthy a £6,800, but if one were to claim they would only pay £5,440. Basically what I am saying - you get into problems when you come to claim. Likewise for selling, here you are mostly correct - it is not so much an issue to sell Cat-N, as much as people will automatically expect at least 20% discount, and with stigma attached to it the discount ends-up being closer 40%. So it becomes almost irrelevant what damage was done to car, nor how it was repaired, it always going to cost less. Now sure - sell it cheaply enough and somebody will buy it, but as result it just means previous write-offs are always harder to sell and always sells for less money in the end. As such I myself consider £10,000 to be too much for Cat-N just on the face of it. Some can argue I am cheapskate, but it being SE, with some suspension issues and soon ending MOT I would pay no more than £6,000... at that price the saving would be large enough to make it worth the trouble in the future. But for £10,000... one can buy car which was not crashed... so why buy crashed one?

No - if car is used most of the days and never left for over a week battery does not need any maintenance. Two options really: either you charging system is not working, so battery never gets charged. or there is something draining your battery when parked.

As above... I would as well add that - how quickly the battery dies and how often do you drive the car? Because if it is parked for extended periods of time (over a month) then any battery will die. So I would say if your battery dies a week after driving for at least 30 minutes, then there is an issue and you need to check what is causing parasitic draw, but if you battery shows orange after 4 weeks and red after 6 weeks, then it would be in line with natural discharge. Following further on the same thread and as said above, you would need trickle charger to maintain the charge on the battery in such case. Not sure I am following on the boot opening, but if the switch is broken for the boot light and it stays ON after the boot is closed, then yes indeed the light would kill you battery over time. However, I cannot see relation with difficulty to close the boot sounds like maybe hinge or lock problem.

Note that SE is very poorly equipped by default (it is pretty much lowest possible trim, there was one rare unmarked "trim" below it), unless somebody paid for expensive optional equipment which is unlikely and even then SE didn't even have most of the options. F-Sport would be more expensive, because by default it has thousands worth of extra equipment and I would say it is worth it just for LFA dials if nothing else. The way trims go are - "no trim">SE>Sport>Luxury>Advance>Executive>F-Sport>Premier>F-Sport+Takumi (FL)>Takumi (FL). Original brochure can be seen here: http://www.johnsonscarsmarketing.co.uk/brochures/Lexus_IS_e-brochure.pdf As mentioned - going for low mileage Lexus is kind of counter-intuitive, instead you should be looking for well maintained one. As well note - it is 10 years old car, so it should be expected to have at least ~100k miles. If it has less miles, then it just means car likely spend more time on short journeys in the city and that is likely worse. I would always buy car with high-miles which done longer journeys and motorway, rather than lower miles city car. Simply said when comparing wear and tear on the car between motorway and the city, the city mileage probably causes 3 times more wear on everything in the car. I am not even joking car which spent 120k miles on motorway would have similar signs of wear as 40k miles car in the city. In short - mileage is just a number, it is good yardstick to estimate the condition of the car, but it is just a starting point. So yes 78k miles F-Sport would be £12-14k, but I still rather have one with 120k for £10k, than lower mileage SE for the same money. Finally, if we compare between say 78k and 120k, there isn't much difference - it is not like 78k is particularly low miles car anyway. Sure if it would be 20k miles then there is difference as 20k would feel for all intended purposes like new car, but by the time it is 78k or 120k, or 160k - it is just used car. As long as it has service history to cover the the miles it has done there isn't really a major difference.

Yeah - I have seen plenty of those... and the thing is Copart sale prices and fees does not allow for proper repair. I was interested myself to buy few cars thinking maybe I can fix them for myself, but cost simply does not add-up... and it is all because of aggressive resellers and aggressive buyers from abroad (UK cars are cheap in comparison and many are snapped-up just for parts). I can often see the cars being sold on copart for £15k, when same car not crashed is like £17k... where is the margin for repair and profit? So they literally just throw the car into cheapest paint-shop (perhaps they have one themselves) and they just do cosmetics and off to sale! I would argue 90% of repairs are like that. So unless there are pictures before and after, and the damage is minor to begin with I would always go by assumption it is poor job.

Hi and welcome, First, before buying a car, I would highly advise to test drive IS300h, just go to your local Lexus dealership pretending to be interested in their car. This will help you see if you like the driving experience. I was excited about the launch of the Lexus IS in 2013 and was literally drooling looking at it, but after test driving it, I was disappointed. I also spent time in the RC 300h and 200t, which are similar to the IS mk3, but likewise I didn’t enjoy the driving experience. So, make sure to test drive before spending your money. I was lucky to have an extensive test drive without sales staff around and discovered both positives and negatives, but don’t just buy a car based on its looks - make sure it’s the right fit for you. Secondly, when buying a Lexus (more than other makes), it’s important to check the service history, as well not just rely on stamps, check what was done in the invoices. On Lexus FLSH is really worth having and paying extra for. A well-maintained Lexus can easily reach 200k miles, but if not maintained, there may be expensive issues to fix, nothing is cheap on Lexus. It’s hard to estimate the cost of fixing your particular issue without taking the car to a workshop. The description you provided is cryptic - it could be a lower or upper bush, or the arm itself that needs replacing. It could also be suspension damage from an accident. Taking it to Lexus could cost at least £600 with labour, and that is assuming nothing is wrong with the arm itself. If you go the aftermarket route and replace the bush yourself or get a used arm from a breaker’s yard, you could do it for half that. However, it’s unusual for only one bush to be worn out, especially at only 78k miles. My old IS250 had over 200k miles and still had all original bushings (sure different car, but bushing will be the same between mk3 and mk2). Finally, it’s hard to say if £10,000 is a good price for the car without knowing more details. What trim is it - F-Sport, Premier, Luxury, or SE? What options does it have - at least Premium Audio or ML, or just a 6-speaker poverty line radio? What year is it? Sure - if it’s a 2018 F-Sport with 78k miles, then the price is great. But if it’s a 2013 Luxury, you may be overpaying, before even considering that it’s a Cat-N car and needs suspension fixing. I would be cautious about buying a Cat-N car and would want to see pictures of the accident and repair (buy car history check, sometimes they have pictures from auction). I would also insist that the seller gets an MOT done. So, do more research on the model and trims to see if £10,000 is a good price for a car with unknown history and previous accident damage. I personally much rather get 120k miles F-Sport for £10,000 with service history and that wasn't crashed (plenty choice of that), then get lower miles write-off without history. Good luck with you purchase!

That’s interesting! How does the car handle with that tyre setup? Lexus cars usually have a "faux" safe understeer balance by default. So, if my assumptions are correct, having grippy and responsive PS5 on the front and older, less responsive PSS on the rear should result in more responsive steering and maybe even a bit of fun when exiting corners. If you had PS5 tyres on both ends, it might just understeer all the way. I don't know about "people", but I can attest that with my own experience... going from Dunlop RT2 to PS4 I have noticed quite a big decline in cold performance... and not even "cold" cold, just normal spring morning say 8C and I felt like I had to war-up the tyres as they would be quite dicey for good 20 minutes of the drive... whereas older and lower-end RT2s would grip from the start. The only thing I can assume is that UUHP like PSS or PS4S are even worse in that regard.

PSS tyres were great for their time, but they’re a bit outdated now. Something like the PS4 (not even the PS4S) would be a better choice for grip, fuel efficiency and comfort, whilst costing less. I’ve heard that the new PSS 5 will be available soon. I’m curious about when it will be released and how it will affect the prices of other tyres (assuming it will be new UUHP king).

I very much agree with you here - wasted nuclear energy can be used to produce clean Hydrogen, that is 100% true. I think the only thing you need to consider is that it would as well be more efficient to then burn that Hydrogen during the peak demand on site, to produce more electricity rather than distributing it for transportation. Now sure - both could be true at the same time, smaller countries (especially island) can even build nuclear stations for sole purpose of generating clean Hydrogen. The key problem as always is not how clean and environmentally friendly it is but economic, there are simply cheaper way to heat our homes, to run our cars etc. etc. and if there is not return on investment it doesn't get done. That is sad reality. As well did you know why wind turbine blades are such a big issue? One would think composite blade could last for 100s of years... isn't it? Well the issue is again economic! The blades would indeed last very long time, but the land is expensive and the land suitable for windfarms is limited, so what ends-up happening, the windfarm operators ends-up demolishing old wind turbines to build newer and larger ones in their place. As horrible as it is - that makes economical sense, the bigger turbine my pollute more, especially considering that to build it the older, smaller turbine which was by the time already carbon neutral had to be demolished, but the profit, the subsidies, the saving on the tax, the saving on the insurance makes it financially worth it. It is economies of scale thing, they could keep the wind turbine running for 100s of years with relatively low maintenance (especially on-shore ones) and after some years in operation they could become carbon neutral (i.e. when output of their electricity exceeds the amount of carbon emitted to build them), but this never ends-up happening because within 5 years there are economical reasons to upgrade them. For the same reason wind and solar farms are half as climate friendly as they are claiming to be, because they always estimate full service life when making perditions, but they rarely stay installed for their entire service life. And indeed as you mentioned - turbine blades at the moment are landfill only, same for most of solar panels... and all because of blind profits.