Linas.P

That is true when it is averaged throughout the day, so it does not matter if 5 cars takes 1.5 hours, 5 cars takes 0.5h... 10 cars still overall take 1 hours each. And if they see more work needs to be done and has been approved they may tell to customer no to come to collect that day and keep courtesy car for another 2 days maybe. But if you have customer waiting expecting the job to be done in 45 minutes from now... and this can't be done, then there is an issue. Usually they won't have spare courtesy cars available on the day and it will be just bad customer service to say - "well sorry you will miss whatever you planned for today, because your 1 hours service will take 3 days now". So that is basically the way I responded to the survey - I said, if it is provided at the same cost, then I may by interested... but I still prefer dropping the car off in the morning and taking courtesy car, because that way I am not dependant on any unforeseen circumstances. When customer is waiting, it is always much more complex to deal with that.

I don't know, but it would be weird if they would give you back the car with dangerous fault and say - "sorry we can't fix it, your time is up, rebook it next time". As well it does not make sense from business perspective as service is key time for all sorts of "upsales", tyres, shocks, brake disks etc. So if they have limited time to work on the car, then they have not time to offer you any of that - they have to just replace the oil and give back the car. Overall, by offering such service they would lose money and it would cost them more to provide it.

My first question was what is the price? The reason it takes whole day is because they group of Lexus Techs (I don't know maybe 6 people) look at 100 cars a day. 6x8=48 - means they maybe spend 30 minutes per car for just as service and inspection. Point is - they can be efficient because everyone brings the cars in the morning and pics-up in the evening, so they never need to care on when customer arrives and when customer leaves. They have have yard full of cars and they systematically work trough the during the day. If they want to do this specific slot with 2 techs, this changes whole way it works. Meaning techs has to do nothing, wait for your to arrive and dedicate their time to your car. They can easily do it in under 1 hour, the problem is that that 1 hour costs 2x£185 normally. So this sort of dedication would be much more expensive service... And what if you car needs some major service, like say replacing crank position sensor (which requires half of front end to be split apart). What they do with next customer who has dedicated slot? Overall they would need much more dedicated techs just waiting for customer to arrive. I am cynical as well, just from different perspective - I just can't see why Lexus would offer such service for the same price? And if not for the same price then how much.

It is more like SE+leather+satnav. Which is exactly what SE-i was, except SE-i had standard heated+cooled leather, whereas Advance does not have cooled (ventilated) seats only heated. So SE-i was slightly better spec. than Advance. All in all, I always consider Advance as lowest-end model available to buy in 2011 (or rather it literally was). So for somebody buying car in 2011 it was Advance>F-Sport>SE-L. Yes compared to older SE, Sport, SR it had more things in it, but it was just because it was introduced later and towards the end of the model run. It could as well be considered "limited edition" model for end of production run, so Lexus added some nice freebees before finishing production. But it is basically a base-spec for model year 2011-2012, anything else from that year will have better spec.

To be honest it does not matter where you buy the battery, what matters is that battery does not spend years on the shelve until they lose their capacity. The risk of that happening is the same in halfrauds or anywhere else. If anything I reckon amazon moves magnitude more batteries so risk of them having old stock is much lower. I would say just don't buy cheap batteries - I bought Duracell and it lasted for 3 years. Lexus original Panasonic batteries lasted for 6 years, problem is that most of Panasonic batteries you find are either fake or old stock and they are the ones causing most issues. Renata of all things belongs to Swatch Group, so they are watch batteries made by the same company as Tissot and Omega! They should be good, but my guess - either fake or old stock in this case. But as others said this is just characteristic to low key battery, never happened to me when driving, but has happened when I had to walk-up right to the door handle before car unlocks and then having to press start key multiple times before it recognises and showing "no key warning". Touching the key to start button always helps. This as well has happened right after battery replacement - specifically by Lexus Dealership i.e. I was doing full service and brought both key fobs and told them to replace batteries (as it should be included). They were kind of surprised by request which didn't inspire confidence, but took them away and told me they replaced batteries. Main key fob was the one giving me an issue, the spare one was never used and as far as I know had good battery. It was what I have used for few days when main one was misbehaving. That said I thought if one died then the other one will die soon. So anyway they replaced both batteries, but month later my main started misbehaving again and then spare one was completely dead. So what exactly they used to replace those batteries?! Nobody knows, but perhaps old batteries they had laying around?! Anyway replaced them with Duracell and key worked fine for years. By the way I am not saying that Duracell is some magic battery, simply they are mainstream brand which doesn't sit around and therefore you get them fresh.

Ohh... actually I didn't catch this little nuance and how it makes a difference, but now I see what you mean. It sounds stereotypical, but I assume most people with caravans nowadays will be the ones who have gotten their licenses before 1997... so you right 3500Kg may not even apply to them and 8250Kg is plenty for any caravan ever. Sure that is stereotype that only old people are into caravans, but realistically it is rare to see anyone under 40 towing the caravan. It seems it is mostly the retired people (I may be wrong) and because the change happened in 1997, this means oldest person on new restriction is 42 years old and very few retire before 55.

That does not answer my question thought. I have BE cat myself so I know that I can tow a trailer, but the mass should not exceed 3500kg for both. My question was - considering that most people use SUVs to tow the caravans and considering that many SUVs are now 2200-2700kg and caravan is 700Kg+ ... what is happening in practice. Do people blocking the roads around the country with their caravans actually have C cat? My suspicion is that many of them exceeding 3500Kg and don't have right category to be on the roads. I am just speculating here, but perhaps police are checking that or perhaps police is not aware of this issue... or they just don't give a...... because nowadays everything is done by cameras - including weighting the cars just by looking at them...

It goes extreme (not sure if that is real, but still fun): The thing from tyres is called "particle emissions". It is true that BEVs emit more due to weight, but even electricity is not "emissions free". Even if that electricity comes from solar or wind, it isn't free of emissions as the solar panels have lifecycle emissions and wind turbines have lifecycle emissions. Overall, quite comprehensive studies concluded that average BEV is about 30% cleaner over it's lifetime than average ICEV... ohhh and that is equivalent to 1 flight hour of passenger jet! One of the biggest issues with BEVs is that emissions are built into their battery and they must drive at least 80-100k miles to offset it, scrapping ICEV after 5 years and 50k miles is not much of an issue, but scraping BEV after 5 years and 50k miles means it is way way more polluting than ICEV.

Interesting - so that raises the question... what is average weight of Caravan and what licenses Caravan drivers have? Do they all really have Cat-C? Because BE - still has same limit of 3500kg... and if we take even average SUV, like Q7, XC90 or even RX450h, they already are easily over 2000kg (closer to 2200 really). Completely empty unfurnished caravan is like 700kg+... so that makes it nearly 3000kg without either towing car or caravan being loaded. Now if go back to the same logic of adding 100kg of fuel, 4 adults (350kg), some food and drinks for weekend (say another 200kg) and it can very easily be over 3500kg. Ohh... and that is before septic tank is considered! 😄 Now I am happy to state I am not at risk ever being found behind the wheel towing caravan, so I never ever even thought about it... how do they do it? IS that the reason we see Nissan micas towing caravans?

The problem is that there is no such thing as "ZERO emissions vehicle" and actually I would argue this branding for BEV is deliberately misleading, because it gives false perception for owners. Logic would say no matter how many times one multiples 0 it will be zero. The problem is that we call vehicles which are NOT AT ALL zero-emissions as such. On this topic I have watched very balanced and nice piece, I can't put it better myself so here is the link:

I wouldn't agree with that - even 2 cars with identical engines, say BMW 530d and BMW X5 3.0d will have different emissions based on their weight and shape. Simply said same engine in BMW 5-series will have to work less at any given time and burn less fuel, less fuel burnt = less emissions. This is both true when car starts driving - lighter car will need less fuel to move itself up-to speed... and when at speed 5-Series will more fuel efficient because of drag. Same even true for BEVs, although there is no strictly identical BEV for example Tesla Model-X will use more electricity than Model-S to go same distance, more electricity is more emissions. Now again - Model-X does not use same battery and same engines as Model-S (Model-X is slightly newer and more efficient), so like for like comparison is not possible, but it is still true that Model-X uses more kW/mile, meaning just because of weight and size it is less efficient and more polluting. So size, weight and shape - do impact emissions. Perhaps it could be argued the difference is marginal, or that they are not directly impacting emissions, but at the end of the day - larger, heavier and less aerodynamic vehicle will pollute more. And all combined it could make rather big difference, because larger heavier vehicle will require bigger, wider, heavier wheels, bigger brakes, stronger suspension components etc. etc. Another practical example - I watched how Brabus makes armoured G-Class. They add about 800kg of armoured glass and steel to the car, but overall after they upgrades brakes and suspension to handle all extra weight the car ends-up weighting 1800kg more on already heavy 2500kg G63 AMG. As result of that they add second fuel tank which doubles fuel capacity just to keep same range. So despite staying the same shape and keeping same engine 1800 extra kg doubles the fuel consumption... and that doubles the emissions. Finally, it is just physics - to move heavier object more energy is needed, more energy used = more pollution. Sure there are caveats, because energy can be produced more efficiently, transmitted more efficiently and used more efficiently. So it may be true that despite weighting more, more modern and more efficient SUV will emit less emissions that old smaller car, but that does not matter, because as soon as like-for-like comparison is made - more modern and more efficient smaller car will always be more efficient than SUV with equally efficient engine.

Yes It only stops when engine is started and immobiliser is deactivated, but if battery is flat, then be prepared to listen to it for 15 minutes. It does not help that secondary siren is next to the battery, so when changing the battery it beeps into your ear. Point is - do not attempt if you don't have spare battery or jump starter ready as it may turn out quite embarrassing!

No... you didn't get me. The price of individual modules is IRRELEVANT. Yes there are ID Code Boxes selling for £7.50, BECAUSE they are basically electronic waste, they MUST be a matching set or "virgin" (meaning brand new from Lexus, never used). I paid £140 for set of like 5 modules and 2 keys from the same car, because they are matching set and therefore only the ECU needs resetting. If you get the module which is not matching then just throw it to the bin, it can't even be coded to work with the rest of the modules... or maybe it can be coded by dealer, but you will pay way more than £140 to get dealer to reset the them to "virgin" and then code them properly, most dealers would not even do it. I even told few of those Lithuanian sellers that they losing money by separating sets, because they are making them worthless. But the answer I got is that most of the time they buy breakers from auction and they have no keys, so at that point ID Box is trash anyway because single key is £450+cutting+programming... and they sell them for £10 Euro for spare components - basically if you have blown component on your ID Box and somebody can solder like capacitor or something, that is what they are for. Otherwise they are useless.

I would love to see SUVs being subject to different rules, (like vans maybe with different speed limits) and maybe some sweet additional tax, sadly it needs to happen worldwide otherwise stupid fashion won't end. Basically anything to make them less popular as there is really no reason why people in the city would needs such a large car. Ok there may be families with 4 kids and 3 dogs, but that is exception... now everyone just buys SUV as default choice which is just bad for everyone, car choice, environment, roads... everything. Anyway this whinge aside... I just can't see how you can load the SUV with extra 800kg, non-LWB Bentley is 2645kg with fuel and Royce Royce is 15kg more. 5 "average" people x 80kg - 400kg. That leaves 400+kg for any personal items. Unless car is filled with bricks, rocks or cement I just can't see it happening. And yes EWB is 3250kg which is very close, but it only seats 4 people and actually has less space in the boot (it just has loads of space for rear passengers). Now granted - theoretically it is possible if somebody deliberately tries, but in practice it just won't ever happen.

It is under the dash, sits against firewall. Kind of surprising it was corroded as it is basically at the window level (so the car must have been fully under the water). Yes it needs to be recoded. The problem is not so much ID Code Box (immobiliser), the problem is the keys and steering lock. They have to match (be all from the same donor car), else you will have to get "virgin" keys and steering lock, which will be major cost. So basically 2x£600 for 2 keys (I assume you could use one), steering lock is like £700 but replacing it is horrible (need to drill out the bolts). So my advise is to find matching ECU kit if you going through the trouble - I paid I think £140 for mine, 2xKeys, ID-box, smart key control module, steering lock. As long as they are all matching then only the Engine ECU needs to be reset, which can be done with paperclip.

Yes Clutch pedal in case of Manual, my mistake. But I said as well that in my opinion it is start button or start button circuit.

First of all, does power button cycles at all i.e. OFF>ACC>IG-ON? What I am reading is that the car won't cycle at all (a.k.a it is dead). So it is long before B2799 issue, B2799 only means immobilisers communication issue, meaning your car will cycle, but will not start. If you car is completely dead (which is what I am reading) then I would start from start button circuit itself. It won't be brake pedal circuit yet (as it would cycle without brake pedal depressed, but would say "depress the brake"), same for gear selector (would turn ACC on and say shift to N), same for key detection modules (would say "key not detected"). So power button itself, then power module (the picture you have of MPX - that is power module), perhaps worth looking at smart key module in the boot (but that is quite high-up so I doubt it would damaged in the flood), neither of the 3 requires programming, but they MUST bet matching part numbers. I am assuming you already did basics like checking all the fuses, fusible links etc?

I don't think you can compare it with speed limit. Not only they are clearly posed, but most of the time we know exactly what margins are, so the point about abusing it doesn't stand either. The speed limits are very clear and you can get fine for 0.1MPH over the limit (I once got it for 2MHP). That police chooses to set cameras with some margin on top and they don't get triggered right away that is another mater (it is their internal guidance not the law). By the way they are not being nice, this is limitation of cameras they use as they have margin of error. So as far as I am aware these margins comes from meteorology standards which are used to certify the cameras. And we know what it is, because their guidance even thought not public document (sometimes it is depending on the force) can be requested on FOI (so we know that for the moment it is +2MPH+10%). But that said they can still prosecute lower if they wish. I think in my case it was average speed and perhaps different margins applies (it was 70MPH motorway where I did 52MPH on non-existent "roadworks"). Going by example above - speed limit is 30MPH, the margin allowed is 30+2MPH+10%, you will get fine if you do 36MPH past the speed camera. So my question is not "when the camera will trigger on 30MPH road?" (although that would be cool to know as well), but first of all my question is "what is the speed limit on this road?", because there is literally no clear criteria when car can be considered tailgating. So what is tailgating distance to begin with? Is it 109.5 meters at 70MPH? (that what HC seems to suggest), the second part we don't know but it would be cool knowing it - perhaps they are set to trigger based on say 20 meter + 0.5s which would make it so they trigger at any distance less than 36 meters at 70MPH? I am assuming police must have guidelines of when to trigger the camera and prosecution. What I am saying comparing it to speed limit is not like for like comparison - we know speed limits, we just sometimes don't know the margins. We don't know exact criteria for what is "tailgating", and we definitely don't know the margin. Yes we do know that drivers are advised to keep at least 2 seconds gap at any speed (3.5 seconds at 70), but that is not only advised, but literally impossible to follow in practice - nobody is driving 109.5 metres apart! Even 62 meters (which would be 2 seconds) is luxury we simply don't have. The cameras can't work on such vague criteria, they must have specific rule on when they trigger. The discussion so far suggest that most of LOC members, many of whom (if not most) are experienced motorists with 100s of years of experience in this thread alone don't know what criteria is and are dumbfounded by this idea of "tailgating cameras". This just shows how stupid is the idea in the first place, how unclear the conditions are... I thought that maybe I am missing something and maybe they announced something somewhere, or maybe it is written somewhere in HC and I just don't know. But no, it seems really that vague - "camera will trigger somewhere between 1 metre and 109.5 meters, likely somewhere around 62 meters, but nobody knows". And I appreciate the point that they not issuing fixed fines and the court has to decide, but the camera has to decide somehow that it needs to trigger before the case goes to court. Camera does not have 3 judges siting in it and judging what was too close, it has to have some criteria, based on something that is published and drivers must follow. Sorry for long post, but it seems this one needs law clarified before the cameras can be put on the road - so they just started it other way around. Otherwise it will be just cash cow... and I know exactly how it will work. The NIP will say - either you admit tailgating and accept £1,000 + 6 points (same as if police would have stopped you) or you disagree and it will go to court where you risk up-to £10,000 and 2 years in jail for "dangerous driving". So event thought this is not intended as fixed fine, it will work as such in practice, leveraging on the basis that majority of drivers are not legal experts and won't take their chances in the court. Especially considering the criteria isn't even clear, so it isn't even clear if the case can be defended at all. And for those few who will choose to defend it will be thought as well, because getting lawyer will likely cost close £1000 in itself. So the only way I can see unfair fines being beaten is when the lawyers themselves will get caught. Basically it means masses will be subjected to unfair fines where everything is stacked against them from beginning and majority will accept the fine, not because it was fair, but because they could not defend it.

That is just not true, because I myself said that IS250 is borderline slow. So you just made this one up that I ever had a view it is "rocketship". What I did say was only that 200t is "trashy" engine, which it is. V6 simply sounds better and more your rev it the better, whereas L4t makes it's power low down and just makes noise when revved high... Generally speaking no L4 engines ever sounds good, they may be loud (4G63), but it never sounds good. 8AR-FTS neither sounds good, nor it is very loud due to turbo and generally silent Lexus exhaust... so it is just quiet rattle under the hood (it is kind of funny that even Lexus fittingly called it 8-FARTS). It is moot point now anyway. I didn't buy the car expecting it "to be so fast that I would not know where it went". I bought it I bought it for spec, colour combo, looks and price... and hoped the engine will be about the same, little bit more fuel efficient, little bit faster, but does not sound as good - this is reasonable expectation. But at the same time I did not expect it to be literally slower all the way to 50MPH, I did not expect it will use more fuel than RC-F and I did not expect Lexus to be so lazy to even sell such poorly integrated drivetrain where car never knows what gear it should be in and just constantly shifts backwards and forwards. They put no effort in "polishing" it at all, to the point where I would call it "undrivable" from drivers engagement perspective.

Torque Vectoring Differential and Dynamic Cruise Control also known as Radar Cruise Control. To be honest I probably could have lived without TVD in RC-F, because RC-F still has mechanical LSD which probably is more than enough on public road, TVD only really makes a difference on the track and I have no plans to take fat RC-F anywhere near the track. As for DCC - it is nice to have, sadly RC-F had old gen TVD, so it is only useful on motorway.

Absolutely, speeding tickets from cameras achieves nothing... they only infuriates... because the reason why one was speeding most likely was because the "condition on the road allowed it". I have been driving in UK for 16 years and I haven't been stopped a single time, whereas abroad (at least my experience in few EU countries) one get's stop on average at least once a year. Sometimes it is just to check documents or warn about road conditions, but you feel that presence of police. Being stopped by police, either because of mistake, or just periodically to check documents etc. has much more profound long lasting effect and instead of annoying people it actually makes them respect police even more... especially if they have been dealt with in reasonable and respectable way, which was suitable for the situation. Only human police officer can do that and no stupid camera will ever be able to be tough enough, which still being flexible and fair for the given circumstances. Nowadays rules pretty much exists only where the camera is and in between anything goes, there is no respect for police (because why there would be?) and there is no order on the roads. I do agree with premise - situation on the road would improve if we had more police officers on the roads and less stupid cameras.

Yes that is correct, they are special highway police cars and they are driving around with ANPR and looking for cars without insurance, road tax etc. Most of the time they just cruise in lane 2 and just wait for somebody to be flagged by computer. They rarely stop cars for any other reason, but you right sometimes they do pull over aggressive drivers or somebody who makes mistake in front of them. It is rare, but they are the only ones who does it. However, normal police almost never does that... even where it is obvious that they should. And to be honest, I don't think they should be prosecuting every driver which cut them off at roundabout, but it seems just sensible for them to stop the driver and check if they are not drunk, if they have all documents etc. Maybe they driving without license or something, it would be something I would expect police to do, they should be part of community. And sure if everything is ok with car and driver they may just issue verbal warning "to be careful" and maybe educate the driver saying "you can't exit the roundabout from the third lane, or you can't simply change the lane on exit from second to first, you should in your lane" etc. etc. As such it would be at very least some benefit for the community, because that one driver may be more careful next time on roundabout, or may genuinely learn something... I know it sounds ridiculous that there are people with driving licenses who can't even exit the roundabout without crashing, but that is the general horrible state of motoring in UK.

Completely agree, lane discipline is the reason why 90% of tailgating happens. Tailgating is less of an issue and more of the symptom of an issue, the actual issue is lane discipline. I said that as well... the likelihood of nobody pulling in front of you when keeping 2s distance is almost non-existent, people do it all the time, and if they do it in the spot where camera is, then somehow that would become your fault! That is why I am question the idea of these cameras. Sure there is remaining 10% who genuinely tailgate for no go reason and that then could be further divided in people who literally don't know how to drive and what safe distance even is, people not paying attention or being distracted and creeping-up on you, to aggressive drivers who are deliberately trying to push you off the road. What media would like us to believe is that most of tailgaters are the last group "aggressive drivers", but reality is that aggressive driver will always overtake and go his/her own way if possible... nobody tailgates just for sake of tailgating... maybe it happens in road rage scenario, but it is literally like 0.0001% of cases. Most drivers, even aggressive ones, will simply overtake and disappear in distance if they have that option. So again it is not them being aggressive which causes tailgating, it is people in front of them hogging the lane for no reason that causes it, if they simply move over as they suppose to, they would automatically remove the reason for tailgating. Even when police are on the road it seems they don't care to look what is happening. I have seen countless time police cars being cut-off on roundabouts and where in area of road rage and generally poor driving and doing nothing. It is so weird for me to see it, because police in UK literally don't care about how people drive, they happy for cameras to deal with traffic and I guess they have "better things to do".

That is not much of relief, dangerous driving is fine up-to £10,000, 1 year mandatory ban and up-to 2 years in prison, careless driving if I am not mistaken £1000 and 6-points. And what worries me is that there is no actual definition of what tailgating is. 2 seconds rule is too vague to enforce and as I said at 70MPH it is huge distance... so possibilities of somebody getting into that gap and then you getting the fine are just too great. And by the way if we say that safe distance at 70MPH is 80 m I don't even have issue if somebody get's into that gap, overtakes and goes back... people literally cut into gaps just barely longer than the length of car. So if we take practical example - let's say camera is just working of reading the number plate and time. If you passed the same spot after 1.5s you still good, after 1.4s you get the fine. I assume that is most realistic way of them working same as average speed in principle, just comparing the time of 2 different cars on same spot rather than 1 car between 2 spots. Now imagine driving in outside lane keeping the extreme 80m distance (I generally do no tailgate, but I drive somewhat closer - maybe 40-50 metres), somebody decides to overtake on the spot were camera is and get's between you and the car in front of you, overtakes and goes back. I assume one would not even think much of it... nothing happened.. but for sure that would look for camera as if you were following the car at 1s and it would send the fine! And this is not even extreme example, as cars have literally pulled in front of me maybe 5 metres in front... that isn't even rare occurrence... and then building the distance takes some times... it is not like one would suddenly brake in outside lane and stop until there is 80 metres between them and car in front. I mean yes I would let off for some time to make-up at least 20 metres, but that is still way too close to follow another car in normal circumstances. As well I understand they may have been trialling them, but what is good in that when conditions are not know? How they expected drivers not to get caught despite not telling them how to behave. And again - I don't believe 2 second rule suffice, neither it even applies to 70MPH... so on what conditions were they issuing the "reminders"?

Dream car was any RC, F-Sport, black, with dark rose interior, sunroof, ML... and for the right price. Put all these requirements together and that makes it very rare find, Lexus sold probably less than 10 cars like this in UK. If it would have been RC300h which was offered at £15.5k I would have got 300h... and probably still hated it. If it would have been RC-F listed for £21k, I probably would have got RC-F, but on top of that RC-F should have had TVD and DCC. I mean I know rational thinking sounds like oxymoron in the same sentence with dream car, but I just hate overpaying for anything... so one of my dream requirements is "good deal" as well. Besides I honestly thought it can't be that bad, thanks to you and few other characters on here who fought me for years telling me that I am wrong and that "IS200t would leave IS250 in the dust and you would not even know which way it went". So despite in principle not liking downsizing and turbocharging I thought "how bad could it be"... Yes it will not sound great (that I knew), but it must still be more fuel efficient than IS250 (on paper it is) and it must still be faster car, so it should be an "upgrade". In reality it just isn't more fuel efficient and in most circumstances it is slower, despite again on paper looking like slightly faster car, with much faster shifting and more modern gearbox, and more power.