Linas.P

For reset there should be button under the dash, but what you mean is not "reset", but what is needed for new sensor to be "programmed". And John already explained what is needed for that.

LFA one of the best cars ever - sadly affordability is out of this world. LC500 is one of the best cars in it's class and it literally has no downsides (maybe perhaps boot space), very special car for very special people, but kind of requires to own another car for practicality - like RX or NX. RC-F is great. GS mk4 is excellent car all around, particularly 450h. RX and NX are great SUVs and very competitive in the class, but I just generally don't like SUVs. I am sure Lexus RC/IS350 are good, but we don't have them in UK. I very much liked IS250 mk2, because it was very competitive and great value for it's day, sadly Lexus didn't repeat it with mk3... in fact I liked them as much that I now own 4th one myself. So to say I don't like any Lexus is just not right - yes I hate ES is .... not particularly because it is bad car, but because it is failed in every conceivable way as GS replacement, as well is not competitive in it's own class going after 5-Series and E-Class which is non-starter. 300h as an engine is just boring and in my option underpowered, it is not like I don't like Lexus, I don't like the engine, same as I don't like IS220/200d, but like IS250. IS220d is good car with bad engine, same for IS300h and same for IS200t. They are just not good engines from both objective point of view and from my personal subjectively needs as a driver. So don't confuse me not liking certain aspects of the cars (some very major like engines), and not liking the brand overall. Yes sure - Lexus makes it hard to like them in UK by giving literally no choice for me or generally people who like to drive, no 350, no IS mk4, no RC nor GS globally... so really the only car remaining in their line-up currently is LC500, which is tall order for most as it is flagship... and considering younger myself I would have no way into Lexus ownership at all nowadays.

If you think IS250 is "gas-guzzling" then you up for surprise with IS200t. It really does not matter what my or yours IS250 consumed, it does not matter what my RC200t consumed or your potential IS200t will consume. The only thing that matter is that IS200t is SIGNIFICANTLY worse on fuel economy - my all time average on IS250 was something ~28MPG, best at times were as high as 48MPG, worst was toward the end of ownership and I suspect o2 sensor was lazy and I would get like 22MPG in city, in winter, but generally 26MPG still very achievable. RC200t maybe slightly heavier than IS200t, but very similar overall - best was 32MPG, worst was 14MPG, over 2.5 years of ownership average was 22MPG... in short it is horrible for fuel economy and this was like for like driving, doing exactly the same driving as before + to be honest I did more long journeys in RC200t so it should have been even better. I am not joking, but in my experience LC500 and RC-F are better for for daily driving gets better fuel economy than 200t, sure put them on the track and they will use more, but just commuting and driving around town 5L V* is better than that 2L turbo. If you getting different figures - fine, just use your figures apply same percentage and you get the idea. In short between IS250 and IS200t, IS250 is objectively better in any way, it is more fuel efficient, it is smoother, it is more lineal in acceleration, it sounds better and it is probably more reliable long term or at less has less to go wrong with it. Yes IS200t faster to 60, but that does not tell you whole story, because IS250 will be ahead most of the way, I would say at 40MPH IS250 would still be ahead, IS200t would overtake it at 50MPH. Same for kickdown - IS250 pulls right away after short pause and because it has 6 gears it is manageable manually, IS200t has more power, but it fiddles so long with the gears you may have accident before it starts going, likewise I simply don't have mental capacity to deal with 8 gears manually, so you can't even put it in right gear beforehand... and they are so short (engine power band so narrow) that you would have to change twice before finishing to overtake. Agree with a lot - engine and gearbox very poorly refined, car never feels in right gear, accelerator is pretty much on or off. It sort of works from 50MPH + and then it pulls to 120MPH in no time, but that is not very usable in UK and license-losing. I didn't find fuel economy particularly good anywhere. on motorway sticking strictly to 70MPH I was getting 36MPG, but driving with the flow which is a bit faster it was just barely over 30MPG. Note - the gearbox is similar to IS-F, but not the same, does not have ATF cooler, not programmed to react as fast. I do believe it is good gearbox, but it just does not suit the engine - in IS-F car has usable revs anywhere from ~2500RPM all the way to 6800RPM, meaning each gear can be pushed all the way, with 200t the usable RPMs are ~2000-4500 and it needs to change, meaning that it is continuously hunting for gears all the way to maybe 5th gear. RC350 would be my dream right now... but Lexus said "nobody would buy one in UK".

"Special" indeed...

My guess would be that increased age/mileage is partially cost of living issue, but not directly because people do not have money, but because nowadays accessibility not the same. Not only that - demand is not the same. Remember the days where every decent job offered car scheme? It was no-brainer not to take as a work benefit and keep replacing car with new one whilst saving on tax. This is why historically cars in UK depreciates much quicker and user car prices are much lower and by the way this is not how it is in other countries - in most Europe even before covid/brex**** debacle decent IS250 costed 10k Euro, whereas in UK they were already selling for £2500 in 2014. Nowadays company car schemes pretty much no longer exists or are simply no longer economically feasible due to extortionate BIK and other costs. I remember I wanted to get on car scheme in 2016 and nearly got BMW 530e, but in the end they wanted so much for insurance and BIK was so high that it just wasn't worth it, I decided to wait for MB C300e to come in stock, but they cancelled the whole scheme before I could get it... and since then there was no car scheme. And all this comes with what I call "war on motorists" in UK - there are so many groups of retarded vegans in lycras trying to make people ashamed of simply owning the car... and it largely works! Young people now don't even desire driving or owning the car, having a license, it is out of fashion, it is considered something almost undesirable - car culture in UK has died. As such companies can afford to cancel the car scheme, because new generation of employees no longer demands that. So lower supply, means lower depreciation, higher prices and lower demand = people keeping cars for longer. Besides car is no longer seen as expression of freedom or status symbol, so having very new car no longer matters for many. Another thing in puzzle is cars themselves - before every generation of car was almost revolutionary, new tech, new features, new comforts, more power lower fuel consumption. At some point I can argue they were even getting cheaper, not in literal sense due to inflation, but there was time where new model almost seemed better value, maybe costing a little bit more but with a lot more tech. But look at cars lately what is there in new car that you don't have on IS250? I been in same place when I was considering replacing mine like 5 years ago. Take for example 2005 IS250 and 2016 IS200t/250/300h, what was there in 2015 car that wasn't already present in 2005 car? If anything 200t engine is in all measurable ways worse (and I can say it because I owned the car for 2.5 years), 250 is the same engine form ~2003 in heavier 2015 car, 300h efficient in city, but far worse driver experience and generally less nice to drive and much slower.. and on motorway not even more efficient, just in city. All standard equipment the same or even worse, for example 2005 car had better standard audio, had keyless entry standard (option in later cars)... so what is the point of even upgrading from 2005 and 2015? Really not much. The only little bit bigger change Lexus introduced was LSS+ in 2019 when it became standard in all cars - but that is about the only bigger tech upgrade in 14 year! So the cars themselves stagnated and not 10 years old car pretty much has all the tech one would ever want. Hence the BEV scam - people no longer want to upgrade cars so ban on ICEV is coming to force the change to happen. Now all thing considered, this is government policy and it is working exactly as planned, people stop driving, stop buying cars and relying more on government to provide transportation. Is it better for planet, maybe, maybe not - remains to be seen, but this is definitely not accidental. The only issue is that now there will be need for new for of tax to replace £40Bn generated by motoring, so we still be paying the same tax in some form just going to be deprived of having personal transportation.

On IS250 seats are not cooled, just ventilated - so it uses whatever air it could get from the cabin for cooling effect. On other models there is direct A/C line going to the seat and it is more noticeable. As for back ventilation it is as others said - technically it ventilates as there is little channel going into the back, but no dedicated fan and when you not sitting on it you can feel just a little bit of air coming out, but it is so weak that it is pretty much useless once you sitting.

When it comes from person who himself owned and maintained IS220d for a long time that adds a lot of credit. Thanks

When I needed same thing I realised there is nothing left, in UK people stopped fixing everything and always just recommends replacement. Same story for gearbox specialists... there are some so called specialists, but every time you speak with them their default answer - "replace it, we won't fix it, won't warranty it". Eventually, I found company called compressor tech which could refurbish the part http://compressortech.com/comptech.php and paid £90 for the job, but bare in mind it was 2016, so not sure what prices are not. Another issue - you would need compressor of the car and post it to them, which means you can't drive and it is kind of hassle. In my case I got used compressor and sent it to be refurbished whilst driving with broken one.

So do it, I am pretty sure they can be called even to your home address. They don't need to know when it started, only that fault is still present. After all you paying for cover, so why not use it.

Yep - if you got your car detailed then both automatic and hand car scratchers are out of question, sadly the rule "if you want it done right, do it yourself" applies here. You right that real professional ceramic coats require UV hardening (not sure about infrared) and that is difficult to do at home. However, what I done last couple of times was simply leaving the car inside (so it does not get wet) for extra time, they say 24h, so I left it over long weekend (closer to 72-96h) and then let the sun do the job over time. Sure consumer ceramic products are not the same as professional ones, but the technology came long way in last 10 years and results achieved at home are more than acceptable imho.

That counts as a claim, so you may find out it isn't worth having windscreen cover.

Lol imagine is that is the only thing you need to make your car E10 compatible.... would be silly isn't it? The other thing to note, from my experience in older cars fuel hoses and other things that are submerged often do not fail before you take them out i.e. one day you think "maybe I am going to change strainer on fuel pump", and you only realise it is very brittle when you try to take it out, or soft and deteriorated. Point being - it is entirely possible that I was driving on E85 for 20k miles completely fine and nothing failed... and I could have driven another 50k miles and all be fine, but the "damage" would only manifests itself when taking fuel system apart in a form of harder, softer, more brittle parts than they should be.

You may be on the money here.

Other tricky thing - they may have switched supplier for certain part, or the supplier changed sub-contractor without changing part number. Say for example fuel pump is Denso, but maybe Denso was buying o-rings from Chinesium Rubber Corp between 2005-2007, but later switched to Cheap Rubber Products Inc. From Lexus perspective Denso still supplies them with fuel pump, but from Denso perspective maybe they know something like certain o-ring when used with ethanol could reduce it's reliability from estimated 100k hours, to 85k hours... and Lexus spec. requirement was for that part to be no lower than 90k hours... so that part is technically out of spec. and therefore using E10 is not recommended. Obviously, we don't know what the standards were and what tolerances were allowed, and sadly Lexus doesn't seem to want to share.

Mate... I literally drove for 20k miles on 85% ethanol and nothing happened... so what are the odds of something going wrong on 10% ethanol? Well I guess "nothing" is not completely accurate, as I haven't inspected every single part under microscope before and after I did it (i.e. it is not scientific), but nothing failed to point where I would have had fuel leaks, or faulty fuel pump, or clogged up-lines or injectors.

Sorry, forgotten to say - you are not the first one Phil. I am sure there were at least few people who contacted Lexus UK and got no answer. Again that is why my assumption, maybe there is nothing wrong with the cars which could be justifiably identified and replaced, it may be just some sort of corporate liability thing which they won't share publicly. Perhaps that would expose some tiny sub-par quality part and trigger another recall and they just thought - it is easier to say don't use E10, than admit we need to recall 100k cars for one o-ring which was sourced from certain supplier between 2005-2007 and turns out not to be up-to spec.

Definitely do not use abrasives on glass, glass is incredibly hard to scratch, but once you do it is nearly impossible to polish. Most standard abrasive pads will be composed of silicone carbide which is harder than glass, meaning irreparable damage. To be honest using metal brush is less bad idea as at least glass is generally harder than metal, but still very bad idea. First of all, I would like to make sure it is water mark and not something else (delaminating?) - if you say your detailer can't remove it, then I just suspect it is something else. Secondly, it would be interesting to know what products you have used to get an idea what it could be, maybe picture of the marks as well. If it is watermark, then there are dedicated products for that - just search for water spot remover and most of detailing product companies will have dedicated product for it (and I mean proper detailing companies, not the products you find on supermarket shelves). You can as well use household chemicals, vinegar with baking soda on microfibre, even bathroom sprays for limescale should work. If vinegar and baking soda does not work at all, then I doubt it is water marks - generally speaking, removing water spots from glass is not hard as long as you use right products, but using wrong products can make a lot of damage.

I really doubt it is the case with these 3 specific models and only between years 2005-2007. Meaning that Lexus already used "modern" plastics and rubbers in 1989 with launch of LS400 and continue to do so for 16 years, but then just for 2 years and for 3 engines switched to old rubbers. Overall I think you right - there is some part which Lexus believes could be damaged by ethanol or potentially not as resistant, but they do not say what it is. But it isn't all seals in fuel system. As well the point Andrew makes is important - we already drive on 5% ethanol, if the parts would really be that susceptible we would already have issues. At least that is if theory about materials is correct, because if you run E5 in classic car which can't take ethanol, that would already be enough to melt everything there. So the question is valid - why E5 works, but E10 doesn't?

I would not bother insurance with such minor details. As long as tyre road legal and not some stupid size (like 35" wheels from tractor) it should not matter. Insurance should not have a right to think anything about it and don't even give them opportunity.

On 4 mile run you are quite lucky to get 35MPG to be honest, car hardly even gets warm in such a short run. So here is your explanation from MPG - short journeys!

I doubt it would make suspension much harder considering the size wall difference is just 2%, but you would definitely get higher fuel consumption and more road noise (because of wider tyre)... handling could potentially get better or right tyres (that is if you go with UHP), but I doubt RX is the car where it is desirable and even further I doubt all-season tyres will give you that impression. As well speedo will be another 1% more optimistic.

As other said, I doubt it is ECU that is causing your MPG to be higher. And in my experience 35MPG is completely plausible on IS300h, especially considering it is F-Sport on 18". I haven't even seen any better myself, but I have lead foot so I always knew it is down to my driving habits. At the same time it is possible previous owner got 38-44MPG from it, if the car was driven at exactly 70MPH on motorway most of the time.

It was UK car. I doubt it is Lexus "mistake", but maybe they have some "agenda". For example years coincides with fuel pressure sensor recall affected IS250s, who know maybe Lexus just being overly careful just in case. You know how corporations are - better safe than sorry, maybe there is nothing wrong with these cars, but just because they had something related to fuel system, they just wont risk it and makes blanket policy that they can't use E10.

I would say I covered good ~20k miles on it specifically in 2006 car, like 2k on E10 and ~20k on E85. And I have done more miles in IS250 on E85, but those were abroad and they were 2010 and 2012 models anyway. I mean if E85 hasn't done it, then I can't believe E10 would be an issue. One thing to note, do it at your own risk - that it worked for me does not mean it is good idea. To be fair I done it because I just didn't know I am not suppose to do it in 2006 (and because I was used to do that in my previous IS250's) and only realised that when whole craze of switching to E10 started in UK, I thought IS250 was modern enough car to be what is known as "flex-fuel" ready (which it kind of is because of "smart ECU"). Some cars are specifically marked as flex-fuel, especially in US, but most modern cars are flex-fuel even if they don't say so. Overall, what makes car flex-fuel is that ECU should be able to tell what fuel car is running on and adjust accordingly (which IS250 does), the second part is that materials used on fuel system should be resistant to ethanol... again I assumed all IS250 are fine, but turns out something between 2005-2007 isn't suitable. But it is kind of bizarre, because other models from same years and even older Lexus cars are fine. I did have some idea that ethanol isn't really great, but I didn't know the 2006 car specifically shouldn't be running it. My idea was based just on general knowledge that ethanol is hydroscopic and if left in tank for long time it could accumulate excess water leading to corrosion, or simply poor running of the car. So the only "prevention" I did (if you can call it that) I tried to never leave E85 in tank for long periods of time, so I would fill full tank only when I was relatively confident I will use most of right away. Again never had any issues with car and it was still running fine at 200k miles.

That is very good questions and it seems there is no answer to it. According to Lexus actually cars from October 2007 are already fine with E10. https://mag.lexus.co.uk/e10-petrol/ But as you said - it is not clear what parts are in particular were changed. I tried to look trough part numbers related to fuel delivery and although some parts have revisions it is not clear that it was anything related to E10. Now again I have extensively used E10 and even E85 on 2006 IS250 without issues, note as well that in most of Europe use E85 and at very least E10 as default fuel, so most European IS250 were running 10-85% ethanol since the beginning and I have not heard any particular issues.