GSLV6

It's what a Lexus dealer quoted me last week for annual insurance/warranty on just the hybrid system if I chose to buy a used RX John. However, having just looked at the prices quoted on the Lexus website, I suspect that he was talking out of his hat, just as he seemed to be RE specifications.

Great car....only hampered by a much smaller boot space than the non-hybrid. As it's a 10 yr old example, it would be well worth taking out the lexus hybrid warranty. I think it's about £56 a year and covers hybrid drive system (including batteries and motor). At £4K for a replacement battery pack, it's well worth it!

Thanks Rayaan. From what you say, the F-Sport or standard Luxury models may be the longer term safer bet. I was planning on taking out their £56 annual hybrid drivetrain warranty, so will enquire what the full warranty might cost annually. If it's not cost effective, I'll go the F-Sport or perhaps the Lux + Advantage route instead. Wasn't overly taken with the turn-in on the Lux model as it didn't take too much to provoke understeer. I thought the chap was talking nonsense and it never ceases to amaze me how little some salespeople seem to know about the products they're trying to sell. Not impressed. I was also promised a call back today on a model I wanted to test drive. No call, so I won't chase them. They either want my custom or I go somewhere else.

Could I please ask for one more bit of feedback from RX owners? (thanks for your patience!) I've now discounted the GS450 and will definitely be seeking out an RX. I have one or two concerns which the dealership has answered by saying "we never have any problems at all", well they would say that when I'm looking to buy one It relates to Premium spec RX and air suspension. I've done a search and found a few issues on older air suspension, especially on the GS. As this is such an expensive one to sort if it goes wrong, does the Premium's air set up better the standard coil springs by much and are they generally reliable (including compressors and sensors) or is it a case of avoid anything over 10 years old? (ie is it worth going down the Premier spec route at all?). Also considering the F-sport. Are the seats as comfy as the Lux model, and is it worth the extra for, essentially, a styling change as I understand that the "lateral damper" system is (in the words of a chap at lexus) just an anti-roll bar within the engine compartment. I once fitted an upper strut brace to a beemer I had and it did sort out the vague handling and was worth it on that. I'm guessing that the actual suspension is the same as the standard model and the real changes are styling and an 8 step CVT over a 6 step? Your feedback appreciated. I'll be looking for a low miles example between 2012 and 2015 if that helps.

+1 I wouldn't worry too much about the spec as SE and SE-L are both specified higher than the newer Lux models. They both have 10 way electrically adjustable front seats, satnav, heated and ventilated seats, reversing camera, adaptive intelligent front lamps etc etc. The SE-L gives you a sunroof and on some models, an upgraded Mark Levinson stereo (my SE has this in anyway). The price and on the one you highlighted looks really good, very low for the year and mileage (on a Lexus forecourt, it'd be £10K all day long....my local lexus dealer had one at over 10K of a simliar age) and its no mileage either. Looks like a very good buy.

For reliability, space and most kit as standard (that accolade doesn't go to the newer hybrid models), the GS300 takes some beating. It drives really well, is powerful, very refined, and more spacious than any of the hybrid models (much larger boot and more rear cabin space). It's not ultimately as quick as the 450h but by any standards is more than adequate with 0-60 in 7.1 seconds and a top whack of 148mph. I average 28mpg in mine (and there's lots of hills where I live), with the best on a run being 42mpg. That's excellent economy for a 3 litre V6 petrol. The engine's superb, the cabin roomy, and SE gets you electric memory heated and ventilated front seats, a Mark Levinson sound system, satnav, CDP, DVD player, 10 way adjustable seats, adaptive HID xenon headlamps (they swivel when you go round corners), dual climate control etc etc etc. Better specified than the new Lux specification hybrid in fact. Bodywork and panel fit is excellent. Handling is ok. It's no 5 series but does better the S60 Volvo by some margin. £497 annual taxation but lower insurance group than newer more powerful hybrids and no CVT transmission (my GS is a 6 speed auto and smooth as silk). Low miles examples are around. You can pick up a 2007/2008 SE or SE-L with full history and 70K miles for about £7K to £8K, or £10K dealer. I have seen private examples go for as little as £6K with low miles. Less complex and less to go wrong than a hybrid and uses the less problematic coil spring suspension. Besides the aircon (which rarely gives problems), the only things to note reliability-wise are the wheels (lacquer finish on these is a complete joke...budget £350 off for a complete wheel refurb); exhausts can split at the joint from the cat-back pipe to the two muffler pipes on the "Y" section (£780 for just the exhaust) and whilst these are meant to last 15 years, mine went after just 9 years. Suspension does take a hammering too on these as they are a heavy car, so budget a few new shocks at around 70K to 80K miles at around £350 each. Other than that, they do seem to be very reliable and very highly regarded. I will be changing mine soon. Its had all the work needed done on it and could be mistaken for showroom it's that good and is genuine low miles. (when it comes time to sell I will be asking just under £8K with a full lexus dealer service history if you were tempted to one). I'll probably replace mine with an RX a the new GS just doesn't appeal as much to me.

It seems to be sorted now Barry, and I'm not really drawn to the newer GS. It does offer a little more economy and more performance, but the truth is, pub heroes to one side, that the 247BHP of the GS300 is plenty enough for anyone, as it offers rapid progress and safe overtaking shove when needed. It's more than enough. Whether it is or isn't roomier in dimensional terms, it feels roomier and more comfortable to the new 450H but I haven't yet tried the Premier or F-Sport options which may better the Lux spec seating which I found too firm. It also sacrifices considerable practicality (no ski flap which I find useful when visiting the DIY stores etc for getting longer items into the car) and boot space. Is the performance and little extra economy worth paying £20,000 plus giving my car over for? The conclusion I've come to is "no, not at all". I also prefer the styling of the mk3 GS cars. It does seem more elegant and has a few rounder curves. Now the RX is more thought provoking simply for the comfort on offer, the improved cabin space and the improved practicality of that large boot space, plus the ability to fold the seats flat or slide them forwards. It would be worth it, and I wouldn't even post about it, if the hybrid technology was, say, 5 years ahead of what it is now. Lexus have already made good strides to improving economy between the pre 2016 and 2016 model RX450. However, the RX, again, offers perhaps just 4 or 5mpg at most over my GS300 on economy, costs more to service and insure, has higher tyre prices and much higher depreciation. The smart move would be to wait 10 years, and buy a really good 5 year old low miles example. By that time, hybrid tech will have moved on a generation, power and economy will no doubt improve, and I won't mind the depreciation on a 5 year old example so much. As I'm well into middle age now, I don't really want to give it another 10 years (!) so am thinking about a move now. Whilst the GS is now sorted and should stay reliable, I could use the extra practicality of the RX. It all boils down to whether I'd live to regret it on day to day driving over the GS, which has no real vices or annoyances. It's a good solid, well made motorcar

I've done a similar comparison myself lately, but comparing the cost of keeping my 2007 GS300 on the road over another 5 years or trading up for a newer GS450 or RX450. When I looked in detail, and was realistic about ownership and running costs, these are the figures that I came up with, which include all running costs and depreciation plus a little for incidental repairs based on experience and age of the car (for the GS): GS300 75K miles kept for another 5 years at 8K miles per annum = £4,190/yr: 5 years continued ownership = £20,950 RX450, 20K miles example, kept 5 years at 8K miles per annum = £4,338/yr: 5 years ownership = £21,690 Both the above discount the cost of buying the car in the first place, since depreciation is factored into the running costs (about £2K/annum for the RX or about £700 per annum for the GS), so you can see that realistically, barring any major hiccups with the GS, it is the cheaper option to keep the car and perhaps benefit from further improvements in hybrid technology 5 years down the road. Or....consider it a sideways move and buy an RX now because it's a want and not a need. The way I see it, reliability, or at least not having the nuisance of dealing with major issues in spite of whole life costs being similar, are worth the extra on the newer vehicle. About £5K has had to be spent on the the GS to get it up to standard and to repair some unfortunate issues such as a cracked exhaust (new system over £800), replacing noisy tappets (engine out, all 24 done, top end rebuild at £3K and this at just 64K miles). You can't warrant newer cars being definitely more reliable, but chances are that they will be. You'll always get the odd example that throws a wobbly but on the whole, the newer hybrid technology seems to be very reliable if not any better than 60 to 70% as economical as claimed. Buy what you can afford, and want as much as need. The newer car in RX guise has a fair few improvements and advances over the old one, but fuel economy aside, the older 350 was lighter and has permanent AWD rather than being a FWD car with occasional stability support from an underpowered 67BHP motor in the rear (ie don't consider it an AWD because in the traditional sense, it isn't). As far as cost of hybrid ownership goes, I consider the Lexus hybrid system to be more akin to a petrol engine using energy recovery for the occasional electrical boost or very limited slow speed battery only option, the cost for which is a lot of extra mass and complexity. Is it worth it? Perhaps on the newer '16 registration cars which have an improved system with better mpg, but on the older one, a really good low miles RX350 might just be a smart move longer term until you can afford to buy into the newer models. I only say that because the V6 petrol unit is as sweet as a nut, one of the most advanced and reliable on the market (I was unlucky with my 3 litre but it ought to stay reliable now its sorted). You wont have air suspension to worry about, nor inverters, battery packs etc. However, you can buy approved used from Lexus and benefit from their warranties including the 10 year hybrid and transmission £56/yr warranty for peace of mind if buying the older hybrid for peace of mind. In fact, it would be very sensible, but add that to annual running cost comparisons.

Hi Rayaan no...we're discussing the 2012-2015 model. Sorry, I should have made that clearer at the start. Interesting you mention the menu options. I did ask the salesman about this (the one we drove was a 2013 RX on Lux spec) and he was very certain in his response that it didn't have the sport mode which the Premier and F-Sport have, to sharpen up the throttle response. He claimed it was done automatically on the Lux spec, and that it suffered a bit of lag. It started off in Eco mode, and I didn't twiddle with any settings, as from what he said, there seemed little point. He also said that it didn't have kick down in the conventional sense, as the CVT just builds revs to peak power when floored. It did have a lag though when I tried it. Yes, I could well believe the tyres make a big difference. This one was fitted with OEM Dunlops, pretty well worn ones too and they were dreadfully noisy. It was a relief to get back into the comparative serenity of our old GS after that test drive. I do have another test drive when they can locate me an F-Sport or Premier to try, so having learned a few tips from what you've said, I'll re-evaluate then.

I couldn't afford a 2016 RX Banji, so a test drive would not be of any benefit for me. I am looking seriously at buying a 2013 to 2015 F-sport or Premier model though. I had a test drive in a Lux but tbh, I found the drive very un-inspiring, the CVT drone and lack of instant response got on my nerves, and on an extended test drive, the fuel economy was appalling (sub 30mpg). I may just stick with my petrol GS for now, or at least look for more feedback from happy RX owners on whether the higher models bring much more to the party. Apologies to the OP for the thread drift.

Nice write up Daniel. I looked at one yesterday, and I'm with you on the looks. I prefer the previous generation for looks, it just seems a little more classy and elegant to my untrained eye. The audio sounding flat is a good description because in keeping with all DAB systems, it uses high compression so is limited in dynamic range. It's a retrograde step. FM would be better. The improved fuel economy is welcome. Seating in the newer GS is firm also...I felt it was too firm; the older car seems more comfortable to me. Would it be fair to say that the older F-sport model would be closer to the new standard model then?

Rayaan Roll-on figures in top gear for the Cayaan may not be comparable because the Cayaan doesn't use the same peak torque CVT system. Surely, all you'd have to do is drop it a gear or two to leave the RX trailing in a real world true test using whatever gearing you would for say an overtake? You seem to miss the point that I was not comparing a 308BHP F-Sport. I was comparing the previous generation 295BHP Lux model without the gadgetry of "Sport" improving throttle response, my views on the car the I test drove still stand. Yes, they are impressive for a car of that mass, but its still no sports car whatever way you chop the figures. There's no way I'd call it quick. The lux and Premier models don't have the option of an instant throttle re-map because they're fully automatic, non-switchable systems on the older cars at least, so they suffer more lag as everything tries to reset to the required throttle settings as a result. Competent and capable? Yes. Fast? No. 124mph top speed is also super-mini territory these days, not fast car territory (autobahns permitting!). It's not top trumps though, so peace ...let's end the game of top trumps . It's more about the feel and every day driving experience and I take the point that as an everyday car, it's justifiably a very popular vehicle. It's just a shame that the model I drove had so much intrusive cabin noise, it really was quite unpleasant, especially for rear passengers (my wife complained that the rear was awful for road noise which would be tiring and unwelcome on a run). I can't but help think that a change of tyres might help at least a little here? (ie does any other owner find it a little noisy? If not then tyre choice seems the culprit). For the record (I'm not top-trumping....honest ), the vRS is quicker in 50-70mph top gear roll on (in mapped form) than the quoted F-Sport figures . The standard 130 ASZ engine still manages the drag in a shade over 4 seconds. The BLT (155BHP) is quicker. The mapped 180BHP car, much quicker, partly due to the torque remapping of that car. We did initially try a more aggressive map, but the torque would have destroyed the transmission. It was able to light up the front tyres in 4th gear from a 40mph roll-on, so the car was "de-tuned" to make it more sensible and reliable. I'm really not sure of the point you're trying to make but I'm with Malc here. Telsa, by the way Malc, make some super-fast fully electric cars that leave most so-called "super-cars" for dead but range is still an issue as is purchase cost. Telsas are mighty impressive cars though. I'm really not sure on the credentials of electric only cars because they still burn fossil fuels to get the electrickery, fossil fuels to manufacture just like any other car, and battery pack recycling involves the dumping of some pretty environmentally unfriendly substances. Hybrid seems to be a good halfway house and at least Lexus have pinned their colours to the mast and progressed the technology arguably further than any other manufacturer. Where we all share something in common is respect for a manufacturer who continues to manufacture some of the best put together vehicles on the road today, and I'm a big fan.

Odd? Not at all. I rarely use cruise control, so adaptive or not, it isn't a big selling point for me. It's a gadget I wouldn't use. Only the F-sport has rear wheel steering according to the blurb and Lexus sales staff also have confirmed this to me. Yes, the RX is well built. Better than the GS? Hmmm, the jury's out on that...I'm not so sure. I agree that the CVT makes speed deceptive but I know what a fast car feels like as I've owned a fair few very fast cars and the RX doesn't have anything like the mid range punch of a genuinely fast vehicle. Anyone who's ever driven a really quick car knows that and wouldn't argue the point. A BMW 3 litre diesel would comprehensively see it off, as would my humble Fabia vRS but as mentioned previously, the RX isn't about speed. It's simply not a fast car. That's not a criticism, so no need to take these things to heart. Its utter nonsense to even suggest that it'll better a vRS from a standing start. It wont. I've driven both...have you? The vRS and the GS 300 are faster to 60 from a standing start. I know that so am bemused why anyone would argue black is white on that. The GS450 is considerably quicker than the vRS or the GS300 though and feels it too. Have you driven a mapped vRS with over 180BHP and over 250ft-lbs of torque in something weighing about half of what the RX does? Lets not be silly about this. It's not a competition, I was merely highlighting my own experiences and thoughts after driving the RX. It's a nice car but a sports car? No, not a cat's chance in hell. This is detracting from the main point though, which as I see it are the real positives about the RX. Performance and handling are not, from my perception, it's strong points. Build quality, comfort and practicality however are. It's a great cabin, and a relaxing drive. I like the car a lot, probably motre than the newer GS. Performance alone doesn't endear it to me. I prefer the older generation if honest.

That does it! I'm not shifting from a GS300 to an RX if the glove box bulbs are going to fail all willy-nilly like that! I'm going to write to Lexus head office to complain immediatment ! (Queue Monty Python's restaurant sketch):

I get about 26 to 27mpg from cold over an 8 mile trip from my Gen3 GS300 petrol, so it seems not a lot different to the hybrid from cold. On a long run, best I've seen was 42mpg (motorway, 70mph). Not too shabby.

Hi Jason. I'm not here to attack the RX....in fact I rather like it for comfort and practicality alone. With all respect to Malc, the LS (any of them) would be just too expensive to run given our mileage and the hills we have round here plus bigger than we need! Yes, I could put the capital saved to one side for petrol, but part of my brain can't compute the logic of taking a risk on a car perhaps 20 years old of unknown heritage (and maintenance) then feeding it for a sub 20 mpg locally which is all we'd get. Have you ever driven a GS300 by the way? If you had, I suspect that you'd you'd concede the difference in performance, and the 430 is even quicker! I think that safe overtaking performance is a must. The RX has it, but needs more care and thought in planning the move. I have run a GS300V6 for a few years, and did put my foot absolutely to the floor in the RX. Being a CVT, there is no kick-down, and even engaging one of the "faux" gear steps makes no real odds to acceleration. All the real world motoring tests don't lie. 0-60 (best time) I've read was low 7 seconds and average closer to 8 seconds. That's not sports car performance. Our re-mapped Fabia vRS does the 60 sprint in under 7 seconds (it's a diesel). That is a fast little car and would show the RX a clean pair of heals, absolutely no question whatsoever. Our GS300 has a 0-60 time of 7.1 seconds and been tested at 6.9 seconds. It is also unquestionably much faster than the RX (being much lighter). We did a fair few miles today in the RX and performance-wise, it simple can't hold a candle to the older, last generation GS petrol only models, but that's not really what the car is all about, plus it simply doesn't have the poise nor handling to carry off sports-car performance anyway. We viewed it for its plus points which we saw as supreme comfort and practicality, combined with excellent build quality and so far at least, very few reported problems. It performs adequately. I have looked in depth at the competition, including Kia's Sorento, the X5, the Merc GLE etc. The Sorento can't hold a candle to the build of the Lexus but is also a good practical car, not as comfy or as rapid but it does hold its value well, much better, in fact, than the RX which has shocking depreciation of 50% in the first 3 years. The X5 is much quicker, handles much better and has at least some pretention as a genuine 4 x 4 although not as good as the Merc. It is horribly expensive on tyres and when it goes wrong (which they do) the suspension costs are enough to make you weep. I wouldn't own one. I also think that they're dreadfully dated and cheap looking on the inside. The GLE seems to be the best of the lot, but not cheap to run and a good deal more expensive to buy plus offers no better comfort, although handling and performance are better. That brings us full-circle to the RX. Lexus have been rather clever here. They have produced the "Grey Man" of the SUV field, yet it's better screwed together than any of the rest (with the possible exception of the GLE), more comfortable, cheaper to run and probably the most reliable of the lot. It only sacrifices a second or so to 60 over most of the others and has a simpler gear train with the single speed CVT orbital gearbox (reliability again), but lets not kid ourselves that it's a "driver's car" because it simply isn't. I don't say that in a derogatory manner. It's just not designed to compete on those terms, that's all. It goes reasonably well, handles competently but didn't inspire confidence and had very little feel through the wheel. It reminded me a lot of driving some of the older Avensis cars and Camrys. It would take some adjustment coming from the faster, better handling and better equipped GS, but I think it's an adjustment that Id be happy to make.

Welcome and don't let the issues put you off. They're not unique to Lexus. We've had issues with every diesel we've owned. The early VW's all cracked heads for a past time, and the later PD engines in our Skodas, whilst generally good (the very best diesels we've ever owned), suffered gummed up EGRs, one car bought used having to have the inlet manifold removed and cleaned and an EGR blanking procedure done to safeguard the engine. Then the crappy KKK turbo self destructed at 60K miles (£1300 to have a new Garret fitted), so all in all, diesels have cost us a lot of money. We also had a Merc 220 Cdi which suffered crank and camshaft sensor failure and needed a new MAFF and turbo vacuum pipes. That lot was over a grand's worth. Long term cost of ownership, with modern PDF filter failures and dual mass flywheels self destructing affect just about all diesels (manuals in the case of the flywheeels) so Lexus is no better nor any worse than other marques. Just view those issues as part and parcel of the running costs (ie as consumables) and your long term ownership probably works out no more costly (fuel savings considered) than a petrol equivalent.

Hi Malc. Interesting that you should mention tyres. When time came to change them on our GS, I fitted mid range Davanti tyres (never heard of them either!) and the ride improved and cabin noise decreased markedly. Tyre choice is critical. I never liked the P6000's. Show them a greasy road and they didn't seem to like it plus they seem to wear out in front of your eyes, and noisily too! My trouble is that I have spinal injuries which have resulted in a regressive condition, and the back pain gets worse as the years knock on (long story but partly due to a teenage spinal condition and partly due to motorcycle and mountain bike accidents). As comfortable as the old GS is, it's no match for the newer RX Hybrid. I suffer on longer trips so am tied to vehicles that don't make the pain intolerable. Whilst the GS is ok, the RX seemed much better, so I am tempted! The cabin noise could be lessened by better tyre choice I'm sure.

Hi Jeff, yes, I think so, although I don't know whether it would pass MOT with warning lights showing. I used ordinary replacement valves in mine for about 5 months after having the wheels done. For some inexplicable reason, no warning lights showed when first done but one day, with family on board and heading for the Lake District on holiday about a month or two later, the warning lights all started blinking whilst we were on the motorway. I pulled over but all tyres were ok, so the sensors only picked up the lack of transmitters on the wheels on that first long trip after the work was done. The lights didn't go out, despite trying disconnecting the receiving sensors. I also learned that the wheels cannot be swapped as they are coded to specific corners, so best to get them re-done properly otherwise MOT and resale could be affected. A nuisance and an expensive one!

+1 to the above. I had mine (2007 GS300) done last year by Glevum wheels in Gloucester who came out, removed the wheels and took them back to clean up and powder coat. I think the cost was £340 for all four wheels and they look brand spanking new. I have just had to change all of the TPMS valves as all had corroded and WD40 wouldn't budge them. All needed cutting and drilling. I wonder if the use of copper-slip or similar when installing replacement valve fitting kits is advisable to prevent corrosion? Lexus Bristol did better than my local dealership. Mine were £380 - odd to replace 4 and that was with the labour charge waived too! (ie cost of valves plus VAT). Trouble is, all cars now have to have them (post 2012), something else we can thank the interfering brainless bureaucrats at the EU for, because apparently, none of us "EU Citizens" can be trusted with a tyre pressure gauge any more

I can only speak as I found it Eame64, and it simply doesn't have anywhere near the acceleration of my GS300. It boils down to what you're used to I suppose, but a "performance" vehicle, it is not. Neither was it quiet, again, compared with the GS. The difference in cabin noise is really marked.

Thanks for the feedback Malc. Yes, sage advice. I do though have need of a little more load space than I currently enjoy, well ideally at any rate, plus the older I get, the more I have developed a conscience for things like pollution, hence the lower emissions of the newer vehicles is a draw, but not enough to counter the argument of the carbon footprint of manufacture (although one can argue that they're already made!). I did test drive both vehicles today and have posted a summary over on the GS discussion section. Briefly though, both had pluses and minus points. On the positive for the GS, it did fly when you prodded the "go" pedal, and handled very nicely. It felt more sure-footed and safer than the older GS, was more frugal, and rather surprisingly (to me anyway) was a more refined and quieter in the cabin. Fit and finish were excellent as you'd expect. the downsides though... To start with, there was less space, both in the cabin and in the boot. Not sure if I could live with the lack of space for my hobby which demands a boot at least up to the old GS (I'm not a golfer by the way so don't measure a boot's usefulness by how many golf "sticks" I can get in a boot!). It was also less comfortable and by a margin. I have a bad back and after 30 minutes, perhaps less, my back was starting to ache. The seats were just too firm and lacked the 10-way adjustability of the older car or newer Premium versions. Also, I found the interior controls and console layout too fussy. A backwards step from the older model imho. Onto the RX. Lovely and comfortable, spacious and practical with (to my mind) a more intuitive and simpler layout, although the console didn't have the look and feel of a premium brand compared with either GS. Zotto, you described the RX as "...a fast SUV" but I beg to differ, at least from my test ride. It felt quite pedestrian, with little initial shove and little overtaking ability. You'd really have to plan your moves well in advance and couldn't safely make opportune nip and tuck over-takes. Both GS models were notably faster, even the old model. However, it is a 2.2 ton SUV so allowances made, it wasn't exactly a slouch either...it just doesn't, realistically, have the rapid acceleration of the other two. The FWD also means that it isn't as sharp or focused to drive but under-steer seems well controlled. All in all, it was a competent and very practical, supremely comfortable vehicle with one MAJOR drawback....that of cabin noise. I found that it really was quite intrusive and not at all acceptable for a premium vehicle like this. The culprit is two-fold: Firstly, that big exposed belly of the beast raised up higher than the GS offer the road, and the larger wheels, means more turbulent under-chassis air flow, allied to large footprint and tyre noise. Secondly, the SUV lacks the rear bulkhead of a traditional saloon, so that intrusiveness feeds in from both front and back into the cabin, although mainly from the rear. It needs better chassis damping to control noise (are you listening Lexus?). There are elastomer damping compounds about that are very effective, although they will increase mass, by possibly 50Kg or so, to adequately treat the noise, but to my mind, that is a price worth paying. Just up-rate the motors and batteries for greater electrical shove. I'd happily pay the premium for slightly more power and a quiet cabin. Not all SUVs are the same. Merc manage it with their premium SUVs and even the Kias aren't that bad! All said and done, neither would tempt me away from our GS unless they were the Premium or F-Sport models with better road manners (in the case of the RX) and providing the level of comfort and toys that we now have. The additional real world 10mpg alone isn't enough to justify a change. We can see ourselves trading up for a Premium RX as an everyday car and living with the compromises for the increased practicality and space plus comfort. We'll see. For now, we're happy with the old GS.

Thanks for your response Boddney. Yes, I am really approaching this from looking backwards to what I already have if that makes sense? Certainly if I was in the market for a limo-class car, I'd be looking at an LX 430, a car so well made, that it made the company little profit, if any, as a statement piece. You can pick one up for well under £10K, and probably closer to £5K if you look hard enough. That's value. I have just returned from a test drive of both the RX and the GS. They held a few unexpected surprises, and a few things that I probably expected. To start with the newer GS, it was a surprisingly quiet and refined drive, quieter I think than the old model with improved suspension, brakes and handling (big tick all round for driving then). Handling was very good and performance brisker than it felt, as the CVT does mask rapid progress over the standard 6 speed auto. However, it lacked both the space and comfort of the older model, and had less on-board goodies. Our SE has a Mark Levinson surround sound audio package as standard, rear sunshade, folding mirrors, memory seats with ventilation as well as heating, and a huge boot. The newer car has none of those things and the seating I found too firm for my liking in the Lux model. The seat adjustments also weren't as comprehensive. The RX felt more like the older GS in the cabin, more familiar and way more comfortable. In fact, it was possibly the most comfortable vehicle that I've ever sat in. I didn't like the intrusive road noise nor the rather choppy suspension, but remembering it's an SUV weighing in at over two tons, suspension has to be firm to prevent excessive body-roll. The surprise was the comfort, the roomy bright cabin, and for a large vehicle, it really felt more like a super-mini to drive. Loads of load space. What was disappointing was the lack of shove. I tried a simulated overtake, going from 30 to 50mph on an empty stretch of A-road. It seemed to take an age compared with either of the GS models (ie new or old), made a lot of noise and fuss, a little like stepping off a sports-bike and throwing your leg over a Harley...lots of noise but little action! To be fair, it wasn't very scientific and we didn't even time both tests...it just felt a lot slower than a 295 BHP vehicle had any right to, especially one with close on 135BHP/ton power-to-weight ratio. We have a 2007 Skoda Fabia diesel hatch which would leave it for dead in a straight line. On the positive side, it was very flexible in layout, front and rear, had loads of cubby-spaces and rear load room although height is compromised. Also, it didn't under-steer as much as I expected it to, bearing in mind it's a FWD with a 3.5 litre lump sat over the wheels, although it was still apparent because turn in wasn't as sharp as either GS model. It tracked well though and steering was light and positive. Of the two, we're leaning towards the RX, because as an every day car, we can live with its compromises but we can't justify the compromises of the newer GS, at least in "Lux'" specification. The performance alone was no justification or reason for trading "up". You nailed it with looking backwards. The new GS to my mind is a trade down in specification and in comfort unless one pulls out a larger wad of notes for the Premium or F-Sport models. I guess in conclusion, we wouldn't change our 2007 GS 300 for either of the models test driven. It feels faster, more refined overall, has more space than the newer one, is as well screwed together ( if not better). We could be tempted to a premier or F-Sport version of the newer GS or the RX. My guess is that if we re-asses things like safe overtaking shove on the RX and give it a fairer workout, and it delivers, we'd go down that route for the simple reason that it offered far better comfort and space for no more money. Time will tell. Lexus will be contacting us in due course when an appropriate model turns up, but for now, we're very happy with our 2007 "banger"! Wwe'd have to re-assess realistic budget though for the trade up to a Premier or F-Sport, so that makes the decision more difficult. It's that or we look at something with a few more miles on the clock.

I don't know if this is the best place to post the question, so I've posted it both here and in the GS section. My wife and I are considering buying a newer Lexus but aren't yet sold on the idea unless there's benefit in doing so. We like our GS300 (2007 model SE), and over the past two years have sunk a lot of money into it. Fair to say, it has not (unusually) been the most reliable car we've owned (that was a merc C220 diesel estate which did star-ship mileage with no real issues whatsoever bar a few faulty sensors). In 18 months on a car bought with just 64K miles, it's had a couple of shock absorbers, a complete new cat back exhaust, two new HID bulbs (£80 odd plus vat and fitting each), new TPMS valves (£383 just for the valves), a reflash of the ECU because the boot opener packed in for no reason anyone understands, a complete engine out and top end strip and rebuild to replace a failed hydraulic tappet (the lot were done....cost £3200), wheels refurb due to flaking finish (£340) and professional front end respray due to bubbling of paint on bonnet (£770). Fair to say, we're a bit fed up with the expense, and whilst we accept any 10 year old car will need stuff doing....this one has needed too much stuff doing to justify its reliability reputation. On the positive side, it's reasonably frugal for what it is, roomy, with a huge boot and ski flap, handles very well for the size, very comfy, and runs perfectly (now!) and performance is brisk with safe overtakes a breeze when needed. It is also refined and very quiet in the cabin and has loads of kit. We've only covered 12K miles in it since we've bought it. I am considering whether to move to the newer GS450H for the advances in Lexus trickle-down technology and reliability so duly visited the dealership and had a quick look at a 450H Lux car. My first impressions weren't overly favourable if honest. It seemed to have less space in the cabin and in the back, the boot was considerably smaller (battery housing), and most disappointingly, the levels of kit and comfort that we enjoy in the GS300 just aren't there except as options! Come on Lexus, what re you playing at? You charge close on £50K for a new GS and offer less kit as standard than the outgoing GS300...really? "What sort of way is that to treat your customers?" was the first thought followed by "greed". No passenger 10 way adjustable memory seats (no driver 10-way seats for that matter); no premium sound system (which I do have in mine), less rear leg room, no through "ski flap" (pesky batteries again) but a considerably larger price tag and really only marginally better real world fuel consumption. I was left scratching my head. I know that I will have missed something, if not a lot here, so am inviting you GS450h drivers to fill me in...educate me, and convince me...where's the draw here? What is the convincing factor? Is it that much better to drive, day to day, is it quieter, faster and safer on over-takes? Does it deliver its extra-urban claimed fuel efficiency? Is it more reliable and is it more comfortable? Why should a Mk3/4 GS300 owner exchange for a newer model? Must admit, I am struggling to see the hook here. I can't stretch to a low miles F-Sport (a different car with a definite draw....performance and handling), nor to a Premium version (which only has what mine seems to have as standard anyway). Your comments/observations invited. I'd love to hear your stories and what you think is great about the new models. I am considering a low miles 2012 to 2014 Lux spec model if I decide to go that route. The second part of this is the alternative. As I do need the boot space (young family plus my hobbies need the boot space). The RX450h is the obvious choice...that is until you scratch beneath the surface. FWD instead of RWD (black mark?). Rear motor not strong enough for genuine off road ability (black mark?); Very steep price tag for what's on offer....compared with a Range Rover or say Land Rover disco sport which it closer competes with, the Landy offers way more comfort and kit. X3/5 better to drive and Merc GLS, whilst 10K pricier is arguably worth the extra if you had the cash. So whilst I love the seating position in the RX, and regard it as very comfortable (I have looked at one, again in Lux spec), there appear to be downsides. Handling isn't meant to be a strong point, but most surprisingly, there are reports that it isn't capable of rapid progress for safe overtaking due to struggling with the additional weight. I'm unsure why it doesn't come with the same power 450H powerplants as the GS, which by comparison can't be accused of being a slouch. I can forgive the fact that it'll never match a saloon in the handling stakes. I can overlook the FWD only option on 450 guise if it drives ok, but I couldn't overlook a 2 tonne plus vehicle with a large petrol hybrid powerplant that can't safely overtake if the opportunity exists except where a mile straight is concerned. I did like the rear load space, the finish, the room and the comfort, so again, unless I'm missing something, is that what this one's about...just the comfort and load space but forget any pretence of modest performance or ride quality? Love to hear from those with feedback. If I did change my GS to another lexus, it would only be for one of the above two models. The IS is simply too small with insufficient load space and the test drives I've had revealed a sound handling decent motorcar, utterly ruined by a very small but very stupid oversight...no adjustability of the seat headrests resulting in my neck aching unless the seat was set too far reclined for comfort. I couldn't live with that, nor with the lack of family space. I'm struggling here...do I continue to pour money into the old GS, and rely on the powerplant taking me to 300K miles, accepting that suspension, brakes and other consumables will all need costly replacement in due course, plus put up with increased punitive road fund tax and higher running costs, or is there a genuine case for going the a 450 hybrid? Sorry for the long post. Just looking for real world feedback on the issues which I have found when seriously looking for an excuse to part with hard earned to change up. The Merc E350 estate or Jag XF are both looking mighty tempting at the minute as the better alternatives but I hope that the Lexus models have something that I'm missing with my initial observations. I am test driving both so will be better able to judge but that's no substitute for feedback from some of you longer term owners. I would like to stay in the "Lexus Club" as the service offered by Listers is second to none by my own experiences.

I don't know if this is the best place to post the question, so I've posted it both here and in the RX section. My wife and I are considering buying a newer Lexus but aren't yet sold on the idea unless there's benefit in doing so. We like our GS300 (2007 model SE), and over the past two years have sunk a lot of money into it. Fair to say, it has not (unusually) been the most reliable car we've owned (that was a merc C220 diesel estate which did star- ship mileage with no real issues whatsoever bar a few faulty sensors). In 18 months on a car bought with just 64K miles, it's had a couple of shock absorbers, a complete new cat back exhaust, two new HID bulbs (£80 odd plus vat and fitting each), new TPMS valves (£383 just for the valves), a reflash of the ECU because the boot opener packed in for no reason anyone understands, a complete engine out and top end strip and rebuild to replace a failed hydraulic tappet (the lot were done....cost £3200), wheels refurb due to flaking finish (£340) and professional front end respray due to bubbling of paint on bonnet (£770). Fair to say, we're a bit fed up with the expense, and whilst we accept any 10 year old car will need stuff doing....this one has needed too much stuff doing to justify its reliability reputation. On the positive side, it's reasonably frugal for what it is, roomy, with a huge boot and ski flap, handles very well for the size, very comfy, and runs perfectly (now!) and performance is brisk with safe overtakes a breeze when needed. It is also refined and very quiet in the cabin and has loads of kit. We've only covered 12K miles in it since we've bought it. I am considering whether to move to the newer GS450H for the advances in Lexus trickle-down technology and reliability so duly visited the dealership and had a quick look at a 450H Lux car. My first impressions weren't overly favourable if honest. It seemed to have less space in the cabin and in the back, the boot was considerably smaller (battery housing), and most disappointingly, the levels of kit and comfort that we enjoy in the GS300 just aren't there except as options! Come on Lexus, what re you playing at? You charge close on £50K for a new GS and offer less kit as standard than the outgoing GS300...really? "What sort of way is that to treat your customers?" was the first thought followed by "greed". No passenger 10 way adjustable memory seats (no driver 10-way seats for that matter); no premium sound system (which I do have in mine), less rear leg room, no through "ski flap" (pesky batteries again) but a considerably larger price tag and really only marginally better real world fuel consumption. I was left scratching my head. I know that I will have missed something, if not a lot here, so am inviting you GS450h drivers to fill me in...educate me, and convince me...where's the draw here? What is the convincing factor? Is it that much better to drive, day to day, is it quieter, faster and safer on over-takes? Does it deliver its extra-urban claimed fuel efficiency? Is it more reliable and is it more comfortable? Why should a Mk3/4 GS300 owner exchange for a newer model? Must admit, I am struggling to see the hook here. I can't stretch to a low miles F-Sport (a different car with a definite draw....performance and handling), nor to a Premium version (which only has what mine seems to have as standard anyway). Your comments/observations invited. I'd love to hear your stories and what you think is great about the new models. I am considering a low miles 2012 to 2014 Lux spec model if I decide to go that route. The second part of this is the alternative. As I do need the boot space (young family plus my hobbies need the boot space). The RX450h is the obvious choice...that is until you scratch beneath the surface. FWD instead of RWD (black mark?). Rear motor not strong enough for genuine off road ability (black mark?); Very steep price tag for what's on offer....compared with a Range Rover or say Land Rover disco sport which it closer competes with, the Landy offers way more comfort and kit. X3/5 better to drive and Merc GLS, whilst 10K pricier is arguably worth the extra if you had the cash. So whilst I love the seating position in the RX, and regard it as very comfortable (I have looked at one, again in Lux spec), there appear to be downsides. Handling isn't meant to be a strong point, but most surprisingly, there are reports that it isn't capable of rapid progress for safe overtaking due to struggling with the additional weight. I'm unsure why it doesn't come with the same power 450H powerplants as the GS, which by comparison can't be accused of being a slouch. I can forgive the fact that it'll never match a saloon in the handling stakes. I can overlook the FWD only option on 450 guise if it drives ok, but I couldn't overlook a 2 tonne plus vehicle with a large petrol hybrid powerplant that can't safely overtake if the opportunity exists except where a mile straight is concerned. I did like the rear load space, the finish, the room and the comfort, so again, unless I'm missing something, is that what this one's about...just the comfort and load space but forget any pretence of modest performance or ride quality? Love to hear from those with feedback. If I did change my GS to another lexus, it would only be for one of the above two models. The IS is simply too small with insufficient load space and the test drives I've had revealed a sound handling decent motorcar, utterly ruined by a very small but very stupid oversight...no adjustability of the seat headrests resulting in my neck aching unless the seat was set too far reclined for comfort. I couldn't live with that, nor with the lack of family space. I'm struggling here...do I continue to pour money into the old GS, and rely on the powerplant taking me to 300K miles, accepting that suspension, brakes and other consumables will all need costly replacement in due course, plus put up with increased punitive road fund tax and higher running costs, or is there a genuine case for going the a 450 hybrid? Sorry for the long post. Just looking for real world feedback on the issues which I have found when seriously looking for an excuse to part with hard earned to change up. The Merc E350 estate or Jag XF are both looking mighty tempting at the minute as the better alternatives but I hope that the Lexus models have something that I'm missing with my initial observations. I am test driving both so will be better able to judge but that's no substitute for feedback from some of you longer term owners. I would like to stay in the "Lexus Club" as the service offered by Listers is second to none by my own experiences.