Bluemarlin

Ordinarily I might consider that if the cat ever got stolen, but it would probably invalidate the Lexus extended warranty..

I use Gummi Pflege on the rubber seals, but 303 aerospace on the rubber hoses and rest of the engine bay. After cleaning everying up it just needs spraying on and then left to dry, no buffing/wiping down needed.

Hi Chris, was that these guys: https://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/264564924596?hash=item3d994c60b4:g:81sAAOSwk2Je4piT&amdata=enc%3AAQAIAAAA8CEqFK3yrZv7hg9A%2FwWBM7hPFSg2iuz1c0QOyUYDwFmqdHx%2By69FK4e4lTpw4KtKObG65TkT3iROYZ78238aQMqDTmijJ55EmJh8GNYyp189Z6bZ1tcNFgY0hUI6ktzVoNnbiCRVjAr%2BuA9XBwFL4fdEo9npRSAFCypF5vpo%2BVlapxWsHrI3T0gGR67hw2KR%2BZ4bITO%2FCFgR37J9mcSPHGQkD9ajwgzHYSqjzDHTo463%2Bn6sr73t58blen0xmw4NXotc30%2FiGWUpcQQ6RL19LVak0A%2F5%2FNQ9qyaOABMm6kGi9Vl0Dc6xLQNoqa6SehBmOg%3D%3D|tkp%3ABFBMqrng7Ixi I've been thinking about using them myself, so your experience of them is helpful.

I woud run a mile! The fact that he allowed the brakes to get so bad is not a good sign, but they can be easily fixed. However, there are multiple areas of corrosion which, whilst not an MOT failure yet, could soon become one if not (expensively) cleaned up and treated. Rust doesn't go away, it gets progressivelyy worse. In my experience, once it gets to the stage this one's at then you'll be forever having to deal with it at each MOT. Chances are there's also more corrosion in the sills and wheel arches and places you can't see. My previous car had far fewer corrosion advisories and it cost me a lot each year to keep patching it up. It was a shame, as it drove like new Walk away, there are much better cars out there.

I know it's common for people to not want to claim for such things on insurance but, for what sounds like an expensive repair, it seems pointless to pay for insurance and then not use it.

As a matter of interest, which (if any) cars can't be stolen easily, and why not?

The £10 charge is usually for the insurance excess waiver, so if they don't charge just make sure you're not liable for any insurance excess if you crash.

Have you checked to see if there actually has been water ingress to the hybrid battery? It's not uncommon if your sunroof drains have been blocked, or water has got in via a number of areas that can leak. If you have had a leak and water has got to the wiring, it's quite possible that wires could be corroded even though you can't see the extent of it. The water can wick up the wires and corrode inside the insulation, I've seen corrosion several feet inside the insulation on boat wiring. Here's a couple of videos on leaks in the RX 400h that you might find helpful:

Variable speed limits are less about safety and more about traffic flow. For example, on a busy motorway like the M25, it makes no sense for traffic to travel along at 70 mph, only to then hit a traffic jam and have to crawl along at 5 mph for several miles. On what might seem like a relatively free flowing motorway, one person hitting their brakes can have a knock on effect that results in a traffic jam some way behind it; so it's better to slow the approching traffic and spread them out, than let them all rush into a jam at 70 mph, thus making it bigger. Variable speed limits are based on looking ahead at flow, and then calculating what speed would allow the most cars through a particular stretch, whilst maintaining a constant speed. As such, temporarily slowing things down to 60, or even 50, keeps things moving and prevents everyone from grinding to a halt. That's the theory anyway. Of course it's not perfect, and doesn't always work as planned, but that's probably down to operator error or the algorithms, rather than malice. In truth, it's better for both the road operators and motorists to move as many cars as possible over a given distance, and my experience is that it mostly works ok. Of course the problem is that because it's looking ahead, and attempting to head off anticipated problems, to the motorist it can sometimes appear pointless, as all they see is free flowing traffic and not the slowing down that might be occuring a couple of miles ahead. As such, opinions vary, based on one's emotional make up. I'm fairly unemotional, and so can see the intention and the logical benefits, whilst accepting that nothing's perfect and won't always work. I know others though, who get annoyed by it, and take it personally that they have to slow down for no apparent reason.

To be fair Linas, it seems that Lexus can't win. On the one hand there's a thread about Lexus not doing anything to break into the mainstream market, whereas now, if they launch a car that might well sell in numbers, they're accused of giving in to fashion 🙂

I would suggest that you try using the maps a bit first before spending money on an update. I tried and just couldn't get on with the inbuilt sat nav, and so have found it much easier to use Google maps/Waze/What3Words on my phone.

Perhaps not worse John, but certainly there are differences across countries and cultures. For example, when I did business with American companies, I had to check the contracts line by line, as there was always a clause that could trap you, and they wouldn't heiistate to use it if the situation arose. They saw nothing wrong with getting one up on the other person, as though it was all a battle, and you could only be a winner if there was a loser. On the other hand, with Miiddle Eastern businesses it often needed barely more than handshake, as both parties understood the spirit of the deal, and would honour that with the goal of mutual co-operation and win/win. Trump was right about one thing, he could shoot someone in the middle of Fifth Avenue and his supporters would still vote for him, as long as he gave them what they wanted. We're not as bad as that, but there's a spectrum, and some countries are further along it than others. I don't know if Scandinavians hide it better, but I do know that they trust their politicians and leaders more than we do. In some of their countries they don't even have a government imposed minimum wage. Workers and bosses trust each other enough to feel that neither side will rip the other off, and they negotiate settlements that work for both parties. I don't know if their approach, culture or attitudes are better, but they usually appear towards the top of wordwide happiness tables. I don't know, I'm a little more optimistic about human nature. Just look at those gofundme type sites, where people receive money from complete strangers when disaster strikes. Often it's even the poorest people who are donating. So, I don't think people are inherently selfish and dishonest, I just think that honesty is poorly rewarded compared to dishonesty, and so people aren't incentivised to co-operate and act as a community.

I may be reading it wrong, but that seems to suggest that pads and discs are £295 to replace, including labour. As suggested, it's not clear, so I'd ask the dealer to clariify. I think part of the problem is that for some of these things there's a fixed price from Lexus that includes parts and labour. As such, the dealer may sometimes have to fiddlle with how they enter it into their invoicing/ quoting system, which might require parts and labour to be itemised. In my earlier example, my invoice showed that labour was billed at £76.20, which I doubt was their actual labour rate, and just a figure used so that parts and labour added up to the fixed price repair cost.

Well therein lies the problem for many things, Linas. Certainly it's possible to have less corruption, as the Scandinavian countries seem to have little, along with one or two others. However, is it solely a government problem, or a societal one? Politicians don't spring up from nowhere, they come from the society they represent; so do we live in a society that breeds more people who are prone to be dishonest/corrupt? I certainly feel that we live in one where people appear to be more self interested than community focused. Some people want to drive at whatever speed they like, whilst others feel that to be unsafe; some want to ride bicycles unhindered on main roads, whilst others want nothing to slow their progess in a car; and some want (and do) park wherever they like, regardless of any inconvenience it might cause to others. People want what they want, and are either not aware, or don't care about the impact, needs or wishes of others, who might want the opposite. There's no attempt to say how can I get what I want, whilst recognising and trying to accomodate the wishes of others who want something different. There's no attempt to compromise, just an attempt by each side to grab as much power as needed to get what they want, even if it's at the expense of others. This seems to be the culture we live in and, in such an environment, politicians are driven to appeal to those groups with wants, in order to gain votes. Doing so then gives them disproportionate power, which they can then abuse, because their supporters tolerate it in return for getting their needs met. So yes, we could have honest, non corrupt political leaders, but it wont come from revolution, resistance or protest; in fact the answer is simpler than that. Instead it will come from us choosing our leaders based on their honesty, integrity and genuine desire to try and do what's best for everyone, even if that means we won't always get what we want; instead of voting for those who simply promise to give us what we want. Democracy isn't simply about meeting the needs of those with the loudest voice, or the most votes, it's about serving everyone as best as possible. That requires compromise and therefore sacrifice, not from politicians, but from those who vote them in. Until we realise and accept that, and that we're part of a community,where others needs are as important as our own, then we'll continue to get the politicians we ask for and deserve.

I had a UX as a loan car once and found that it was quite small inside, as well as the boot space, so you might struggle with it if you were barely managing with the CT.

I agree with you that it seems unfair that motorists appear to be a cash cow. However, my point is that, at a simplistic level, a country is managed (locally & nationally) by revenue in and money spent on public services. That revenue can come from general taxation (vat, national and local taxes) as well as road taxes, fines and penalties. Therefore, if general taxes are insufficient to cover general costs, and motoring revenues are spent soley on motoring, then general taxes would have to rise, or public services be cut. Diverting motoring revenue mitigates that need though. Whilst that seems unfair, there is at least an element of choice with regards motoring costs. One can choose a car with a low or zero tax rate, and one can choose not to break the legal speed limit. It's not perfect, but the alternative is to spend it all on roads, and either raise income tax or cut public services. Personally I'd rather see people fined for breaking traffic laws, instead of public services cut or my general taxes rise, but that's just my opinion. I wasn't saying that general taxation is out of scope, just that the inefficiencies and corruption with how it's spent is a separate discussion. You are of course right though, in that it's possible that both roads and public spending could be accomodated more effectively if we increased efficiency and eliminated corruption. However, given that I doubt we'll do that any time soon, my point was based on that being the environment we live in, and therefore playing the hand we're dealt.

I get what you're saying Linas but, as you say, it all comes down to money. Let's say they spend the £40 billion collected on roads, and have active and relevant policing, then that money just gets diverted from somewhere else. That might be healthcare, education or housing, and so the money would just have to be collected in another way. Yes, fines, cameras etc are revenue generators but, unlike private industry, that revenue isn't "profit", that goes to a handful of shareholders, it's public revenue, that gets spent on public services. Every penny not raised in fines and penalties would either have to come from an increase in general taxation, or a reduction in spending on public services. Sure, there's an argument concerning how well or badly public money is spent, but that's a different discussion. In short though, we can have al the things you suggest, but people wouldn't be prepared to pay the high levels of taxation required to deliver them, or we can have the clumsy approach we have now, because that's all we're prepared to pay for. In reality, we could have a crime free society, with few restrictions on how we drive, plenty of places to park, significantly lower levels of sickness, and no homeless or hungry people, but people wouldn't accept the conditions or costs required to delivered that. As a result, governments are left to govern on the basis that most people have neither the interest or ability to see the bigger picture, are self interested, and so have to be managed in a way that accepts that, and attempts to deliver a compromised outcome. The fact that they do that badly is largely a product of the fact that governments are made up of the same type of people they're trying to govern, with all the same faults, flaws and imperfections in how they think and act. Welcome to the human race 🙂

Sounds good in theory, but the reason we have speed limits is precisely because of the number of people who aren't either responsible or capable enough to judge what is and isn't safe. Sadly, when you give people the freedom and responsibility for their own and others safety, it doesn't always end well; which is why you have situations like American school children doing shooter drills and buying bulletproof backpacks. Governments sometimes make stupid decisions in the name of safety, but they're in a constant battle with the stupidity of the people they're trying to govern.

It's a secret, only for those with hydrogen powered cars. If you give me the make, model, registration and VIN of your hydrogen car, then I can let you know your nearest location 🙂

Partly because they can't offer any warranty on the fix as they don't know the provenance of the part. Not sure what their liability is either if the part goes pop. That said, I'm sure there are garages that would do it, but it might take a lot of ringing around to find one. Things is, you'd probably need someone who's done an RX before in order for them to quote over the phone, as I think it either requires a lot of labour, or someone who's familiar with a quicker way to do it. That would likely mean a Lexus specialist, who's less likely to want to fit unknown parts.

No

I don't know anyone in East London, so Japex in Kings Langley (Herts) are the nearest I know to you and are a Toyota/Lexus specialist, so should be able to do it. They also do loan cars if booked in advance.

As mentioned above, I think the quote for £295 includes the parts. When my rears were done labour was itemised at 1.2 hours for a total of £76.20 (ex vat).

I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that they don't hate us, haven't forgottten what the US did, and that it's purely a commercial decision. They may think we suck, but they wouldn't be a party of one in that regard though.

No, it's not the norm. I was charged £245 for rear discs and pads by my Lexus dealer, and that included parts and labour. Labour was itemised at abouut £75 an hour (in vat) but in fact I think there's a fixed price for disc and pads change somehwere on the Lexus website. Are you sure that price didn't include the parts?