IS250 Auto vs Manual

[HoofHearted]

My search for an IS250 is well documented. 
 

having an absolute nightmare trying to find the right one and there is one that has come up near me that is a manual. Had pretty much everybody on here tell me an auto is the one to go for and whilst I’d prefer that I’m starting to get impatient.

just looking for input from anybody who has or has had a manual. Gearbox/clutch lifespan, things to look for. Still fun to drive? 
 

thanks in advance.

[Linas.P]

I don't have manual, but I have driven one and the points related to manual are as well quite well documented and common knowledge on forum. 

First of all is the road tax - automatic was £325 and manual was £585 last time I have checked, probably more now. At least for me it makes no sense to pay same road tax for IS-F as it costs to run IS250 manual.

Second point is reliability and cost of maintenance, manual gearbox just costs more - fluid in manual gearbox needs to be replaced every 40k miles and is expensive job, whereas in theory automatic does no need it at all (but I would say at least once in 100k miles would be good idea) - so in short you will need to spend £400-£600 to replace fluid 2.5 times more often on manual. Same for clutch and DMF - neither exists on automatic, so you don't need to worry about them, on manual it is £1200 just in parts.

Third point - how fun it is to drive... I would argue manual is more fun if you know what you doing, but particular one fitted in IS250 just doesn't suit the car as well as automatic, doesn't suit UK speeds either. So automatic in this case suits the car more and feels smoother and more luxurious overall, gear ratios are better for UK and I would argue it is even more economical where it matters. Manual is "more fun" - but IS250 isn't a sports car and doesn't really benefit from additional "control" you get from manual, but suffers from worse economy and other manual gearbox related issues. 

I mean sure - if you plan to use IS250 as cheap drift car platform, fit it with rock hard coilovers, change suspension geometry, fit LSD, strip the interior and trash it on the track... then sure manual is the way to go. But for daily driving, comfortable, reliable, entry-luxury car the automatic just makes more sense. 

[HoofHearted]

11 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I don't have manual, but I have driven one and the points related to manual are as well quite well documented and common knowledge on forum. 

First of all is the road tax - automatic was £325 and manual was £585 last time I have checked, probably more now. At least for me it makes no sense to pay same road tax for IS-F as it costs to run IS250 manual.

Second point is reliability and cost of maintenance, manual gearbox just costs more - fluid in manual gearbox needs to be replaced every 40k miles and is expensive job, whereas in theory automatic does no need it at all (but I would say at least once in 100k miles would be good idea) - so in short you will need to spend £400-£600 to replace fluid 2.5 times more often on manual. Same for clutch and DMF - neither exists on automatic, so you don't need to worry about them, on manual it is £1200 just in parts.

Third point - how fun it is to drive... I would argue manual is more fun if you know what you doing, but particular one fitted in IS250 just doesn't suit the car as well as automatic, doesn't suit UK speeds either. So automatic in this case suits the car more and feels smoother and more luxurious overall, gear ratios are better for UK and I would argue it is even more economical where it matters. Manual is "more fun" - but IS250 isn't a sports car and doesn't really benefit from additional "control" you get from manual, but suffers from worse economy and other manual gearbox related issues. 

I mean sure - if you plan to use IS250 as cheap drift car platform, fit it with rock hard coilovers, change suspension geometry, fit LSD, strip the interior and trash it on the track... then sure manual is the way to go. But for daily driving, comfortable, reliable, entry-luxury car the automatic just makes more sense. 

It’s the increased maintenance i was worried about. Reading this I’ll probably bide my time and wait for an auto. 
 

just fed up with waiting that’s all.

 

thanks for the input mate.

[H3XME]

29 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

My search for an IS250 is well documented. 
 

having an absolute nightmare trying to find the right one and there is one that has come up near me that is a manual. Had pretty much everybody on here tell me an auto is the one to go for and whilst I’d prefer that I’m starting to get impatient.

just looking for input from anybody who has or has had a manual. Gearbox/clutch lifespan, things to look for. Still fun to drive? 
 

thanks in advance.

It's completely up to you. I'd just go out and drive both, see what you like. 3 of my friends have IS250 automatics.. I have a manual because I take it drifting while it's my daily. I like the auto-boxes in these to be honest, if it wasn't my only car (that I also take drifting) I'd happily go for auto, but that's just my personal preference. If you are a sensible driver who doesn't bother getting the back end out, go for auto, it suits the overall Lexus lifestyle better 😄 and it's cheaper too, like Linas says. It's just over £300 for road tax, whereas 2006+ manuals are £500+. In terms of reliability, I had my clutch changed at 140k miles for the first ever time and the DMF was still fine, so it cost me about £400. They will always push you to change the flywheel too, but flywheel is around £1000 from Lexus... crazy money, so if it's fine, there's no point replacing it.

I disagree with Linas in regards to fuel economy. My car does around 43mpg on the run @70mph and around town it's 23mpg but I have an aftermarket exhaust and I want to hear it. My mate's automatic gets ~25mpg around town but he just cruises, doesn't drive to hear the exhaust even though mine comes to life at only 2,500RPM.

[Guest bigbullhead]

Mine is for sale 😉😉

[Linas.P]

Re fuel economy - the most noticeable difference is motorway and it has nothing to do with how you drive it, just gearing. The best I got from automatic was 48MPG, but truth to be told I never drive @70MPH, city was ~26-28MPG. When it comes to city driving then I think manual could be as economical as automatic provided driver changes all gears perfectly all the time. So in theory automatic is slightly more economical, in practice automatic it depends on what sort of driving you doing and how well you shift with manual and that could be anywhere from slightly less economical to significantly less economical. Just to be clear - I am not saying difference is significant - few % at most, but in favour of automatic. 

[eleveneleven]

I've driven the IS220D (manual) if its the same gearbox the Manual in these feels like something you'd get in a van quite sloppy, doesn't feel sporty or luxurious. Only advantage (if you're not going to be drifting it) is that you have access to all the cars power when you want it. The auto likes to shuffle through the gears as quickly as possible. 

The auto does has a manual gear change function via the gearstick or paddles on the steering wheel. It's not great to be honest, gearbox is a little slow to react and it'll still change gears automatically at higher revs but it's an option if you need it or just fancy a change sometimes. There's also a switch (PWR) that makes the car hold gears for longer. 

and as pointed out, less maintenance on the auto, and cheaper to tax.

OP: Have you considered a GS300? bigger car, slightly bigger engine (similar fuel economy to 250) but a more comfortable ride overall. Insurance costs should be pretty much the same (£10 difference for me) same VED cost as a manual 250.  

[HoofHearted]

47 minutes ago, bigbullhead said:

Mine is for sale 😉😉

Seen yours in the sellers corner mate. Mileage is a bit high as I’m hoping to have the next car I buy for a few years. Shame too as the colour and pretty much everything else about it is bang on what I’m looking for! 

[HoofHearted]

17 minutes ago, eleveneleven said:

I've driven the IS220D (manual) if its the same gearbox the Manual in these feels like something you'd get in a van quite sloppy, doesn't feel sporty or luxurious. Only advantage (if you're not going to be drifting it) is that you have access to all the cars power when you want it. The auto likes to shuffle through the gears as quickly as possible. 

The auto does has a manual gear change function via the gearstick or paddles on the steering wheel. It's not great to be honest, gearbox is a little slow to react and it'll still change gears automatically at higher revs but it's an option if you need it or just fancy a change sometimes. There's also a switch (PWR) that makes the car hold gears for longer. 

and as pointed out, less maintenance on the auto, and cheaper to tax.

OP: Have you considered a GS300? bigger car, slightly bigger engine (similar fuel economy to 250) but a more comfortable ride overall. Insurance costs should be pretty much the same (£10 difference for me) same VED cost as a manual 250.  

This is the other aspect of it. I’ve watched YouTube videos of used 250s and can’t help but grin like a Cheshire Cat at how refined they are don’t think I’d feel that way about a manual in all honesty. 
 

ive got my heart set on an IS mate absolutely love the shape of them.

[Linas.P]

As long as car is maintained you don't need to worry about mileage on IS250. My last one was nearly 200k miles (now it is well over that) and it never had any major issues. In other hand low mileage car could be just as much headache and even more if not maintained. For these cars (and most cars) maintenance is everything - not mileage. 

[Tam Templeton]

I have a manual sports model ,the gearbox is excellent ,gear selection the best in any car I've ever owned .( That's a lot !! ) I drive the car to my destination not the other way round .road tax is higher no rhyme or reason but that's why manuals tend to be cheaper to buy .I live in Kilmarnock you are welcome to come and see if you like it .

 

 

[HoofHearted]

5 hours ago, Linas.P said:

As long as car is maintained you don't need to worry about mileage on IS250. My last one was nearly 200k miles (now it is well over that) and it never had any major issues. In other hand low mileage car could be just as much headache and even more if not maintained. For these cars (and most cars) maintenance is everything - not mileage. 

Heard a lot of people say this in fairness. Just for somebody not mechanically minded in the slightest low mileage can be reassuring even if it is purely a placebo effect.

[HoofHearted]

5 hours ago, Tam Templeton said:

I have a manual sports model ,the gearbox is excellent ,gear selection the best in any car I've ever owned .( That's a lot !! ) I drive the car to my destination not the other way round .road tax is higher no rhyme or reason but that's why manuals tend to be cheaper to buy .I live in Kilmarnock you are welcome to come and see if you like it .

 

 

I’ll send you a DM mate. 

[Linas.P]

57 minutes ago, HoofHearted said:

Heard a lot of people say this in fairness. Just for somebody not mechanically minded in the slightest low mileage can be reassuring even if it is purely a placebo effect.

That is fair enough - all things being equal, lower mileage cars should be in better condition, sadly in practice it is hardly ever that simple. For example I got IS250 from auction which is lower miles (100k), but it absolute pile of **** - never washed, never serviced and in terrible shape. I guess what I am saying - don't falsely believe that lower mileage automatically means good condition, you need to check to validate it is actually the case. Besides 150k is no "high-mileage" for 15 years old car, because you looking at ~2008 car you should expect average one to be around ~130k, I think in UK average mileage is somewhat lower ~8.5k/year, so you looking at 110k in best case scenario. Finally, car likes to be driven on long distance - car which was doing loads of miles on motorway will always be in way better shape than car which was driven on short journeys in the city, or worse was "owned by pensioner" who drove to the church only 10 miles on Sundays. In my experience these hyper low mile cars are even worse condition than high mileage ones, with all rubbers and seals perished, underside rusted and so on, because they were sitting still a lot. 

[Dcisfsport]

Have you come across this yet?

 

https://www.woodcroftmotors.co.uk/cars/lexus/is/2.5/585805/

[wharfhouse]

11 hours ago, Linas.P said:

That is fair enough - all things being equal, lower mileage cars should be in better condition, sadly in practice it is hardly ever that simple. For example I got IS250 from auction which is lower miles (100k), but it absolute pile of **** - never washed, never serviced and in terrible shape. I guess what I am saying - don't falsely believe that lower mileage automatically means good condition, you need to check to validate it is actually the case. Besides 150k is no "high-mileage" for 15 years old car, because you looking at ~2008 car you should expect average one to be around ~130k, I think in UK average mileage is somewhat lower ~8.5k/year, so you looking at 110k in best case scenario. Finally, car likes to be driven on long distance - car which was doing loads of miles on motorway will always be in way better shape than car which was driven on short journeys in the city, or worse was "owned by pensioner" who drove to the church only 10 miles on Sundays. In my experience these hyper low mile cars are even worse condition than high mileage ones, with all rubbers and seals perished, underside rusted and so on, because they were sitting still a lot. 

Totally agree with this - I've run many of my cars to well over 100k miles (often from new or nearly new) and one to over 200k miles. All have been maintained according to the brands service schedules (but nothing extra) often by franchised dealers and any maintenance items done as needed. Much of my mileage was motorway miles and the cars were used very regularly and were all very reliable. Cars are designed for regular use and doing low mileages and low speeds often causes many more problems than regular high mileage use when properly maintained. 

[HoofHearted]

5 hours ago, Dcisfsport said:

Have you come across this yet?

 

https://www.woodcroftmotors.co.uk/cars/lexus/is/2.5/585805/

Sadly way out with my budget. An absolute diamond of a motor though.

[Linas.P]

Absolutely ridiculous price for 11 years old car, nobody should be paying this when mk3 can be had for less. This is one of the issues trying to find excessively low mileage examples - people think that based on low mileage alone they can overcharge.

Just for some reference - I have bought 2008 IS250 in 2014 for £3950. So that was 6 years old car for £4k, now these guys are expecting nearly £11k for 11 years old car. Sure inflation is the thing and current used car market is inflated even further, but that car is in no way shape or form is worth £11k. I would say £7-8k would be expensive, but maybe acceptable if the car is in really perfect shape and in current crazy market. It doesn't take much to run valuation and confirm that -sale price comes up as £8400 from dealer i.e. if Lexus themselves would be selling the car it would be that. From third party I would expect to pay closer to £7k, privately probably 6k - because PX range is like £5200-6400.

So it is not about being able to afford the car, it is just silly price. I don't believe it is ever going to be sold at this price unless they found somebody completely clueless. 

[wharfhouse]

19 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Absolutely ridiculous price for 11 years old car, nobody should be paying this when mk3 can be had for less. This is one of the issues trying to find excessively low mileage examples - people think that based on low mileage alone they can overcharge.

Just for some reference - I have bought 2008 IS250 in 2014 for £3950. So that was 6 years old car for £4k, now these guys are expecting nearly £11k for 11 years old car. Sure inflation is the thing and current used car market is inflated even further, but that car is in no way shape or form is worth £11k. I would say £7-8k would be expensive, but maybe acceptable if the car is in really perfect shape and in current crazy market. It doesn't take much to run valuation and confirm that -sale price comes up as £8400 from dealer i.e. if Lexus themselves would be selling the car it would be that. From third party I would expect to pay closer to £7k, privately probably 6k - because PX range is like £5200-6400.

So it is not about being able to afford the car, it is just silly price. I don't believe it is ever going to be sold at this price unless they found somebody completely clueless. 

Crazy priced market - on Lexus own Used Cars website nationally there are three IS250 (Mark II, not Mark III) for sale through Lexus dealers:

An SE-I Auto 2009 with 75Kmiles at £7,900

An Advance Auto 2011 with 65K miles at £10,716

An SE-L Auto 2008 with 19K miles (that's what you call low mileage...) at £14,950

IS Mark 3 lowest price is £14,995 (and that's base SE trim, 2014 with 72K miles)...

 

[ahmed-abrar]

nice looking example, btw is the boot lip available as an add on ?

[eleveneleven]

4 hours ago, ahmed-abrar said:

nice looking example, btw is the boot lip available as an add on ?

Yes, I've seen them being sold on Ebay 

[Lex_utor]

On 1/17/2022 at 2:00 PM, Tam Templeton said:

I have a manual sports model ,the gearbox is excellent ,gear selection the best in any car I've ever owned .( That's a lot !! ) I drive the car to my destination not the other way round .road tax is higher no rhyme or reason but that's why manuals tend to be cheaper to buy .I live in Kilmarnock you are welcome to come and see if you like it .

 

 

Here's another positive feedback for the manual. I bought a manual and looked for one quite a while, as they are very rare. Specially around my neck of the woods.  When you find one they command a premium in price too. Most likely because it's the only real option to a manual 3 series.  When I found mine I had basically given up finding a manual. I had test driven the IS220D and IS250 autos. But I wanted a petrol manual. 

I read all the comments on how the auto fits the car better, about the manual gearbox not being a great one, higher maintenance and petrol costs etc. Didn't care at all for these comments once I drove the car. I bought it on the spot basically. 

Maybe because I set my expectations accordingly and didn't expect a sports car. But I find the car great! I love driving it. I love shifting it! I love the sound it makes when the RPM gets higher, so love dropping a gear when I'm driving. I see nothing wrong at all with the manual box, which by the way is not the same one as in the IS220D.  I also don't find the car underpowered at all as many will say the IS250 is. It's enough poke to shove me back in the seat when I drop a gear or just hit the pedal hard. 

All together after reading all the reports I was really surprised. It's almost as if they drove a different car that I'm driving. It's a lot of fun, drives great, shifts great, plenty quick, specially with the manual box. 

Granted the car has a couple of very mild mods. A sports exhaust and a sports intake. But that is it. I can't think that would totally transform the car. The rest I was told is totally stock. The sound is different though. Sounds great while an auto IS250 I drove when looking I could barely hear the engine even if I hit it hard. It had a stock exhaust. But I doubt the mods are adding any perceptible power. So I must disagree the car is really underpowered. 

I'm very happy. Again, maybe because I had realistic expectations and didn't expect a sports cars. It isn't. But no complains. And I have owned cars such as RX7 turbo, RX8, Porches 944 and 928 etc.

Now of course it neither handles or drives like the above sports cars. But I truly don't understand the complains about the manual box. Or the complains of power and handling by BMW types.  As a luxury saloon which lets you have some fun while driving in comfort, the manual is great. Looks 1000x better than a 3 series too! :) 

[Linas.P]

1 hour ago, Lex_utor said:

Now of course it neither handles or drives like the above sports cars. But I truly don't understand the complains about the manual box. Or the complains of power and handling by BMW types.  As a luxury saloon which lets you have some fun while driving in comfort, the manual is great. Looks 1000x better than a 3 series too! 🙂

Nothing exists in isolation, so nobody is saying that IS250 Manual or any particular car is all bad or all good. The simple case is that if there is something better, then automatically something else is worse. 

In UK owning manual your are penalised right away by tax (and this is by the way strange exception) and then having manual in the country with most congested roads in the Europe is no fun either. I said before that driving manual is more fun, but on balance on probabilities you going to find auto in more useful and easier to live with.

Strangely in UK it is opposite, you can get manual for 30% less compared to auto, but the saving is not enough when annual tax is almost double.

As for IS250 being underpowered, again compared to what? Contemporary E90 325i? certainly not... but it is not as fast as 330i or IS350. I think for it's time (2006) IS250 was great on both power and economy. As well we need to look into the context of what it replaced - it was more fuel efficient than IS200 and faster than IS300, so it was great. It was as well comparably fast to BMW325i, but more economical and sounded way better, although BMW handled better.  Anyhow - how fast or slow it is matter of context and perspective. 

[Tam Templeton]

I think difference in road tax for a manual is +£245 a year . Around 21/2 hours labour at Lexus dealers . But auto or manual can be expensive on repairs .( Just like any car these days ) 

 

[Linas.P]

Again matter of perspective. IS-F which is 5L V8 with 471HP costs about same to tax as manual IS250. As well manuals needs a lot more attention than autos. I know recently there were few thread of gearbox solenoids and similar stuff, but we need to recognise that these cars are now 16 years old and many have over 150k miles. Many have not seen anything done with their boxes either... whereas in same time it would have been at least clutch work on manual, 3x fluid changes and maybe some odd DMF. Again that is not to say manual gearbox is bad, but it is certainly more costly... and in London trust me I don't want to be sitting for hour in standstill traffic with manual of any kind.