Yikes! A Bad Lexus? Is220d - Advice Needed

[Mark W]

I've always been a diesel fan - there's nothing quite like a good torque "shove" in a RWD car...

You need a go in a 430 mate.... ;)

but you shouldn't really need it if you have >100bhp per ton...

Why shouldnt you? - the bhp quoted is available at a defined point - therfore you are only going to hit it at those particular revs....

Edited November 4, 2008 by Mark W

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

I've always been a diesel fan - there's nothing quite like a good torque "shove" in a RWD car...

You need a go in a 430 mate.... ;)

but you shouldn't really need it if you have >100bhp per ton...

Why shouldnt you? - the bhp quoted is available at a defined point - therfore you are only going to hit it at those particular revs....

I did drive the SC430 which was vry nice :-) - loads of kick...

As far as the 100bh/ton is concerned - it would be Ok if the defined poiint was at 3000rpm...but in an IS250 it is too far up the range - so you find yourself thrashing it to make good progress...true VVTi style...

[giorgoXXI]

Having just blasted back up the A19 with ECT Power engaged I can confirm that the 250 Auto is not gutless....just flex that right foot big toe.

Sorry, if I seem to have upset you. It was a very brief drive anyway(15mins in 250, and 15 mins in diesel).

Although both my current cars are petrol, I'm predominately a diesel fan(previously owned Merc 300TD, Volvo XC90, Audi 4.0TDI,BMW 530d), I currently have a budget of upto £25k, so choosing a Lexus is a no brainer ( the percieved quality and reliability of Lexus), having driven both cars back to back, the diesel was my choice, but now having read various member's posts, you can imagine my disappointment with the below par economy and reliability of 220d.

I'll be asking the dealer for an extended test drive in the 250...so watch this space

LOL - no of course you haven't upset me.

My point is that if someone is used to the rather abrupt power delivery of the IS220d that comes in at 2000rpm and then stops at 4000rpm, the petrol model is going to feel different.

However, the IS250 has 204bhp and certainly not short of power but the maximum power is delivered after 4000rpm when the variable valve timing comes into its own. The engine is beautifully smooth and will rev easily past the red line without seeming stressed. You put the car into Sport and use the shifters to keep the revs up and the whole character of the car changes - it feels much faster.

I agree, but it also means that you need to work the engine much harder to get any decent power (or rely on the kickdown). In the diesel however you could be driving normally and if you require power to overtake all you do is put your foot down and the power delivery is almost instant. I was honestly quite dissapointed with the engine of the IS250 (in terms of performance, cause it was excellent when it came to refinement and smoothness).

Not quite sure how the engine in the petrol is working harder. I had a diesel 220d and was constantly coming up to the rev limiter at only 4500 rpm. I never need to go near the rev limiter in the petrol. I think I know which one is less stressed.

What I meant is that, under normal driving conditions, you are never nowhere near the 4000 rpm mark. Therefore if you require suddenly a boost in acceleration, either you wait for the RPM to climb to 4000 or you use the kickdown. On a diesel, you normally drive at 1500 RPM, and if you require that boost then all you do is put your foot down and almost instantly you are within the optimum powerband.

[Mark W]

use kickdown vs put foot down........what is the difference ?

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

use kickdown vs put foot down........what is the difference ?

With the diesel, you don't feel like you're thrashing it's horlicks off all the time...

In the 250 Auto, it can take some time before you hit 4000rpm, having floored the pedal, waited for it to decide what gear you need etc etc. unless you drive it at high revs all of the time...which means manual flappy paddle mode to get control....then the flappy gearchanges aren't quick enough and it ruins the enjoyment....

the manual 250 just feels lethargic, unless you keep at 4250+RPM...then it feels quick enough...

In the diesel, you just squeeze the pedal and as long as you start at over 1850rpm in 2-4, the power just comes in a silky surge...you don't have to floor it like you do in the 250Auto to get anywhere...and you don't have to change cogs...

Also, in the diesel, if you try doing this at revs lower than 1700 you can at times get nothing..zippo...no go at all...and at roundabouts in the rush hour it is almost dangerous...the boost is either on or off...

You have to keep the revs up and drop the clutch. Towards the end I was doing that at busy intersections, and my clutch was starting to judder when warm...it couldn't take it...only after 20k on the clock...

Like I've said, these are not performance saloons - they need to be driven with a gentle style, in which case the 250A wins - it's a proper Lexus...

[giorgoXXI]

use kickdown vs put foot down........what is the difference ?

With the diesel, you don't feel like you're thrashing it's horlicks off all the time...

In the 250 Auto, it can take some time before you hit 4000rpm, having floored the pedal, waited for it to decide what gear you need etc etc. unless you drive it at high revs all of the time...which means manual flappy paddle mode to get control....then the flappy gearchanges aren't quick enough and it ruins the enjoyment....

the manual 250 just feels lethargic, unless you keep at 4250+RPM...then it feels quick enough...

In the diesel, you just squeeze the pedal and as long as you start at over 1850rpm in 2-4, the power just comes in a silky surge...you don't have to floor it like you do in the 250Auto to get anywhere...and you don't have to change cogs...

Also, in the diesel, if you try doing this at revs lower than 1700 you can at times get nothing..zippo...no go at all...and at roundabouts in the rush hour it is almost dangerous...the boost is either on or off...

You have to keep the revs up and drop the clutch. Towards the end I was doing that at busy intersections, and my clutch was starting to judder when warm...it couldn't take it...only after 20k on the clock...

Like I've said, these are not performance saloons - they need to be driven with a gentle style, in which case the 250A wins - it's a proper Lexus...

Just to add that in the Sport version you rarely fall under the 1700 rpm mark when changing gears sensibly... so the turbo lag is minimized.

[kin]

What's the economy like on the 220d sport? And the VED cost?

[giorgoXXI]

What's the economy like on the 220d sport? And the VED cost?

Tax is around £90 more expensive per year than the standard 220d. However if you get a new one (facelift version), apparently the CO2 emissions have dropped considerably in the Sport version (so has the final gear ratio) and it will be the same as the standard model (can't confirm this).

Economy in town is around 30-32 mpg, and 42-44 mpg on the motorway.

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

What's the economy like on the 220d sport? And the VED cost?

Tax is around £90 more expensive per year than the standard 220d. However if you get a new one (facelift version), apparently the CO2 emissions have dropped considerably in the Sport version (so has the final gear ratio) and it will be the same as the standard model (can't confirm this).

Economy in town is around 30-32 mpg, and 42-44 mpg on the motorway.

The Co2 will be 264g/km on the 2009 model, I believe on all variants.

Current Models 220d 220dSport

Urban (mpg/l/100km) 35.8/7.9 29.7/9.5

Extra urban (mpg/l/100km) 52.3/5.4 45.6/6.2

Combined (mpg/l/100km) 44.8/6.3 38.2/7.4

CO2 Combined (g/km) 168 195

The figures say one thing, but you HAVE TO drive them to appreciate the differences for yourself...

[giorgoXXI]

What's the economy like on the 220d sport? And the VED cost?

Tax is around £90 more expensive per year than the standard 220d. However if you get a new one (facelift version), apparently the CO2 emissions have dropped considerably in the Sport version (so has the final gear ratio) and it will be the same as the standard model (can't confirm this).

Economy in town is around 30-32 mpg, and 42-44 mpg on the motorway.

The Co2 will be 264g/km on the 2009 model, I believe on all variants.

Current Models 220d 220dSport

Urban (mpg/l/100km) 35.8/7.9 29.7/9.5

Extra urban (mpg/l/100km) 52.3/5.4 45.6/6.2

Combined (mpg/l/100km) 44.8/6.3 38.2/7.4

CO2 Combined (g/km) 168 195

The figures say one thing, but you HAVE TO drive them to appreciate the differences for yourself...

264? Do you mean 164? I am pretty sure I read a brochure that said the Sport version will still have higher CO2 emissions as usual, but much lower than the current one. Basically I think they tweaked the gearbox again to improve economy, seeing that the Sport version was never an option as a company car due to excessive tax.

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

What's the economy like on the 220d sport? And the VED cost?

Tax is around £90 more expensive per year than the standard 220d. However if you get a new one (facelift version), apparently the CO2 emissions have dropped considerably in the Sport version (so has the final gear ratio) and it will be the same as the standard model (can't confirm this).

Economy in town is around 30-32 mpg, and 42-44 mpg on the motorway.

The Co2 will be 264g/km on the 2009 model, I believe on all variants.

Current Models 220d 220dSport

Urban (mpg/l/100km) 35.8/7.9 29.7/9.5

Extra urban (mpg/l/100km) 52.3/5.4 45.6/6.2

Combined (mpg/l/100km) 44.8/6.3 38.2/7.4

CO2 Combined (g/km) 168 195

The figures say one thing, but you HAVE TO drive them to appreciate the differences for yourself...

264? Do you mean 164? I am pretty sure I read a brochure that said the Sport version will still have higher CO2 emissions as usual, but much lower than the current one. Basically I think they tweaked the gearbox again to improve economy, seeing that the Sport version was never an option as a company car due to excessive tax.

Sorry - meant 164 and not 264 - typo.

They have probably settled for a different final drive (Diff) as they were different between Sport and non-Sport. Gearbox's were the same AFAIK. May be a new engine Map too? Who knows...

[Exiled]

Having just blasted back up the A19 with ECT Power engaged I can confirm that the 250 Auto is not gutless....just flex that right foot big toe.

I found the 250 Auto superb to drive, thought it had loads of power and acceleration especially when using the manual option or the paddles.

Is it fast? It depends, if you have been used to driving a car that does 0 to 60 in 10 or 11 seconds you will think it is quick, if on the other hand you are used to getting to 60 in 6 or 7 seconds you may think it is slow.

The car is about more than that, reading road tests many journalists comment that it has a level of refinement the competition cannot match, is this refinement what jamboo refers to as "waftability"?

[Scarlet Pimpernell]

...... is this refinement what jamboo refers to as "waftability"?....

Oh yes - it is superb! That's where it feels like a GS in many respects...sublime...something that the germans aren't very good at unless you get a S Class, 7er or a CLS possibly...

May be I'm getting old but I've lost the boy racer passion...I just like to be wafted around now - my new car does just that... but the gearchange is not as smooth as the GS's...

Incidentally, I managed to get a drive in the new Honda Accord - it was a 2.0 Auto...I was really impressed overall - not terribly quick but a very good car at the price!! A lot of road noise compared to Accords of old, but it is seriously good. Just too many buttons on the dash...and dare I say it I thought it was marginally better than the new A4...

[Exiled]

...... is this refinement what jamboo refers to as "waftability"?....

Oh yes - it is superb! That's where it feels like a GS in many respects...sublime...something that the germans aren't very good at unless you get a S Class, 7er or a CLS possibly...

May be I'm getting old but I've lost the boy racer passion...I just like to be wafted around now - my new car does just that... but the gearchange is not as smooth as the GS's...

Incidentally, I managed to get a drive in the new Honda Accord - it was a 2.0 Auto...I was really impressed overall - not terribly quick but a very good car at the price!! A lot of road noise compared to Accords of old, but it is seriously good. Just too many buttons on the dash...and dare I say it I thought it was marginally better than the new A4...

In your opinion then the new Honda Accord is marginally better than the new A4 which a couple of weeks ago you thought was rubbish! Maybe you are getting old and your memory's going.

A bit slower this time.

What's.......your.......opinion.......of........the........new.........A4