2009 Is220 'improvements'?

[Steve_L]

Please forgive me for returning to the topic closed by egnot on 2 November when he lost his way and diverted to the Mazda dealer.

I posted this in 'New Members' area as a reply to my first entry, but more likely to get a good flow of respondents here.

"We concur on a number of points, not least of which is why Lexus themselves do not address what seems to be a fairly common problem with their diesel engine. It does not compete if fuel consumption alone is the key criteria for purchase, but as you say, it has other great qualities, which is why I have a second one.

The main issue I would like to take up with members is the best route to resolve the lack of improvement I am suffering. My plan at the moment is to book it in early for 10000 service (I have 8000 on clock) and ask dealer to check set up; but no certainty of success. Lexus claim the engine has fuel consumption over 10% better than old one. Have any other members with 2009 model achieved this improvement?"

Can't understand why the 'new' engine should be worse. Please help me someone.

[Monsterped]

I'm currently running around in a 59 plate demo as my 57 220d is broken for the umpteenth time.

Can't say that the consumption on the 59 is any better that mine and that the "revised" diesel is significantly better that mine either. No way would I have another.....

[fjcfarrar]

I'm currently running around in a 59 plate demo as my 57 220d is broken for the umpteenth time.

Can't say that the consumption on the 59 is any better that mine and that the "revised" diesel is significantly better that mine either. No way would I have another.....

Diesel engines started as clattering, rough power sources that only functioned over a narrow rev range - but in cars and vans, driven appropriately delivered good fuel economy. They also used up an otherwise useless (and thus cheap) by-product of the oil industry. Good economy particularly appealed to those with badly organised lifestyles and/or having employers that questionably require personal attendance for meetings or business in general all over the country, consequently driving enormous mileages entailing many hours behind the wheel. This has demanded increasing diesel refinement; but each step ate into economy. Manufacturers also pandered to a requirement for pretend quality vehicles which were perceived as able to be run on the cheap. Unfortunately, Governments have upped the price of the fuel because they could, and green legislation has split development towards advanced, clean diesels with very little advantage in economy or equally complex, rougher thrifty types. Choices have to be made where to site the compromises. Lexus's position in this is not the best for everyone; but I am sure they are mindful that the diesel is an obvious evolutionary dead-end - given that to convert a stationary engine into something that works for vehicles required enormous mechanical and electronic sophistication, compared to petrol engines which were suitable in the first place and especially newer and hybrid technologies on which they are now concentrating together with everybody else. I think diesels were a mistake for Lexus and all that can expected from them is "sticking-plaster" until the problem just goes away - hopefully soon. The real solution is to try much harder find a way to do a lot fewer miles in a vastly superior petrol car - like the IS250 Auto in this class - until technologies mature to provide something reasonably priced, thrifty and actually compatible with quality and driveability.

[Gunther]

I'm currently running around in a 59 plate demo as my 57 220d is broken for the umpteenth time.

Can't say that the consumption on the 59 is any better that mine and that the "revised" diesel is significantly better that mine either. No way would I have another.....

Diesel engines started as clattering, rough power sources that only functioned over a narrow rev range - but in cars and vans, driven appropriately delivered good fuel economy. They also used up an otherwise useless (and thus cheap) by-product of the oil industry. Good economy particularly appealed to those with badly organised lifestyles and/or having employers that questionably require personal attendance for meetings or business in general all over the country, consequently driving enormous mileages entailing many hours behind the wheel. This has demanded increasing diesel refinement; but each step ate into economy. Manufacturers also pandered to a requirement for pretend quality vehicles which were perceived as able to be run on the cheap. Unfortunately, Governments have upped the price of the fuel because they could, and green legislation has split development towards advanced, clean diesels with very little advantage in economy or equally complex, rougher thrifty types. Choices have to be made where to site the compromises. Lexus's position in this is not the best for everyone; but I am sure they are mindful that the diesel is an obvious evolutionary dead-end - given that to convert a stationary engine into something that works for vehicles required enormous mechanical and electronic sophistication, compared to petrol engines which were suitable in the first place and especially newer and hybrid technologies on which they are now concentrating together with everybody else. I think diesels were a mistake for Lexus and all that can expected from them is "sticking-plaster" until the problem just goes away - hopefully soon. The real solution is to try much harder find a way to do a lot fewer miles in a vastly superior petrol car - like the IS250 Auto in this class - until technologies mature to provide something reasonably priced, thrifty and actually compatible with quality and driveability.

Really? I do sort of agree..........But! Fuel cell is the future, not electric or petrol/diesel hybrids! Even plug - they won't last unless someone invents zero emissions electric generator or power stations, and I wouldn't think the solar panels or wind mills are the way yet!

Check THIS out. It shows that with a careful amount of investment, Diesels can make lots of sense for some time yet!

[ihpj]

The issue with Lexus and diesel is that Lexus are backing Hybrid...not diesel as their technology of choice. If they too turn to diesel then there is an implied acceptance that Hybrid was a diversion at best...at worst a failed technology. And that would be the end of Lexus.

[Steve_L]

Didn't expect to start a philosophical debate about the merits of diesel technology and Lexus' commitment to improving their status in the green revolution! But thanks for the contributions.

Sorry to hear about your troubles Monsterped. My concerns pale into insignificance against that but I had a genuine expectation of improved fuel consumption compared to that for the 47,000 miles of my first 220d, which I was obviously happy with otherwise I would not have bought one.

2 points come to mind in response to the 'philosophy'. First, it is difficult to understand how Lexus fail where others - e.g. VW/Audi and Mercedes - go from strength to strength with their diesel engines. [i nearly bought a C Class because of the superior 'official' (and probably real) figures]. Secondly, I have to resign myself to the 220d being a thirsty animal in town and around the hills of South Wales.

Still love it and pleased to have it sitting on my drive waiting to prove me wrong - probably on the next motorway run.

If anyone is still interested, I will provide feedback after the service booked for early December.

Cheers

[toppa33]

Diesel to have their merits - whether it be Lexus BMW Audi Merc etc.

And it is clear BMW have a much more refimed oil burner than Lexus (and the Audi's and the Merc's) - I traded my 2.0d Efficient Dynamics in recently and their is no question the Beemer is a better engine (much more refined).

But take etheir fuel consumption figure with a huge mountain of salt - The Beemer I had was listed as 58mpg combined - I averaged (mostly on A-roads and out of town) - 44mpg.

The Lexus (I believe) is between 46 and 48 combined and I achieve 42 mpg, doing the same run, so 2 mpg worse than the BMW - but shown in the figures as nearly 12mpg difference.

The BMW although not a poor car to drive by any standards, does not have the luxury of the Lexus (the run flats - which I believe are now being fitted to all models) are not a comfort (although you do become a skilled driver steering madly through the potholes) - and they are also more expensive (BMW do offer you insurance on them though)

I also heard problems regarding the particulate filters on cars that were being used on short journeys (sound familar)

The Lexus model is not far behind the Beemer and only needs a small amount of R&D on the engine to be matching the what is supposed to be 'top of the Engine class'

SO why shouldn't Lexus take note and put their efforts into both Hybrid and oil burners.

[Local Yokel]

I can't understand the problems.......I have been running my 220D SE-I since new in March 2009. Have clocked up 11,600 miles and not a single problem of any significance. Regularly getting 48-50MPG, no rattles or squeaks from the interior, everything works electrically and mechanically. Just runs very well indeed. All I do is check the oil, water, tyre pressures etc.

If I have a gripe, it is only one and that it is the quality of the paint. Its rubbish in comparison to the german products.

Next time, I;ll buy a ligter colour rather than Windsor Blue so this won't be a problem.

Other than this, I will be buying another and probably a new LF-Ch for the missus!

[pml9952]

Diesel to have their merits - whether it be Lexus BMW Audi Merc etc.

And it is clear BMW have a much more refimed oil burner than Lexus (and the Audi's and the Merc's) - I traded my 2.0d Efficient Dynamics in recently and their is no question the Beemer is a better engine (much more refined).

But take etheir fuel consumption figure with a huge mountain of salt - The Beemer I had was listed as 58mpg combined - I averaged (mostly on A-roads and out of town) - 44mpg.

The Lexus (I believe) is between 46 and 48 combined and I achieve 42 mpg, doing the same run, so 2 mpg worse than the BMW - but shown in the figures as nearly 12mpg difference.

The BMW although not a poor car to drive by any standards, does not have the luxury of the Lexus (the run flats - which I believe are now being fitted to all models) are not a comfort (although you do become a skilled driver steering madly through the potholes) - and they are also more expensive (BMW do offer you insurance on them though)

I also heard problems regarding the particulate filters on cars that were being used on short journeys (sound familar)

The Lexus model is not far behind the Beemer and only needs a small amount of R&D on the engine to be matching the what is supposed to be 'top of the Engine class'

SO why shouldn't Lexus take note and put their efforts into both Hybrid and oil burners.

Have just exchanged my 06 plate 220d for a BM 320d touring which I initially considered simply because it offers a bit more luggage versatility. I had recently had a 2009 220d on loan and whilst it was a bit smoother than my old car I have to say not much, and I really felt Lexus have cheapened some of the interior trim on recent models. I did a back to back test with both the BM 4 cylinder 320d and the 6 cylinder 325d but frankly the 4 cylinder amazed me with its smooth refinement that I just couldn't see a significant difference between it and the 325d. Its much better than the Toyota unit. I'm sure the 330d is well worth having if you want to spend nearly 40 grand with options.

The BMW engine is much quieter, smoother and more flexible. I don't find the run flats unforgiving, on the contrary the car is more cushioned over poor town surfaces than the Lexus ever was, there's less road noise and no wind rustling around the door gaps like the Lexus. Yes the interior materials are a bit cheaper in places, the optons cost a fortune and unfortuantely the world and his wife have one, and yes I will miss Lexus sevice which has been superb, but a 320d touring gives you a bit more flexibility luggage wise and genuinely is a more enjoyable drive with sensible gear ratios to boot!

[Steve_L]

Seems ages since my last post but still the widely differing experiences come in. Thanks guys.

I said I would feedback after my 10k service. I specifically mentioned there was no improvement in consumption despite claims. Outcome is .... no change. Still doing around 35 mainly urban.

HOWEVER, the pleasing news is that I did 2 long motorway runs before the service. One over 200 miles, the other 80+ miles. Achieved over 50 mpg - yes 50 - on both. Kept revs below 2000 but still averaged over 70 mph. As soon as I started local mileage again, down came the consumption.

Other pleasures include - it performs to its 178bhp (if I want it to), it has not let me down and it looks far better on my drive than the BMW 3 ever could (personal taste I know).

Toppa33 - I'm with you as your suggestion about Lexus taking note is exactly what I was looking for when I restarted this topic. Surely Lexus UK would take note if enough of us questioned the accuracy of their claims. I for one have enough evidence to show that the 09 MY does not perform better than the 06 MY. Perhaps they took an old engine off the shelf in the factory when they built mine????

Happy motoring