markoose

I would consider one, I used to own an Audi A4 S-Line 1.8T 190, which was the best car I've ever had. The Seat Exeo 2.0T is very likely better than that; it's got a newer, more powerful engine, the improved interior from the A4 cab and updated suspension. If I was buying today I'd look at one of those bad boys. Certainly my A4 rode and handled better than my IS250, which is OK but has comparatively jittery handling with little feel through the wheel. Also the turbo engine was amazing, pulling from 1750 rpm all the way to past 5000 rpm, I could always accelerate, any gear, any revs. In fact the more I think about it the more I remember how good these cars are, the control layout and ergonomics are top drawer and the seats are amazingly supportive. Also considering how bad the IS220d's engine and gearbox are (I chopped my IS220d in for the IS250 when I realised that you needed a crowbar to get it into 1st and 2nd and a magnifying glass to locate the power band) the 2.0TDI Exeo is probably miles better considering the good reviews that this latest VW group engine has had. Plus I doubt the dashboard rattles...

I wouldn't worry too much about the space, I'm 6'4" and don't have any problems and reckon that really tall people at maybe 6'6" or 6'7" would be fine too. The only thing I have noticed is that the grab handle is right next to my head as the car seems to get much narrower towards the roof. I used to hit my head on it a bit before I got used to it and my previous IS (a 220d) had some nasty black gunk covering the grab handle where I reckon the previous owner used too much hair gel :-) I used to own a mk3 MX-5 and was amazed that I could fit in that too with the correct seat adjustments, they are great cars BTW and I miss it whenever the sun's out.

As a rule, the engine uses more fuel in neutral than when rolling down a hill while in-gear. This is because in neutral the engine has to keep itself idling by burning fuel, whereas when rolling in-gear the wheels help turn the engine meaning that it requires hardly any fuel to be burnt at all. The extra distance you'd get from rolling in neutral isn't usually enough to offset this saving. I've read about this in several articles over the years including this one: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/driving/c...icle4345670.ece

I usually get between 35 and 36 from my IS250 auto on the read-out, which I've found to be about 2mpg too high. I've clock 44mpg from Bromley to Uxbridge round the M25 before trying wherever possible to drive at 70. Town driving tends to bring it down a lot but it's surprising how far the car will roll without losing too much speed if you just let off the throttle. I would trade for a 250 auto if I was you, petrol's 10p a litre less as it is and the car is just better than the 220 manual.

I'm amazed that you had to pay for the new pads! If they replaced the discs under warranty then the pads should not have been chargeable since they have to be replaced if new discs are fitted and hence they are covered by warranty as the "wear and tear" aspect is not applicable. I've had discs done on two or three occasions and kept the pads, no garage has ever said they have to be done or tried to get me to have them done at the same time. One garage did say you "usually" do pads at the same time but this isn't necessary if I don't want to.

I've not experienced or heard of wear problems on the rears but the service manager at a Lexus dealer told me that it's best to inflate the tyres to 36psi (on the 16inch wheels) to avoid uneven wear. He was referring to outer/inner wear differences on the same tyre though.

It doesn't measure noise outside the car, it clearly says that the microphone was positioned by the drivers ear.

Mine still selects 1st in snow mode. Snow mode lowers throttle sensitivity by increasing the distance the pedal needs to be depressed before it gives a certain effect. The auto gearbox also has different criteria for when to change down. It stays in higher gears for longer although it will still kick down when you floor it. Power mode does the opposite, increasing throttle sensitivity and changing down to lower gears more readily when the car is asked to accelerate.

Both my IS's have done this. Usually after 20-30 mins of driving. I have also assumed that it's due to temperature change, although I don't think it is limited to very hot or cold settings as it always happens eventually on any journey. I just don't worry about it since it only happens once per trip.

I got a real 33.5 mpg from my first full tank in my IS250 auto, the trip computer was showing 35.something, so it was about 2 mpg optimistic. Yesterday I got 40.4 mpg on the trip computer between Kent and Middlesex round the Heathrow part of the M25. I was nursing it a bit towards the end but while crusing was never driving less than 60mph and most of the time keeping at 70mph. This is the highest I've ever had on a journey that is representative of real world conditions but I don't think it's realistic to get this without at least a bit of nursing. I would question whether it is possible to get mid-forties on a "normal" drive at the legal limits (or even sensible speeds) unless it is at 40mph in sixth all the way. I think I once achieved 47.something on the trip computer in these conditions going through roadworks at a constant 40mph, but this is not representative of something you'd get on a full tank or even again on the same section of road. I think the engine/gearbox in this car is great. I believe that Lexus made a giant mistake with the manual box and the diesel engine, a massive amount of disappointment has been expressed on these forums from so many different people, it must have put a lot of people off of Lexus (including myself). It is only because my petrol auto was so much better than my diesel manual that I have any respect left at all for the Mk2 IS. It would have been so nice to have an auto diesel with a smooth power curve.

Uncanny. I have had exactly the same experience on both an IS220d and an IS250. I have even used the same description of feeling like I'm driving on a windy day. Also I have exactly the same issues with the grooves in the roads. To speculate, I think the problem is the electric power steering is set to be too sensitive, it needs some more weight to it and a touch less immediate response. I noticed the other day that the steering wheel rotated left then right about two inches on it's own as I gently moved into the inside lane on the motorway, it felt like the road surface had fed back through the steering and activated the electric power steering motor, which had then amplified the movement of the wheels into the grooves on the road.

I have just swapped an IS220d for an IS250 auto. I never had probs with fuel consumption (42-43 mpg consistently) and it is really at home on a-roads and motorways, with lots of overtaking power. However the reasons I swapped: 1) Too noisy, I'd never owned a diesel before and it was worse than I thought it would be, although the sound-proofing is very good and it's no worse than any other 4-pot diesel. 2) Poor change from/to 1st, 2nd gear, just thought Lexus could have done better here, but the gearbox could prob run a tractor it feels so tough. 3) No power before turbo kicks in, anything much less than 1900rpm and there's nothing there, meaning you have to make sure you use the clutch to keep the revs up. 4) Sixth gear too long for British motorway speeds, unless you have 2000rpm on the clock you will lose speed when you're not on a flat/downhill stretch. You would also have to change down for any meaningful acceleration. However, 5th is fine for cruising between 60-80mph, gives loads of overtaking ability and isn't over-revving the engine as it's still quite long. The petrol auto eliminates all these problems, it's a great combo, only thing I'd say is that the engine sounds like a big hairdryer (but a quiet one). My normal routes have bagged me 35 mpg in the petrol, so quite pleased with that. In general, I think the IS is quite susceptible to crosswinds for some reason and has overly responsive steering from the straight ahead considering it's lack of seat-of-the-pants feel so can feel jittery on the motorway. Overall though the diesel will be right for some people, it's not a bad engine and most of the competition who have launched 2.2 175ish bhp engines have had exactly the same drivability criticisms in the motoring press as they tend to have long gearing. So it's all about your usage and style, see if you can get a car for a long test-drive and then if you're not happy try the petrol, I'm sure the dealer will swap the order for you if you like it better.

Black looks great but having owned a silver car for three years I can confirm it magically hides the dirt :-) The auto is essential for the IS250 IMO, the manuals are heavy duty and it shows in the heavy shift action, plus the auto is below 225 g/km so the tax is less, whereas the manual is above that threshold. I wouldn't worry about potential small probs like rattles, any car can suffer and if you've got a warranty lexus will fix it.

My IS220d was supplied from a Lexus dealer with one asymmetric Dunlop and three symmetric Bridgestones. I almost came off the road more times than I can remember, the steering was feedback free and scarily light; I just thought the car had crap handling. I fitted four Continentals and it is much more responsive although why did Lexus fit such a quick steering rack to a car with such poor handling? It just means you can upset the chassis quicker.

I hate to resurrect such an old thread but I've noticed mine doing this too, to the extent where I have been constantly harrassed by tailgaters and people overtaking me in dangerous situations. I've never had this in any other car and haven't changed my driving style. I've been sitting there wondering what the hell was going on as yet another person overtakes when I'm reading just over 60mph on a single carriageway I've been driving down for years. Have started thinking it's all because of the speedo overreading but I'm not sure by how much. I'm wondering if it could be over 10% based on how high my speed has to be to keep up with traffic on fast roads. Put it this way I was reading 64mph when behind a lorry that claimed to be limited to 55mph. I'm going to dig out my garmin shat nav and see what it has to say. Bit annoyed because I've been really stressed out due to harrassment while driving since I bought this car and couldn't figure it out. This problem couldn't cause the mile counter to go up quicker could it? I don't fancy putting an extra 1000 or so needless miles on the clock every 10000.

Ah, well i don't know what to say then... maybe a hug? Wait! Only kidding, I am going to see what I get for the rest of this week. Cue dramatic music... Something's changing with my car, I don't know if it's just getting fully run in or what but I've noticed with every car I've had in the past and now this one that I get to a certain mileage and it just becomes sweeter, the gear shift improves, the engine seems smoother, mpg up... maybe I'm achieving a symbiotic relationship with my Lexus like Alan Partridge had. I do know that someone has sprayed "***** ***** partridge" on the side and I've filled up the passenger footwell with scotch egg wrappers.

The car was warmed when I reset the counter and the road is mixed up and down hills. I noticed that the rev counter was sitting at around about 2300-2400rpm in 5th, right where I get this little step in power, my theory is that the variable geometry turbo alters setting at this point from a high torque set up to one that is better for higher revs. I have also noticed that I don't get good economy below the max torque band. So if I change up to 6th at 70mph the engine appears to labour and has to use more fuel struggling against the gearing so I think that higher gear does not equal better economy in all situations. I always try to keep between 2000-2600rpm when cruising and 2000-3600rpm for accelerating through the gears. I only ever dip below 2000rpm in 1st, 2nd or 3rd gear. I would only ever use 6th if I went fast enough to be over 2600rpm in 5th.

Coincidentally I looked at my pressures last weekend and set them at 35/38 front/rear. I then got 52.9 mpg at 70mph in 5th gear with cruise control on down a 13 mile stretch of dual carriageway today. Before I was getting ~46.5.

I've been reading all of the posts about idling speeds and fuel economy and have some comments. In my opinion reduced fuel economy compared to some competitors' slightly older diesel engines is because of the emissions reducing features of the Toyota 2.2 diesel engine. In a diesel engine we burn the fuel (hydrocarbon) with air (nitrogen and oxygen) and ideally this would produce only nitrogen, carbon dioxide and water. However, the engine designers have to perform a complicated balancing act in order to keep harmful emissions caused by less than ideal combustion in check. These harmful emissions are carbon monoxide, carbon (soot) and NOx (oxides of nitrogen). Funnily enough CO2 is a product of perfect combustion yet is still undesirable due to its possible contribution to global warming. Although diesels produce less CO2 than petrols I believe that you get a comparable amount of CO2 produced from a tank of diesel as you do from a tank of petrol, however the diesel goes further on a tank and hence releases less per kilometre. When the combustion process occurs at a high temperature the fuel and air are able to react together more efficiently and this means that we move closer to out ideal of complete combustion. Because the fuel is more completely burnt it means we have released more of the available chemical energy in the fuel and hence reduced the amount of unburnt fuel emitted in the exhaust gas. We also reduce the amount of soot and carbon monoxide that are produced when incomplete combustion occurs i.e. if there is not enough air (and hence oxygen) to react with the carbon part of the hydrocarbon we get just carbon © and carbon monoxide (CO) rather than CO2. So the engine designers need to keep the combustion temperature up. A problem is that diesels have a lean air-fuel ratio by nature and so this means there is a surplus of air (oxygen and nitrogen) with no fuel (hydrogen or carbon) to bond to and at high temperatures the nitrogen and oxygen bonds in complex ways to form NOx gases, these react with sunlight to form low-level ozone (photochemical smog) and cause allergic reactions and lung damage. So we actually need to make sure that the combustion process is not too low OR too high. One way of managing NOx production is to allow the ECU to introduce an inert gas to the mix, which will therefore reduce the amount of air in the mixture (so there is less oxygen to react with the nitrogen). This also happens to lower the maximum temperature that the mixture can naturally reach during combustion and increase the specific heat capacity of the mixture (so it takes a greater amount of heat energy to raise the temperature of the mix by a given amount). This inert gas can be the exhaust gas and the system is called exhaust gas recirculation. However, diesel engines still produce lots of NOx compared to a petrol engine and so Toyota uses a fifth fuel injector to mix a small amount of diesel as a reductant with the NOx-rich exhaust gas. The oxygen in the NOx is more strongly attracted to the hydrogen and carbon in the diesel and so forms water, nitrogen and carbon dioxide. So the engine is using extra fuel to reduce the NOx into less harmful gases, perhaps contributing to the relatively poor fuel economy when compared to older more polluting diesels. Also it's possible that in order to maintain a temperature sufficient to prevent excessive incomplete combustion the ECU is naively programmed to automatically crank the idle point up if the engine temperature is low and the climate control is switched on - but does not check to see if the compressor is running or not. The engine also has a particulate filter, which cannot "self-clean" or "regenerate" unless it is at a high enough temperature. If you are in stop-start conditions and/or are driving below about 40mph the ECU will eventually intervene and try to raise the exhaust temperature by changing the fuel injection parameters. I'd speculate that this might require more fuel to be used and in turn may generate more NOx and therefore require more fuel to be used as a reductant by the fifth injector. So in conclusion you've got a very clean car but the trade-off is slightly worse fuel economy.