Linas.P

I would like to think, especially because ICEs can be converted to run on hydrogen, meaning we can reuse existing cars without needing to scrap them (which is carbon inefficient). Secondly, for me as car lover that is hope to keep some vintage, exotic, rare cars relevant.... However, hydrogen production, storage, logistics etc. are very inefficient and expensive ... sot it is compromise as anything else. hydrocarbons - cheap, easy to produce (although limited), easy distribution, storage and high power density, but dirty. electrical power - clean, cheap, but expensive and difficult to store and to distribute, but very efficient to use when done right. hydrogen - difficult to produce and not very clean, expensive , difficult to store and distribute, but has good power density if done right. As you said hydrogen makes sense in ships and planes e.g. the larger is the vehicle the easier it is to convert it.

Well... you tell us? I would be certainly one of the first in the queue to get one... I can say... maybe because they are stupid, or maybe because market is too niche to care, or maybe other reasons. Your question in itself is kind of weird - we are saying, that we don't understand why they don't do it and you asking us why they don't do it - "if only I knew..."

You need a kit called Po-40 and I assume you already have it, in that case I guess it would be best to contact the seller for instructions. I know there were few differences in terms of wiring from year to year, so it is hard to advise. Try looking at links below:

Here you make several assumptions: 100% power generation efficiency 100% energy logistics effciency 0% loses in power distribution JIT demand And those are all incorrect, we do not have 100% efficient way to produce the energy, we waste 47-58% of produced energy in networking, delivery and uneven demand. Say "clean" nuclear power stations have to consistently produce power during the night, solar panels only produce power during the day, wind power is inconsistent and the only power stations you can turn on and off at your will are the ones powered by hydrocarbons. Electric vehicles might indeed be much more efficient, but by the time they are charged, there are massive inefficiencies in power transfer lanes, charging equipment etc. This might not be accurate numbers but lets say in ICE with 30% efficiency 1l of fuel generates 100kw at the wheels, 1l of fuel produces 150Kw of electric energy at the station, but 10% is lost in "step-up" transformation, 5% is lost over the lines another 15% is lost on "step-down", 10% is lost in charging process (AC/DC conversion), 8% are lost in battery storage, 4% are lost power delivery between batteries and engines and 2% in engines themselves and we might get even less actual energy produced from same amount of fuel ~91Kw(150-15-7-19-9-4-2-1=91)... and all that assuming JIT demand which it isn't. Now again these are not necessary real numbers (real loses can be easily found on the internet), I might have overstated/understated loses in certain steps - it is just an example. My point - with centralised electricity production as we have now it might not be even nearly as beneficial to switch to electric vehicles, that is even before we take in consideration lifetime carbon emissions from manufacturing. So to really get advantages of electric vehicles we either need to significantly improve centralised network or we need to decentralise the electricity production (something like small thermal-energy reactor in every home)... and we are very very far from this. The original Fisker Karma actually nailed it with on board generator (decentralised energy production), on board generator was nowhere near as green or efficient as large power plant, but the nature of "on-demand", on board generation without delivery loses made a lot of sense. So being environmentally friendly it is not as simple as switching to electric vehicles...

I actually disagree that there is issue of not having non-hybrid for RX, however 200t for the car as large and as heavy as RX is joke... so when we say "oh 200t was not-hybrid and didn't sell, so lack of non-hybrid version is not valid argument" we need to understand that not any non-hybrid engine. Take for example RC350 - yes that would be interesting, but would RC150t would be interesting - no certainly not, it would be joke as RX200t is joke. @rayaans - I never said that IS250 can do 0-60 in under 7s, neither I ever claimed that opinions disagreeing with that are irrelevant and nobody cares about them. You pretend to represent collective mind, I only ever represent myself - here is big difference. Every time somebody claims 300h is good enough, I will come and say it is sluggish, because it is. If I use same terminology as you do, then - "stop repeating same old crap in very thread that 300h is transparently good enough and ok!" . If you exhausted just bugger off to Tesla forum.

Time spent on this forum was more worthy then the movie - the only one way of knowing was to watch it, but now I can say it for certain. Now I have to make sure I can get it back some off it - expect more 300h digging and more inappropriate 220d part jokes to be made soon!

That is key... I wound even say charge time is more important then the range. If there is reasonable recharge network, I guess even 200miles can suffice for the begging before we get to higher capacity, but anything longer then 1-2, maybe 5 minutes max to recharge is deal breaker. Second thing is degradation of batteries e.g. Tesla supercharger which is still relatively slow in comparison with pumping dinosaur juice into the tank... actually damages the batteries. You get more range and better lifetime, by not using supercharging. In petrol tank... doesn't matter, tank capacity doesn't change every time you refill. Finally, there are a lot of bogus science on environmental benefit - tail-pipe emission is 0, correct! But energy doesn't make itself... if we assume maybe 100k electric cars whizzing around London (big cities is where they are most beneficial) and they all charge from otherwise wasted energy at night - then yes there is benefit. But if we thinking to eventually replace all the car with electric ones, electricity production will simply going to increase and the pollution going to form power plants instead of the cars on the roads - no long term benefit there...

That is subjective - assuming that the only thing I am currently doing is posting here that probably would be correct. But I might learn something interesting about inner workings of the cars (like FWD pushes from the back), in which case it might be very good investment of the time.

I needed to google that-up... Not sure... I probably need to watch the whole thing to answer you why you think I remind you that guy, but I have no plans of doing so. One common theme is that he seems to argue for the sake of argument (like me, or any principal, opinionated person), but he looks kind of uneducated as well, I guess - go figure ..

that is at least one way to put-it... I guess depends if you have family (which I imagine as having two kids...) What I agree with, you need to have multiple cars - one car just cannot do all things and all things well at the same time. I would have at least 3 cars: - 1 classic car, for leisurely weekends - 1 race car, for more active weekends (say - track, rally, drift or other) - 1 practical daily car which doesn't suck that much in practical terms ~ maybe something along the lines of RC300h or more powerful. but that is dependent on one's circumstances, maybe in country side one would want to have capable off-roader or if you have family instead of 2 doors daily, maybe it is more practical to have SUV... and I think one can certainly utilise more then 3 cars, but 3 sounds like "good starting point....tell me about it".. when I have 1 parking space for £20k and overall there are only 30 for 100 flats 😄

Lotus Elise? Thought - we need to define country side roads. British narrow, broken, bumpy roads with blind corners - yeah probably. Wide, sweeping, smooth roads with clear corners, loads of space to correct - not so sure, you can have a lot of fun in rather heavy and powerful GT car.

Yep... I don't put much hopes into this... That is not the first time Fisker is trying to pull this-off. The Chinese company seems to be more credible in fact, but I don't see it like mainstream manufacturer, not even in Tesla's niche competitors sense, which itself if balancing on the razor edge over bankruptcy as it is yet to make any profit. I think these cars will be available in limited editions, number in countries like US. Uber rich will grab few from pre-orders that will be all we hear about them before the company will go bust again.

I would agree in general... however as explained previously, with RC-F you get into "performance car ownership issues" - not practical daily, expensive repairs, unreasonable fuel consumtion etc. We just getting into same discussion. Yes I want something faster then RC300h, but yet I don't want something as fast as RC-F - there is the gaping hole in the Lexus line-up and I guess we can agree on this?

Is this not consistent with what I was saying about RWD balance? equally, Cio Cup - doesn't it represent "ultralight track car with sticky tyres" as I mentioned? As for 400hp+ it is more like badge of honour rather then necessity on public road, you can put it down from time to time and for fraction of a second perhaps without loosing your licence... but here is the other side - what is wrong with 100MPH, it is just in outdated and arbitrary British rules it is offence, otherwise it is not high speed at all. We need laws changed, better lane discipline, better driver training and we can certainly drive faster. It is almost like caring the gun - the best defence is not in shooting it, but by simply letting everyone know you are armed. In car terms that is letting all s***** with their riced fiestas and civics to know they need to back-off. For me driving in UK is far too inclusive, so many people who should not be allowed anywhere near the roads, never mind cars... are allowed to fool around. For me it seems it should be more exclusive and only the ones who likes driving and cares about how they drive, about the rules, should be allowed to do it. It is not the game - lives can be lost. Yet is not the speed what kills, it is idiots behind the wheel going at speed who kills.

nah... I found the car ugly - just my opinion obviously. Secondly, I am not brand snob and not one of those fan boys making BMW ****** on Audi symbols - but Kia is of the scales of my brand approval. maybe in 30 years time their image is going to change and then who knows... edit: ohh and I want 2 doors as well... Now you may question what I am doing here "mourning" about death of GS, but I have explained it previously. GS450h was hope for me to see 450h in other models like IS450h or RC450h as some sort of mid range competitors for C43, BMW 440, S4/S5 and filling that gap between 300h and "F", but now with discontinuation of GS that is certainly of the cards and I am ****** off...

Ar you now officially elected representative of the sluggish 300h owners club? Congrats.. just to remind you, this is public forum and people have opinion here - some will agree some will disagree, this meant to be this way. If you get offended nobody forces you to read - pull the internet cable out and go read a book!

@rayaans - I disagree, 300h is very relevant- because that is the only engine option we will have going forward bar "F", LS and RX.. if you don't car nobody forces to accept or object to it. @Jamesf1 My driving style is my own business as long as I stay within the rules or rather get fined by police - nowhere in the rulebooks it says how long it has to take for you to reach speed limit... Your guesses would almost be funny if you at least try... which part of S3 is coupe? nevermind FWD (mostly) or front biased AWD...

I don't see how me finding suitable car is relevant here? Is that going to make 300h a better engine option for RC? what that has to do with GS being discontinued? Finally, even when I get suitable car - what makes you think I stop criticising 300h?

Who are you to tell me where to put my money? I will put my money when I found suitable car or when I compromise on something. It is not like I cannot have opinion about something if I don't own car better then yours... This is not d*** measuring exercise. If you can objectively prove me wrong - go ahead, if not then our subjective opinions are equally good..

again, when I need you opinion what suits me I will ask - don't worry. Just very quickly - what is wrong with Focus ST. It is FWD (~mostly), it has small volume turbo engine, it is hatchback, it is not a premium or luxury car, it is Ford... and probably few other issues. Why you trying to guess what I like? RC350 would be fine, fast luxury car - that is what I need. @noby76 - you are the other one who cannot grasp with the question at hand. The topic is about GS being discontinued - yes there are all sorts of used cars.. it is irrelevant. Going forward you will have single type of engine and it will be 300h... that is IS300h, ES300h, RC300h... what if I don't want used car?

I guess that friend was Noby with his sleeper rocket ship Accord which "pushes from the rear"... that explains all! @FTBBCVoodoo Never driven Integra and to be honest don't even want to try. As far as your statement goes "one specific Integra was better then one specific S2000" - it might well be true, but that would be more of an exception then a rule. Certainly, even most basic FWD family car nowadays handles better then say American muscle... so what? I understand that some very light FWD track cars with very sticky tyres in the front can handle very well, but that is not applicable to street cars. As I said, for me RWD balance is important, I fell more comfortable with progressive oversteer, then with any sort of understeer... it is more fun, it looks better, it feels better and that is how the car should behave in the corner.

60-70MPH is plenty fast enough, as well I often have to overtake people just do 40, then slowdowns to 30 in any slightest bend in "national limit (60)" A-roads and that very quickly infuriates me. Overtaking with IS250 is already sketchy as many corners in UK are overgrown and blind, with 300h that is sketchy on whole new level. Other thing which is kind of key for me is 0-40MPH acceleration as I like to be in front of the queue at traffic lights - again some lights are adjusted to turn green for literally few seconds and only 4 cars get's trough... when somebody fails to "launch" from the light that is again infuriates me. You get the picture - I am easily infuriated... and I don't mean just a little bit I literally get enraged at slow drivers a sleep behind the wheel.. Other times - I always accelerate hard onto slip roads leading to motorway, I always launch for traffic lights and 300h is just not good for it, especially bad from stand still. Now, originally I said that I liked RC300h in A/B roads and that is true - for leisurely driving on quite roads it works quite well. Car is low, wide, weight is low down with batteries, seating position is very good and comfortable, steering even though not very communicative is direct and precise and eCVT is lovely - the fake gear changes on manual mode are quick and almost mechanical. However, in UK you will rarely find the road where you are alone on it - I was driving late at night and I was almost alone on the road, my average speed was 60 (which is the limit), but I was driving with the "flow" of road, so actual speed was between 50-70... during the day in same road I woudl have encountered multiple zombies doing 40 on that road and I woudl not have been comfortable overtaking in RC300h. Overall, it looks like very fast car, but fails to deliver miserably. @rayaans/ @Jamesf1 the talk is about Lexus here, I can buy another make or I can buy RC-F, but my opinion about 300h would not change - it is not about the car I have, it is about what 300h is and what I think about it. When I want your advise on what should I buy I will let you know! @noby76 GS450h... no more! Whats now?

Not sure if 320d drivers needs permission to speak here.... RWD is massively important for me, even without driving cars to the limit the balance is completely different, just say for little spirited driving, even within speed limits RWD feels so much better into the corners and out the corner. I once made mistake and got myself Passat CC, they tied to mimic RWD balance there by having wider tyres in the front (I believe it was 235 fronts, 225/215 rear) - in result what you get, car still understeers on throttle and snap-oversteers off throttle... in short balance was all over the place. On other FWD cars you get torque steer (especially in 200hp+), they always understeer and balance is mess.. completely not enjoyable to drive So even without power (more so with the power) RWD is just about balance, joy, feel in the corners and control... well obviously unless you have FWD "which pushes from the back"! I will make bold statement here and I am sure that is going to be massive explosion of insulted "snowflakes" - if driver doesn't feel the need for RWD, they they do not enjoy driving and they cannot qualify to call themselves petrolheads..

In this topic we are talking about GS450h being discontinued, so it is about future, not about present day and certainly not about past.. As such your argument is invalid. Yes you right, you can get 2013-2014 IS250, which is by the way more sluggish then already little sluggish mk2 (I have mentioned in previous threads that a single issue I have with IS250 is that it is not fast enough), you can get very rare IS200t which is strange combination neither fast nor fuel efficient (hello Doog!) or even more sluggish IS300h. That is pretty poor choice... However, if you rock-up into Lexus dealership today (or certainly in future), the only choice you get is 300h..

I think heater and heated seats in IS250C are identical to other mk2 IS. They are perfectly adequate in Saloon, but I see your point with roof down they are nowhere powerful enough in convertible ... On the bright side at least you have heated seats, many other cars don't... but obviously it is not as good as MX5 which was designed as roadster from outset and therefore they figured out it will need better seat heaters.