Linas.P

Maybe I am wrong, but the actual manual gearbox is the same on 250 and 220/200. Obviously, 250 manual is going to be more joy to drive than 220/200, but not going to be more reliable etc. We need to establish one fact - there are no BAD Lexus cars, just some are better than others e.g. 250 is clearly better than 220/200, and makes much more sense in any aspect. It doesn't mean that 220/200 is bad car. I am sure that manual BWM 320d, MB C200d and Audi A4 2.0td are very similar cars ... well the least they all not very nice to drive, Lexus at least have the best built quality and best materials from others, thought (for unknown reason) they decided not to pair IS220/200 with automatic gearbox. Back on the topic of 250 MT vs. AT. I never said MT is unreliable, but for fact AT is actually cheaper to maintain. To start with, AT has no issues with the clutch changes (and other related parts), no need of oil change (though is being done as well, but less important than MT). True - if you manage to destroy AT it will cost more to replace than MT, but it happens so rarely that overall Lexus owners are spending less of AT, than on MT. True - IS (2gen) is fairly new car (maximum 10 years), not many of them have covered more than 200k and hence it is within AT reliability range. Maybe in 10 years time the MT will prove that they are more reliable than AT (especially when cars will start reaching 200k, 300k), but in current day to day costs they are less expensive to maintain. AT are usually less stressed, because ... well you know - not everyone uses the clutch right. This is particularly important for used cars. Majority of ATs are actually in better shape. So what I am saying is not that MT is the one to avoid, but that for casual driving, short distances, city and for more comfort the AT is better. Even more it is cheaper to tax, and requires less regular maintenance (fluids, clutches) and even more it is less what can go wrong with them (like premature wear and ther of gearbox parts).

This actually makes sense and is completely correct, because in majority of Europe and Japan the speed allowed is 130 km/h or 81 mph. So when driving 70 mph you are really reaching the speed for 6th (overdrive) gear. Similarly, in US (the major market) the majority of the roads are limited ~60 mph and historically were limited at 55/65mph (until 1995). Even currently there are just certain extra urban "freeways" where you can drive up to 85 mph, but is not like common. So tactically the gear ratios are correct for Lexus major markets EU/Japan -6th, US -5th. It is only UK (sadly) where the majority of the motorways(and other roads) are limited to 70 mph. I personally, believe this is more of the UK issue than Lexus - theres is no real reason why speed limit cannot be lifted to say 90 mph - but that is different topic. True - Lexus could adapt gear rations to UK, but they didn't (probably because it is minor market). Actually, I am quite happy they didn't as most of the time I am .... (well you know what) :). Not only the 17 inch are bigger, but I guess the tires are wider (should be wider). And the tires are actually bigger contributor to fuel economy, wider tires are obviously grippier and hence have larger rolling resistance. The rim size would matter more in acceleration, and would unlikely to contribute to fuel consumption while driving at steady speed on motorway. Depending on the speed and rpm of the engine bigger rims might even have better fuel economy (if not the tires). Other important thing I would like to note - yes turbo probably affects the fuel economy (didn't have IS220d long enough to have opinion on that), but it actually makes the fuel to burn more efficiently. Essentially, what I am trying to say - driving the diesel car on RPM which is below Turbo range will impact the reliability, not only you are risking to block DPF, but as well turbo itself. So it is better for a car and for the engine to actually be in the turbo range. Finally, this is really cost vs. benefit. If you drive relatively low miles (under 25k/a) then you better off staying in turbo range - the fuel saved will not cover maintenance costs. If you doing a lot of miles (e.g. company car, which is unlikely to be Lexus IS) then maybe it is actually worth to save money stis way - yes after 60k miles you will have to replace DPF and the Turbine (and maybe other pieces ... like the whole engine :D), but the fuel saving will work out better than maintenance. Though, I am unsure if that saves money (unless you sell the car just before breakdown), here are my calculations: 12000 annual (that is about average for private cars): at 45MPG it will cost you: £1188 at 55MPG it will cost you: £962 worse case scenario - you will have to replace turbo after 5 years (£1500-3000) and DPF (maybe twice £1200) ~£3500+ you're saving on fuel 5 years £1132 Obviously, you can have best of both - if you do maybe one day driving in 5th to flush the turbo and partially DPF, then you can still save money. Note: Above calculation is just part of the whole story. I am sure there are many permutations I didn't consider here and it is very complex matter. E.g. you might crash the car in 5 years or sell it, finally DPF are getting blocked anyway and even driving perfectly (in terms for DPF) you will still need to replace it sooner or later. Personally, I did all these calculations and therefore I have IS250 (and generally petrol cars). It makes sense for the high mileage company car to have diesel (which does maybe 60k annual), but not for personal use. You are better of if you can drive it on motorway, but especially in the city is more of the trouble than benefit. Furthermore, used diesel cars are bad investment, because they are likely have covered many miles and have DPF and Turbo partially blocked. To conclude any saving on fuel on diesel cars are contributing to spending on the maintenance, hence it only makes sense where you saving is greater than spending, and for diesel cars there are only few specific cases where it is the case.

I have never driven IS250 manual, but have driven 220d manual (obviously) and all my cars before IS250 were manual without exceptions. For me personally, the manual should normally be the choice for reliability, better fuel economy, lower maintenance costs and lower tax. As I personally have no issues using clutch or manual I would in many cases actually prefer to have a manual car, BUT: for all modern cars fuel economy on auto is no longer an issue (unless you are manual/clutch master and somehow can magically save the fuel), in case of IS250 automatic as well is more reliable and therefore cheaper to maintain, finally, even more cheaper to tax. It is not like manual is very bad on Lexus IS250, but Auto is definitely better - more comfortable, reliable, cheaper to maintain and to tax. If I would live somewhere outside of the city, I probably would consider manual as well, but for short drive in London in congested areas automatic all the way. P.S. When I tried 220d manual on motorway it was unable to keep steady 70, nor 80 MPH on autopilot and I had to shift down to keep it going uphill, which kind of defeats the point of autopilot on motorway. I guess this is not the case for 250 as it has more power, but would be interesting to know how that works.

I don't have much more to say except to agree - 250 auto is the way to go ( I had 3 myself and they all were excellent)! As for 250 vs. 220/200d - I believe it is not the 220/200d being terrible, but rather 250 being so brilliant which makes that whoooooping gap. Recently drove my friends BMW 320d manual... and it feels the same if not worse than 220d. Again that is more of the bad combination of gearbox and diesel engine in 220/200d. Another important thing is that people are using it in the city for short journeys where it must not be ever used! I believe that generally people who use this car for motorway driving don't have much issues at all.

Yes. Would agree "quieter" tyres alone doesn't make a quiet ride. That is leads me to another point I forgot to mention. All R18 RT's (not sure about others) are "XL" or "extra loads" (reinforced walls). Mine R17s are not and I was actually looking for ones particularly without reinforcement. This is because XL's rides similarly as "run on flats" and give you terrible hard ride. Which actually means more vibration inside and consequently more noise. Sent from my Galaxy S6 Edge using Tapatalk

No it is exactly same in terms of noise. My old SP's were 68db, so not expecting much, but I guess they better then some cheap ones with 74db. I can add pictures of how they looks fitted tomorrow, nothing amazing in terms of rim protection. I would personally pic RT's for more economy and TT/GT's for more grip on dry.. guess because of climate in UK I have gone for RT's. Sent from my Galaxy S6 Edge using Tapatalk

Sorry for reviving this old topic. They don't have name, but part number is 74217 / 74218.

Sorry for reviving this old topic. They don't have name, but part number is 74217 / 74218.

Hello Jack, Just fitted my fronts with Dunlop SP RT's. They all have MFS by default (or at least majority), which meant to protect the rim from kerbing, however from my experience there are hardly any tyres which does that. Definitely, not Dunlops - previous I have Dunlop SP's (not RT, TT or GT) with rim protection, it helps maybe on very gentle hits when parking slowly, but if bus gone wild (happens about twice a week to me) in narrow London's street and you made choice to "kerb" instead of writing-off you car to the bus... no rim protections wouldn't help. As I said, had a tires with quite pronounced "lip" and still got my rims "kerbed", lips got even "chewed" in places. Option 2 - drive super carefully and slow...

That is bu*****, my car was always serviced at lexus and they managed to change auto-gearbox oil twice (at 80k and 120k) - that is qute short "life-time". As per changing it yourself - it is impossible or at least impossible without proper equipment and original service "run-book". It has to be changed at certain temperature and rev's, otherwise you either overfill or underfill... I not even talking about lifting a car etc. - definitely not something you can do on your driveway. That doesn't apply to manual thought.

Yes they are RT with MFS, but mine's are R17 These are the ones I got: http://www.mytyres.co.uk/cgi-bin/rshop.pl?dsco=110&cart_id=32363804.110.9778&sowigan=So&Breite=225&Quer=45&Felge=17&Speed=&Load=&kategorie=6&Marke=Dunlop&ranzahl=4&tyre_for=&x_tyre_for=&Herst=Dunlop&m_s=3&rsmFahrzeugart=ALL&filter_preis_bis=&filter_preis_von=&homologation=&search_tool=standard&Label=C-B-67-1&details=Ordern&typ=D-119940 However, they do list R18 with MFS as well: http://www.mytyres.co.uk/cgi-bin/rshop.pl?dsco=110&cart_id=32363804.110.9778&sowigan=Sao&Breite=225&Quer=40&Felge=18&Speed=&Load=&kategorie=6&Marke=Dunlop&ranzahl=4&tyre_for=&x_tyre_for=&Herst=Dunlop&m_s=3&rsmFahrzeugart=ALL&filter_preis_bis=&filter_preis_von=&homologation=&search_tool=standard&Label=C-A-68-1&details=Ordern&typ=R-248032 Cannot confirm if that is right or not. As per Dunlop itself these tyres are only available with MFS (maximum flange shield). So you should be be fine with either TTs or RTs. Not sure why it is different from the site but Dunlop.eu has these 3 listed: http://www.dunlop.eu/dunlop_uk/tires/passenger/sp-sport-maxx-rt/?ean=3188649817429&from=browse http://www.dunlop.eu/dunlop_uk/tires/passenger/sp-sport-maxx-rt/?ean=5452000463531&from=browse http://www.dunlop.eu/dunlop_uk/tires/passenger/sp-sport-maxx-rt/?ean=5452000564207&from=browse Regarding MFS itself, Dunlop claims - "protects from kerbing". My personal experience - it can protect rim from pot holes in extreme circumstances, but by far not from kerbing. There is not enough edge to protect rim from scratching.. however, same would apply for both TTs and RTs again. P.S. I am currently looking for decent place to refurbish the wheels...

You talking here about rears or fronts? I just fitted fronts RT with MFS (rim protection), but mine are B, C, 67db (225/45/17). £61.5 per tire from mytyres.co.uk +£10 each for fitting, balancing, nitrogen inflation. It seems like TT better on dry grip e.g. sporty summer driving and RT better on wet and on fuel economy - I guess preference thing.

That is what I thought as well.Sent from my Galaxy S6 Edge using Tapatalk

Mine was replaced at 114k.

Choice is yours, if you want diesel and you feel that is right car for you.. go for it. Few things to consider: Obviously, XE20 (that is IS 2gen. as a whole) is really good value overall and comprehensive equipment by default. When considering used MB's and BMW's with same equipment they are at least 2x as much. Even XE30 has less cool stuff in "base trim" (e.g. keyless entry or what lexus calls "Smart entry" is an option for a lot of £££). I am still amazed with all gizmos I have in SE-L and that is third IS (XE20) I own. Few more things to consider: ALE20 (200d/220d) has no auto option. For me that was main issue and manual for this model is not great e.g. maintenance costs are actually higher and it is less reliable e.g. clutches likes to wear and slip. While on the other hand v6+auto is one of the best sorted options (at least for relaxing driving). Diesel engine is as well not the best ever (especially 220d), many reliability issues. 200d seems to have addressed majority of 220d issues, but still far from perfect. Finally, driving style and location - XE20 is motorway car, especially ALE20. In city you will get DPF problems very quickly, as well as clutch (might depend on person's "manual" skill). In other hand there is nothing better than autopilot on motorway (especially if you have radar one... which correct me if I am wrong was never an option with manual?!), unless you have a diesel and need to change gears down when going uphill. If you are really in need for a city car then why not CT (A10).. it is by far the best looking hatch for me.. maybe only new mb a-series with amg pack comes close in terms of looks. In conclusion IS 250 (or otherwise GSE20) auto is much better option. It is still quite efficient - sitting in London traffics all day my long term AVG MPG is 25.2, but you can easily get this car to 30-35 on mixed cycle. Other thing as mentioned here - http://www.lexusownersclub.co.uk/forum/topic/72447-increase-your-mileage-in-few-steps/ - IS is heavy car and that is something you shoudl use to get good fuel economy, what is applicable for 220d is aplicable 250 as well. Basically, you will save little bit with ALE20 at the pump, but will spend just as much on maintenance, while at the same time it will never be as wonderful to drive as GSE20. As well it doesn't seems like SE-L's cost much more than SE's hence it is all about being little lucky and patient until there is car in the colour option you looking for. Sent from my Galaxy S6 edge using Tapatalk

Exactly the same happened to me 2 months ago. It was not even rusted, but simply break-off. Get quote from halford - £660 part + "labour" (that is 2 bolts and 6 rubber holders ~15min when car is raised), didn't even bother to quote dealership. As mentioned "custom-made" ones would cost ~£400 - I got 2 quotes MIJ £354.99 + fitting, Longlife -£699 with fitting, neither would agree to post it and both required visit their workshop somewhere in midlands (that is for sake of "professional fitting"). As my one was not rusted, just got to the local eastern european service to check what is the condition of entire cat-back and end up paying £60 just to weld it back to place. Just chatting with them I find out that if that would happen again or if I want an "upgrade" they can do "end-to-end" titanium for 700eu (emhh.. that is £489 from engine to the end), "IS-F style quadruple tailpipes" included as an option at no cost. Not sure if I trust them (+ it takes 2-4 weeks for it being shipped to UK .. and I guess fabricated), but sounds reasonable upgrade. As for used ones from breakers - there are not many IS250's, majority are IS220d's and you would get no warranty that same won't to happen few miles after fitting. I would say - check whole rear section - if it is rusted then consider changing... if it is like mine just ask to weld it back.

Thanks for replies. Just quick update. I have called to Lexus Woodford (seems to be closest to me) and they said to send an e-mail as they "cannot take an order over the phone" (or the guy was probably busy with more profitable business). So I have sent emails to all Lexus dealerships nearby - will post the prices if they comeback with something. However, still not putting off the option to buy only clips and glue them back. That would become a problem only if I need to change windscreen. But then in any case these would be required anyway. Update 18/11/2015: Got my prices from dealership (that is Croydon service which has replied) and it comes as both good and bad surprise, see below: The moldings themselves are much cheaper than expected, and considering it is directly from dealer I would call that "cheap": So moldings - £87 +VAT (£43.5 each) - expected to be in 3 digits zone. However, the clips are £5.67 + VAT each... and this means each, as 10 are needed simple math it is £56.7 just for clips - this outrageous. My guess - they balanced the cost of moldings with clips so it is not going to end-up as mere 2 digit number. Total ~ £180. To my next question the answer was muddy: "Me: If I do it as part of the my service (4+ year old cars plan) would you be able to fit them, how much would be fitting? Joe: I would imagine there will be some sort of charge for it, but I am unable to tell you how much." Surely that won't come cheap - this is very intense job - no tools needed... just to push clips in... I cannot "imagine" how much that could cost neither. Just for fun: I asked how much are Engine cover Push-Type retainer clips - these are £1.14 + VAT each. Forgotten to mention to Joe, that all of the missing ones were lost by one of his colleagues in Lexus Hedge-End, because nobody else ever worked on car except of Lexus dealership. I guess previous owner was not picky enough to ask them to be replaced for free after service. Some other stuff: On same occasion I asked how much would be: Driver's mat (or rather set), that is expected - £81.33 + VAT Foot rest - £56.33 + VAT ... according to Joe "each" - it is good I only have one in my car.. that saves some money. I will update when I fix my moldings...

Hello All, This is my first post in Lexus forum so sorry if I have missed similar thread. My main question is - where to buy IS (2nd gen.) "Windshield Mouldings". There is thread in US forum how to replace them, but first I need to find where to buy them and it seems there are nothing available in UK. (e.g. http://www.amazon.co.uk/LEXUS-DRIVER-PASSENGER-WINDSHIELD-MOULDING/dp/B00RDLRU5C) Part numbers are (at least US ones, probably EU/UK ones are the same): Right - 75551-53020, Left - 75552-53020, Clips - 75545-53011. There are few in ebay and amazon from US and the shipping costs more than the moldings themselves. Breakers are not a good option either as I assume used moldings not going to be much better than the ones I have. Additionally, it seems they are kind of disposable. For this reason I would prefer to go for a new ones. I guess Lexus meant to design them so blue clips breaks when removing and the moldings can be re-installed, but in reality every second clip of molding breaks as well. If there is anyone in UK who have replaced them please let me know where did you get them from, maybe somebody knows the price from the dealers? I guess my final option is to glue the broken molding pins to the clips and instal the clips as normal. If anyone have any suggestions or have experience with this thing please let me know, thank you in advance, Linas