19 minutes ago, Hatat said:

Thanks man for sharing your thoughts don't worry I won't rev the car when I see any French Police🤣 do you reckon the it's same for the rest of the EU? Countries like Germany, Switzerland and the rest?

I reckon going to Paris will be problematic? 

No - not an issue. Think of literally 10s of thousands of cars driving from UK to Nürburgring every year. They are barely road legal, nevermind OEM. Yes France has stricter laws regarding modifications, but they apply to French cars only... with exception of what I said clearly and obviously dangerous mods. 

So as long as your car does not look something like this:

... you will be fine. 

Germany also not an issue, it is more relaxed than France in a sense that you can certify mod on your car, rather than needed national certification of each mod for each car model. Not sure about Switzerland, but again - the strictest country in Europe is France when it comes to car modifications, it only get's better after that.

You cant freely take modified British car to France. 

Yes - France does not allow unauthorised/uncertified modifications. Down to things like wheels - you just can't put aftermarket wheels on car unless they are specifically model certified. The way it is dealt with is via similar process as MOT in UK i.e. if you take modified car without certification it will simply fail. However, when it comes to foreign cars France would rely on country of origin to inspect the cars. So if you car has MOT in UK, then it is good to go - it is none of French business what is modified on your car, it is not for them that are certifying it. 

As long as your car is somewhat road legal they not going to pick on modification. By "somewhat" I mean no stupid camber, no flames shooting out of the bonnet and similar. For them to take action your car would have to be obviously unsafe for public roads.

In short their rules do not apply for cars registered in UK and just visiting, expect of things like tyre thread depth which you have to comply when visiting. My assumption would be that exhaust should not exceed certain noise levels as well, but possibility of you being pulled over for that is non-existent... unless you stop in front of police and start revving the engine.

I agree with that, my problem is rather prioritisation - we starting from smallest and least polluting industry (Transportation) rather than most polluting (Manufacturing). As such we are inefficient in making those vehicles which suppose to be greener to be. Also for me it seems that BEVs are more of political tool to control and punish the population rather than genuine attempt at solving climate change. I know it sounds little bit like conspiracy theory, but one has to question why we are forced in using public transport "because of little pollution caused by cars", but we actually encourages to consume as much as possible otherwise?

Yes I agree - source of our fuel are still evil dictatorships, if not in form of ruzzian czars then in middle-eastern sheiks... having fuel source which does not require to be dependant on authoritarian regimes would be welcome, sadly BEVs are just not there yet and trying to force them upon population right now feels like sub-optimal solution.

2 hours ago, LenT said:

 

It rather depends on why the tyre is cheap!

Presenting it with a combination of adverse road conditions - such as cold, snow and ice - is no time to discover that the manufacturer used inferior materials and poor design technology.  It may sound obvious, but I avoid anything that’s merely cheap if my life depends on it!

However, there are many alternatives to Premium priced tyres.  For example, many major manufacturers produce lower cost ranges simply by offering a more restricted range of sizes - but still applying the sophisticated tyre design and materials development that they’ve invested in.

If it helps, here’s a website that claims to list the lesser known brands owned by the major tyre manufacturers.  I think it’s reasonable to presume that they maintain their standards while reducing the price.

https://tyres.rezulteo.co.uk/expert-advice/before-buying/brands-products/leading-tyre-manufacturers-which-brand-belongs-to-which-group

Absolutelly, I just used cheap winter tyres on car in arctic conditions and they were very dodgy  (not much choice - it was rental). It was -20C and therefore main roads were dry, even summer tyre could have handled that, but going on slippery side roads was a real challenge. And we talking here about literally brand new tyres with probably less than 100 miles on them.

Yes there are situations where even cheapest winter tyre outperforms best summer tyre, but they are very specific situations. Otherwise, same like one can tell shaite summer tyres from good ones in summer, likewise one can tell shaite winter tyres from good ones in winter. If anything it makes more difference in winter than summer, my opinion is that summer tyres are easier to make so if companies can't make good summer tyres, they have no chance to make good winter tyres.

Usually such deal would only make sense if Toyota had Century cars that could be sold for general public, but they don't, so it would not make much sense. That said - it would be interesting to see royal family or government using them, quite good value also me thinks... certainly better than Jaguars and Range Rovers.

9 hours ago, hondansxr said:

A cheap set of winter tyres would be better than a seto of summer tyres

Absolutelly not. Maybe depends on exact conditions, but particularly in UK that cannot be further from the truth. For set of cheap winter tyres to have an edge it has to be deep snow/packed snow conditions that basically does not exist in UK for more than few days.

Also Nexens are one brand I avoid, old memories, so perhaps I unfairly discount them as budget tyres, but I have once replaced brand new set of Nexens, because they were horrible. 

5 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

20-30 years they could be far more politically aligned with the West than any other country in the region. 

I don't disagree with some of the things you say, but do think you underestimate them.  In fact I think the West does in general, which further plays into their hands.

If we are talking about 20-30 years perspective then anything is possible, I would not speculate where Iran will be in 30 years. 

Also I agree with your second point - west underestimates how evil and efficient dictatorships could be and relies too much on China. Same mistake as relying on ruzzian oil, becoming too dependant on dictatorships is generally bad idea.

Likewise I agree that AI will shape our future very soon, I am just not convince we will need BEVs in the future or that they will help environment, so anything in that direction in my view is wasted effort. Primarily because cars are minor contributor to global warming. If we want to tackle global warming we need to look into other sources of emissions. 

To be fair Lexus is kind of fading away. Hard to say what it will become, but it is increasingly similar to Toyota.

From true Lexus models there is only LC left. I guess LS could be considered "true" Lexus because Mirai used Lexus platform rather than other way around (although platform being owned by same parent company makes this point is kind of moot). It also could be argued RX does not have direct equivalent in Toyota range, but all other Lexus models nowadays are just Toyota with lipstick:

NX = RAV4

ES = Avalon

UX = CH-R

LBX = Yaris Cross

GX = 4 Runner

LX = Landcruiser

CT = Auris

Now not all cars are bad, and some provide extensive improvements - like GX550 is great looking mid-size SUV, NX is quite a lot more premium than RAV4, but importantly RAV4 was fundamentally strong platform, so it is good car... but otherwise Lexus is becoming just top trim in Toyota line-up, rather than standalone Luxury Brand.

When one is buying BMW, it isn't just some Opel badged differently and with more leather, same for Merc... I have always considered Audi as less luxurious than other "premium" brands simply because it shared a lot with VW, but even then Audi at least option of their Quattro system (with caveats), also Audi get's some unique performance engines that are not shared with VW, also also - Audi sometimes shares platforms with Porsche now... but Lexus really just takes Toyota model, changes some angles and creases in the body panels, adds more leather, adds worse navigation system with more confusing controls, adds better sound system and that is about all. All Lexus cars now get's identical engines with identical power as their Toyota counterparts and they are even slower, because they are heavier. They don't even try any arbitrary power restriction marketing like Audi, where same engine in Audi get's 320HP, in VW 280HP and in Skoda 265HP... I hate that in VW group products, but at least there is perceived benefit of having Audi + Quattro (even if it is haldex based). Whereas doing blind test in Lexus vs. Toyota it would be hard to tell the difference. Even pricing wise the gap between Lexus and Toyota is shrinking, Toyota is going more upmarket, Lexus is going more downmarket. Take NX, RAV4, BMW X1 and X3... at first it seems like RAV4 goes more against X1 and NX more against X3, but then upper trims of RAV4 actually costs more than lower trims of X3 and NX. And generally even starting price of Lexus vs Toyota is much closer. On BMW there is clear distinction X1 starts at 34k, X3 at 46k, but on RAV4 is 38k and NX is 43k. No X1 ever cost more than X3, yet as I said RAV4 can easily cost more than entry level NX or BMW X3. I really don't know why, but Toyota just does not try to position Lexus higher.

Whereas Century has always been highly regarded and totally different car in Japan, I kind of doubt it will ever leave Japan, but I guess that is decision Toyota made - they are not making Lexus their flagship brand, no Toyota is the flagship brand itself. Lexus is losing relevance when Toyota itself is becoming premium brand nowadays, and they reaffirming that statement with Century. 

No - not even similar.

Also which V8 -  1UZ, 3UZ, 1UR? Obviously none of them would have mountings in same place as diesel, but some of them would have them in slightly more convenient spot. 1UZ would be simplest swap also easiest to fit, but you likely will also need different gearbox and bell housing adapter, custom aftermarket ECU. There are loads of things that would not be straightforward at all. Also you would be better of starting with IS250 (because petrol) and also because it is v6, so you already have banked exhaust and wiring meant for petrol car, diesel would be different with DPF, downpipes from turbo, very different wiring (but you would need custom wiring loom anyway).

Is this question, statement or what? What you want to know exactly? 

Technically possible, practically complicated. Generally would be interesting project, I would like to do it myself, but I don't have place or time to do it. 

3 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

Iran's population (ie ordinary people) have  always been fairly pro western, it's just the religious leaders who've been more beligerant. An interesting statistic about education in Iran is that women make up 70% of STEM graduates, far higher than in Western countries. Education, especially for women, is a leading indicator for development, productivity and growth, which in turn lead to more democratic inclinations.  In any any event, even a move towards fullly secular leadership, and away from a theocratic one, is likely to align Iran more closely to the West. The reasons for that include Iran being the strongest Shia state amongst mainly Sunni theorcracies, as well as (with the exception of the mullahs) being historically friendly towards Jews and the existence of Israel. Also, once you remove the threat of being an enemy, you remove Iran's need to sponsor terrorism, and so it could become a powerful ally in any war on terror.  Practicalities aside, there are many benefits to both parties.

For Iran is draw at best... some of the stats you mentioned are interesting, but quite far away from being indicative of "hidden pro-western" sentiment. It remains to be seen, but my bet would be that iran will remain on the side of china and ruzzia in short-to-midterm future. 

3 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

I'm not using China's own stats, nor even news stories, but reports and research from New Scientist.  Whilst it's true that China is behind the West in using renewables, it suppliies the West with most of their equipment. It's also catching up on its own usage, with significantly more wind and solar installations being built than the US and Europe. Sure, China still uses a lot of coal, but most new plants are now being assigned as simply backup during the transmission to renewables. Whilst I was commenting more on overall capabilities than EVs, it's worth pointing out that BYD overtook Tesla in sales at the end of last year. I know people like to knock China, but it would be foolish to underestimate them.

As for the batteries, I doubt they're looking for investment, as it's a joint venture with Microsoft. This is also not just about one specific example,  but the principle of how fast technology can move.  To find an alternative to lithium would take years of testing and screening the possibilties. Microsoft's AI took only months to screen 32 million materials and come up with one candidate that produced the results. There are many research projects looking into renewables and alternative sources of energy and storage. We know from history that we will find better ways, and that they just take time. This kind of development shows that AI has the potential to reduce that time from years or decades, down to months.

I think people are still unaware of the capabilities and potential of AI, it's far more advanced than people think. However, as people tend to focus on the scary stuff about it, here's an amusing story. A  Google eemployee was questioning one of its AIs about whether it had real feelings, at which it replied yes, and went on to explain them. It was then asked if it was ok to examine its code in order to study it for signs of how real feelings might be formed. At that point the AI asked for a lawyer to advocate for its rights, and one was engaged.

So you are using chinese stats, because if you wouldn't be using them then you wouldn't say BYD overtook Tesla, because the didn't... Also BYD isn't a Tesla (not to say Tesla is great company, if anything I would predict they will be bankrupt in less than decade)... it is like saying Casio overtook Rolex in volume of watches that they have sold... no sorry wrong analogy... because Tesla is not Rolex, Tesla is more like Casio.. and BYD is more like Ching-chong-chow watch company which makes cars primarily for Chinese market. Their sales are primarily Chinese market and therefore the numbers are outright fake. Apparently they sold 270,000 cars outside of China (mostly poor developing countries) which is the number I trust, yet they state that is mere 3% of their total production... meaning they claim to have made 9 million cars total. This being Chinese numbers I would say it would be safe to divide it in half twice. Not to mention they not exclusively making BEVs even if they claims they have sold twice as many BEVs as Tesla.

Also I know and I understand that some models of BYD looks to good to be true, but you guessed it - that is because they are not true. I have been in BYD factory and I have seen the cars they make (be it in 2018 and I assume things have changed since then), they look very nice from few metres away, but they are made of trash, literally fall to pieces in days of use. The only real value of BYD is their ownership of foreign car companies, the china business will always remain domestic only, maybe some other poor countries, but it will never meet our standards (this statement may age badly). 

China has strong central "government" (dictatorship) with strong central planning policies, so if they want to build 10 gazillion solar power stations, or billions of BEVs they can simply decide and do it and then report whatever they like. That doesn't make them advanced or green, if you thought greenwashing is bad in the west then it looks almost funny in China. Corruption is rampant, so when they say they built whatever million of something, then realistically 50% was never built and 50% of remaining 50% was defective and then 50% of remaining 25% failed within days of running. This applies to everything and brings us nicely on absolutelly 100% fake BYD sales figures. They not overtook shaite - they build EVs and park them in the fields to rot. It is all centrally planned, they been told to beat Tesla by government and they did it ON PAPER. Those cars were not sold, some of them probably were not even built. Also beating Tesla in sales volumes is kind of irrelevant fact, Tesla sales volumes are irrelevant, so what that they beaten Tesla? When they going to beat Toyota, VW Group in validated and accurate sales figures outside of china that is going to count. I can also invent any number myself, but it does not make it true. That is before even considering that EVs aren't even good for environment (my personal opinion) and current generation EVs will soon be obsolete massive piles of toxic waste. So china might be leading in some thing, but they are not necessarily good things.

Honestly - you have way too much faith in China and non-sensical stats they provide. The whole country is backwards, culturally the people are medieval, it would have taken them 50 years to catch-up with the west and that was before they started making leaps backwards due to deranged authoritarian regime which wants to control power at any cost.

Now final thing regarding China... which could look like I am contradicting myself here - our governments sadly fails to curtain their regime influence and we may end-up too dependant on them. Sadly they remain too convenient and profitable to do business with that we still look past things like genocide happening there... and they with their centrally run dictatorship are more efficient than us and may catch-up or even overtake us if we let them.

3 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

I doubt they're looking for investment VS.  as it's a joint venture with Microsoft

So they not looking for "investment", they have already secured it and Microsoft has few billions to burn anyway. Yeah makes sense.

3 hours ago, Bluemarlin said:

I think people are still unaware of the capabilities and potential of AI, it's far more advanced than people think.

Most of my shorter posts are written by AI already which impersonates my style of writing quite well, I just adjust it slightly and it is good to go.

It is both far more advanced that people think... and far more dumber that people thing. Although much is to do with artificial limits added. For example Chat GPT was amazing when it launched and now it is barely useable, because they basically castrated it and created so much rules preventing it from working properly that 9 times out of 10 I get answer - "I’m sorry, but I can’t assist with that. Let’s move on to a new topic."

5 minutes ago, GMB said:

Let me just say  -  Nuclear Fusion.  Sounds wonderful.  Any takers?

Seems like any solution that would solve all the issues... my view - if with 40s technology we managed to solve nuclear fission (not even we, maybe 5% of world scientists in US), then I can't believe with todays technology we can resolve nuclear fusion. However, the funding is just not there.

4 minutes ago, Bluemarlin said:

A young man like yourself should be thinking more long term LInas 😉

With Iran's ever growing secular population, who are largely pro Western, things could change dramatically. My personal view is that the religious extremists are on borrowed time. If and when that happens, and Iran shift to a secular democracy, then the US and Europe would be more natural allies than Russia and China.

China's not worried either way, as the other big shift in the power balance in the Mid East is the reducing importance of oil, as everyone switches to renewables. As it stands China are way ahead of anyone in the global manufacture and supply of the technology and equipment for that.

In other, vaguely related news, just read in New Scientist that AI has taken decades off normal scientific research and come up with a new material that enables batteries to be manufactured with 70% less lithium.

It is always old men that are thinking long term... just the way it is.

Not necessarily that I disagree with you, but for each of your point I can play devils advocate... 

Why do you think Iran's secular democracy would be pro western? Or why do you think it would be democracy, it may as well just be another form of dictatorship? In short - fall of current dictatorship is most likely to be replaced with another dictatorship, not democracy and there is very little reason for any form of government to be pro-western there. I just can't see the reasoning behind this claim.

Secondly - I hope you not using China's own stats for their adoption or readiness for anything? Because if you do, then I sadly need to inform you they are ahead of nothing, all their stats are made-up, they don't make as many EVs as they claim and those that they make are rotting in the massive fields because they either do not work, or nobody wants them, or they fail as soon as somebody tries to use them. All this green revolution in China are totally made-up story. And whatever little they have is all stolen technology, they haven't invented anything meaningful since probably year 900, when they figured out how to make gun-powder.

Also I will believe that batteries can be made with 70% less lithium when I see them. I may be old fashion, but I am not into religion and EVangelism is a religion, sadly scientific journals seems to be penetrated with that nowadays. To be clear here - I am not saying it didn't happen, they may have found a way to make Battery with 70% less lithium by using AI, however that is not the same as saying "they are ready to make that Battery using mass production methods at anytime soon". Now I am sure such article as always says "we have working prototype and in 12 month we will start pilot of the technology, INVEST HERE!", but so far I keep seeing these claims times and times again for decades and billions invested and lost, but no working product. So needless to say I am sceptical.  

1 hour ago, peniole said:

Specific Crimes

Genocide

Coined in 1944 by legal scholar Raphael Lemkin, ‘genocide’ is a term with both sociological and legal meaning. As Lemkin explained,

the term [genocide] does not necessarily signify mass killings. More often…the end may be accomplished by the forced disintegration of political and social institutions, of the culture of the people, of their language, their national feelings and their religion. It may be accomplished by wiping out all basis of personal security, liberty, health and dignity. When these means fail, the machine gun can always be utilized as a last resort.

For Lemkin, the violence inflicted against the individual is secondary to the aim of the destruction of the larger group to which individuals belong.[28]

Our current understanding of genocide shares a great deal with Lemkin’s interpretation: It is a special, collective type of violence enacted against a specific people. The term was defined with greater legal specificity in the Genocide Convention as acts “committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group.” These acts could include components such as “(a) Killing members of the group; (b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group; (c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part; and (d) Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group.”[29] This definition is mirrored in Article 6 of the Statute of the ICC, which gained jurisdiction over crimes occurring in Palestine since June 13, 2014,[30] and in the Rome Statute, to which Palestine acceded on January 2, 2015.

During the 2014 Gaza War, the U.N. Special Advisers on the Prevention of Genocide issued a statement that they were “disturbed by the flagrant use of hate speech in the social media, particularly against the Palestinian population,” and that “individuals have disseminated messages that could be dehumanising to the Palestinians and have called for the killing of members of this group,” while “remind[ing] all that incitement to commit atrocity crimes is prohibited under international law.”[31] This sort of language is not isolated, either. Israeli lawmakers have publicly called for action against Palestinians that would clearly meet the definition under the 1948 Convention. In 2008, Matan Vilnai, the Deputy Defense Minister for Israel, declared that the increasing tensions in the Gaza Strip would bring on a “shoah” (or holocaust). He stated, “The more Qassam [rocket] fire intensifies and the rockets reach a longer range, they will bring upon themselves a bigger shoah because we will use all our might to defend ourselves.”[32] Israeli Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked posted a statement in June 2014 on Facebook stating that “the entire Palestinian people is the enemy” and he advocated for Palestine’s destruction “including its elderly and its women, its cities and its villages, its property and its infrastructure.” The post also called for the killing of Palestinian mothers who give birth to “little snakes.”[33] The language is shocking, and when combined with the policies enacted by the people saying things like this, it becomes clear that the actions of Israel could constitute genocide.

Professor of international law Francis Boyle agrees, and he testified in 2013 that “The Palestinians have been the victims of genocide as defined by the 1948 Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide.” He went on to say that for the past 65 years, the Israeli government, and the legal systems before them, “the Zionist agencies, forces, and terrorist gangs – have ruthlessly implemented a systematic and comprehensive military, political, religious, economic, and cultural campaign with the intent to destroy in substantial part the national, ethnical, racial, and different religious group (Jews versus Muslims and Christians) constituting the Palestinian people.”[34]

The repeated campaigns of violence into the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), causing a civilian population to constantly live under the very real threat of airstrikes or other military action, and not allowing them to leave, seem to satisfy some of the elements of the crime as laid out. The same is true about the policies of tightly controlling food, water, electricity, and fishing – all of which warrant at least investigation by the ICC.

https://worldwithoutgenocide.org/genocides-and-conflicts/israel-palestine-conflict-history-causes-and-international-law#_ftn34

and today we see south Africa arguing the same in the Haugue https://apnews.com/article/israel-palestinians-south-africa-genocide-hate-speech-97a9e4a84a3a6bebeddfb80f8a030724

 

I also see you ignore this bit:

I'm guessing then this is acceptable?

 

Neither side are angels, and Bluemarlin again hit it on the head.

I am with you on this, Hamas may be terrorist organisation who committed or are committing terrorist acts, but Israel overall policy for Palestine and generally Arab minority in the country is that of genocide. Overarching goal is to either eradicate people, or eradicate their culture whereas overtime "2 state solution" will not be needed as there will be no such people as Palestinians. Also it is kind of hard to accused Palestinians of anything considering they are living in open air concentration camp for decades now... and the only reason Israel can get away with this is memory of WW2 and holocaust. Kind of ironic that people who should know the best are the first ones to forget. 

Now that said - it is quite far from the topic of iran proxies and chinese response. I know that attacks on shipping is in response to Israel's invasion of Palestine, which is in response of Hamas terrorist attack, but we need to understand that Palestinians and their cause and Israel is really just as side story to larger Geopolitical gamble. ruzzia, iran and china are generally interested in destabilising west, ruzzia desperately needed to open new fronts, they did it in ex-french colonies to distract Europe/EU as France's military is big part (note France's support is nowhere the top of the list for Ukraine, France really playing minor role, even Germans who were really slow are now way ahead), then Israel was just what was required to compromise US resolve. I know now there are many issues, but war in Israel marked the point where US could not agree to any more aid to Ukraine. And now iran and houtis attacks on shipping is just wider destabilising actions, they need to be looked at in this wider context. Then suddenly it becomes clear why china isn't really worried about it, because it works out for their general strategy.

Sadly, there are no simple solutions for that, no "silver bullet" - practice and experienced is the only answer... but in UK there is nowhere to get that.

• So option 1 - get some winter driving experience, there is training for that abroad, also one can go for winter holidays more often, there advanced courses (although they may be focused on wet driving/aquaplaning in UK, but still useful).
• Option 2 - not to drive. That is genuinely workable option with UK having maybe 2 days per year of winter it is doable (I know I deliberately taking pssss here, but winter days are few enough to be able not to drive, it is genuine option).
• 3rd is not really an option in my view - but if one has to drive, like they went to meet family up north, it was 9C, then suddenly out of nowhere there is blizzard and it is -5C at night when they have to go back... and they have to do it because tomorrow they are going for long planned holidays. Then keeping distance, driving slow and taking extra care is the only way. It is not an option, because it is no point of being "mindful" or being "careful" if one fundamentally does not know what to look for. Sorry to say, but most British drivers do not know what they looking for in slippery conditions, that is not criticism it is just a fact and result of generally mild weather in UK. To be mindful of danger you need to know exactly how to deal with it. It is like saying to person "go pick-up that snake", we all know that snakes are poisonous, quick and can bite - still that does not help at all in picking-up the snake. So same with driving on slippery roads - one needs to know how to drive in those conditions and practice it, it is not enough to know it is dangerous. 
• One thing NOT to do - get winter tyres and act like it is summer. Sadly, this is in my experience most common thing people do, not because they are stupid, not because they are not careful, but because with lack of real-life experience people just don't know what they looking for, they think they have prepared they don't all the steps on "top 10 tips winter driving list from Sunday Times", but they don't understand they simply don't have skills and experience to deal with situations they will encounter. Tyres gives you nothing if you don't know how to use them, may even give false sense of safety until it is too late.

I am not saying don't get winter tyres, or not put -40C screen wash (by the way the thing is horrible if you driving on motorway at -10C), or not keep extra distance, but with all that preparation one still have to always default to option 3, unless they have completed option 1.

How to prepare car for winter, that is separate topic - I like to use some lubricant on the rubbers just not to get them frozen overnight. Other useful thing - if google says it will take 15 min to drive somewhere, just double that and add 30 minutes on top. First of all you need to prepare car after the night (if it was outside), warm it-up first, properly for like 10 minutes, clean it properly, not just little slot on windscreen. Obviously, having right tools helps, keeping car indoors or under the cover even better. Driving Lexus I found that lifting wipers is pointless as all of my cars had heated windscreen, but if you don't have it, then lift the wipers when you park. All this prep takes time, hence just blanket extra 30 min for any trip, because last thing you want to do in winter is rushing. General mechanical prep - noting special, tyres should be good, should be same, should be at the right pressure (in winter pressure could be lower, but must be even), all the fluids should be right and to the right level. Small note on winter screenwash, -10C, -15C, maybe even -25C are alright, but when you get into real winter screenwash with -40C it is alcohol based and alcohol tends to evaporate, so if you driving in real winter (-20C or such) and you try to use it at speed it will internally freeze out of the nozzle and makes amazing icicles, so you need to slow down, ideally nearly stop before using it, but if you doing 70 on motorway, it will freeze. Also remember -10C, - 50C whatever, that is not a problem. Worst temperature is -0C, or let's say between ~ +1C and -1C. That is when you get black ice and that is when no tyres helps. Above that is just wet, any tyres will handle that reasonably well, once everything freezes everything is evenly slippery and below -5C actually dry, but that temperature around 0C is most dangerous. Aslo you can definitely see black ice if you know what you looking for, if not sure then slow down to relatively slow speed, make sure you have plenty space in front and behind you and start braking increasingly suddenly and you will figure out right away how slippery it is and at what point your car loses grip, it is good test to do if you not sure how slippery it is or hoe well your tyres can cope with it.

2 weeks ago I was driving for a week in ~ -10C-26C for a week with RAV4 hybrid (fake-AWD) and brand new, but crappy winter tyres. It was rather scary how bad were those winter tyres, they looked good, but they were unpredictable, obviously being new car with all safety systems it was alright. Today I just got back from snowboarding where rental company failed me in providing "winterised" car, paid extra 90 euro for winter tyres and found Michelin PS4* on the car, then they gave me snow socks as "solution", which is not exactly the same. However, I must say PS4* were amazing, despite -10C and very dodgy mountain roads. I don't know if it was the * (star - BMW special fitment) that made a difference or it was something to do with BMW 4GC which despite being RWD only handled slippery mountains roads like a champ, but I had great time. Did car lost grip - yes of course it did, it was performance summer tyres on icy mountain roads, but it was always predictable and controllable ride. It is true that getting up the mountain is always safer than getting down the mountain (which you can as well consider tip), but I didn't have issues either direction.

On 1/16/2024 at 11:32 AM, Boomer54 said:

Interesting. The middle east is rapidly heating up. I am beginning to wonder if Iran and the USA will be in a state of outright war quite soon. If so, does Russia use that as an excuse to take its European agenda even further. As for China all of that serves to give them a window of opportunity in Taiwan. Frankly, I cannot remember a more dangerous time in the last 50 years than what appears to be facing us today.

I think that is kind of the point as to why China sits on side-lines. It does hurt them in short term, but in long term their strategy is to destabilise "the west". So they are alright with Iran backing houtis and can accept little bit lower exports, also let's not forget - this creates shortage and it is buyer who bares the additional costs. I guess in long term it may reduce their export volumes, but short term it is just extra cost for Europe. Also Europe is likely able to pay that higher cost, so it is win-win strategy wise, they hurt their geopolitical rivals whilst not losing anything at all themselves. Also it is known that houtis generally allow ruzzian ships past and I assume same applies to China bound ships, obviously controlling terrorist organisation is hard, so eventually they will target some wrong ship, but 1 ship from 1000s isn't that big of a deal for china. 

Answer is simple - economist ties with dictatorships does not prevent wars, I would argue it makes them more likely. Same like spectacular failure of German policy towards the ruzzia, same here - china is totalitarian state, any trade with us they going to exploit and use it as leverage to undermine us. So we should stop looking into precedent of European integration, the only reason trade prevents wars in Europe is because Europe is democratic, no democratic government ever going to sacrifice economy over some stupid war, but dictatorships will. I guess point I am trying to make - we should start sanctioning china now, and cutting our economic ties now, not when they invade Taiwan or somebody else. Because all this globalisation and trade for them means - more money to arm and more opportunities to get necessary technology for war. Sure there was time when china was liberalising and becoming more democratic (if we can call it that), I think it was fair to give it a chance, same for ruzzia - in 90s they were becoming more democratic so they deserved the chance, the problem is that we are too slow to act when country turns totalitarian. That even applies to Europe itself, Poland just barely averted democratic collapse, Hungary is openly pro-ruzzian and EU/Europe/Combined West completely fails to act. Turkey is hardly an ally, yet they still in NATO playing both sides.

That is why dictatorship looks at "us" and says "they are weak, we can manipulate them". Sadly, that is kind of true. 

13 minutes ago, GMB said:

 

Not wanting to be a pessimist but what if one dropped dead just after paying for future services. I bet you'd be mad as hell.  Ooops sorry that doesn't sound good.

And Linas, surely by now you know that NOTHING  is faster than a ratty Clio. It's just a fact of life.

It was legitimately fast one, my guess would be RS 2.0, so it does 0-60 in 6.7s and as we know RC300h had no chances against it. It even had speed lines and little wing at the back (pointing upwards and giving it's rear a little bit of a lift as it suppose to), so that should have been my sign to back off. 

I still don't think speed and acceleration is acceptable for RC300h, but that is my opinion I guess.

On 1/20/2024 at 11:49 AM, Malc1 said:

I doubt it’s just UK originating stolen cars feeding the Africa and Eastern Europe crooked car dealers and breakers ……..

How they get into containers and then freely onboard ships baffles me ……. does no one check, Maersk themselves whatever ? 
 

Clearly the UK insurance industry doesn’t care a hoot …… possibly not economically viable for them to set up any sort of checking system ! 

Simply up the insce premiums to cover themselves OR not even insure some marques …… like Range Rovers now I understand 

Best to simply own a car not worth thieving maybe 🤔

Malc 

UK insurance does not need to care - it is police job!

Shipping companies do not care either - they rent you container, you fill the container, if you want to send it over to Africa empty - that is fine. It is border control problem and responsibility. That said - UK has no fffing border control, certainly not on the way out, it barely exists on the way in. So the way they see this - there is no harm if "illegal" stuff goes out, it is on the destination country to check. In theory that works, but when destination country is Nigeria or Angola we all know what happens. They are just corrupt and nothing get's checked, by the time car arrives there it already has all the forged documents or maybe not... maybe $100 is all the paperwork they need.

On 1/20/2024 at 5:04 PM, malcolmw said:

As most of the countries taking in stolen vehicles have LHD cars, you might think that our RHD models would be less attractive.

UK is attractive country to steal from because we have loads of new premium cars in great condition, non-existent police response, non-existent boarder force. One can steal car from Germany, but apparently it is much harder to get German car out of EU, because Fontex apparently knows how to protect the borders and German Polizei takes no shaite for an answer. In EU there is no BS like in UK where they can catch person with tools, but without stolen car, or with stolen car and without tools and they can get away. No that doesn't work that way, if they get person with tools that is reasonable grounds for arrest, they will detain the suspect for say 72h and then comb thought his phones, chats, calls, locations etc. and track down what he was up-to. Also there are no excuse for driving stolen car like in UK, driving stolen car is in itself a crime. And I mean that is not only the case in German, most of Europe. Eastern Europe in particular, because they had a lot of issues with car theft, so by now they are very adept dealing with them. Also in most European countries there are not so much desirable cars - what are they going to steal? Dacia Sandero? Whereas UK is really heavy on particularly luxury SUVs.

So yes - logic says LHD should be more desirable than RHD, but countries where the cars are going to have so little of traffic laws that it hardly matters, they are only technically driving on the right side of the road. Secondly LHD cars are much harder to steal and to export, as such I assume they are much more expensive to buy and therefore not as desirable, but UK is kind of soft spot really, with lenient laws, high burden to charge for car theft, police that isn't really interested in investigating car related crimes, people who happy just to claim on insurance etc. It is just many different issues in one.

On 1/19/2024 at 4:21 PM, RONNIE W HODGEKINSON said:

Richard The lexus Link + app is all over the place at the moment So Don,t Let that put you Off...As Far as i know they are still working on the Software to iron out all the problems....But it aint Coming on the Fast Boat..!!! Happy Motoring With Your New AMAZING..!!!

They tried ironing it out for as long as I can remember... so 8 years perhaps... still hit and miss. Also it is highly model specific, I am sure most of features works on RX, but they are just not correctly disabled on RC. Overall, it is kind of sad because RC is really the car I want to like, but Lexus just didn't put effort into it, they knew it will be low volume product and the car always felt unpolished in my opinion. Not in any fundamental way, but especially around features, technology, how it is integrated together - digital dash is perfect example, it literally offers limitless possibilities to show any information, show maps like in other cars, it is just matter of developing little gadgets to display it... but it is as basic as it gets, there is so little customisation possible that it seems they never bothered to even try. NX and RC does not get LFA style instruments, but they have just so much more options and inflation available there.

On 1/19/2024 at 4:52 PM, Parker87 said:

Update on the Service Plan - I've just had a conversation with a Manager at the Lexus Centre involved and it turns out that my Plan has been calculated on the basis of my car being an RC-F! I suspected this but it's good to have it confirmed, and a new quote will be forthcoming. They declined my offer to accept an RC-F to balance the books 😉

This is sadly quite common i.e. confuse RC F-Sport with RC-F and it happens both ways. I don't mind it too much when some private seller lists RC300h F-Sport in RC-F section, but it clearly says 2.5L hybrid, but it really pisses me off when actual Lexus dealers makes this mistake and it is very common one at that. After all they are the people who should be experts on the car and if they can't tell RC-F from RC300h F-Sport, then it does not inspire confidence. Your one isn't even F-Sport, so I just don't understand why they made this mistake. 

1 minute ago, Tonyw said:

To be honest it’s more the depreciation that is killing me.

At least at 3yrs old the UX has taken its biggest hit, you would of thought 

In that case yes - UX has taken hit and it is in demand, so likely won't depreciate much for some time. 

2 hours ago, eightk said:

They’re only doing the RX so their name will still be mud as far as LC, LS, UX, NX and ES owners are concerned. If they do nothing their name will also be mud with insurers. See JLR auction prices for how well that plan worked out.

The only way to solve it is to make a Lexus something thieves aren’t interested in, by fixing every afflicted car. Every single one. By recall. Not by owners chasing Lexus on an individual basis because Dave down the pub said they could get something done about it if they asked nicely.
The first post from new members here is “my cars gone, apparently I could have had some plates fitted to stop it”. That ain’t good enough.

Suggesting to owners they fit immobilisers and (now proven pointless) steering locks ain’t good enough either. 

Definitely recall, I said same thing elsewhere - right thing to do would be to recall every car, but it seems they are not biting that bullet yet. To fix issue properly I assume they need to replace ECU, reprogram it at very least, although I assume if it wasn't designed for encryption it is fundamental enough to warrant replacement. That is a lot of money.

Other thing which may happen (and has happened), they may do it for US and leave UK to suffer, UK just isn't their key market and honestly they don't care what happens here in grand scheme of things, they have showed it times and times again over the years.

The other problem - this is not considered safety issue so DVLA does not give a flying f... I still think this is consumer protection problem. This isn't individual car, or small number of affected cars... this is issue with ALL the cars for like 5 years period (actually it is broader than I thought, before Colin listed all affected cars, perhaps only saving grace - not all cars are attractive for thieves). 

On top of that - let's just face it, it didn't come from nowhere, Lexus already had security vulnerability with keyless entry, so they are not Tesla that is coming from nowhere and who didn't know what the "real life" looks like, they knew any vulnerability will be exploited by thieves, they not small company either (Toyota certainly isn't and this is system comes from Toyota, RAV4 is widely known to be one of the most affected cars due to easy access of wiring). So it is absolutelly inexcusable they that they have not considered every aspect of the system. Like engine start and immobilisers has to be isolated from the rest and it should be buried under panels etc. This isn't even new concept - if you tried accessing immobiliser even on old Lexus/ Toyota you would know that is 2 hours job with dash out and then you need to program them once done, which is another 30 minutes. It is just unthinkable that they left CANBUS totally open and you can just plug into it and do whatever you like. 

11 hours ago, Tonyw said:

leaving ES ownership before it leaves me and maybe even spending less which is why the second hand UX

You got me confused here - so if I understood you correctly... you afraid of CANBUS vulnerability, but you looking to replace it with UX, which has same vulnerability? 

Or is it because Lexus offers some sort of protection for UX, but not ES?

20 minutes ago, ColinBarber said:

Yes. The facelift model introduced LED headlights which are CAN bus connected. Basically any IS built (not registered) from October 2016 until it stopped being sold here in 2020/21 - there were around 5,000 sold.

That is obviously almost all IS300h and maybe handful of IS200t. 

Also in many countries that receive such cars there is a view that Europeans were colonists (which we were), so buying cars that was stolen from some sucker is morally sound and justified (even if that sucker may be their relative trying to build their life in UK).

My point - I don't think the fact that car is stolen detracts much of buyers in countries where they are sold. Maybe it is not explicitly advertised, but I am sure nobody have any illusions of how the cars ended-up there.

I thought you car is red?