Drb80

2 hours ago, Shahpor said:

*sigh* Ok, so apparently this is important since you used a bold font.

Shall we take this point by point?

John didn't try to convince you, just stated his own opinion on the matter.  Also, you may have noticed that he has made no comment on your evidence now that you have produced it.

Slightly?  I thought I made myself pretty clear.

Not true.  I don't recall having any direct discussions with John before, but if I thought he was wrong, I would say so just the same.

Who said you couldn't have any opinion?  My concern was with the specific part I quoted, which I thought was argumentative and unnecessary.

 

So, having said all that, my question is what you hope to achieve by continuing this?  I don't mean your original question, just the manner of your responses since.

3 different people on this thread have told you it is not worth getting into a fuss about, so perhaps that should tell you what the people on this forum are like?

Maybe we can put this to one side now and carry on discussing what is important to you in this thread?

Oh dear, look who’s the argumentative one making a fuss now! and to think you’re the one who told me to relax and that it doesn’t matter.

John did try to convince me so don’t say he didn’t, read his replies and anyway stop bringing John back into this, this is about your feelings now, not that I’m interested. 

I managed to prove my challenged point and that was the end of it until you got yourself involved, all because you didn’t appreciate the manner of my response to another member, or so you say. I was well within forum guidelines and didn’t get personal so I don’t get what it’s got to do with you, I don’t know who you think you are trying to police a thread for specific manners and politeness, you’re acting like an oversensitive renegade moderator.

You didn’t make yourself clear either because you asked if I was the one trying to start an argument. I didn’t answer that silly question because there was nowhere further an argument or debate could go, so it was finished until you hijacked the thread and started your own argument which really is a pointless waste of time, though you seem to be getting some kind of enjoyment from it.

Anybody can see that all this after the event bickering is not necessary and I’m sure most people have refrained from contributing here because it’s just embarrassing, I’m actually ashamed of myself for allowing you to pull me in this far.

You don’t have anything to contribute to this thread so how about putting yourself to one side and allowing anybody with knowledge of the GS to contribute if they wish, you’re boring and if you think you’ll have any success in dictating to me you are very wrong, your gold member supporter status has clearly gone to your head.

On 28 January 2017 at 1:14 PM, Shahpor said:

Mark, are you trying to start an argument?

The reason I ask is that John has said nothing that warrants this kind of response.  Saying it's not worth arguing about is not 'taking the moral high ground', it is just good sense.

I have had several debated in my time here (a couple of them quite lengthy!), and I have generally found the people on here laid back and respectful.

So, let me add to what John has said and say relax, it doesn't matter.

So somebody tries to convince me of something that I know not to be true and suggests I have no evidence, I supply the evidence and slightly indirectly I am told I’m being argumentative, over excited, disrespectful, without good sense and have things in a twist.

Anybody would think I had been abusive or had not ended this debate with what I think is an interesting and at least evidential reply.

John is an advanced member and known to some of you here so gets preference over myself and that’s fine but I think it’s unfair to suggest that I have no right to an opinion or challenge to a claim within my own thread and if I do I’m being unreasonable and whatever my concerns are they are unimportant. 

Read the title of the thread and you should understand that it is somewhat important because I am questioning and bringing into debate the differences between the gen 3 and 4 no matter how small or unimportant they are to anybody else.

15 hours ago, AmbroseJohn said:

In the absence of any evidence to the contrary, it not unreasonable to accept the stats, however ridiculous you may think they are. Does it really matter anyway, it's certainly not worth starting an argument about. 

I accept the varied stats but what I don’t accept is your claim that it takes 0.7 seconds to get from 60-62mph and it does matter because you are still trying to convince me and anybody who reads this thread that you are correct when you are wrong, whilst taking the moral high ground in what I suspect is an attempt to conveniently end this debate, anyway here’s another explanation with evidence which I feel is more than enough for anybody to understand:

0.7 seconds represents 8mph in a 0-60 time of 5.6 seconds when the linear curve is straight. The first graph shows an almost straight yet accelerating linear curve for the 450h which proves that 0.7 seconds represents approximately 8mph from start to finish and not as slow as 2mph at any point. The other graph relates to a Kia deceleration curve that does show 0.7 seconds from 60-62mph and the final graph explains both curves.

I hope you got something from that John because I certainly did, Honda S2000’s are a lot quicker than I would have guessed.

16 minutes ago, rayaans said:

Essentially, what you need to know is the 4th gen GS450h feels about the same as the 3rd gen in terms of performance

Its also better insulated and the rear wheel steering on the 4th gen is something surreal. Lane changes on the motorway feel like they're from another dimension.

The interior quality of the gen 4 is much improved but something to note is that the F-Sport is moderately firm compared to the 3GS so its worth a test drive. 

The 4GS and 3GS had identical 0-62mph times in the UK but the 4GS is certainly better in every way including driving dynamics.

I've been told about the rear wheel steering and I've also been told it makes the car more nimble and handle better than a 5 series, that would be nice.

22 minutes ago, AmbroseJohn said:

But the acceleration curve is not constant. There's a huge difference in the time taken for 0-2 mph than 60-62 mph. The formula is far more complicated than the one used in your calculation.

I did say that it's not a totally linear progression (acceleration curve) and I didn't claim my calculation to be precise. It was just an attempt to make clear that the idea that a 450h takes the best part of a second (0.7) to get from 60-62mph is a ridiculous claim. I find it a bit odd that you and others stand by that. 

37 minutes ago, AmbroseJohn said:

Quoted acceleration time these days are 0-100 km/h or 0-62 mph and the GS is 5.9 seconds. For the US market they use 0-60 mph figures and quote 5.2 seconds.

Hence the confusion.

If the Gen 4 is 0-62 in 5.6, it is indeed quicker than the Gen 3 but you'd probably never notice the difference anyway so don't panic. :)

I don't want to get hung up on the 0-60 times because like I said it's not important but lets have it right fellas. I know a cars 0-60 time isn't a totally linear progression though I'm sure the CVT makes it more linear than most but 2 (mph) goes into 62 (mph) 31 times, if you divide 5.9 by 31 you get 0.19, that would make a 0-60 time that was formerly a 0-62 time - 5.690 seconds which seems to be supported by this : http://www.lexus.com/models/GS/specifications/gs-450h-f-sport-rwd which suggests officially that the gen 4 is slower.

Is there anybody here that's gone from a gen 3 to a 4? it seems the gen 4 shares nothing with the gen3 other than the engine and a few switches, quite a rare car the F sport, less than 240 F sports sold in the UK since 2012.

2 minutes ago, royoftherovers said:

Mark,

In my book, the GEN3 450h,0-60 time was 5.9, thus making the GEN4 faster (if that is important to you) !

 

Regards

John

That 5.9 figure is officially incorrect : http://www.lexus.com/pdf/models/GSh_driving_performance_guide.pdf?utm_source=LexusOwnersClubUK&utm_medium=ForumLinks

It might be a 0-62 figure that gives a 5.9 time and that's why it's confused but I doubt it, anyway the gen 4 0-60 is not that important, I just wondered if others were aware of it or any other differences and advantages that the gen 3 might have over the gen 4.

Having recently sold my gen 3 GS450h I am soon to be buying a gen 4 GS450h F sport.

I notice the gen 4 emissions are down, economy is up and the official 0-60 time of 5.6 seconds is 0.4 slower than the gen 3.

I can understand why it's a little slower to 60 now but wondered if there's anything else that I might need to be aware of? 

I'm waiting for the dealer to decide how much money they will return to me. It was M.O.T'd last week with no advisories yet I received the car with both rear tyres worn down to the markers, one front tyre with a badly torn side wall and of course the leaking shocks, none of these issues were cited at the M.O.T. Apparently my car came with a standard 3 month warranty so they're attaching the suspension problem to the warranty (£500 maximum claim) but for now they're saying they'll contribute to 3 new tyres.

A local independent garage has the car and has documented the faults and next week I'm booked in at Lexus for its due 100k service so I'll have two separate evaluations and quotes for the work needed, I imagine once they see those along with photos they'll take me a bit more seriously, I'm still very suspect though about the M.O.T not giving the advisories.

Also Lexus looked at the history and told me that apart from a recall the car has not had any replacement parts or repairs with them and the history with them couldn't be any better, the previous M.O.T's only ever mention worn tyres as advisories.

After owning my GS450h for less than a week I have noticed that two of my shock absorbers are leaking, one front and one rear.

If I change the shocks for something aftermarket making the AVS redundant does it cause warning messages or any other problems?

I would prefer the OEM option (I think) so any advice on either option would be greatly appreciated.

Hi forum

A first time Lexus owner here, mine's a GS450h and I'm impressed to say the least.

I have a few areas of interest I'd like to better my understanding of so I'm hoping this forum can help.