GSLV6

Long post...please bear with me: I think that people may be missing the real points here and there seems to be too much splitting of hairs on top trumps and technicalities that really don't figure at all in the marketing side. Lexus doesn't make marketing decisions based on straw poles about what people say that they might or might not want. They make marketing decisions much like any equivalent car manufacturer, based on sales figures particularly those from the largest markets. They do not care, or even think about how this might affect those "loyal" lexus customers who (like me) mourn the passing of possibly their best all round saloon, the GS. Whatever opinions are bandied about on personal preference, the fact remains, sales figures to one side, that the 3.0 V6 and the 3.5V6 were amongst the most reliable petrol engines on the planet by all measured assessments over the years and that they offered the best compromise of economy to performance. Whether we need a 3.5 V6 is irrelevant otherwise we'd all be conned into buying the absolutely godawful plethora of turbo/supercharged 1.5 litre direct injection disposable monstrosities. Before anyone gets hurt by that remark, it's incontrovertible that issues such as petrol dilution of oil sumps from direct injection cold running (cold start) foibles, equals more frequent oil changes and less engine protection, and that's before we even get to a puny little 1.2 or 1.5 motor, lugging about 1 to 1.5 tonnes, stressed to the nines to achieve over 200BHP and high torque figures. All the evidence from Honda and Ford shows beyond all reasonable doubt that these engines are problematic, short lived (by comparison with non-direct injection normally aspirated larger engines) and as such the carbon footprint over time is only likely to be higher. You can argue either way and try to justify your points but for some of us, we don't care if technology provides an alternative. The simple fact is that many of us don't care for those alternatives, in terms of pride of ownership, of likely longevity (most of these cars are frequently sold as disposable assets with shorter lifespans likely which helps boost car manufacturers towards their future model sales) or of the driving experience. And please, if anyone is tempted to respond by "telling" me what I would or wouldn't like or should like...don't go there! Some of the remarks (no names but we know who I refer to) on this thread have been downright arrogant, uncalled for, rude and aggressive. Some folk need to grasp the fact that we are all entitled to our opinions so to call people "stupid" is bang out of order on what is usually a more gentlemanly and better mannered forum. Might I humbly suggest that we try, at least, to keep it that way? There's a hell of a lot positive about the normally aspirated straight 6 or Vee 6. It's inherently smoother, better balanced, and in anything over 2.5 litre upwards, produces ample torque and power whilst remaining under-stressed, by and large bombproof reliability wise, simpler, and over time, likely to have far better longevity and durability. Some of us want a 3 litre or 3.5 because we prefer a lazier larger, less stressed engine that makes adequate power. This isn't about 0-60 top trumps (I couldn't care less what a 1.5 turbo 4 pot does the 0-60 in...really, it's an irrelevance) because any modern 3 litre normally aspirated car will have more than enough shove for safe overtaking and relaxed long legged motorway cruising, or for lugging loads up steep hills. Personally, I wished that I had kept my GS300. It was far and away the best car (and one of the better driving experiences) I ever owned, and I have owned fast German saloons and estates. What this whole thread boils down to is that Lexus are discontinuing (in the UK at least where sales figures of around 350 cars per year make no sense to them) possibly the best all rounder that they've ever made. Whether it is the "best" is irrelevant to them or to us, as sales figures are what it's all about. The GS was never picked up in anywhere like the same numbers of the target audience....executive company car fleets, because 1) it was sold at too high a cost compared with the economies of scale of BMW/Audi/Mercedes to compete and because 2) it appealed only to those buying (rather than leasing or as a company vehicle) to the over 40's due to initial purchase price and insurance. Take those main contributing factors to low sales away and compare the car like for like and it many ways it betters the competition, in reliability, comfort, finish and refinement. Performance figure comparisons belong on paper. The driving experience is what it's all about and sadly, part of that was lost when the switch to hybrids came along due to the weight penalty it brought with it and most certainly to the switch to fwd. Lexus do a good job (except I'd argue with the CT which is has imho appalling ride quality) and have made cars like the GS and even the RX hide their mass well. People in the market for the GS I don't think will want the LS. It's that much larger and costlier to buy and run, new or used, plus costs more to insure, and in the case of the hybrid, has a pathetic boot size for such a large car. The irony of all of this is that the best selling Lexus in the UK also remains the worst Lexus in the UK (the CT) which is beaten in just about every area except internal finish by its competitors and especially on ride comfort, which goes to prove that none of these decisions are made on what a great car the GS was. It was, and remains a great car. So where does that leave the customers who hanker after a 3.5 V6? Well, Lexus are mistaken if they think for a second that people are likely to stick with them and accept a 300h or the underpowered and rather rough running lump that the 250 is. I wouldn't. Those customers will be lost to Lexus but that doesn't really matter to them because they only amounted to 350-odd annually anyway compared with 21,000 for the RX, or even more with the CT. Hard facts, because running a successful business is about profit and reinvestment. Are electric-only cars really viable presently? No. You might like them an want to argue the opposite, but once you look into what viability entails, none of the arguments I've so far heard bear up to close scrutiny. Not if you do loads of miles and not based on purchase costs and most definitely NOT on carbon footprint. You have to look at the efficiency of getting electric from burning gas (where a majority of our electricity generation still comes from) in terms of the generation process, the distribution (and distribution losses) and charging losses (battery efficiency) and motive efficiency (motors and transmission). Petrol likely still remains more efficient and we will not have national capacity for a switch to electric any time soon, by all official estimates, not for well over a decade or two. So should you feel bad about running a 3 litre V6 until such time as things change? No, of course not. From every aspect including durability/ longevity and whole life carbon footprint it remains a valid choice. Sadly though, the powers that be disagree and will tax the behind off you should you ignore them and decide to buy one. Think about how that affects sales too. The reasons for people buying into electric-only are more due to the worries about particulates (valid and understandable), Nox (ditto), about government subsidies and about tax breaks making them suitable for urbanites and semi-urbanites who do relatively low annual mileages where cost of ownership may be lower over any given annual period. Not all of us want an electric only car (I certainly don't, at least not yet) and I'll be honest and say I only went hybrid because the car I wanted was still offered as a V6, and over the years, I have loved every 6 cylinder motor I've owned from my 1970's Triumph 2000TC through to recent cars like the BMW and Lexus models owned and because I wanted the extra grunt. We also have a butterfly-friendly Honda i-vtec and it wouldn't pull the skin of a rice pudding unless revved until the valves cry out for mercy. It was a decision of the head. A V6 is a decision of the heart as much as the head.

Prices have obviously risen! I double checked and I was slightly out as my battery was £180, not £150. Even so, that seems a pretty large step cost wise to £217 for this year? Personally, if mine goes again, I'll just buy one and fit it myself and save over £100.

I had one replaced last year by Cheltenham Lexus and pretty sure it was way cheaper than Cardiff are quoting!!! The battery itself is around £150 (deep cycle leisure battery from Panasonic). Labour is all of 5 minutes so don't be fooled by that one. £266 is daylight robbery. Here's the same spec as the Lexus one from a different supplier which will do exactly the same job: https://www.amazon.co.uk/d/Electrical-Power-Accessories/SuperBatt-Leisure-Battery-Caravan-Motorhome/B00WPZFAXK

The ES is only really with us in the UK because of USA demand. It was a big seller in the States and Lexus needed to make a decision whether to maintain models by sales numbers or because we in the UK by and large wanted a BMW 5 series competitor, which the ES by any stretch of the imagination is not. It's not a bad car per se, and I happen to like the interior very much, but the engine is a compromise too far to ever tempt me into one as is the FWD switch from the RWD GS. I'm not stuck on brand loyalty because brands change the goalposts according to sales and commercial decisions made in the board room. For me, the ES is using its interior, styling and badge to try and convince us in the UK that it's worth the cost of a well specified 5 series, which it is not. Whether it comes gold plated with a 15 year warranty is immaterial. It uses a relatively small 4 pot motor, lugging about batteries and an electric motor for about-town fluffy friendliness and better low speed mpg but that doesn't do anything for driving dynamics, especially since it is also FWD and it can't hold a candle to some 10 year old diesel 2 litre oil burners, let alone older ER46 6 pot 3 series BMWs (I had one and there's no way the ES matches that on performance or driving dynamics). So that brings us back to why own one? That's not ES bashing, that's simply looking at the facts. People seem to be paying the premium for the badge, the customer experience, the class leading interiors, the relatively cheap running costs (low taxation etc) and not for the performance. I think that the ES is a hard product to place in the UK because it really doesn't do anything that the IS250 can't already do except to offer a little extra interior space. I would be in the camp that argues that the GS was the natural break up the product line and for one, am sad to see it go. So now, we have the ES, then a big jump cost wise if we want an RX, and not everyone wants an SUV. I've discounted the NX as that doesn't offer much in the way of extra space or performance, if any, to the ES....or IS come to that). Now and ES with the 3.5 engine and RWD would be an altogether different proposition...oh wait, we had one called the GS!

True, the RX is heavier but on power or torque to weight, they'd still have it beat. The cars mentioned are all pretty powerful, even if lighter. X3 is 305BHP/295 ft-lbs; F-Pace 3litre is 300BHP and a whopping 595 ft-lbs torque...Audio also produces more torque. I'd say It'd be a lot closer if they had the additional 400Kg handicap but given most have similar power with more torque on tap they'd probably still take the honours. Academic though. I still wouldn't own any of the others.

+1, wrt pricing anyhow. Personally (and I know it's a very personal thing) I lost interest in the GS range when the Mk4 arrived. My favourite Lexus of all time was and remains the Mk3 GS300 which gave you more toys than you could shake a stick at in SE/SE-L trim and was like sitting in a gentleman's club. I had the SE and still rate it as the best car I've ever owned. The fwd cars do lose something of the driving dynamics and I haven't yet driven a hybrid with CVT that drives just as quietly or smoothly as the last of the sick auto box GS cars. They were wonderful things, killed off by draconian UK emission tax penalties (£500 annual tax was no joke for anything made from 2007 onwards).

Problem with videos like this is that they're a little misleading. I tried the same thing with a friend using a stopwatch to time how quickly 60 came up from a standing start. We averaged 5 runs and the average came out at 6.8 seconds, a little quicker than seen in the video above which was quoted at 62mph which is what you might expect (but remember engines all differ slightly in actual power output). We then used a quality GPS device to check speed at an indicated 60 (and this week I used a Nextbase Dashcam's GPS to do the same). At an indicated 60mph my car is actually doing about 56mph so actual 0-60 is likely about 0.5 seconds up so closer to 7.3 seconds and to 62 would be closer to 7.5 seconds. Splitting hairs I know, but about 7.5 is I think closer to the mark for the RX. That's still pretty quick and quicker than most executive oil burners. To put in perspective, that's a full second faster than a Mk1 Golf GTi or Volvo 850T5 but slower than the Mk3 GS300 which had a tested 0-60 figure of 7.1 seconds (GS430 being 5.9 seconds). I always thought my GS was quicker than my 3RX and had a debate with Rayaans I think it was a few years ago, who thought that the RX was the better performer. We know that not to be the case but it doesn't detract from the surprusing turn of speed from the big RX. I think that the equivalent BMW (the X3 is closer to the RX than the X5 in size) the X3Xdrive35i does the sprint in 5.3s, the F-Pace 3.0D does it in 6.1s and the Audi Q5 3.0tdi in 5.6s so many of these big prestige SUVs are all pretty nimble on their boots! They are well ahead of the RX which isn't really a sporty vehicle. It's more about wafting you from A to B in comfort with adequate performance. A good friend of mine has the Mondeo Titanium diesel and it's not really a match for the RX but is quite punchy.

+1 new or used, you do need to walk into premium Lexus model ownership with eyes wide open and a healthy bank balance. If they were 1 million mile cars where all you did was put petrol in them, everyone would be driving them. They're not. The engines, by and large, are utterly reliable and almost unburstable, but it's rarely the engines that give trouble...it's all the peripherals, just like most other cars. A few thousand for a roadworthy example in generally good condition is still a good buy however you want to look at it. To get it trouble free for the next 10 years probably wants three times the purchase cost spent on it and then it would still be cheap motoring. A sense of perspective sometimes defuses some of these debates which otherwise get a little too emotional between certain parties!

I agree. The GS is powerful but it is not a fast car by modern standards. Performance is not wanting in either the 300 or 430 models, and the 450h models go like the clappers. For overall balance the 300 is lighter and I prefer the handling on mine to a 450h I drove. Brakes are good and the performance is not likely to get you into trouble unless you go asking for it. The car has a high top speed but unless you're looking to exploit high speeds then it's as safe or safer than most equivalent sized cars on the road. All round air bags and curtains, good handling, good brakes. What's not to like? As Olliesgrandad says, most people get into trouble when they exceed either their own capabilities or the car's capabilities, or both. Knowing where each limitation lies is the secret to maintaining control. That and adopting a defensive driving style, exercising good observation, hazard awareness and car control.

I agree. Problems happen because there has never been a car made (whether prestige or not) that doesn't wear or have a few design or quality issues. Inevitably wear happens as much to cars as it does to their drivers! Considering any 20 or 30 year old car with over 150K miles which hasn't had a meticulous eye kept on it and a bottomless wallet which has paid for every little replacement or repair needed means that something will be required. I wouldn't be put off buying any LS marque except for the last two which once they went hybrid just became rather pointless by sacrificing useful boot space for batteries that make sweet FA difference to rear world fuel economy (real reason was reduction on paper of emissions to drive down the tax band for directors considering one as their company car!). I'd happily buy any well looked after LS400, 430, 460 or later non-hybrid model knowing, eyes wide open, that it will cost a bomb to run (fuel, taxation, servicing) but it'l likely still be running fine in a decade's time and that there are few if any other cars this side of a £150 to £200K Rolls, Bently or top spec Mercedes Limo that offer the same ride or luxury. Looked at from that perspective, 2.3K is silly cheap and probably looks more like the bi-annual champers Bill of those who can now afford to buy the equivalent new car. One thing though that I would check and that's rust. It is the enemy of any car that age. I would look carefully at the underside for evidence of any serious rot on suspension linkages, wishbones, sills, sub-frames etc of any car I buy, as well as the bodywork. I wouldn't go there if there was any. Rot is easy to prevent or treat if caught in time, but left too late it's something that would make me walk away from any vehicle deal.

I had my leisure battery go flat last year. All I did was connect another small gel battery across its terminals, enough to power the systems for the hybrid battery to crank the starter motor. An hours drive around and all was ok. I removed the leisure battery and put it on a deep cycle charge. It lasted a few months but once you run these right down, chances are (especially if a few years old) they may not recover. Mine was replaced under warranty. It's only a 5 minute job to remove the battery to charge it. In my case I didn't even remove it. Charged insitu after disconnecting vehicle terminals. Speakon do a dedicated power socket as well as the lower rated sockets: https://cpc.farnell.com/neutrik/nac3fca/powercon-cable-a-connector/dp/CN04055?mckv=shNG274SO_dc|pcrid|224645161149|kword||match||plid||slid||product|CN04055|pgrid|45968746254|ptaid|pla-576170237002|&CMP=KNC-GUK-CPC-SHOPPING&gclid=Cj0KCQiAj4biBRC-ARIsAA4WaFjQ3Rw621-WJhGUQPMxl1JU4hxpJR5cKuOxBn3Xj14pAe4K96JdllIaAhX-EALw_wcB This is 20A rated.

That's just a ferrite magnet Herbie which lessens the risk of EMI interference on things like DAB radio from the power cord.

No apology necessary! It'd be great if it were true as we'd have a considerable life left in our warranty LoL! Yes, Kia and Hyundai have won a lot of brownie points for offering such good warranties and for supplying cars kitted out with all the creature comforts as standard. They're showing the way. I think that a lot of this specification lark is driven by fleet markets where when you order your new company/pcp car, ticking the options list just allows loads more profit from the greed driven marketeers of the vehicles. As Kia and Hyundai are not really part of the fleet scene, they've adopted a smart strategy with both car specifications and warranty to attract cash paying punters and good on them.

I finally managed to get hold of a Nextbase 312G dashcam which is a 1080p 30fps full HD camera. I bought this for several reasons: Firstly, not all 4K cameras are quite what they seem (many are only capable of 24fps and some are only actually 2K resolution, also many of the so called 4K cams have bitrates that are too slow to reliably freeze numberplate data from moving vehicles). The 312 series has for several years won top marks in reviews for performing optically equally as well as the more expensive models in the range and uses a similar 6 element glass lens providing a useful 140 degrees. Any more than this is not a lot of use to me, as looking at a few 170 degree lenses, fisheye distortion is very noticable and detail drops off at the edges, so anything I reckon between 90 and 140 degrees is more useful. I bought it also for the excellent customer support and useful website offered by Nextbase themselves. It's actually quite small, but I still wouldn't leave it in an unoccupied car as it's easily visible from the outside. The mounting (powered) base is far less obtrusive and can be left in place. I took a few photos of how I mounted it and where I routed the cable. Bear in mind that I had the low sun in my eyes and photos didn't all come out well but just so you get the picture. I've put together this mini guide below as it may be of help to anyone else considering doing the same. Total time to fit camera: 10 minutes. Start with the mount to the passenger side of the rear view mirror and find a spot and angle for the camera that takes in the full width of the road, angled so you just see your bonnet in frame. Next, tuck the power cable under the front of the head lining using a plastic ruler to gentle prise it down enough to get the cable in, and route towards the front passenger windscreen pillar and across the join between the down pillar covering and headlining. Cable from headlining now being tucked into post cover: Shown below all neatly hidden away: Next, route the cable to the main cabin rubber door seal and with the aid of that ruler again, gently prise the seal open enough to tuck the in neatly and run it down to the first of the main footwell panel joins. You can just see part of the cable here as it comes from under the rubber seal into the gap between footwell panels: I found it easier to undo the plastic nut from the front of the panel (in the footwell area to the left) and partly remove the panel to get the cable neatly in. Once done, replace the panel. Feel for the front of the panel under the glovebox area. The edge comes down with little effort. Don't remove it, just prise it gently open a little and feed the cable along the front edge inside the panel until it meets the centre console area. From there, you can affix self adhesive cable clips (I will do this) and the cable is routed to the under-storage bin in the console and the power adaptor plugged in. I never use this power point anyway but if I need to I'll just unplug the dashcam feed so no big deal. I decided not to hard wire it as it's a lot of faff just to save seeing the last few inches of cable. Now once the camera is mounted, it automatically turns on and starts recording until the ignition is switched off or until you press the stop button to pause recording. I would have preferred a smaller unit (even though this really is dinky) without a screen but honestly, it would be fiddly to set it up properly without taking a lot of test clips and altering the position to suit. To download, you unclip the dashcam and using the lead provided plug it into your PC or Mac and press the "mass storage" selection on the dashcam when it senses a power connection to the computer. You simply treat it as an offboard mass storage devise, highlight the files you'd like to transfer and load them to either your machine or offboard drive/usb and you can view them with a windows media viewer or download the Nextbase software (really very useful as it includes a google map view of your trip route as well as a host of other information). Job done! If I can do it, everyone on here can do it. 😂

I can understand the raised eyebrows with real world mpg V's makers claims which are done according to EU stipulated rolling road tests, but the real purpose of these tests is to determine things like tax band and to offer customers a comparason, like for like, between new cars. On average, if you take the claimed mpg and multiply by 60 to 70% that lands you closer to actual combined mpg. The mpg of a GS300h I borrowed was actually pretty good at 45mpg, given it's 2.5 litre 4 pot engine. That's at least 15mpg more than I got from my 2.5 litre 6 pot bmw petrol. The RX again is pretty good really when judged not by claimed mpg, but when you sit and consider what other 3.5 litre V6 hauling around a 2.3 tonne mass, with high frontal area would let you see close to 30mpg avarage. That's as good as the BMW X3 and X5 diesels, and on flat mixed driving that average can easily hit high 30's with care. Whilst not an economical car, anyone with the money to buy one generally has the finances to run one without resorting to LPG conversions which with the complexity of the car in the first place and cost of the proper conversion, I'd have thought wouldn't pay dividends at least not where an RX is concerned. I would never consider it as I don't do a big mileage in the first place, perhaps just 7 or 8K miles annually. I prefer thinking of the RX like I do my BMW GSA1200 bike....one of the best all rounders going, with a great driving position, great comfort, decent handling and a real do-it-all nature. Not best in any one area but possibly a vehicle that'd be hard to better by anything else on the market all things considered. MPG, whilst not the lofty figures claimed, are actually pretty reasonable. They certainly better my previous Volvo S60 2.5T, BMW 325 and on average, even my Lexus GS300. Oh, I never use the ECO mode. I usually have it in sport mode and find very little difference in economy but prefer not to have that awful lag between the pedal being pressed and anything happening. Best I've seen on a 20 mile mixed drive was 44mpg average. Worst was about 18mpg over several days where I was hauling a 500Kg payload up and down some pretty extreme hills!

That's interesting but i'm a little confused here...are you saying Renato, that Honda (UK) offer a 7 year warranty because I'm pretty sure that's not the case (except maybe for corrosion). We have a 2016 Honda and it's just out of warranty which extends (like Lexus) to 3 years. If you want to extend it you can. We bought it used a few months ago and were given a one year extended warranty with it. I can't think of any other manufacturer except perhaps Hyundai or Kia that offer much more than 3 years. Merc are 3 years, BMW 3 years and most other luxury cars are the same, including Lexus.

400 odd miles is roughly 30mpg from an RX (65 litre tank). I usually top up when the indicator tells me that I have about 50 miles left in the tank and once topped up (brim full) I get between 330 anfd 360 miles before I'm back to the same point, so roughly 400 miles sounds about right. However, that's mixed driving and nothing extreme. Last year whilst in Exmoor for 3 weeks the tank was emptied in under 260 miles. That's the price you pay when lugging 2.3t plus luggage up and down very steep hills (worked out at under 20mpg). The hybrid adds nothing to climbing hills but you burn more juice to lug all those batteries and motors about. If I lived somewhere like that, the RX wouldn't be for me. That's where diesel makes more sense.

It depends what it is. Engines like the GS300 V6 rarely go wrong so big ticket items are very rare. I've heard of a few issues with water pumps going on the V6s but that's mainly where incorrect grade coolant is used which causes corrosion and advanced wear/leakage. Shock absorbers are more common and most GS Mk3's will be lucky to get past 60 or 70K miles without one or all needing replacement but that's common to most cars. OE parts can be expensive. I think I paid over £400 to replace one of my GS shocks and few aftermarket parts are available for them. To provide a balanced perspective, my GS cost me £1800 in repairs over a couple of years but only as it has reached a mileage where those things would need looking at. Had I kept it, chances are it would have then chugged along for another 5 years with nothing needed except regular servicing. Over a 5 year period our Skoda Fabia vRS (Mk1) cost us almost twice that in repairs which extended to a replacement turbo, brake caliper, suspension bushes, engine mount, water bottle joint failure, door panel seals failing (letting water in), cruise control packing in, EGR valve problems, inlet manifold clogging up...the list goes on. My Father's Toyota Camry never ever went wrong in all the time he owned it but from what I remember, parts prices were not dissimilar to Lexus. Labour is the real killer. Find a specialist garage that you trust, look for a good, sorted GS300 and buy with confidence would be my honest opinion. There's still a fair few low miles examples out there waiting to be snatched up!

GS300 is a wonderful car. If you can afford the running costs it's one of the most reliable, engine wise, made. Generally speaking it's the bolt-on consumables that will start inflicting cost on 10yr old plus cars. Check exhaust pipe (Y section on the GS V6 ones prone to fatigue and corrosion breakage about this age), check shocks...they're expensive to replace and the GS in the Mk3 guise (my favourite version) had a few issues (300 and 430 and 450h variants) with early failure of shock seals. Brakes need checking for disc wear and check water pump for leaks of coolant (Gs is chain drive so unlike belt drive cams, water pumps aren't as routinely replaced). Only other gremlins can be with TPMS playing up, boot lid soft close not working properly (ECU sometimes needs re-flashing) but other than this they're about as reliable as it's possible to get. A Honda Civic would be much cheaper to run in petrol guise but not a patch on ride quality, refinement, space or power. In your shoes though, until some NCB is accrued it would be more sensible to look perhaps down the range at an IS petrol. Cheaper to insure and run but with the usual Lexus refinements. Can't comment too much on the foibles of the IS as never owned one but only know from speaking with a Lexus technician that the higher mile diesel IS's are more prone to (costly) problems than the petrols.

This does seem to be a long standing issue with Lexus. I've lost count of the number of complaints I've read about Lexus wheels corroding due to poor coatings or similar. I had all four of my 2007 GS wheels re-furb'd due to extensive corrosion. Three years ago that cost about £340 all in, so well worth the hassle but to see this on new-ish cars is disheartening. Such finish and corrosion issues Lexus suffers from seems all too often to be swept under the carpet, and too many people seem to put Lexus on a pedestal about how great the finish and build quality is. Truth is, unpalatable or not, that they are nothing special in some respects and bank on too much smoke and mirrors marketing about how good they are. Sure, the paintwork is pretty decent, interiors also very good...thought to cable routing good, engines good but lack of attention to the underside protection and joke wheel finishes are not what you expect from a premium brand and it's things like this that would make me think twice about shelling out more than average money for one again.

Good to hear you're getting it sorted. Keep us updated whether coilpack or injector was at fault?

Another vote for the RX but It's a tough call for me. If I didn't need so much load space then I'd plump for the GS300 but not any of the newer ones as I simply don't like them as much as the Mk3. To my mind, that was one of the finest Lexus cars made, along with the LS430/460 models. Having owned one and driven the newer GS450h, the later model was more uncomfortable, nowhere near as compliant on the suspension (much harder sprung) and lost some of the gentleman's club aspects of design that its forebear was endowed with. Both the older LS and GS cars always pulled off the trick of making the driver feel special every time they got into one. Less so with some of the later GS models but that's obviously a very personal thing. The Mk3 GS300 was reasonably economical, buttery smooth, fast, quiet, luxurious. GS430 lovely too but a bigger cheque book needed to run one. For my needs the RX is the best all rounder currently available. If living in cloud cuckoo land where money was no object, ideally I'd have an LC500, RX450h and a Mk3 GS300 for "slumming it" in as an everyday hack!

I once took my Mk3 GS300 to about 135mph and it was very stable at that. It would do alledgedly 148mph (not limited) so the 270-ish BHP 430 wouldn't I'd have thought exceeded the limiter speed by much. More powerful versions, perhaps by a little more? Not had the RX abroad yet but know that's limited to 124mph and wouldn't want to take it past that anyway!

Had similar issues with my 2007 model. Front lateral beam (support for the rad) was badly corroded as was front of engine block itself. Bonnet was also corroding along parts of the inside face seam and around the bonnet lifter strut mount, where in both cases the aluminium under the paint had powdered and bubbled the paint. I tried a warranty claim to no avail since the previous owner had applied a few stone chip paint blobs to the bonnet top (and appeared to have re-blown in a small area along the front edge) it was claimed by Lexus that as the bonnet had "been painted by people other than Lexus" this rendered the warranty void. This has nothing to do with corrosion of the seam but that argument fell on deaf ears. Not the way to impress brand loyalty from customers. I was also told that the remedy is not treatment and re-spraying, but replacement of the affected panel. In my case, as the corrosion on the bonnet underside was severe, I had to have it re-sprayed after first taken to bare metal and all corrosion treated. Cost of that and blowing in side wings was £750. Front beam wasn't addressed. The car had previously been owned by someone living close to the Bristol Channel and that possibly was a contributing factor. I note too that my RX rear subframe and suspension linkages were a little rusty as these appear to not come treated in any way from the factory, which is disappointing. Not even galvanised. Lexus need to up their game here and properly see to a decent underseal on these cars, not least as it's what one would expect of a car costing upwards of £55K. I treated the subframe with XCP professional which I will shortly repeat as it's been about 6 months since I applied it.

Had exactly the same with my 2007 GS300 boot lid. Had the ECU re-flashed and it never happened again.