LenT

If they’ve not been replaced before, then they’ve done well. Life span of the batteries is regarded as being 5 - 10 years, with an average of seven. But life expectancy is also dependent on usage, temperature and driving conditions. This info from a TPMS supplier gives more detail. TPMS life expectancy is directly related to the number of radio frequency transmissions the sensors make. Driving habits greatly influence the number of RF transmissions a sensor makes in its lifetime. For example: sensors usually transmit when the vehicle is stopped and transmit more often when in motion. Maintaining a constant speed, such as when you're on a highway, reduces the demand on TPMS sensors and allow the sensors to transmit less often. Drivers who often find themselves driving in start-and-stop type traffic will have a greater impact on the vehicles tire pressure monitoring sensors. Weather can also have an impact on tire pressure sensor battery life. Cold conditions allow batteries to last longer. Warmer conditions take more of a toll on TPMS battery life.

A very sound investment. And as I’m sure you’ve noticed, also a useful portable power pack for recharging your phone, iPad and such like!

I went through the same process when I discovered from the gov.uk site that there had been a recall issued on Dec 9. When I contacted Lexus MK they confirmed the recall for the replacement of what was described to me as ‘the fuel tank breather tube’ - although other reports suggest it may be rather more than that. Apparently I had not been contacted because the part was not yet available! I too discovered that although signed up to My Lexus, the Lexus recall page did not recognise either my Reg or VIN. Probably something they should look at!

Thanks Linus. Yes I've found one that cites an Australian article referring to: The issue affects 14,301 Lexus IS and GS sedans, as well as RC coupes made between 2012 and 2018. Four-cylinder, hybrid, and V6-powered models are affected by the issue. High-performance 5.0-litre V8-powered GS F and RC F models are also affected. Lexus will replace the fuel-evaporative emission control unit in the vehicles for free. So slightly ambiguous on the dating range, but apparently a pre-emptive action - once the part is available! Strangely, I can find no mention of this recall on the Lexus UK website.

Sorry to intrude, Bogdan. My error. I just stopped at the first one headed IS250.🙁 I’ll look for a specific 3IS forum! But you raise an interesting point…how long will Lexus honour a factory recall? Meanwhile, I’ll get me coat….

Idly checking my Lexus status on the gov.uk site - as you do - when I noticed a section offering to advise me about any factory recalls. To my surprise, one had been issued on December 9. But for what remained a mystery. So I contacted Lexus MK using the website form - and got a call back just a few minutes later. Apparently, it’s to do with the fuel tank breather tube. But not to worry - it can be done at the next service. That is, if the part arrives. It would appear that the lack of this part may explain why Lexus hadn’t yet notified me. And that was just about all the girl who replied could offer as an explanation. So anyone else got a problematic fuel tank breather tube? It may be worth checking.

I have the Goodyear Asymmetric Eagle F1 5s and I can confirm that they are an excellent choice. However, my first choice was the Michelin CrossClimate - but Michelin didn't make one of the two sizes that my Lexus required. In addition the then new Goodyears tested very well against the Michelins. There are quite a few outfits doing comparative road tests of tyre brands. I certainly found it worthwhile reading and watching them and assessing which most closely reflected my specific needs.

This is so true, Bernard. I recall a friend who had spent some weeks one Winter on business in Sweden and Finland. Shortly after returning to the UK he was driving around his newly snow-covered country lanes - within the speed limit, he emphasised - when a Police patrol car decided to follow him. It wasn't long before a glance in the mirror confirmed the Patrol car sliding gracefully across a bend and in to a ditch.

I suspect that the answers you've been getting are not what you hoped for. No security system will guarantee to be invincible! After all, houses and safes are still broken in to despite extensive security measures. It's only if a system can be shown to have failed that you might have a claim; not if the system was bypassed or defeated by a novel form of attack. The only consolation is that your tracker proved its worth and you have not suffered a total loss. In many ways, the development of advanced electronic driving systems has made life easier for thieves. There was a time when simply removing the rotor arm from the distributor prevented the car being driven away! But you have raised one point that intrigues me. You say that when the tracker became active again, you went to the location and 'retrieved the car from the thieves'. Why? And should that be simply 'retrieved the car'? Did you inform the Police so that they could set up an observation or examine it forensically? How do you know that the thieves returned at 23.58 if you had already retrieved the car? Did you remain at the scene yourself? Ironically, a steering wheel lock (eg Disklok) may have prevented the theft in the first place - although some types are not compatible with steering mounted paddle controls. But, sadly, this may be the way to go if you have to leave the car accessible in the future.

Another thought - which you’ve probably already had! - is that as well as waiting for the Service Station liability response, it may be worth checking any Household Insurance because that sometimes includes Loss of Earnings.

Very sorry to hear about your accident, Vladimir. A timely warning to us all! If you feel the paracetamol isn’t quite up to the task, ask your chemist about some co-codamol. Otherwise, doing as little as possible is pretty much the main treatment for broken ribs.

I hope this makes it clearer! Note eyelet connection to the battery posts.

This is the one I have … MSX 5 Test & Charge. It comes supplied with two connector leads: simple bulldog clip connectors and the eyelet type that you connect permanently to the battery posts. So charging is just a simple matter of exposing the battery and clipping that eyelet lead to the charger and plugging in the charger to the mains. You can leave it connected as long as needed because the system protects against overcharging. https://www.ctek.com/storage/938B6F0FD89110019EA95392D63F8D50B4768D0503F1A5B37A36B3194D394A2F/9857f9c716ec406cbd20b76adb076861/pdf/media/7c4ce0ec9e1749d197faafda62be20f1/MXS_5.0-productsheet-low-EN.pdf Other versions are available and you can shop around to get the best price from all the usual suspects. I hope this helps!

I have a CTEK trickle charger and plug that into a regular socket in my garage. To make life even easier, CTEK sells a connector that you connect permanently to the battery terminals and simply plug into the lead from the charger. Check it out on the CTEK site - although it’s entirely possible that other makes are available! 😊

Do you have a trickle charger? If you’re able to garage it, then that should solve the problem.

I had to top up all four tyres today - and all by the same amount - due to minus ambient temperatures. So I think Peter’s right. You should check the Manual to see if your TPMS provides a low battery warning - I don’t think mine does. As for battery replacement, it can be done but I for one wouldn’t contemplate it. After all, you’ve still got to get the tyre off in the first instance to get at the valve. In terms of age, you could well be in that area, but mileage (ie the total time the TPMS has been active) is also a factor. Presuming that you have now inflated the tyres to the correct pressures, then you could try resetting the TPMS and see if that eliminates any warning lights. If it doesn’t, then at least you know the pressures are correct. What are your tyres like? If you were contemplating fitting a new set, then I would be inclined to replace the TPMS valves at the same time, as you’re having to remove the tyres anyway. When I had to replace a TPMS valve, a large local tyre retailer was able to supply and fit a compatible unit for £65. If you tie a new valve set in with the new tyres, you can probably negotiate a deal. But it can’t hurt to put the same proposition to your local Lexus dealer. You may be surprised!

Sound advice, John. However, my Father was a taxi driver. As a child, I recall frosty winter mornings when he would boil a kettle of water and pour it over the ice-covered windscreen! Amazingly, as I grew up to realise, it never shattered! I’ve no idea why - and it’s not something I would ever try myself. On the other hand, if he thought of it, he’d lay sheets of newspaper across the screen the night before which could then be peeled off to reveal an ice-free screen. Nowadays you can buy a cover for the windscreen to do the same job!

This is the sort of item, Nick. Not that I can vouch for any of them! And there’s plenty more where they came from. So here’s a few alternatives…. https://gbr.grandado.com/products/car-seat-gap-pad-spacer-fillers-for-lexus-es350-es300h-gs350-is200t-is350-lx570-nx200-nx300-nx300h-rc200t-rx350?variant=UHJvZHVjdFZhcmlhbnQ6ODA0NDEzMQ&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIw6iPrqfr-wIVs2LmCh0e6wBCEAQYASABEgJwWvD_BwE https://www.wish.com/product/5fbdd3a297c7099deab1cbf8?from_ad=goog_shopping&_display_country_code=GB&_force_currency_code=GBP&pid=googleadwords_int&c=17739879730&ad_cid=5fbdd3a297c7099deab1cbf8&ad_cc=GB&ad_lang=EN&ad_curr=GBP&ad_price=11.00&campaign_id=17739879730&retargeting=true&exclude_install=true&gbraid=0AAAAABOL3PPy5wbNtx5ndPRsfcDupOY4G&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIw6iPrqfr-wIVs2LmCh0e6wBCEAQYAyABEgL8I_D_BwE https://www.pinterest.co.uk/pin/lexus-car-seat-gap-filler--458452437067531676/ https://www.aliexpress.com/item/1005004352707769.html?pdp_npi=2%40dis!USD!US %2421.96!%2410.98!!!!!%40211b5dfd16705472211593787eb06f!12000028867362317!btf&_t=pvid%3Af0ae89dc-ffb7-48a8-b8a8-41e58c9b10b4&afTraceInfo=1005004352707769__msite__c_ppc_item_bridge__xxxxxx__1670547221&spm=a2g0n.ppclist.product.0&gatewayAdapt=4itemAdapt Strangely, there doesn’t seem to be anything from the Lexus eBay store - but I may have missed it!

Surprising that these gap fillers - or chip catchers - don’t come with your Premium Pack. But they are available on the After Market - either as Fillers or Storage Pockets and even Lexus branded. There have been occasions when mine have proved their worth!

These days I would think that is indeed the case.

In our day, the comparable test was called The Four Ball test. It involved one large ball bearing rotating at high speed under pressure in a nest of three similar ball bearings - which Slick50 prevented from fusing into a solid mass! A more practical demonstration was conducted at Mallory racetrack. We had three cars of similar age - two had been treated with Slick50. The oil was drained from all three and they set off in convey around the track - led by Roger Clark. The untreated car seized up in less than one lap; the other two continued until Roger called it a day after 50 laps because he was bored!

As ever, you make some very valid observations, Vladimir. Well, I can't speak for Lexus, but this point came up in earlier post. If you're referring to a detergent cleaner supplied by Texaco, then I offered a more detailed explanation in this post: Haven't looked into Millers additives, so can't comment. But this was a blast from the past! I've not heard of ZX1 but looking through their website I would say it is probably identical to a product called Slick50 that I launched many years ago. They are rather shy about divulging its constituents, but judging from their claims and its mode of operation, I would suggest that it's remarkably similar to the PTFE based Slick50 - despite stating at one point that it is not P.T.F.E. molybdenum! In which case it may well deliver its claims, despite not providing the detailed evidence that we had to! I don't think that pointing out that MMO doesn't provide evidence to support its claims is actually 'scare mongering'. In reality, their suggested dilution of one 4oz bottle to 10 gallons (US, presumably) is a dilution of over 300:1 - (I stand to have my maths corrected!) - which I suggest is neither here nor there. As I concluded earlier, modern lubrication technology is now so sophisticated that it's unlikely that any additive is going to produce a significant improvement over the designed parameters of a modern product. On the other hand, it's just as unlikely to do any damage! It's just that a subjective reaction is not the same as highly controlled and comparative scientific analysis. It may interest you know, that we had to support all our claims by providing authoritative analytical evidence to such as The Advertising Standards Authority - and they would not accept even a single 'unsolicited' testimonial as evidence!

Having been involved in the launch of motor oils and 'performance improvers', I know that the biggest stumbling block is the acquisition of authoritative independent testing to support any claims that are made. So it's significant that MMO has apparently failed to present any such evidence. Apart from that, such is the development of the additive packages that modern oils contain that I doubt any manufacturer would approve the addition of any other product to their blend. So it's possible that doing so would invalidate any claim regarding damage or loss of performance.

I think it’s a little more nuanced than that. After all, if different axles have tyres of different tread patterns and composition, then they will react differently under the same driving conditions. Of course, you may never put yourself in a position to discover this. But no-one plans an accident. I think this article from Continental details the general recommendations. https://www.continental-tyres.co.uk/b2c/tyre-knowledge/mixing-tyres.html

Yes, you’re probably right there! Phil also makes a very good suggestion. Another thought is to check the valve ~ which you may have already done! A little blob of washing up liquid should reveal any bubbling caused by a slow leak. And a missing dust cap is often the cause by allowing grit into the valve.