SW03ES

Ditto what smooth said... Be happy too theres an interface at all! Until 2010 Lexus had no iPod interface, you had to buy one aftermarket.

Post pictures!

Thats not bad at all for such a big rig...

The IS and the ES are about as different as two sedans can be. What do they have in common? They have 4 doors and are made by Lexus, thats about it. The ES is physically faster from a stop, but performance wise the IS runs circles around the ES in every other area. Its RWD/rear biased AWD setup, stiffer springs and suspension damping, more neutral wight distribution are all VERY apparent when driving down any sort of curvy road or when driving aggressively. The ES is a boulevard cruiser, the IS is a sports sedan. Would you want to switch from an ES to an IS? Drive an IS extensively and see. I have driven IS250s many times as dealer loaners, and while I would never buy one myself because they're too small for me, and I prefer a boulevard cruiser type car, they are a lot of fun to drive. The IS rides very stiff compared to the ES IMHO, but its supposed to. The 250 isn't quick...but it has plenty of power for everyday use. You could get an IS350...but you could almost get a GS when the options are all added to the IS350. The GS would only be $1500 or so more... If you don't like the ES...you won't like the LS. They drive very similarly. The LS has the benefit of being RWD, which I too prefer, but you really can't tell the difference unless you're pushing the car...and the car isn't designed to be pushed. Perhaps the GS would be a better compromise if the budget allows it, still smaller than the ES but not as much so as the IS, still stiffer than the ES but not as much so as the IS. I really like the current GS. Maybe even consider a GS a couple years old vs a new IS. Or, if you've got the coin to buy a new GS...I'd buy an Infiniti M37 instead myself. I've already decided my next car will be that class, the GS, M, E Class, 5 series...etc.

Wow, that really turned out well!

I've always admired tinted windows too, and have always wanted to have mine tinted but for some reason have never gone through with it... I also think the same tint all around looks better, although I can't tell in Jim's pics either...

There are two scenarios where the lights will stay on forever and not go out: 1. If you never open and close the drivers door. The car assumes you are still in the vehicle, and leaves the lights on until you exit, then the delay counter begins. 2. If a door or the trunk is ajar. My guess is either a door or trunk is slightly ajar, or a sensor somewhere thinks it is. Do the interior lights stay on? Does the info screen ever briefly indicate an open door when one is not open? What happens if you lock the doors twice with the keyfob? The lights should override the timer and go out...

The sales figures are more than 1k per month. In 2007 they sold 35,226 LS460s, its down in '08 and '09 to 20.255 and 11,335 due to the recession. 2009 sales figures were the worst for the LS ever in its history, but on average I'd say US sales figures average out to 2k units per month. $2.5k maybe.

Doesn't surprise me...its going to get worse before it gets better...

It all depends on your proportions too. I'm 6' and have been comfortable in every Lexus I've had or driven. My brother in law is like 6'4 and interestingly he could sit comfortably in the front or back of my '03 ES but is very cramped in the front of my '10...

LOL!

Lookin good man! I did ours today...

Vindicated! Exactly what Ive been saying on here for years!

Welcome to the site! I've seen that done also, its definitely a custom fab job,and I think your problem is going to be finding a modern tuner that will fit. All the new tuners are all-in-one jobs, and the installs like that I've seen use older, smaller, control panel and separate tuner style kits they don't make anymore...

If you're looking to modify the car to get the most power you can, you're really missing the point of the hybrid. Can you tune it to get more power? Probably...but at the expense of economy. The HSD system is also a highly technical system, one that doesn't really lend itself to DIY modifications. Have you driven the CT? I haven't...

He's not Bwilliams...but he's banned like him lol. Carry on.

If you want to take your business to GM...go for it. They're making far better vehicles now than they were. They don't make anything yet that really appeals to me. If however you don't expect a pro-Lexus/Toyota attitude on a Lexus/Toyota forum...don't know what to tell you about that. As for Toyota "killing people", you do realize how the inquisition into the issue by the government would up right? No design or product flaws in the vehicle. Any accidents were simply caused by operator error.

The ES may very well be AWD or have an AWD option. It will never be RWD though because it will always be based off of the Camry. If its AWD, it will be front biased AWD like an Acura.

Huh?!?

You do see a lot of ES cues in it. However, I think this is likely to be indicative of the next GS, not the next ES. When the LF-Ch concept came out, it morphed into the CT. The LF-Sh as a concept showed us the new LS. Plus, this car is RWD...which the ES will never be. Article: http://www.autoblog.com/2011/04/12/lexus-unveils-lf-gh-ahead-of-new-york-debut/ More cool pics: Does look a lot like an ES though.

No problem! Welcome to the club!

Again, just because you found someone who does it wrong...doesn't make it less wrong. Given my prior experience with the Auto centers at Sears, the fact that they did it doesn't hold a whole lot of weight with me... I think common sense would dictate that the tires be mounted according to the instructions provided by the tire's manufacturer. How is there no common sense in mounting tires the way the tire manufacturers say the tires need to be mounted? And you can take it to someone who cares as little about your safety as you do if you choose, which you did. So, how are you damaged by the original shop's insistence that they mount the tires properly? Again, sorry to be hard on you. I like you and have no desire to start some kind of argument...but I think you're 100% in the wrong here. Since you can't come up with any reason why you wanted things the way you wanted them other than "the customer is always right" and "its my money and my vehicle" I think you understand what I'm getting at. What if you wanted them to replace your shocks and mount them with glue instead of bolts? Its your vehicle and your money right? They *BLEEP*ed you off because they tried to show you they knew better than you did...and you reacted to that as being poor customer service when in reality its good customer service, they tried to show you the video about why the tires need to be on the rear, and in the end put your safety above their need to make money. In the light of day you see what I'm saying. But all of this is a completely different topic than a shop's refusal to mount your tires the way you wanted them when that would put you at risk as per the tire's manufacturer. Giving good service doesn't mean blindly doing whatever the customer wants. I can't really improve on Paul's assessment above...were they rude to you about it? Thats an excellent question, and the fronts are going to wear much faster than the rears because they can't be rotated. I would say for safety's sake I would not replace the front tires without replacing the rear tires as well. I'd guess that a shop that adheres to these manufacturer's guidelines would not mount the front tires.

Yeah the only person in danger of getting the boot here is you Bwilliams. I took the edit one step further to remove a personal attack. The only warning Bwilliams...and its the banned for you. EDIT...I just saw the word that LEXI removed...we're going to go ahead and ban this guy now.

Yes, manually calculate. When you fill up, reset the trip odometer. Wait until the tank reads empty (ignore the trip computer) and look at the mileage. The trip meter's estimated range mileage is based off a running average over time of your fuel economy. If you have been mainly driving around town...that average goes down. The computer calculates the average mileage based on the estimated number of gallons in the tank and that average. So...17 gallons in the tank...a 280 mile range is an average of 16.47 MPG. Not an unusual city mileage for that car. 400 mile range would be 23.5 MPG. More of a highway mileage. So, in short...its incredibly inaccurate unless you drive exactly the same way all the time. For instance on my 2010 (which has a better range estimation IMHO) when I bought it a full tank showed a range of 375 miles. Now, I drive a mixture of highway and city, some of it is street to street with a lot of startups and shutoffs when showing houses, so my average MPG on a regular basis isn't great. In the 7 months or so I had it I had taken a couple 3 hour trips but with traffic and such, my range was showing 320 miles or so after a fillup. Last month I took a 5.5 hour open highway trip where I was able to set the cruise on 80 and just drive. My 2010 will get 31MPG or so on the highway. When I filled the car up after that trip...the estimated range was 415 miles. nearly 100 miles more than was previously estimated. Now...driving on the highway I probably was able to go 500 miles on one tank...but in my normal driving thats not the case obviously because the MPG is less. So what has changed is simply the data the computer is using to estimate the range, not the actual range. Now that I'm home and back to my normal driving habits the range is decreasing with each fill-up again. Down to 380 the last time. So what is decreasing is your computer's data used to compute the range...not the range.

What evidence do you have that their corporate integrity has changed? And NO company puts the customer ahead of profit. Companies are in business to make profit...period. Volvo may have a focus on safety and may be a pioneer of a lot of safety innovations...but they didn't do that out of the goodness of their heart...they did it to make profit. Its their unique selling proposition. You speak as if everything that isn't a Volvo isn't safe and people are buying flash over safety, hardly. You don't think a Mercedes, or BMW, or Lexus are as safe as a Volvo? Of course they are...look at the crash test results. People simply chose style and substance with safety over safety with no style. Why don't you drive a Volvo? Um, last time I checked Ford didn't make tires. As for the Explorer rolling over, I had an Explorer for years. Believe it or not, I drove my Explorer on a handling course during a driving event. The Explorer was no more prone to rollovers than any other period SUV. The issue was Firestone (a company that had nothing to do with Ford) tires that suffered separated tread resulting in high speed blowouts. That model of tire was OEM really only on the Explorer. Those tires only came on SOME Explorers (mine had Goodyears from the factory). The issue had nothing to do with the Explorers...it had everything to do with the Firestone tires. Did Ford know about an issue before it became public knowledge? I'm sure they did. Anyways...Ford for the most part kept their hands off of the brands in their Premier Automotive Group. I don't think you can make any valid argument that any of the companies Ford bought as a part of that group are anything but better off because Ford purchased them. Look at Jaguar or Land Rover...huge improvements under Ford ownership.