Lexus CT200h Forums banner

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
Hi,

I have been looking at this vehicle as my next company car.

I live in the UK and fuel is very expensive - approx £6.15 ($9.68) per gallon and on top of that I pay tax for having a company car. The latter will decrease significantly for having a eco friendly vehicle.

My current car is a 2.0 Audi A5 and I am wondering how I will adapt to the change in performance which, for the sake of cost saving, I am prepared to do.

How do you guys with the CT200H find performance and the change from having more powerful vehicles?

What sort of MPG are you getting during regular day to day driving?

I will cover about a 100 miles per day just to and from the office which is mostly motorways.

Your thoughts and advice is appreciated.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
37 Posts
I have E46 M3 (340+ hp). I used to own GS400 (300hp).

CT200h is my daily driver for commute. Mostly local streets and some highway. I drive almost always at the speed limit in CT.

CT200h, from 0-30 is sufficient. 40 onwards is pretty weak.. To pass a car on highway, I almost need to full throttle. Its my commute car, it does everything well, I am very happy with it. Sometimes I wish it has 200hp, since its suspension and chassis have so much potential.

I am getting 43-45 MPG.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
The CT power is designed for a coupe but it seats 4. By that I mean if you have a front passenger, the power is sufficient even in Normal mode. If you have a front adult and 2 kids in the back, you will probably want to switch to Sport mode. If you have a car full of adults.... be ready to hear horn when you try to get on to the freeway. :p

One time my car was full and I was getting on the freeway and merging. My wife asked me, what is that sound? That's the sound of the engine running at 6k rpm. :p
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
I'd second what pardo says. We have a great car but it could do with more grunt in the engine. The motor has enough power to let the CT do electric only at 45mph on the flat but the engine can struggle to maintain 70 on its own without using more throttle than is economical.

However - the brain behind the CVT gearbox makes up for having less power available by making the most of what it has. Sport mode at the lights makes the car Go Very Fast. You don't need a paddle gearshift because the CVT brain reacts faster than paddles. That said, I use sport on 70mph roads because it's easier to maintain 70 in sport.

For mpg, hybrids do much better in town compared to diesels but diesels will do better on the motorways (because diesel has more energy density than petrol). The key advantage of a hybrid is that we don't use any fuel when in nose to tail stop/start traffic. Bluemotion makes an attempt at saving fuel when you're not going anywhere but the stop/start battery is too small to give a diesel as much range in stop/start as we have.

I've got from 43mpg in cold town driving top 50mpg on town+motorway driving. The aerodynamics aren't as clean as the Prius, so we lose lots of mpg going from a 70 cruise to a 75 (or higher) cruise. I've seen 72-75mpg on the trip computer after 20 miles of 40mph restrictions on the A46. I'm hoping for 50+ on a fillup when it gets warmer, hybrids do better in warm weather because the engine can be off more.

Fuelly in my signature will give you lots more information on mpg's - plus they will have information on their site about the other cars. Things like while Bluemotion TDIs look good in the adverts, they lose too many mpgs while sitting still.

I'd look more at the total car package than the mpgs, which is why I went for the CT instead of Prius or CR-Z. Really happy with what I've got :)
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
708 Posts
Hi,

I have been looking at this vehicle as my next company car.

I live in the UK and fuel is very expensive - approx £6.15 ($9.68) per gallon and on top of that I pay tax for having a company car. The latter will decrease significantly for having a eco friendly vehicle.

My current car is a 2.0 Audi A5 and I am wondering how I will adapt to the change in performance which, for the sake of cost saving, I am prepared to do.

How do you guys with the CT200H find performance and the change from having more powerful vehicles?

What sort of MPG are you getting during regular day to day driving?

I will cover about a 100 miles per day just to and from the office which is mostly motorways.

Your thoughts and advice is appreciated.
At those prices I understand why you would go for fuel economy.

However, I have posted this before - if I only had access to one vehicle and I could afford the gas then the Ct would not be the car I would purchase. It's performance is anemic.

Since 1999 my personal cars have either been BMW's or Audi's and since you currently drive an A5 I guarantee you wont be happy with the performance of the Ct.

However, with a 100 mile commute that's a big gas bill you have.

My wife is getting about 43 mpg (US) and we are paying about $3.85 a gallon for gas in Connecticut which has some of the highest gas prices in the US.

I drive about a 100 miles a day here in the US (300 hp twin turbo BMW 135i) and smile every day (nothing beats horse power) even though that's about 4 gallons of gas each day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
12 Posts
My current car is a 2.0 Audi A5 and I am wondering how I will adapt to the change in performance which, for the sake of cost saving, I am prepared to do.
How do you guys with the CT200H find performance and the change from having more powerful vehicles?
I will cover about a 100 miles per day just to and from the office which is mostly motorways.
First I must say that I'm very happy with my CT200h (lux.line). It offers a very smooth and comfortable ride, compared to my previous 318d. I enjoy driving it every day. It's loaded with nice options and gadgets. The tax I have to pay for driving it as a company car is much lower. So far so good...
But... if you are looking for a car with reduced fuel consumption on motorways, that's imo not the strongest point of the CT200h, and I really think you could be better off with a modern diesel.
If you would use a common mix of road types, including city traffic, then the CT200h will suit you better. I think you also will experience the power of the CT200h on motorways as a little bit "weak", while in city traffic it's (more than) enough. Once you are driving at the desired speed, easy "cruising" on motorways is also very nice, but in that case a modern Audi or BMW diesel will consume less gallons, and will give you more feeling of power.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
I live on Tyneside and am a family doctor. I seem to be doing around 750 miles/ month, it's a 5 mile commute to the surgery but I do visits at lunchtime. I have a Premier spec CT.

I'm currently getting 48 mpg (UK gallons), it was about 45 when it was colder, on weekend trips up the Northumberland coast I have hit 60 mpg but usually around 55. I used to use my GS 300 as my work car and I put £80 (approx) worth of petrol in it per week. I now put £25-30 worth of petrol in per week. Going up and down the A1 in Yorkshire (we have a caravan in Harrogate and my parents live near Sheffield), which is all 2 lane dual carriageway or new full 3 lane motorway I can easliy exceed the legal limit (70 mph for non-UK readers)

Most of the time there's just me in the car. It's great for 2, if your kids are 6 foot + then there may be problems with the back seats, mine are both teenage girls under 5'3" ( they will never be big as I'm 5'9" and my wife is 5'1") so we are fine

I'm very happy with the overall package. My other car is a GS300 (0-60 7.1 seconds, top speed 145 ish) and, to be honest, I don't notice much of a performance drop as I don't drive fast any more.

We also have a big 7 seat MPV for when we need a van to go
to France (get lots of cheap booze in) and shift big stuff.

I don't think I would have got a CT if it was my only car as it's not got a huge amount of room in the back for my kids, but it's not my only car. I think it's perfect for what it does, the mileage is incredible for the type of driving I do, it is very comfortable and quiet, and safe. I also will be getting about £8k back from the taxman eventually due to its low emissions.

PS if you are in the area, Lexus Tyneside will loan you a CT for half a day for an extended test drive.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
I drove a BMW 3 Touring 2 litre diesel fully loaded. I do miss the luggage space for our fortnightly trip to Anglesey a 260 mile round trip. Achieved just over 50 mpg last trip. Daily commute is just over 60 miles get between 52/54 mpg. I do not drive much differently than before perhaps if I did I could get better mpg
With regards to space I am training my better half to pack less.
The Ct premier spec has everything the BM had plus a bit more at less cost. Biggest benfit is the tax saving of around 300.00 pounds a month.
Go for a good test drive I think you will be impressed
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
I don't have a problem with the CT's performance. My partner bought a CT and recently we did a 1,200 km round trip. It can be a bit 'give and take' on Australian regional roads and overtaking performance is pretty handy. Together, the handling, braking and performance (especially in sports mode) made the CT quite a nippy 'pocket rocket'. In fact, this trip resolved any of my lingering doubts about the CT's performance and I traded my IS250 in on a CT f Sport in Flame Blue, which will go even faster (when it arrives in about one more week).
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
708 Posts
Of all the 2011 cars tested by Motor Trend last year only one - Hyundai Santa Fe - was slower than the Ct - 0 to 60 mph. That's pretty sad !!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
Whilst I agree it's not a fast car, they didn't test many cars then. There are LOADS of cars which are popular outside North America that are slower than the CT.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
Whilst I agree it's not a fast car, they didn't test many cars then. There are LOADS of cars which are popular outside North America that are slower than the CT.
Among the cars made after 2011, I don't think there are too many that has a slower 0-60 spec than the CT. The most popular Minivans are in their 7's to 8's. I think 80% of the new cars are in between 6 and 8 sec. But really the CT does not drive like 9.7 sec car. It feels more like a 8 sec car.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
35 Posts
I cant get my CT to do anything very impressive in the way of speed, acceleration or fuel consumption whilst travelling on motorways in UK. I commute 38 miles each way every day on A roads , B roads, through towns and villages and the CT fits the bill very well. My son in law has a diesel Mazda 6 which has quite a lot of punch and returns good figures for being lead footed on motorways. While the CT suits me, it doesnt suit him at all. I have had an A4 , S60,S80etc which are similar animals in some respects to the A5 and I guarantee that the CT just cant perform the same tricks. There is a guy who drives an A5 along the same route to work as I take..On those smaller roads his A5 seems to be disadvantaged since when he finally passes me in my CT I see him 15 miles down the road in the same queue at the traffic lights just 2 cars in front. Horses for courses , it seems.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
Of all the 2011 cars tested by Motor Trend last year only one - Hyundai Santa Fe - was slower than the Ct - 0 to 60 mph. That's pretty sad !!
Confused. Quick look at BMW specs 318 ES Auto 0-62 = 9.9 secs
CT200h 0-62 = 10.3 secs
Don't call that particularly slow
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
Confused. Quick look at BMW specs 318 ES Auto 0-62 = 9.9 secs
CT200h 0-62 = 10.3 secs
Don't call that particularly slow
Anywhere near 10 sec is slow in spec.. at least for the US. The only 3 series wagon BMW US has is the 328i and it is 7.1 sec from 0 to 60. You know it is slow when the most common Minivans (Odyssey @ 7.8 sec and Sienna @ 7.7 sec) beat your spec by 25%. :p The Camry Hybrid is @ 7.2 sec.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
209 Posts
Agreed, hence why I said "outside North America" in my earlier post. In the UK at least, and I suspect in all of Europe, we just cannot afford to run cars with big engines. For example, there are lots of 3 series BMWs on UK roads but most are less powerful than the 328i (they are mostly 320 or 318 round here).

I would LOVE to pay what you guys pay for petrol, even after your price rises.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
441 Posts
Yeh, yeh, yeh, but I read road tests where other cars "race" or sprint from 0-100km/ph (0-62m.p.h.) in about nine seconds and the CT is about one second slower and it's a 'slug'. I don't get it. And whose driving routine is it, driving everywhere in 0-100km/ph acceleration runs? There are a few other cars around that run into high 10 and 11 second times but who cares? I found out on the open road the CT can be quite a 'pocket rocket' in Sports mode and using its brakes and handling to advantage.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15 Posts
All this rhetoric about 0-60 or 0-62 is very interesting. If you want to acheive good acceleration why would you consider buying a hybrid?
The objective surely is to improve fuel consumption, which the CT does and it also provides a good spec.
In my opinion a good car that was produced to compete with the A3 and BMW1 and it does that admirably.
If you want fast acceleration do not look at a hybrid.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
270 Posts
Actually - hybrid, at least for the Toyota/Lexus eCVT system does make for fast acceleration ...

I'd agree that 0 to 60mph/100km/h is a very artificial figure. I'd struggle to think of a road where I'd have the chance to legally try that out, i.e. straight road with 60mph limit with traffic lights. It's a situation you're very rarely in. 0 to 40mph on the other hand, is what you may have to do pulling away from traffic lights in town. When I've asked the CT to Go in that situation, everything behind has typically gone byebye into the rear view mirror.

From 0 to 40, our CTs are pretty awesome. And that's before you think of what you need to do in the different cars to get the 0 to 60.

CT - press Go pedal, go fast. Start off on a motor that provides massive torque from 0rpm, with the engine coming in when it can. Engine and motor are regulated to constant speeds while you are accelerated by changing gear ratios. No clutch involved at any point.

Manual box - set gas, burn a bit of clutch to get started off in first. Have that awkward clutch frying time when car is catching up to engine. Burn a bit more clutch to change to second, add wear and stress to 1st+2nd gear and synchros. Add wear and stress to the engine as you redline it to get 60 in 2nd.

You have to thrash the clutch and manual gearbox to stand a chance of the hot 0 to 60, whereas the CT just flies. The manual box will also struggle due to the wear, the box in my last car (Focus ST170) was struggling to get 3rd after only 60k miles ...

I went for the CT partly because of its eCVT gearbox (sciatica in left leg wasn't appreciating clutch use in stop/start traffic) and I've been pleasantly surprised by how well the eCVT brain responds when you ask it to Go Fast :cool:.

PS I remember the quote from someone that said that 0-40 in a CT was better than in a Panamera :)
 
1 - 19 of 19 Posts
Top