Low amount of annual miles, mainly town and some dual carriage way....I'd suggest either model is compromised driving experience with worse economy you would get out of normal car versions. They aren't even that high up, so you'd still wouldn't get the benefit of an elevated driving seats considering everyone seems to be lapping up these fake suvs.
Something like a petrol version of the Skoda oktavia would provide a much better ride, better economy, much more practical and spacious... I presume you mean 40mpg? If so that's rubbish for a diesel. My 1999 Peugeot 406 averaged 50 mpg on the motorway at 80mph I have not had that model but owned a few PSA (Citroen/Peugeot) vehicles.
If you buy one, pick up the diagnostic software from Ebay for £20 or so. Peugeot/Citroen will charge you double this just to read the faults.
The engines themselves are reliable, however, the sensors for MAF, DPF, Turbo etc are not, even being Bosch. I had to change 2 on my C4 Picasso to clear a Turbo fault, which caused the car to go into limp mode. Yes I do mean 40mpg and it's a 1.2 3 cyl petrol turbo hauling a large car with passengers and a mobility scooter plus hoist using motorways, a, b and c roads. Peugeot do something called grip control which offers a bit more traction but no need for actual 4x4 drive, just want something taller that's easier to get in and out of because of bad backs and old folk not being able to bend so much. Otherwise, Octavia vRS is my choice; it's much cheaper, faster, more enjoyable to drive, more space and looks better.
Anyway, I think this has swayed it in favour of the Lexus:
Most reliable cars: Electric and hybrid models beat petrol and diesel | Daily Mail Online Fair enough, make certain you try them out before setting your mind on one. They really aren't all as practical as they are made out to be, and that includes getting in and out of them. Side steps on the mundane height models always make me smile. Sure they can look nice (when new before the oxidation kicks in) but as most passenger car based models are so low they are pointless to use as a step to get into the vehicle. And when you want to step over them and not dirty your trousers it can get quite awkward.
Oh and if you live in a hilly areas I really wouldn't like that drive train from the 300h again. I found it unrefined, the engine screams at high revs going up a hill. I found it embarrassing at it looked like I can't drive. On flat smooth roads where you can pulse and glide then yes it is great.... Apologies, I thought you were talking about a diesel. I'm not a fan of this small, turbo powered petrol engines. The misses had one in her Juke, the fuel economy was pants, and you had to rev the hell out of it to get anywhere. 100% take the Lexus on a test drive, the CVT auto isn't for everyone. No problem, I always used to have diesels but my mileage dropped over the last couple of years, so I went for petrol this time and work picked up, but the engine certainly revs if needed though I do find it very flexible and only have to drop a gear to do a fast overtake. I give it back in 2 years so don't have to worry to much about the high mileage. Not really an equivalent to the 180bhp diesel. It'd be the 1.6 THP petrol at that power level.
The trouble with reliability surveys is that cars are all so close together that results swing wildly from source to source depending on other factors like the exact question being asked. For example the survey mentioned above claims the Hyundai i40 is the more reliable executive car, yet if you look at MOT data it has a below average pass rate:
Hyundai i40 MOT Results | Honest John
Pages:
1
[2]