92 LS400 vs ES350
09-02-13, 11:13 AM
#17
Lexus Test Driver
Hell the original ucf10 was so over engineered and well made it could smoke a early ucf20. Off the line and down the road!
09-02-13, 03:11 PM
#18
From stoplight to stoplight from a dead stop in city streets, yes the new es could probably take an original Ucf10 Ls400, but on the highway or any kind of road that goes a few miles, not a chance.
Hell the original ucf10 was so over engineered and well made it could smoke a early ucf20. Off the line and down the road!
Hell the original ucf10 was so over engineered and well made it could smoke a early ucf20. Off the line and down the road!
1st gen cars are SLOW.
09-02-13, 03:34 PM
#19
I drive on really steep hills a lot, and although it is a highway, most cars slow down to around 50mph... I kid you not, even though the limit is way above that. And I have zero patience for those doing 50 in 65 zone. (and there is an occasional slowpoke doing 40-45 there, and I am just aching for them to get a ticket for driving too slow, especially when they do it in the left lane)
Funny enough, when I try to pass them, THAT'S when they start speeding up. And most v6, including E350s and V6 camrys have no chance. It is probably due to the fact that the hill is steep, air is a bit thin and my V8 could not care less about all that - it just goes as fast as you need it to.
From the stop, yes, lighter car will be faster, but when torque, speed and acceleration all have to be combined at some not very friendly RPMs, my 1990 LS still performs like a champ. OK I have a little advantage in that I step on the gas first, but that seems to be enough to discourage them from racing, even though for a second or two they try.
Funny enough, when I try to pass them, THAT'S when they start speeding up. And most v6, including E350s and V6 camrys have no chance. It is probably due to the fact that the hill is steep, air is a bit thin and my V8 could not care less about all that - it just goes as fast as you need it to.
From the stop, yes, lighter car will be faster, but when torque, speed and acceleration all have to be combined at some not very friendly RPMs, my 1990 LS still performs like a champ. OK I have a little advantage in that I step on the gas first, but that seems to be enough to discourage them from racing, even though for a second or two they try.
09-03-13, 01:05 PM
#20
Drive a 1989 Landcruiser around for 10 years, the First gen LS's will feel like lamborghinis to you.
My .02 cents and opinions on the comparision from my experience working at a lexus dealer in 07, was that the ES350s have a very VERY plasticky feeling interior which was not anywhere near the materials use in the LS. For example:
The part that really stood out to me was the part of the dashboard that swoops down next to the radio and the shifter on the center console. That, the steering wheel and pretty much a good majority of the interior panels are compased of a hard plastic that sounds hollow and thin, and is just unpleasant,. On the LS, the comparable panels are made of foam covered metal brackets finished with vinyl or whatever it is, that have a small amount of give if you poke them with your finger. This in turn make them feel and sound more solid and gives them sound insulating properties.
It's all a matter of the time frames that they were built it as well. the bottom line is the newer you get, the higher and higher the CAFE ratings get, so over time, your build materials are going to get thinner and thinner in an effort to save weight.
Also, yes, the 3.5 V6 has higher power ratings on paper, but where it makes up in higher horsepower it lacks in its low end muscle in its powerband in my opinion. After working there several months, and driving all those newer models around all day, when i had the opporitunity to drive a 94' LS that came in i was actually a bit surprised at how much torque it had right off the line.
The ES350 will still likely trounce a first or second gen LS in a drag race, but the LS has better usuable power in its powerband and therefore doesnt have to change gears all the time like some of the newer ones do.
Not only that, that ULTIMATE reason why i would't get an ES over an LS of any sort: Tranverse Mounted V6 When you ineveitably have to open the hood and do work on it, it is going to SUCK!
My .02 cents and opinions on the comparision from my experience working at a lexus dealer in 07, was that the ES350s have a very VERY plasticky feeling interior which was not anywhere near the materials use in the LS. For example:
The part that really stood out to me was the part of the dashboard that swoops down next to the radio and the shifter on the center console. That, the steering wheel and pretty much a good majority of the interior panels are compased of a hard plastic that sounds hollow and thin, and is just unpleasant,. On the LS, the comparable panels are made of foam covered metal brackets finished with vinyl or whatever it is, that have a small amount of give if you poke them with your finger. This in turn make them feel and sound more solid and gives them sound insulating properties.
It's all a matter of the time frames that they were built it as well. the bottom line is the newer you get, the higher and higher the CAFE ratings get, so over time, your build materials are going to get thinner and thinner in an effort to save weight.
Also, yes, the 3.5 V6 has higher power ratings on paper, but where it makes up in higher horsepower it lacks in its low end muscle in its powerband in my opinion. After working there several months, and driving all those newer models around all day, when i had the opporitunity to drive a 94' LS that came in i was actually a bit surprised at how much torque it had right off the line.
The ES350 will still likely trounce a first or second gen LS in a drag race, but the LS has better usuable power in its powerband and therefore doesnt have to change gears all the time like some of the newer ones do.
Not only that, that ULTIMATE reason why i would't get an ES over an LS of any sort: Tranverse Mounted V6 When you ineveitably have to open the hood and do work on it, it is going to SUCK!
09-04-13, 09:37 AM
#21
Hello. Nice topic. If you discovered Lexus from the UCF10 then no other lexus will satisfy you, I have 92 98 2004 2012 all LS and I can tell you that the 92 is the smoothest the quietest and the best in quality. Only the 98 have 80% similarity.
The ucf10 was made in an era where toyota had a bigger goal, which is establishing lexus as a quality car.
By the way we had a 1993 GS300 (sold now) and it feels very much as the 92 ls which proves the point above.
The ucf10 was made in an era where toyota had a bigger goal, which is establishing lexus as a quality car.
By the way we had a 1993 GS300 (sold now) and it feels very much as the 92 ls which proves the point above.
Last edited by mar1; 09-07-13 at 01:34 PM.
09-04-13, 01:11 PM
#22
Okay, so you're comparing the flagship of yesteryear to the present-day entry model (well, if you don't consider the CT). Naturally, after 20 years, the (relentless) pursuit of perfection would lead to a better entry model. Why not compare the '92 with a 2013 LS? It's like you're trying to compare a '92 Dodge Viper and a present-day Dodge Dart.
09-09-13, 09:50 AM
#23
Lexus Test Driver
09-09-13, 04:47 PM
#24
Lead Lap
Nope, I'm with Pure on this one. The current ES350 V6 is substantially quicker than any stock 90-97 LS400 ever was. The 98-00 LS400 is a different matter. My 2000 LS400 felt and the specs confirm that is substantially quicker than the 2013 ES350 loaner I had in June.
09-09-13, 05:53 PM
#25
Road & Track posted this for the '07 ES.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-revi...7-lexus-es-350
There are not many modern cars produced in the last 5 years that don't walk/spank the '97 and older. The aging '97 and older LS400's might be good for 16's on a good day with 25MPH tail wind and 7% downhill grade.
http://www.roadandtrack.com/car-revi...7-lexus-es-350
Horsepower, bhp @ rpm -272 @ 6500
0–60 mph - 6.2 sec
0–100 mph - 14.9 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) - 14.6 sec @ 99.0 mph
0–60 mph - 6.2 sec
0–100 mph - 14.9 sec
0–1320 ft (1/4 mile) - 14.6 sec @ 99.0 mph
09-10-13, 02:23 AM
#27
Out of any pre 97 LS the 95 was also the lightest at ~3600lbs maybe that has the best chance out of any of those years... The lack of a 5th gear hurts early LS's get off the line. That first gear is pretty long on the 4spd too.
Last edited by VanCityLS4; 09-10-13 at 02:30 AM.