Upon news that my Black Sapphire / Cashmere Ultra is on the way to the East Coast for arrival at the end of September, I read the road test of the car in the recent Car & Driver magazine. They tested the 0-60 mph time as 6.2 seconds (versus Lexus 6.8 seconds) and the quarter mile at 14.7 seconds / 97 mph. I remembered that in the heyday of the sixties and seventies musclecars, these performance figures were very good. So I did some research through my old car magazines from those eras and found that our Lexus ES350 can stand up to quite a few "musclecars". Here are some examples: 1970 GTO witha 455 V-8 did the 0-60 in 6.6 seconds, 1/4 mile in 15.0 seconds at 96.5 mph. A 1973 Pantera did the 1/4 mile in 14.5 seconds at 98.5 mph. A 1972 454 Corvette went 6.8 seconds to 60mph and the 1/4 mile in 14.8 seconds at 93 mph. A 1967 GTO took 6.2 seconds to 60 mph and the 1/4 mile in 14.7 seconds at 95.5 mph. A 1970 Z/28 Camaro did 0-60 mph in 7.0 seconds and the 1/4 mile in 14.9 seconds at 97 mph. We have come a long way in almost 40 years....

 

AND we get 30+ MPG on the freeway! ha!

I'm wondering if there's a way to tune the car and get the extra 30 HP they give to the IS350...

 

What good would that do? The ES is a lot heavier, it still wouldn't be able to match the speed of the IS.
I think 270 hp is very good for a luxo barge. I test drove the car. I found the power delivery a little slow but more than adequate once it comes on. The ES models all seem to have that little hesitation when you mash the gas. But boy does it go when it get up to speed. I thought it was the best ES yet.

 

I'm not sure, but I think the IS and GS 350's have a different fuel injection system - Probably direct injection. That, coupled with a little hotter tuning = the additional 30+ hp.

 

Actually there isn't much difference in the weight of the ES (3,580 lbs.) and the IS (3,527 lbs.). The difference in performance is the 30+ ponies. Maybe different gearing too, but not sure.

 

I'm shocked to see the weights being that close. Are you sure those numbers are accurate? Amazing...doesn't seem right. I've been in both and I just don't believe it.

 

I was kind of surprised too. I got the information @ Edmunds, using the Compare Vehicles feature. FYI, the GS 350 RWD weighs 3,704 lbs.

 

The IS is a heavy car for its size b/c its based on the bigger GS. In engineering, when a smaller car shares a more expensive platform, it will be heavier.
Its vice versa with the ES, being based on the lighter Camry, the ES being a step up, will weigh only slightly more.

We are witnessing the golden age of cars. Basically your average new Lexus has the performance of an exotic from yesteryear!

 

Not without running up a very hefty tab.... the IS350 has a higher compression engine (11.8:1 vs 10.8:1) and uses direct injection.

Remember those old musclecar times were also with non-radial bias ply tires. Putting power to the pavement was much harder back in those days - tire technology has really improved over the last 30 years. You'd probably cut a full second off each of those cars with modern rubber.

As with cars today, different magazines get different results as well... 1970 GTO with the same 455 engine below:

0-60 mph 1/4 mile Equipment
4.9 sec 14.2 @ 103.0mph 360hp Ram Air, auto, 3.90 rear Source - Motor Trend

Don't get me wrong, ES350 is a great peformer and a huge step up from the previous gen Great to see those new test numbers.

 

hm...seems like the ES350 is a good car...seriously contemplating on switching the 04 GS for it...i'll wait to see if prices fall more...heh...anybody know the best deals now for the car is?

 

garsarno, thank you for the research. IT is something to see how far technology has taken us to get such refined power from a V6. Now if we could just have the option to make our ES sound like a 1970 GTO

 

255 width rear tires help the IS get to speed better also, ES has 215s

 

The tires are the difference. A 1974 454 Corvette, while on the downturn of performance, ran the 1/4 in 15.6 sec / 92 mph on radials. While we cannot compare to a 427 / 435hp Corvette, we hold our own to quite a few "fast" cars of that era.

 

Maybe a CD we can play in surround sound

 

Ok...maybe im too young to appreciate the classic muscle cars.... but isnt comparing our new state-of-the-art vehicle with cars from 40 years ago downplaying how far technology has come? I mean it sounds like "wow my computer that I just bought can run as fast as the 1968 IBM mainframe." Of course the newer model should be better and faster....otherwise we're regressing in tech advancement. So what is the point of the comparisons? That our luxury passenger vehicle today is comparable to the creme-of-the-crop cars of yesteryear? I can appreciate that comparison, but it has taken 40 years of car making experience to make that happen....which IMHO isn't very impressive. What is awe-worthy about this evolution?