In some youtubing recently, I ended up watching some acceleration videos and also saw some comments about the 06 GS430...one that Lexus published 5.7 seconds but it's really over 6 and a half. That just didn't seem right.

That and my re-sparked interest in my GS had me do something out of curiosity and time an acceleration. Since I've never done it before, I can't say what change if any came from the new exhaust. I was in an industrial park that seemed pretty empty, so I stopped and let the one car that was on the road get some distance on me and just did a mash and go start. These days, I don't challenge people or try to race at stop lights or even care very much about it beyond the passing thought here and there. I simply drive the car and it's always felt quite powerful enough to me to make aspects of that enjoyable, especially the feeling of the torque.

Based on the various comments I had seen, my mind was blown. Which leaves me wondering if the various things that people try to do to "launch" can actually be counterproductive in a car not necessarily designed to take advantage of them, like turning off traction control, torque braking, holding gears, etc.


(and technically, the trimmed clip was 4.97 seconds, but video timecode display is in seconds and frames, not seconds, tenths and hundredths)

 

Impressive. And those 460 guys in the other thread are saying the 430 is slow. I am like you. I’ve had my 2006 430 for 10 years this coming April. I truly enjoy driving it. I rarely ever get on it, but I know the power is there if I need it. I remember seeing the stat that the car was 0-60 in just under 6 seconds. I doubt it’s under 5, but I do believe it’s a 6 second car all day. I do think you need to maximize launch conditions though. I also think power mode makes a difference. It looks like you were paddle shifting?

 

That was actually the point that this experiment leaves me questioning...do attempts to "maximize launch conditions" actually end up detracting from the acceleration the car is able achieve with its features unmolested? The car is well broken in and has the secondary cat and resonator deleted with an aftermarket axle-back system (which from everything I've read should only have a minimal impact). Other than that, I had the ECT on "Power"...I simply stomped on the gas pedal with it in D; no attempt to manually shift.

It doesn't seem possible to do better than the 5 seconds it did, and I can only imagine that if I tried messing with the traction control and shifting and torque braking, things would only get worse. From the time that I had the error that turns off traction control, I know that it can light the tires up, but the 5 seconds is evidence that not allowing the tires to break loose at all works perfect well.

Like you, I've been driving this car for 13 years...longer than any other car I've owned, and overall, it's been an absolute pleasure and until very recently, almost completely trouble free (so I suppose it's fair for it to start nickle and diming me some ). For the fist few years, it was grin inducing almost all of the time. At the time I got it, I was looking most closely at the GS300, RL, G35 and M35 when I decided to possibly stretch my my budget a bit on this one, and the feeling of the power delivery sold me on it immediately. Regardless of what the "time" is, it feels good.

 

Yep, feels good and sounds good. What about it has been nickel and diming you? I’ve had a few things go bad but either have decided to live with them (stuck parking sensor, dead TPMS, leaky moonroof) or fixed them myself (door lock actuator).

 

Well, it just had its first major non-routine maintenance with the exhaust, and I was so enjoying not having any warning or errors showing on the dash...that lasted three days until this TPMS Check System warning (I presume a dead sensor battery, as it's probably past time). I'll replace the sensors and not be surprised when the next thing pops up, and I can just see the hits coming...better if not, but I just won't be so surprised at this point.

 

Yeah, but you’ve had the car for 13 years so these things do pop up. My TPMS sensors are the original ones so they’re 16 years old. I figure I’ll replace them when I get new tires and just deal with the blinking light until then.

Why did you replace the exhaust? Did it spring a leak? How many miles do you have? I’m at 182k and figure I’ll be due for my second timing belt/water pump soon. It’s still cheaper than a new car and I don’t think cars today are as made as solidly as back then, and in any event I don’t think there’s anything affordable in a V8.

So, if it costs a little here and a little there for non routine stuff, I still think you’re coming our way ahead.

 

Oh yeah, I definitely consider myself way ahead...that's why I said I think it's fair to expect to start seeing some things go. In relative terms, it's been an absolute dream to this point. I'm coming up on 138k. The exhaust had leaks from rust and corrosion. Also, there were indications that one of the primary cats needed to be replaced. I had options, but replacing the whole system seemed best in terms of both relative cost in dollars plus time, frustration, anxiety, certainty and personal comfort with the end result, which also has an intangible element of a re-sparked enjoyment and interest in the car for a while longer. In that, it's a huge success.

 

Interesting! Where are you located (for elevation), what was your outside air temperature and what grade fuel are you running?

I’m nearly a mile above sea level and 91 is the highest octane we have. Sometimes I floor it and feel like meh. Other times I’m like WHOA. My 430 isn’t slow but sometimes I expect it to have more pickup than it does. However, the quicker and firmer shifts of the 6-speed gearbox are a massive improvement in feel over my GS400’s 5-speed. That alone makes the car feel much more responsive.

I deliberately chose the 430 over the 460 anyway just from a maintenance perspective. I’m way more familiar with the UZ motors and they seem far easier to wrench on.

 

Yeah, it kinda seems like "interesting" is putting it mildly. My mind is still blown, but those 5 seconds are right there frame by frame, so it's not like I'm relying on an app or a stopwatch.

I'm right there with you on the experience of it feeling faster some times than others and I think that's part of what happened here; by random chance it was simply the best conditions in every conceivable way. I'm definitely going to try a few more if I'm in a good spot and no one is around. My guess it that times will vary some, and I won't be surprised if I never happen to record that low of a time again.

The elevation is 350 feet here, it was about 58 degrees, and I almost always get gas from Shell, so whatever their premium is, I don't know off the top of my head ... the mental image of the pump I'm coming up with is "V-Power 93", but it could be 95? I'll have to look next time I go.

Whatever part the exhaust plays in this, it sounds cool as hell to me, and it's nowhere near obnoxiously loud.

 

Yeah, keep posting your results, I'm interested to see if/how things change.

I bet elevation and octane play a huge part. I lived in a city around 2k feet for a few years, and I always felt like my old GS400 was discernibly punchier at that lower elevation than it was when I would drive home for visits, back to the 4k feet area. At sea level on 93-95 is about as optimal as it gets, and usually where engines are benchmarked.

I also wonder if the "intelligent ECT" or whatever they put in it that adapts to the driving style plays a role in response sometimes. The old 400 ALWAYS felt much faster after an ECU reset, before it had time to "re-learn" my driving habits.

 

Yep. We'll find if and out how much of a fluke it was.

I've never lived at any high elevations, so can't comment from experience. I also don't know any of the details on how the ECU works. My understanding is that the ECT modes change the shift points. If there's more to it than that, it's beyond me.

 

Unfortunately using a youtube video for any kind of automotive testing is just completely inaccurate. There's no slope indication, so this could be downhill, and the speedo isn't entirely accurate either. I would get a Dragy so you can see what your car is actually doing. Even with mods, I would be surprised if you reach low 5s. Or you could visit your local dragstrip. If your 0-60 is truly around 5.0, you should be able to hit low 13s in the quarter, or mid 8s in the eighth.

This is dragy, and an old run, but I currently have the fastest 3GS on the app with the closest 430 running over half a second slower. Since your car seems to be running pretty well you probably have a quick 430, so I would be interested to see what it actually runs.

 

@TreysGS460 What can fairly be said is "Using video for serious automotive testing isn't completely accurate". I think it's unnecessarily pejorative and a bit hyperbolic to say "using a youtube video for any kind of automotive testing is just completely inaccurate". In and of itself, video is very accurate for measuring what I used it to measure...a recorded instance of the time to 60 indicated on my speedometer. Putting the video clip in an NLE, the display is accurate to a 30th of a second and subframe trimming is accurate to a 100th of a second.

What I did was prompted by videos that showed the same thing, and I'm not really holding it up against anything else. I understand that speedometers have variation in calibration and tend to intentionally be calibrated to read at the top of the threshold. I also understand that even some slope which I didn't measure could have played a role. But to me and for my own interest, comparing like to like things is still valid. There are a handful of videos on youtube with 06 430s showing the same thing as the video I took, but the times are from 5.6 to 6.8 seconds. Again, this is comparing like to like things; using the time that I get by trimming the video clips. One comparison shows a GS300 at 6.5 and a GS430 at 6.8, which is just as much of a head scratcher to me.

Now, I can't help but believe (and have already said as much) that this one run was a something of fluke, with every single necessary element just happening to fall into place...air temp, road temp, how much gas was in the tank, maybe a gust of wind coincided perfectly, all the down to the the speed that I depressed the pedal (not too fast, not too slow, but just right to perfectly get into the torque and power without traction control ruining the whole thing). Sometimes taking off in the car car can feel a little different...sometimes great, sometimes less so. This was one that felt absolutely perfect. Part of the fluke is that I was recording. I don't question or doubt that if I were to use some "proper" and calibrated means of testing that the resulting number would have been higher, but not 6.8 seconds and that still does nothing to affect how it compares to like things; it would just give it different like things to compare against.

As I said, I do intend for my own interest to try this again, but I firmly believe that there are too many variable tho think there will be a consistent time. I'm also finding that in my normal daily drive there are fewer opportunities to casually pull it off than it seemed. My interest in this is nowhere near enough to ever imagine going to a drag strip. I also wouldn't buy a device.

There's an app that appears to use the iPhone's built in accelerometer instead of GPS (it wasn't 100% clear) that claims to be accurate within I think it said 2%, but it costs money, and I don't know if I'm that curious. Maybe I'd be willing to pay if I can confirm how and how well it works.

 

There is a device called a Draggy, I believe that is the spelling, that uses the OBD2 port and GPS to measure the performance numbers very accurately. I would suggest picking one up and doing this test again. A Draggy isn’t expensive and is excellent for recording accurate performance of your personal car.
There could be something your not measuring correctly. If the rear end had been swapped out for a GS300s or the tire size wasn’t correct, they could be affecting the speed your showing.
That being said, a vehicle that has a good bit of life under its belt, will be able to spin easier than when it was tested originally and the engine was still extremely tight. So in optimal conditions, your engine could easily be producing more horsepower now than when it was new and originally tested.

 

Nice, you've helped my argument out a bit more lol. You're saying there are multiple GS430s using youtube videos and stopwatches to measure the 0-60, you got a 5.0 and others have gotten a 6.8. THAT'S A 1.8 SECOND SPREAD!!!! A stock 460 and stock 430 are only about a .5 second difference, so it's obvious that the method of testing is VERY inaccurate, as well as not being very precise. I've already explained why the numbers could be off and won't go any further.

I don't think its a fluke either, just a misrepresentation of the actual time. I would love to be proven wrong.

Any phone apps are BS too, only ones that use separate devices are widely accepted as proof, with Dragy being the best.