Lexls.com is a great website but it isn't an authority on performance figures for the 90-92 and 93-94 LS400.

The official performance figures for both generations are the same:
1992: http://www.lexus.com/contact/pdf/1992/1992LSspecs.pdf
1993: http://www.lexus.com/contact/pdf/1993/1993LSspecs.pdf

Unfortunately, the "official" figures probably aren't very accurate either.

There was a lot of buzz in the automotive press back in the early 1990's about how much slower the 93-94 LS400 had become due to the added weight and drag of larger wheels and tires, the new air filtration system, additional standard equipment, etc. Automotive writers were calling the 93 LS a "dog". Note that the official curb weight of the 92 LS is 3,759 lb and the official curb weight of the 93 LS is 3,858 lb.

100 pounds isn't all that much but it is going to make some difference in accelleration times. I noticed that by 1993, as the base price for the LS had increased from it's original $35K to $47,030, the average 1993 LS400 -- at least the ones I saw -- were more fully optioned (i.e. heavier) than the 90-92 LS400.

My bare bones 1990 LS400 was a real screamer compared to the much better equipped 1993 LS400 I test drove way back then.

The flack from the automotive press about the slowness of the 93-94 LS400 was probably one of the reasons the curb weight of the 95 LS400 was reduced to 3,650 lb and horsepower increased to 260. And note that the curb weight of the 3,650 lb 95 LS had standard equipment that was optional and not included in the curb weights of the 90-94 LS.

 

Oh yeah! 93 for me, 3850lbs of delicous fat! although to be fair your average VW golf nearly weighs that these days, hell 3800lbs is the stripped down carbon fibre version on a Ford Taurus!

I used to live at 3500ft in Calgary, I always felt like the Celsior was running a bit slow, I assumed it should have more power, and I knew that altitude robbed it of lots...

I live at sea level now and WOW what a difference! the car pulls so much harder at sea level, my GF's escort ZX2 is transformed!

The 0-60 time is not great, but 2nd gear acceleration is much better once you get out of that massively tall 1st gear and the slow torque converter.

Lose weight? I guess, but what it the point of the car then? still makes 28mpg on the highway, although I'm not 100% sure how the cabin filtration system helps me, but I leave it on anyways!

 

I stand corrected Kansas, good post.

Id argue the other way about my 93 ls but i have intake and straight pipe exhaust with an xpipe so my 93 feels much more peppy than my 91, so its not exactly a fair comparison.

 

Corrected the '95-97 info for you!

 

LOL, nice

thats worse than the Honda Insight(good car but slow, CD). must have some blown plugs.

 

When I tested my 0 to 60 times about 10 times my gas mileage was about 15mpg normally I get 18 to 20.