dicer

It was on ebay, and I don't think I'm supposed to link to it here. It sold for the 9k.
It had 18K miles and was supposed to be all stock. Unknown options as there was only one picture. It just reiterates what I have said about having cars in good shape. Makes me wonder what the 3000 mile LS at the California dealer went for, does anyone know?

isfdude

iTrader: (11)

Some people will pay a pretty penny for a car with low mileage. There's a 1990 supra going for 80k from a dealer and it only has 70 miles it it I believe.

93LS500

my 93 LS only has 50k original miles...my 97 has 85k
I always see really low mile LS in the AZ retirement communities

Stereorob

I wouldn't go anywhere near a 92 with 18k miles. thatd be nothing but trouble. means it was never driven. when they get to be that age its better to have a really clean one with 160k on it that was driven normally.

CELSI0R

I saw this car as well, and was thinking of posting it! I'm really interested to see if the new owner pops up here, or if it's in someone's collection now.

I would think that a collector would be one of the only types of people to pay that much for a 92' LS at the moment.

The options that I saw were visible on the car include:

• Traction Control
• CD Changer
• Cellular Phone
• Leather Interior
• Lexus Carpets
• Moon roof
• Heated Seats

Overall, a very clean car.

I've attached a few of the many photos included on the listing. I like to save a lot of webpages and media on Lexus history, as well as good finds here and there..

AandSC

I respect your opinion but I disagree with this. I've had quite a few very low mile vehicles that I've either owned or bought over the years and have never had an issue. I would much rather have that like new, low mileage car that I know has years more of life left to it. There's a reason collectors will always pay more for very low mileage examples also.

Rdrcr

I'm not a collector and you can count me in as one who would pay $9K for a similar LS as long as it has a detailed and extensive service history...not based on mileage, but by age, and has been garage-kept its entire life.

I reason that I can't buy a similar new car for anywhere near $9K and higher mileage LS's typically need a lot more reconditioning than low mileage examples.

Mike

Stereorob

ok think about it this way..

the car has no miles on it. so all the rubber is going to be bad, all the gaskets and seals will be bad, its going to have all original 24 year old parts on it. its never even seen a major service. sure its beautiful but its going to be trouble for whoever got it. the only way to kill an Ls400 is by not driving it. statistically, 90 percent of the ones ive seen in junkyards have very low miles. ive seen enough to know and to have a legit opinion.

all original parts.. that will break soon. its better to get a car with 160k on it that is in pristine condition that's been kept up then this. think about it, by 160k everything that would have broken has already been replaced!

beautiful car but no way. NO WAY.

Rdrcr

That's my deal. Based on age alone, the car should have already seen minor and major services.
If not, I agree, no way.

Mike

AandSC

Granted, my LS400 was only 16 years old when I bought it and had 33,000 miles, but the seals/gaskets/leather/rubber were and still are all like new. If the car is garage kept and properly maintained then it's not going to the junk yard. It still had the original coolant and timing belt in it. When I flushed the coolant and changed the timing belt you could tell the age but there was no sign of any issues caused by this. And I think with 14,000 miles over the past seven months I would have been hit by any issues that this car's sitting would have been affected by.


Had too many low mileage vehicles to be concerned with cars that have been kept in a garage, and have never had an issue.

Aron9000

Its all in how you store it and maintain it when they have stupidly low mileage like this LS. If its garage kept and has had the oil changed every few years, the coolant changed a couple of times, and the cam belt isn't more than 6-8 years old, you're good to go. Rubber hoses, vacume lines, weather stripping, they don't deteriorate if they're kept in a garage at a reasonable temperature.

All the rubber seals and parts on my 1992 SC looked brand new when I bought it back in 2012 with 60k miles on it. And that car had been driven about 5,000 miles in the past 10 years according to the previous owner

mappo

That last pic shows one of my pet peeves - this car was lovingly cared for over a quarter century, is nearly pristine, and then some asshat two bit used car dealer got their paws on it and slapped their dealer name decal on the back. Nobody cares that the car spent 0.00001% of its life at your crappy little used car lot!

Stereorob

guess that possible. but still, it was basically sitting on a shelf for 24 years. if it was indeed maintained and regularly serviced and driven every now and then on the highway it might be okay, but its still really really bad for any car to just sit. ive had enough low mile old cars to know. I had a 1991 mercury marquis with only 26k on the clock a few years back. it was an absolute time capsule. still smelled new, very very neat car. it lasted a year and in that time everything on it broke. however it was also my daily driver but I did maintain it. I once had a 1986 Mercedes 420SEL with 48k miles. another disaster, I also had a 1987 Toyota camry very briefly that had less than 50k. also blew up on me. guess ive just had bad luck with very old cars with very low miles.

dicer

Celsior, I think that is the one. And a super low mile car is way worth it because all the interior would be new.
So I don't agree with stereorob at all about low mile cars, as there will be no more problems with them than there is with a higher mileage car. And you can't tell me that things like ball joints and upper control arms are going to be worn out on a 3000 mile or 18000 mile car that sat in a garage. And besides any car with low miles will sell for a high price at collector auctions. If you are buying something like that low mile LS none of that should matter to you anyway. Why? because the most stupid thing you could do is drive it and use it because every mile that goes on it your investment is going down. Its like people that have money in a bank, you don't take it all out and use it that is if its there as an investment. Anyone buying a super low mile old car and planning on driving it, is not a smart person. So Stereorob, there is no way to ever have bad luck with a low mile car, that has collector potential someday. I don't think a Ford Taurus would qualify ever so I advise against one of them low miles.

Stereorob

low miles means a better car is a myth. I see it every day in my service dept. just sayin.

however,

anyone whos gunna pay that kind of coin for a super low mile mint ucf10 Ls400 is going to be a collector anyway, and it will probably end up as a garage queen. if I got a time capsule LS400 like that, I wouldn't drive it. id be too scared some jackass texting and driving would rear end me