What a beautiful car

Newbie1 · February 24, 2017

Got to love public MOT history.

A dog to be avoided...

ScousePaul · February 24, 2017

The advisories don't seem particularly horrific for a 130K miles 17 year old car. All the info is there for any buyer to make an informed choice :).

Newbie1 · February 24, 2017

You pays your money, you takes your chances...

cruisermark · February 24, 2017

I think there is more advisories on there then any other Lexus I've ever looked up

ScousePaul · February 24, 2017

I do think the asking price is on the high side, so yeah caveat emptor

Newbie1 · February 24, 2017

The subframe corrosion advisories had gone from the most recent MOT. Welding, perhaps?

Bluesman · February 24, 2017

There's one heck of a lot more advisories on that car than mine and mine is 159K and the same age and an LS400.

MOT history of this vehicle

Test date 2 February 2017
Expiry date 17 February 2018
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 159,182 miles
MOT test number 7109 8885 4268
Advisory notice item(s)

offside Front suspension has slight play in a lower suspension ball joint (2.5.B.1a)

Test date 5 February 2016
Expiry date 17 February 2017
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 152,648 miles
MOT test number 5382 7598 2746
Advisory notice item(s)

front number plate temporarily displayed

Test date 18 February 2015
Expiry date 17 February 2016
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 145,088 miles
MOT test number 4190 0974 5047
Advisory notice item(s)

Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)

brake disc worn, pitted or scored, but not seriously weakened (3.5.1i)

nearside headlight beam is slightly low

Test date 2 December 2013
Expiry date 9 December 2014
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 137,313 miles
MOT test number 8190 2623 3323
Advisory notice item(s)

Front Tyre worn close to the legal limit (4.1.E.1)

Centre Exhaust has a minor leak of exhaust gases (7.1.2)

Test date 29 November 2012
Expiry date 9 December 2013
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 121,326 miles
MOT test number 7561 4413 2315

Test date 30 November 2011
Expiry date 9 December 2012
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 115,462 miles
MOT test number 6874 4403 1340

Test date 8 December 2010
Expiry date 9 December 2011
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 104,690 miles
MOT test number 3618 9224 0302

Test date 3 December 2010
Test Result Fail
Odometer reading 104,609 miles
MOT test number 8601 0753 0316
Reason(s) for failure

Tyre tread depth below requirements of 1.6mm (4.1.E.1)

Test date 25 November 2009
Expiry date 9 December 2010
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 95,716 miles
MOT test number 3704 1902 9340

Test date 24 November 2008
Expiry date 9 December 2009
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 87,759 miles
MOT test number 7216 2952 8390

Test date 21 November 2008
Test Result Fail
Odometer reading 87,759 miles
MOT test number 3226 0652 8336
Reason(s) for failure

Nearside Front Upper Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)

Offside Front Upper Suspension arm rubber bush deteriorated resulting in excessive movement (2.4.G.2)

Front Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)

Rear Brake pad(s) less than 1.5 mm thick (3.5.1g)

Test date 10 December 2007
Expiry date 9 December 2008
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 81,704 miles
MOT test number 3704 0464 7319

Test date 6 December 2006
Expiry date 5 December 2007
Test Result Pass
Odometer reading 73,622 miles
MOT test number 1100 2074 6304

ScousePaul · February 24, 2017

What do you reckon the lowest cost is to fix those though? Things like ball joints are £50 or so. If you're a dab hand mechanic and can do it yourself it's not a big expense.

Wouldn't be an LS for me (I can hardly change a light bulb) but probably not a big thing to others. No doubt others out there better value, but the gene pool is getting smaller and smaller for this model.

Newbie1 · February 24, 2017

What these repeated advisories show is a car where routine maintenance has not caught such things and it's left to MOT time.

ScousePaul · February 24, 2017

Gotcha. So not as lovingly well maintained as described. eBay descriptions can be quite florid though ;).

Newbie1 · February 24, 2017

Caveat emptor, as you say, and all these old girls will be hiding a dirty secret of some sort!

Spacewagon52 · February 24, 2017

20 minutes ago, Newbie1 said:

What these repeated advisories show is a car where routine maintenance has not caught such things and it's left to MOT time.

Last year my car had corrosion advisories, I had the corrosion treated and waxoyled. Same garage did the MOT this year - no advisories. You may look at the MOT record of my car and think - smells a rat (Sorry Big Rat!). I am trying to look after my LS 400. If ever I sold it I would explain warts and all - that is my nature. I think I have a very good LS for the year, but as people realise, it is nearly 20 years old!

I agree with Bluesman, buyer beware but lets get real regarding faults - these are getting old girls and will not be perfect. If you want a perfect car (if there is such a thing) buy new. You pays your money you take a chance. In my opinion we must begin to view these cars as classics. Think how much work and money is spent on classics of a similar age. Lexus LS 400 still work out remarkably cheap to run in comparison to something like a Jaguar XJ. Just my opinion

I would still have a look at this one but judge the owner when you meet them - someone on here said, "Judge the car by the owner."

ScousePaul · February 24, 2017

I sold my LS400 mkIV about 10 years ago. Still regret it, but had been given a company car at the time and couldn't justify running a second "weekend" car. When I jumped back into the LS world recently I went for a 430 as to me that was closest to the LS400 in style and build and there are plenty of very good examples available. The LS400 still beats it in exterior looks though. Would have snapped up a mint example 400 for similar price, but those are now like rocking horse sh*t.. There's no doubt they're a classic car these days and worth investing in, and worth preserving and looking after.

shanra · February 25, 2017

"Wafter" there's a lot in a name and if I went to view it I'd wear wellingtons as it may be quite deep. As Bluesman points out he had a Porsche up for sale and the reason, he's now got two dogs. So he's now got four dogs or he's had two cars and cannot fit them in either or he's got two dogs and they don't like either car or..... . Advisories so many it's certain to cost you and some of them if not now it will later. There's a lot of corrosion on it and something needs to be done about that. An MOT unfortunately is to some degree as good as the tester and I know mine passed an MOT in June '16 and I bought it in July and replaced brake discs and pads and had the calipers reconditioned yet they had passed an MOT, and a part of it that's tested by machine not man. Why did I replace them, because the pads all round were not grabbing the whole of the discs and the discs were worn and calipers were obviously not working properly. Yes those brakes were stopping me but not anything like they're stopping me now. If you strip away the "Waffle" in the advert you're not left with much whilst he's waxing so lyrically about the car where's the service history or any mention of what repairs etc have been done to the car and the cam belt is due in two years or so, "regularly maintained and serviced" means nothing without proof. He tells you the resprayed parts are poor but in his own floral language. I could go on but I'd better get down off the Lectern. I know people will say you've got to expect to spend money on a car of this age and you're correct I bought my '97 LS 400 with 196,000 miles on it for £800 and have spent another £1400 and lots of my labour on it and it's not far off where I'd like it to be and it had 20 Lexus service stamps and all service history after and that's why I think it's in good condition for the year. £2695 for this car is to my mind way over the top as it's going to cost an awful lot to get this car to where it should be.

Bluesman · February 25, 2017

11 hours ago, ScousePaul said:

Gotcha. So not as lovingly well maintained as described. Ebay descriptions can be quite florid though ;).

Think eBay description think Estate Agent.

Newbie1 · February 25, 2017

Aside from shopping trolley cars it's been my experience any sub £2000 car will need a grand spent on it to get it just right; more if paint is required. Many people use passing an MOT as the baseline, but as was pointed out above, that's not an assurance of safety. It's the subjective view of a tester that a car meets a broad standard. Would I be happy having a car with an advisory that there is play in the suspension? Hell no. Some would say "well, not worth spending the money on a cheap car" but for me it's worth spending the money on a safe car.

plastic orange · February 25, 2017

With regard to rusty subframes etc, it depends on the tester's attitude. The majority these days just seem to give advisories for the slightest thing, and I'm sure the subframe rust will just be surface corrosion and could be restored with some elbow grease. There can't be many Ls 400's out there without rust somewhere on the underside, but i'd suggest most are superficial, but are listed as advisories and are copied from one year to the next to keep the tester right.

Pete

Caractacus · March 6, 2017

Hi, hope you are as fortunate as i was, a neglected one owner Ls400, boor full of water, car full of rubbish; but got it started and everythingi checked worked. So bought it and two years later, it's a dream. See pics.

dendonc · March 6, 2017

^{Lovely looking ls, is t a japanese or US import? Im asking that cause of the grill, that toyota emblem on bonnet & have never sen that color before or is that you're own preference/ lovely color though.}

Caractacus · March 6, 2017

50 minutes ago, dendonc said:

^{Lovely looking ls, is t a japanese or US import? Im asking that cause of the grill, that toyota emblem on bonnet & have never sen that color before or is that you're own preference/ lovely color though.}

Hi, hope you are as fortunate as i was, a neglected one owner Ls400, boor full of water, car full of rubbish; but got it started and everythingi checked worked. So bought it and two years later, it's a dream. See pics.

Caractacus · March 6, 2017

No its neither, was bought by a company boss, ( as his retirement present to himself ) new in the U.K. who had it for nearly 18 years; then lost hos ability to drive properly. Scraped 3 corners and i 'found' it with the boot full of water, the car full of rubbish and a flat Battery. Got it started an all seemed to work ok, so had scrapes fixed and now spent two years doing it up, imported chrome grill from USA and wheel arches from China, the bonnet emblem is genuine Toyota and for a 4x4 i believe but as it fold down on impact is perfectly legal. Bst but us imported wood kit for facia and trim from Bulgaria, Been a long and somewhat difficult search but well worth it as i love i t to bits now.

N550LWL · January 27, 2018

Please forgive me for raising this old thread, but I must admit this gave me quite a giggle! This was my LS400, and I was the seller. There's a Land Rover Series now sat on my drive fulfilling the dog walking duties, and indeed I did sell my 924 also. I've driven older classic / modern classic vehicles as daily cars for a long time, spreading the mileage across them so not to clock up silly miles.

With regards to the subframe advisories on the MOT, I too was concerned by this when I bought the car. One of the reasons I wanted an LS was that they avoid the ravages of structural corrosion. However, the car was owned by over a decade before me by a lady who took it to the local Renault dealership for MOT and servicing. I can only think they are dutifully bound to advise of any surface corrosion and are usually experienced with a nearly new Megane. Clamber underneath and it's immediately apparent the subframe is completely solid, hence why it disappeared once I took it to a different test centre.

Had I owned the car longer, a new set of rear pads and ball joints at the front would've perfected the car and ensured several more years faultless reliability.

The LS went to a very respectable gentleman in Essex who has a large collection of over 50 classic vehicles.

It was a lovely example, and sorely missed. I would quite like it back if ever it appears again for sale. It's a shame that people jump to negative conclusions so quickly, but I appreciate we all need to approach used car purchases with a sceptical eye and scrutiny!

The-Acre · January 28, 2018

It does amuse me sometimes when the post begins with "this looks like a good buy" and after 30 replies it's not half the car it appeared to be. Some advice of course is good, some based on guess work. Glad yours went to a good home, and I fully understand the missing it part!