LS430

[b4u2]

Just went yesterday on a road trip in my friends ls430 and I must say it's a beautiful car with every possible gimmick in the planet. It was so smooth and such an enjoyable ride. He even let me have a go behind the wheel some of the country roads. It's like a limousine or rolls royce. Had all the bells and whistles. Only thing I hate is the exterior body shape otherwise can't fault the car. Oh and of course very expensive on fuel due to 4.3L 

[Tomtit]

You can't see much of the exterior when you are enjoying the drive.

It is worth the fuel costs to have that super smooth V8 under the bonnet. Besides, you will not be spending on repairs as you would on a less reliable car.

[Malc]

14 hours ago, b4u2 said:

It's like a limousine or rolls royce.

ah no no no ......  it won't breakdown like one of those !  

Malc

[BMCWP]

I use my LS430 as a daily driver.  The fuel cost is only part of it with these cars actually going up in value now (so depreciation has bottomed out) and standard servicing and running costs are less than any of my previous cars (Jaguar XJ8, Mercedes S Class, Range Rover etc) I managed to sneak under the high tax bracket as well with my car being a 2005 model but registered in 2006 so tax is only half what the others were. The car often gets mistaken for a Merc (no bad thing) and yes its a bit plain but that suits me as it does not shout "look at me" as much as the others did. Just as an example, my S Class cost me more to fix and keep on the road in the 9 months that I owned it than I have spent on my Lexus in total. And that includes buying it and doing the timing belts etc.  Beauty (as they say) is in the eye of the beholder. 😁

[ambermarine]

On 8/19/2021 at 8:25 PM, b4u2 said:

Just went yesterday on a road trip in my friends ls430 and I must say it's a beautiful car with every possible gimmick in the planet. It was so smooth and such an enjoyable ride. He even let me have a go behind the wheel some of the country roads. It's like a limousine or rolls royce. Had all the bells and whistles. Only thing I hate is the exterior body shape otherwise can't fault the car. Oh and of course very expensive on fuel due to 4.3L 

The body shape is a rare thing these days as most cars are the generic jelly mould with tweaks to the brightwork and light clusters otherwise they are all built from the same mould. If you own one the last thing you do is drive past shop windows looking at the reflection of your car, you enjoy the driving experience.

[Spacewagon52]

I found my LS 400 had better fuel consumption overall than my RX 300 - around RX 22mpg - LS 25 mpg

[b4u2]

@Spacewagon52

How's that possible? 

LS400 is much bigger engine!

[b4u2]

30 minutes ago, Spacewagon52 said:

I found my LS 400 had better fuel consumption overall than my RX 300 - around RX 22mpg - LS 25 mpg

?

[Malc]

1 hour ago, b4u2 said:

How's that possible?

...........  it's a differently engineered car with less stress on the engine maybe ......  hence less effort and therefore less fuel to travel the same distances 

I think 25mpg is probably about right, often less when poodling around and quite some more when coasting along the motorway fully laden at 70mph

In my limited 20+ years experience of the Ls400 I found my mpg varies between about 18 and  ......... 31 mpg in the latter fully laden and belting around scenarios

Malc

[ambermarine]

Years ago I used to cruise down to Devon from Scotland at around 56mph as it took two days and I was'nt in a rush I recorded 34mpg in my Mark 1 Ls400 on a regular basis .I have only been able to do at best 32mpg in my Mark 4 at 70mph average, not been required to do 56mph since the trip now takes 6 hours .Around town average is about 18mpg but if you want the luxury and a best experience what is a couple of extra quid for petrol and do not start me up on the pollution theme.

[Spacewagon52]

1 hour ago, Malc said:

...........  it's a differently engineered car with less stress on the engine maybe ......  hence less effort and therefore less fuel to travel the same distances 

I think 25mpg is probably about right, often less when poodling around and quite some more when coasting along the motorway fully laden at 70mph

In my limited 20+ years experience of the Ls400 I found my mpg varies between about 18 and  ......... 31 mpg in the latter fully laden and belting around scenarios

Malc

Totally agree with that Malc. It does seem strange considering it is 1,000cc more but drag and weight are the main factors against the RX300.

[Spacewagon52]

1 hour ago, ambermarine said:

Years ago I used to cruise down to Devon from Scotland at around 56mph as it took two days and I was'nt in a rush I recorded 34mpg in my Mark 1 Ls400 on a regular basis .I have only been able to do at best 32mpg in my Mark 4 at 70mph average, not been required to do 56mph since the trip now takes 6 hours .Around town average is about 18mpg but if you want the luxury and a best experience what is a couple of extra quid for petrol and do not start me up on the pollution theme.

My Mk3 LS400 was better on petrol than my Mk4 as well.

[Tulpen]

2 hours ago, Spacewagon52 said:

Totally agree with that Malc. It does seem strange considering it is 1,000cc more but drag and weight are the main factors against the RX300.

I remember, when I bought my first LS (Mk3 400) back in '97, I read an article which stated that the Mk3 LS400 had the lowest drag co-efficient of any production saloon car - I can't remember the actual number.

In comparison, the RX has the aerodynamic qualities of a house brick. 😄

That could be the answer to your question.

[BigBoomer]

RX300 Drag Coefficient = 0.36
LS400 Drag Coefficient = 0.29
LS430 Drag Coefficient = 0.25 which is better than the current LS500H (Cd= 0.26) but is beaten by the Tesla Model S (Cd=0.24 in 2012, 0.208 for 2021 model)

As Brian states, all SUVs have the aerodynamics of a brick.