Lexus: LS400 vs RX300
-
LS400 vs RX300
My wife and I (no kids) are looking for a car to replace our Integra
sedan that we have driven for the last 14 years. We will use it for
grocery shopping and occasional road trips (I have a Miata for daily
use).
We both like the RX300, and have found several '99s right around the
$20k mark. But I wonder if a '98 LS400 might be a better choice (for
the same price) over the long term. For just the two of us we don't
need a huge car, but the LS we looked at was quite a bit plusher than
the RXs we've seen. And I imagine the stability of the car would be
better than the SUV as well, both for turns and crosswinds. But the RX
would be newer/less mileage, and could occasionally accomodate
oversized cargo.
I'd appreciate any advice, specifically:
Which would you rather spend 10 hours on the freeway in?
Which would you expect to last longer?
Thanks!
Owen
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
Based on the last 2 questions the LS400 is definitly the better car.
Myles
Owen Strawn wrote:
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
The LS is a long-range cruiser without peer. I drive mine from KS to FL
and back routinely, 1430 miles in two days, and at the end of the trip I
don't feel beat up or totally drained. It's just superb on either the
interstate or older 2-lanes. The comfort, silence, smoothness, power,
and precise roadworthiness are worth the cost. My LS typically averages
about 26 mpg over long hauls at fairly brisk cruise speeds.
The Lexus V-8 was a reputation for long life. So does the LS. LS's
typically run 240,000 to 320,000 miles before needing major attention.
-- Pete
Owen Strawn wrote:
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
Thanks for the replies! Can anybody give me specific comparisons, I
fear the LS may be too much car for us, but if the higher position of
the RX isn't really an advantage...
PS. I am in Wichita, with family in FL, WI, CA, and WA. So far I've
only made the drive to WI, can't imagine going farther without a
better car.
Pete <com> wrote in message news:<YZiDc.15296$rh.2636@okepread02>...
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
I have a 2000 RX-300, my trade-in was an 1997 ES300. Both cars are great long
distance cruisers, both allow a day of driving without tiring you out. The RX
is more comfortable to drive because it has superior visibility. Being in
amongst a flock of SUV's and other tall vehicles in the ES300 (or any sedan)
was hectic due to limited ability to see around or thru them. With the RX300
you can see everything. It took about 1,000 miles to become accustomed to the
higher seating position in the RX300 and after that it becomes just a very
roomy sedan.
Crosswinds are no more noticable than in a slabsided rental sedan.
The amenities, CD changer, sunroof, sounds system and cruisecontrol are great.
The factory tires were lousey in the wet but a set of Michelin CrossTerrains
from TireRack corrected that.
Go with the RX300, you'll not regret it!
Bob in Atlanta
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
On 29 Jun 2004 05:03:04 GMT, com (Rlstockman) wrote:
I will respectfully disagree. We have a 2004 ES330. It is the great
cruiser as mentioned above. I have driven RX 300's and 330's when
getting service work done and am always shocked that people pay the
money for those. The refinement is gone. Yes, it looks like a Lexus
inside and out and it does have the higher seating position, (but not
as high as our suburban). But when you start down the road you could
begin to think you were in a chevy blazer or something much less than
$42000. Compared to the ES, it is not as quiet, or smooth, or
directionally stable. Another problem I have is that the seats don't
seem to hold me in place quite as well either. I also don't think it
has as much room inside. I am sure someone has measurements for it
but when I drive the RX, I always end up resting my arm on the
PASSENGER arm rest. I am 6'4 but I fit comfortably in the ES. I am
confident that all the differences I have mentioned between the RX and
ES are more profound if comparing the RX to a big LS sedan.
Bob in Augusta
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
Until recently, I had both a 2001 GS-430 and a 2001 RX-300. I
previously had a 97 ES-300. I recently returned the GS when the lease
came up, and kept the RX. As noted above, the RX has a great driving
position. I find it very smooth and a joy to drive. Perhaps a bit
under-powered (I was spoiled by the GS). It is great in the snow too.
I would definitely buy one again--when the hybrid comes out.
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
Well, I haven't driven any of them yet, but I was able to check out a
97 ES300, 98 LS400, 99 RX300, 00 SC300, and a new RX330 at the local
car lots. The ES that we saw seemed to be far less luxurious than any
of the others - maybe it was a poor example of the breed but all the
other cars seemed much nicer to me, even the RX300 which I expected to
be equipped much the same as an ES.
Thanks for the input!
Owen
Bob Muse <spam.comcast.net> wrote in message news:<com>...
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
LS400 definitely. If you don't need the four wheel drive, the LS is an
unbelievable car. I have the ls430 for my wife's car and it drives like a
dream on long distance trips.
"Owen Strawn" <com> wrote in message
news:google.com...
news:<com>...
great long
The RX
in
sedan)
RX300
to the
very
great.
CrossTerrains
-
Re: LS400 vs RX300
I'll agree with the putting your arm on the passenger armrest...I do just
that, but for a long haul from chicago to memphis...it was a very
pleasurable drive...even over the rough I-55 in Arkansas! ...2004 RX-330 w/
everything exc. nav, and multipart sunroof
"ag" <net> wrote in message
news:MR6Fc.5269$news.prodigy.com...
out.
Being
the
accustomed
are
Posting Permissions
- You may not post new threads
- You may not post replies
- You may not post attachments
- You may not edit your posts
Forum Rules
Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.6.0