Test Drove a 2001 LX today

[cary]

I happened to see a 2001 LX 470 with 60k at a local dealer today so I test drove it. I had a very mixed impression of it.

What I liked: The levinson stereo if fabulous. I also like the guages and the climate control system.

What I didn't like: The electronic suspension. The system does a great job of keeping body roll and motions to a minimum, while at the same time keeping the ride quality nice. The problem is that there is virtually no feedback to the driver. I could not tell what was going on with the road. I have not experienced this with the 100's I have driven.

Compared to the 80- Quieter, slightly better acceleration, nice climate control, more luxerious. Not as big of a step as I expected. It is IMHO a natural evolution.

 

[1loudLX]

what setting was the suspension on? If you keep it on "Sport" setting it provides pretty good feedback. Im a "Spirited+" driving style and i think its not bad for a nearly 3 ton truck.

 

[cary]

what setting was the suspension on? If you keep it on "Sport" setting it provides pretty good feedback. Im a "Spirited+" driving style and i think its not bad for a nearly 3 ton truck.

I had it in the full sport setting.

 

[SWUtah]

I had it in the full sport setting.

You need to drive some others to see if it is you or that particular LX470?

 

[Poriomania]

Compared to the 80- Quieter, slightly better acceleration, nice climate control, more luxerious. Not as big of a step as I expected. It is IMHO a natural evolution.

I thought the same thing. I was expecting a huge difference in performance, ride, and interior. The 100's were noticeably better in all areas, but not as much as I had expected.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Compared to the 80- slightly better acceleration Not as big of a step as I expected.

Cary: I'm not trying to cause trouble....but....SLIGHTLY better accelaration? Are you kidding!? It must have been one really short test ride. Go up any hills? Try passing from 45 MPH like you would on a single lane highway? My god...it's not close.

As far as a "big step up"? You could not tell it's a completely different vehicle that dwarfs the 80-series on road?

Not picking on you....you just need more seat time. Every time I return from a trip in one of my 80's then get in the 100 to go out to dinner I'm reminded that the vehicles are nothing alike.

Maybe I'm too picky and am more sensitive to the 80's inadequacies? (How the heck ya spell that? )

Sent in luv brother! Just surprised by your impressions.

 

[SWUtah]

Cary: I'm not trying to cause trouble....but....SLIGHTLY better accelaration? Are you kidding!? It must have been one really short test ride. Go up any hills? Try passing from 45 MPH like you would on a single lane highway? My god...it's not close.

As far as a "big step up"? You could not tell it's a completely different vehicle that dwarfs the 80-series on road?

Not picking on you....you just need more seat time. Every time I return from a trip in one of my 80's then get in the 100 to go out to dinner I'm reminded that the vehicles are nothing alike.

Maybe I'm too picky and am more sensitive to the 80's inadequacies? (How the heck ya spell that? )

Sent in luv brother! Just surprised by your impressions.

Got to agree, I've owned a 95 FZJ80 and a 99 LC 100 series and now the 2004 LX470 and it just keeps getting better

 

[cary]

I've actually driven 4 different 100 series. I spent some time with my sisters 98 100, then her 2001 100 (she has a 2005 but I haven't driven that one). I have also test driven the LX, and a 2003 100. Out of the bunch, I was the least impressed with the LX. I think the extra weight may kill some of the perceved 100 benifits. The 98 100 felt faster, and IMHO, the five speed auto in 2003 made a huge difference. It felt like that added 40-50 horsepower.

I also have to wonder if a lot of people driving 100's (like shotz) are comming out of 80's with 33" tires + armor and big lifts that add 500+ pounds to their 80. That would make a 100 feel much faster. I have purpously kept my 80 light and stayed with a smaller tire to keep the performance.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

I also have to wonder if a lot of people driving 100's (like shotz) are comming out of 80's with 33" tires + armor and big lifts that add 500+ pounds to their 80. That would make a 100 feel much faster. I have purpously kept my 80 light and stayed with a smaller tire to keep the performance.

I'm not only talking apple to apple tire and weight wise. I'm taking it another step further.

My 35" tired-up 100 with a billion extra pounds. Tires make for a 12% power loss via gearing. Compare that to my '97 LX w'35's and 4.88's. The LX has a 7% added advantage from gearing. There's NO comparison. My 4-spd, 235HP 100 smokes it.

Now, one step further....my buddy Walt has a 4.88 with S/C....he's no match either. Plus...while the 80's are roaring and vibing away the 100 isn't even taxed.

But that's OK Cary. I got ya. I see you run a smaller tire for better performance. We all have various priorities in play and that keeps tjhe sport (and forum) fun!

 

[SWUtah]

I've actually driven 4 different 100 series. I spent some time with my sisters 98 100, then her 2001 100 (she has a 2005 but I haven't driven that one). I have also test driven the LX, and a 2003 100. Out of the bunch, I was the least impressed with the LX. I think the extra weight may kill some of the perceved 100 benifits. The 98 100 felt faster, and IMHO, the five speed auto in 2003 made a huge difference. It felt like that added 40-50 horsepower.

I also have to wonder if a lot of people driving 100's (like shotz) are comming out of 80's with 33" tires + armor and big lifts that add 500+ pounds to their 80. That would make a 100 feel much faster. I have purpously kept my 80 light and stayed with a smaller tire to keep the performance.

They all have different feels. I had a 95 FZJ80 and loved it, drove like a solid axle truck but I loved that feel about it. My 99 LC was more of a luxury ride and the ride improved when I added the bilsteins. My 2004 LX is on another level. I ride with it on the middle sport setting. I like the ride feel of the LX better then all of the others. I guess its just a personal thing.

 

[Jim_Chow]

I'm not only talking apple to apple tire and weight wise. I'm taking it another step further.

My 35" tired-up 100 with a billion extra pounds. Tires make for a 12% power loss via gearing. Compare that to my '97 LX w'35's and 4.88's. The LX has a 7% added advantage from gearing. There's NO comparison. My 4-spd, 235HP 100 smokes it.

Now, one step further....my buddy Walt has a 4.88 with S/C....he's no match either. Plus...while the 80's are roaring and vibing away the 100 isn't even taxed.

But that's OK Cary. I got ya. I see you run a smaller tire for better performance. We all have various priorities in play and that keeps tjhe sport (and forum) fun!

Were all of those 100's you test drove using the same brand/octane gas with about the same air density (altitude, temp, humidity)? My LX is a slug on 87 octane, but accelerates quite quickly with 91.

 

[cary]

My LX is a slug on 87 octane, but accelerates quite quickly with 91.

You may have hit on something there. The LX was at a dealer and generally they use the cheapest gas available.


Shots, just to clarify, when I say a smaller tire, I am saying vis-a-via a 33 or 35". I run a 265/75/16 which is approximately .6" taller than the stock tire.

 

[Jim_Chow]

You may have hit on something there. The LX was at a dealer and generally they use the cheapest gas available.


Shots, just to clarify, when I say a smaller tire, I am saying vis-a-via a 33 or 35". I run a 265/75/16 which is approximately .6" taller than the stock tire.

Yep, when I took delivery of my 03 LX w/ the full tank of complimentary gas, it was a slug, no better acceleration then my 5spd, 4 cylinder (22re) 86 4runner w/ header and 2.25" cat/catback and TRD cam running 4.56 gears on 31's and carrying a few hundred pounds of body armor. I then put in chevron 91 and it was like night and day, so I assumed the dealer had cheapo 87 in there.

 

[ShottsUZJ100]

Were all of those 100's you test drove using the same brand/octane gas with about the same air density (altitude, temp, humidity)? My LX is a slug on 87 octane, but accelerates quite quickly with 91.

OH OH....VERY SORRY! When I refer to my LX I mean my LX450 (not a 470). I was comparing the power between my trucks.

 

[LXPearl]

Engine wise, I did not notice much difference at all between my LC and LX. The LX has a smoother sensation with the AVS set to Comfort. Press the Power button and put the AVS in Sport, and it feels remarkably nimble - more so than the LC did.

The 5 spd trans in the 03+ models makes a bigger impact than the extra 5 HP. For a 3 ton truck, torque makes the primary difference, so the 5 spd vs 4 spd can "feel" like an extra 40 HP.

There are differences between the perceptions of various used 100s, maintenance, gas, tires, fluids, etc. can add up. Condition of the Oxygen sensors and other sensors can have an impact that you will then encounter down the line. In general, a 100 in the 60-70K mile range should drive very similar to new. I tested many 100s before getting my LX, those that did not drive and perform as I knew they should were left for someone else. I even had a Lexus salesman get frustrated with me because I drove each of the LXs that were of interest to me to compare them, commenting on them as I drove them. He stated they all drove the same and did not like me wasting his time. I told him they did not all drive the same and that I knew the difference. End result, I quit test driving his LXs and bought from a different dealership.

My guess on the LX you drove is that there were some issues with it somewhere - so keep looking. The LX should perform well enough that the only noticeable difference would be quieter and smoother than the LC.

 

[spressomon]

Yep, when I took delivery of my 03 LX w/ the full tank of complimentary gas, it was a slug, no better acceleration then my 5spd, 4 cylinder (22re) 86 4runner w/ header and 2.25" cat/catback and TRD cam running 4.56 gears on 31's and carrying a few hundred pounds of body armor. I then put in chevron 91 and it was like night and day, so I assumed the dealer had cheapo 87 in there.

Also I have experienced a significant difference in power and MPG when using 91/Premium purchased in Reno (oxygenated) versus outside of Reno during the winter/inversion months. With non-oxygenated (or at least the pumps outside of Reno do not display the winter fuel/oxygenated blend sticker) 91/Premium I consistently get 40-50 more miles per tank. The only other cars I have owned that were as sensitive to fuel as my 100 have been turbo Saabs.

 

[Jim_Chow]

I always seem to get my best fuel economy during the summer. I'm not sure if it's a tire pressure thing where tires heat up a lot more after driving a few miles, or does the EFI lean the mixture due to the thinner air (from higher temps, drier air)?