Lexus IS Forum banner

1 - 20 of 26 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
just got my 01/00 motortrend..they tested 21 cars...and here are the result. notice the IS topped in skidpad, and second in both slalom and 60-0 braking..good enough for me=]



[This message has been edited by Lexus_IS300 (edited November 29, 2000).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Discussion Starter #3
well i dont subscribe to them, but for some odd reason, they have kept sending me issues for the past year or so and i havent been billed once.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
44 Posts
where is the BMW (325)? I know the IS is better, but I want to prove it to a friend of mine who owns a 325Ci.


Any links to that kind of info would be appreciated as well...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,250 Posts
i have to say that if nothing else, the IS brakes EXTREMELY well. 113 feet is no large numbe,r although the 112 put out by the c320 surprises me even more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
62 Posts
Originally posted by mrclam:
i have to say that if nothing else, the IS brakes EXTREMELY well. 113 feet is no large numbe,r although the 112 put out by the c320 surprises me even more.
Hey Clam, isn't that your cue to start professing the greatness of your M3?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,250 Posts
since you asked the m3 brakes from 60 back to 0 in exactly the same amount of distance as the IS, 113 feet. motortrend gave it a .91 on the skid pad and a slalom speed of i think 67 but i'm not sure on that. oh and it went 0-60 in 5.5 and hit the 1/4 in 14.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Discussion Starter #12
clam...ive only seen 14 flats 1320 runs posted by lightweight m3s..mosly 14.1-14.3 for regular models, and for people who are saying its not a big diff. it is when ur really racing.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
281 Posts
Dont even believe dat bs...
Motortrend is da king of bs when it comes to tech data..
they r soooo off..

da IS does 0-60 in 7.1, quater-mile in 15.3...
no way da C320 is faster than da IS..
I test drove both cars...
da C320 is quick, but da IS is quicker...

late...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
Ugh...it's so pitiful that the Aurora nearly matches the IS' performance...sheesh. Come on Lexus, you got the handling down, now let's see some straight line performance!

Uh oh...some CL owner may see this and start proclaiming the greatness of his car...doh!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,544 Posts
Discussion Starter #15
how does the aurora nearly matches the IS's performance?? thats a stupid claim. read the chart again...look at the slalom..that tells you exactly how much better the IS can "wiggle" than the aurora. and if you're comparing skidpad that isnt as accurate for handling as slalom would be. i think lexus aimed at over all performance, not jus straight line.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Once again, they let a moron on the loose.
Originally posted by shadoh6:
Ugh...it's so pitiful that the Aurora nearly matches the IS' performance...sheesh. Come on Lexus, you got the handling down, now let's see some straight line performance!

Uh oh...some CL owner may see this and start proclaiming the greatness of his car...doh!


------------------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
Wow this is a first: I have to defend myself against zealous IS300 owners! An interesting turn of events. I'll break this down with list as I've always done...

1.0-60 times: 1/10 second difference
2.1/4 mile time: 2/10 second difference
3.braking: 10 foot difference (that is something, but then again the IS' braking nearly matches a 360)
4.Skidpad: 2/1000
5.Slalom:5.4

Well, besides slalom and braking, the Aurora, does a pretty damn good job of keeping up with the IS in performance. The release of the IS has been pretty clear: The ES handles the entry level luxury sedan market, while the IS handles the entry level sports sedan market, putting the 3-series in a very vulnerable position. And while many are satisified with the IS' performance, the IS has been touted as a performance oriented vehicle, and I, along with many other people, are not satisfied with the numbers. If an Aurora can hang with the IS, that is pretty damn pitiful IMHO.

Let's get one thing clear however, I love the IS. I've owned one since July 7, number 1804 off the line thank you very much; but loving something means that you appreciate its good qualities and understand its bad qualities, not ignore or dismiss them. So before you call someone a moron, maybe you should understand where this person's coming from, and shut yo azz up.

[This message has been edited by shadoh6 (edited December 02, 2000).]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
O'kay let me break it down for you this way and why I say moron. Aurora or BMW 328 sport.
1. 0-60 times: 3/10 second difference
2. 1/4 mile time: 4/10 seond difference
3. Braking: Almost the same
4. Skidpad 4/1000
5. slalom: 4

Now looking at a comparison the way you are, the Aurora does a pretty good job of holding up against the BMW also and many of the other cars in this sport sedan category. Point being, you have to be realistic when you look at these numbers because from top to bottom they really don't mean that much. You're not happy with the IS numbers, but you'll read something about the 330 which does 0-60 in .4 seconds faster and then you'll be saying you're happy with its numbers. It's ridiculous. Look at the cars in this class' slalom numbers and find how many cars do it better? None. People get so caught up in the numbers when you couldn't feel the difference in .8 of a second let alone .4. That's why I say moron because you need to learn not to get so caught up in the numbers you read and think for yourself.
Originally posted by shadoh6:
Wow this is a first: I have to defend myself against zealous IS300 owners! An interesting turn of events. I'll break this down with list as I've always done...

1.0-60 times: 1/10 second difference
2.1/4 mile time: 2/10 second difference
3.braking: 10 foot difference (that is something, but then again the IS' braking nearly matches a 360)
4.Skidpad: 2/1000
5.Slalom:5.4

Well, besides slalom and braking, the Aurora, does a pretty damn good job of keeping up with the IS in performance. The release of the IS has been pretty clear: The ES handles the entry level luxury sedan market, while the IS handles the entry level sports sedan market, putting the 3-series in a very vulnerable position. And while many are satisified with the IS' performance, the IS has been touted as a performance oriented vehicle, and I, along with many other people, are not satisfied with the numbers. If an Aurora can hang with the IS, that is pretty damn pitiful IMHO.

Let's get one thing clear however, I love the IS. I've owned one since July 7, number 1804 off the line thank you very much; but loving something means that you appreciate its good qualities and understand its bad qualities, not ignore or dismiss them. So before you call someone a moron, maybe you should understand where this person's coming from, and shut yo azz up.

[This message has been edited by shadoh6 (edited December 02, 2000).]


------------------
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
654 Posts
I'm not too sure if I understand what you're trying to say but here goes anyway...

This topic was posted with an article which was composed solely of numbers, so if I get too involved with numbers (the topic) then forgive me. At one point you say numbers don't mean that much; then you go on to point out how the IS' slalom numbers are so great. Isn't that a bit of contradiction? And to say that people get caught up in the numbers is right: part of buying a car is getting very proficient with numbers, whether it be 0-60, 60-0, HP and (of course) price, but on paper, that's all a car is isn't it? I guess that makes everyone a moron then...
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
201 Posts
Let me slow it down further for you. You're saying you don't like the IS on paper and you made the comparison with the Aurora. I'm saying, If you don't like the IS, then you must not like any of the other cars in the whole sport sedan category. If you're going to nit pick about 7.4 from 0-60, when the bench mark 328i with sport package was only doing it in 7.1 or 7.2 then how could you like any of the cars? You can't feel in the drive these minute differences. Then I was saying If you're going to judge something, look at the slalom speeds, that gives you the best info for handling. It's like me being a football coach and saying I picked someone elses son over yours because I didn't like your son's numbers on paper. I picked a kid who ran the 40 yard dash in 4.4 and your son runs it in 4.5. You'd call me a moron and that's what I'm doing.

------------------
 
1 - 20 of 26 Posts
Top