By Justin Berkowitz
February 19, 2007 - 86,197 views
Coupes should be firm flagships and style vanguards: the best of a brand. Where does that leave Lexus, a marque best known for… reliability? With the Lexus SC430. The folding-roofed Lexus coupe is the second oldest model in Lexus' portfolio of pomp. For a company [relentlessly] pursuing perfection, that would make the SC430 the most imperfect car Lexus sells.
The Japanese luxury 2+0 self-consciously straddles the line between boring and weird. In fact, the super Toyota coupe's proportions are positively playtpussian; the front overhang is ridiculously long, the hood absurdly short, and the rear deck excessively deep. Everywhere you look, something's not quite right. The BMW Z8 is weeping in its shallow grave.
The SC430's disproportionately humongous head lamps complete overpower the car's front end (a la Escalade). The squat greenhouse is as peculiar as the Chrysler 300's is powerful. The 18” wheels look dopey; lacking shape, or delicacy, or style. Strange then, that Lexus' kooky coupe soldiers on, even though its competitors have sharpened their creases, Bangled their butts and added Billy the Big Mouth Bass grills.
Stepping inside the SC430's cabin is like lowering yourself into a bathtub. The seating position is a throwback to bygone era, when rakish drivers knew low meant go; a time before owners of $100k SUV's looked down on diminutive coupes. Shame the roof is too low for you to look back up at them.
Once you've descended into the belly of the bulbous beast, you're immersed in a tragically unmemorable interior. All the traditional luxury elements are there: lustrous wood, buttery cow-hide and toe-friendly wool carpets. But it's luxurious interruptus.
The SC430's textured aluminum panels would be better suited to tabletops in the Getty museum café. The buttons' action seems carefully designed to fool blind people into thinking they're in a Toyota (even if they are). And the cowled gauges are garish and out of place.
As you'd expect from a car launched at the turn of the century, the gadget count is low. Sat nav and Bluetoothery are about as gee-whiz as it gets. Still, in the world of Lexus, less is motorized. Push a button and a wooden door covers or uncovers the SC430's unsightly stereo head unit. The navigation screen also resides behind some electro-hydraulic furniture. It's just as well; the GPS device is as easy to understand as a vintage Porsche shop manual. In Javanese.
Fire up the SC430's V8 and… Hello? Testing. Is this thing on? The coupe tips-in like an ocean liner swinging away from a pier; the six-speed automatic swaps cogs early, often and gracefully, maintaining both seamless progress and the powerplant's vow of silence. Give the SC430's sides a swift kick– 'cause, well, soft leather can only entertain for so long– and you'll instantly understand why Lexus' 290-horsepower two-door is so 110 horsepower ago.
Yes, the 3840-pound two-door accelerates from standstill to sixty miles per hour in an entirely respectable 5.9 seconds. But it could be the least exciting 5.9 seconds of your life (at least since you learned how to eat soup). For one thing, the SC430's go-pedal travel is both excessive and inconsistent; an inadvertent recreation of Mercedes early-70's luxobarges. For another, the car’s dynamics aren’t.
The SC430's speed-sensitive, power-assisted rack-and-pinion steering somehow manages to get it exactly wrong. The system's too heavy when you'd expect it to be low-effort, and numb and vague when you expect it to sharpen-up. The double wishbone suspension also inverts expectations. It crashes at low speeds and floats when hustled. What's more, visibility is atrocious from inside the pillbox.
All of this lamentable engineering is merely an evil accoutrement to uncertain footing and piss-poor grip. Switch off the traction control and cane the SC430 through a corner– as completely improbable and totally inadvisable as that sounds– and the coupe's nose plows towards the scenery like a pig scenting a truffle.
Even by the traditional Lexus metric (i.e. Vicodin-on-wheels), the SC430 doesn't cut the Grey Poupon. Its engine may be quieter than a Quaker meeting in a sound-proof booth, but there's plenty of wind and tire noise, top up or down. Taken as a whole, it's no more luxurious than a gussied-up Camry, and less luxurious than the fresher IS350.
The SC430 does nothing to dispel the idea that Lexus caters to the wives of stock brokers and dentists, and they no doubt will continue to fawn over it until it is euthanized. No one is asking the SC430 to be a sports car, though the coupe is a poster child for purists who claim that Lexi are fun Hoovers. The real tragedy here, perhaps the only tragedy, is that the SC430 isn’t even a killer killjoy. Buyers in search of a drop-top automotive QE2 are advised to shop elsewhere.
Subscribe to New Content Alerts
More Reviews73 Responses to “ Lexus SC430 Review ”
Leave a Reply 
Back to Top
You must be logged in to post a comment.
BlinkList
Digg
del.icio.us
Facebook
Furl
Google
Live
NewsVine
Reddit
StumbleUpon
Technorati
YahooMyWeb
POWERED
February 19th, 2007 at 8:52 am
Good review. This is one of those cars that was styled, rather than engineered, and it just looks wrong.
Lexus should dump this puppy in favor of an IS hardtop convertible ASAP.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:21 am
Now that the SC’s party trick roof is common place, it’s lost is Wow factor. Unless god awful rims wow you, that is.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:24 am
“Positively Platypussian”
And I’ll bet that the emphasis is not on the “Platy”…
“and the coupe’s nose plows towards the scenery like a pig scenting a truffle.”
HAH!
Thanks for the thoroughly entertaining thrashing of a piece of automotive pomposisty. It’s good to see that TTAC’s disdain for poor automotive execution CAN cross the pond!
(BTW… is there any Solara DNA in this car?)
February 19th, 2007 at 9:53 am
Great review! This is as close as I have come today to laughing out loud! Goes to show that behind an unproportioned and uninspired (or outright ugly) design there’s also crappy engineering!
Maybe all isn’t lost for Detroit yet!
February 19th, 2007 at 10:36 am
Someone has to make Chris Bangle look good.
Worse yet, the SC430 car-without-a-mission sales simply trounced those of the aging-but-still-terrific NSX in every year they competed. Doesn’t say much for ‘enthusiast’ impact on the market…
February 19th, 2007 at 10:49 am
Although I don’t find the looks of the car as objectionable as Justin does, I do agree on a couple of fronts. The cars outward visibility is on par with that of a WW2 pillbox. And the wheels! Actually the ones on the tester are an improvement. I don’t know about the US market, but one option in Canada was a set of chrome rims straight out of Pimp My Ride.
The price is ridiculous. Here a new one will set you back over 100k (on par with a Z06!). I’ll take the latter, thanks.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:49 am
I am glad someone finally said it. Lexus' are BLAND. Expensive appliances. A Camry by any other name…
February 19th, 2007 at 10:51 am
excellent review… this is one of the ugliest cars in the universe, driven by bored, pampared housewives of mid to upper level execs…on their way to the hair dressers and then the olive garden for lunch!
and they always try to look so cool when in them - especially with the tops down, always on the cell phone, trying to look important - its so ‘the king has no clothes” - always brings a smile to my face! Its the height of tasteless pomposity.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:01 am
Never liked the thing. Even today almost all these steel folding roof cars are ugly, but this and the peugeot 206CC are quite possibly the worst examples. Even with the top down they look terrible. And at least the Peug is cheap…
Apart from the usual Toyota blandness and proportions what really annoys me are those two “backseats”. They fitted headrests on them, too. Why!?!
I’m not a big fan of Mercedes, but I can’t see anybody buying this over the SL which was launched at about the same time.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:10 am
All these criticisms thrown at the poor car, and you missed my #1 problem with it: the seats provide absolutely no lateral support. They are comfortable, though.
Sadly, that’s all I remember from the only time I’ve driven this car, at a Lexus event a couple of years ago. A Mercedes SL is much more entertaining.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:18 am
My stepmother bought one of these despite the protest of the rest of her family. She cooed all over the wood and leather… the pushbutton drop top. She even harrased a Z3 owner about the manual top at a stoplight during the test drive.
The punch line was when she called her son and daughter just moments before signing on it, frantic. “I thought I was buying a Lexus, but all the documents say Toyota on them!!!!”
Now she refuses to commute with it because its “too nice a car” for that kind of duty, so instead she uses my Dad’s S2000.
We don’t like her that much.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:24 am
… oh, I forgot the worst part : the license plate says, “SXY LXY”.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:28 am
I always thought the SC430 needed a bit more love from Lexus. A nip and tuck, a tightening of line and pushing out the wheels would have done wonders for its looks. The interior is a bit too bland, but it is a Lexus so what are you going to do?
Although I am not a big fan of Mercedes, I do think the SL is, by far, the superior car in this class. This car makes me long for the days of the Supra based SC, a far superior car in every way. If they had put a hard-top convertible on that and just updated it along the way, it would be a better car even though it would be on a platform twice as old.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:41 am
Every time I see one of these, it’s either “Fawn Mist” like the one in this picture or maybe black–and I wonder who the drive is trying to impress? And being Las Vegas, it usually has the biggest possible chrome “bling-y” wheels which really make it look nice.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:49 am
Nicly said.
I was such a fan of the original SC300/400 when they first came out… more’s the pity.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:08 pm
Bought one new in 2001. Now at nearly 60,000 miles. The original run flat tires were an abomination. Back seats good only for luggage. Otherwise a superlative freeway cruiser, adequate performer and utterly reliable. Lots of trunk space with the top down. Simply not designed for enthusiasts.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:09 pm
Ha, very entertaining article. Much to agree on with this. Although I will admit that it was on my shopping list at one point, but that’s because I couldn’t afford the far superior SL. The wheels of the first several years were the worst wheels I’ve seen on any modern car, they looked like they belonged on a 1992 Chevy Beretta.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:32 pm
So, how do you really feel about the SC430?
February 19th, 2007 at 12:37 pm
Shaker:
No Solara DNA. Different platforms, engines, transmissions.
Tomb Z:
I think the seat heaters are just top of the line. Really. Even if “2 seat rear wheel drive convertible” doesn’t conjure images of driving in frosty winter.
February 19th, 2007 at 12:47 pm
The tragedy is that the original SC400 was a breakthrough design, certainly one of the most beautiful to come from a Japanese company. I remember when Lexus spun its PR tale about sending the designers of the SC430 to the Riviera to look at speedboats for the design of the new car. They clearly drank way too much wine, lost track of the time and hastily sketched something they hoped would work.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:05 pm
I have to go with J-Shoe and Will-Mont w.r.t. the original SC 300/400.
My friends and family have passed around a ‘92 SC 300 for several years now (best friend owned it, then my ex-wife, now my brother) and it’s still a *great* car. Classic time-tested styling, reliable and sporty.
In contrast, the SC 430 gets about 1 out of 3 right (reliable).
I think of the SC 430 as Lexus’ Aztek!…:-D…
February 19th, 2007 at 1:20 pm
I’m still amazed at how many people adore this machine. I thought it was only a trophy wives’ car, but then one of my friends (in his early 30s) bought one and put some 19″ dubs on it. Go figure.
Its no Mercedes SL, but the tasty leather, excellent dealer service, and badge on the grille are enough for most people.
Nice review.
February 19th, 2007 at 1:45 pm
I can’t help it, I do like the design of the SC430. Then again, I’m also a fan of Chris Bangle.
Anyone know when the SC430 is due for more Botox and a boob job?
February 19th, 2007 at 1:53 pm
Sajeev Mehta:
it IS a trophy wives car….
February 19th, 2007 at 2:22 pm
But it could be the least exciting 5.9 seconds of your life (at least since you learned how to eat soup).
Reading this line concurrently with eating soup/drinking not advised.
One of the most abominable cars I’ve ever seen on the road was a black-on-black SC430 with a set of 20″ black and red Iron-Cross spinners that go beyond pedantic descriptions of hideousness. The only word I can use is French; “abrutissant.” It roughly translates to “soul-crushing.”
February 19th, 2007 at 2:27 pm
The comment about the car being designed instead of engineered is right on. Based on the amount of space in between the front seats’ headrests and the rear seats’ headrests, how would a child even be able to fit in the back seat? I don’t think my head could rest comfortably on the rear headrest without my nose digging into the front headrest. What happened there?
February 19th, 2007 at 2:30 pm
I’m still amazed at how many people adore this machine. I thought it was only a trophy wives’ car, but then one of my friends (in his early 30s) bought one and put some 19″ dubs on it. Go figure.
Yet another reason to avoid this car (and the LS 430) - it’s become a favorite of celebrities, professional athletes, Hollywood types, politicians, and all the other worshipers of the religion of “Bling”….
February 19th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
I don’t know anyone who owns or even desires to own this car. It was just awful from day one. In a parking lot that’s a sea of BMWs, Mercedes, Cadillacs, Audis, Range Rovers and other Lexi, I don’t recall ever seeing one of these goofy things. At least Toyota finally restyled the wheels. They looked like clutch plates when the car was initially launched.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
I think this is one of the few cars that everyone can agree on: it’s perfectly ugly.
Still, keep in mind that at 60Kish the car comes fully loaded, it even has navigation. A comparably equipped SL would cost a whole base 3 series more. Plus when it came out hardtop convertibles weren’t nearly as common as it they are today. Not that I would ever buy one, I’m just saying these were the selling points that have made it a pretty popular car (unfortunately.)
Yet another reason to avoid this car (and the LS 430) - it’s become a favorite of celebrities, professional athletes, Hollywood types, politicians, and all the other worshipers of the religion of “Bling”….
Every luxury or semi luxury automobile has already appeared in a rap video with 19inch dubs. Lexi, if anything, are the least “worshiped” by the religion of “Bling.”
February 19th, 2007 at 3:07 pm
But still, when hanging out at the Lexus dealership waiting for the ice cream bar to open (don’t ask), it’s the one car my 15 year old daughter wanted to sit in.
So, it apparently has the right stuff in the eyes of 15 year old girls.
The rest of us, not so much.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:23 pm
When I see one of these on the road it recalls dim 50s childhood memories of those cheap pressed tin friction toy cars (from Japan, back when that was a marker for poor quality) that got all of their color and detail from an overlay decal. And in each window, was a image of a cartoonish gaijin head (side or front view).
That's all one sees of the people in the SC430, their heads. Since the Japanese have a thing for retro, maybe someone there will resurect these toys. An SC 430 would be a delicious irony.
February 19th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
I’ve always thought of this car as a tasteless Asian Audi TT rip off. I am suprised to read that the car is actually under par for a Lexus…
The story about the mother in the Lexus dealer freaking out about the Toyota paperwork was hilarious!!!
February 19th, 2007 at 4:01 pm
I seem to be the only commentator who actually owns an SC430 … in bright red, black seats. Let me emphasize that it does what it is supposed to do in grand style. Toyota doesn’t care a hoot that car bugs dislike it. Their customer base is elsewhere, to say the least. I have owned open Alfas, a Morgan, a prewar Bentley cabrio, etc., and my adjustment to this luxobarge has been painless and pleasurable. Ask the man who owns one.
February 19th, 2007 at 4:21 pm
Every time I see one of these (thankfully not often), I seriously want to ask the driver: “So, what other cars did you consider and reject in favor of this thing?”
I do like the interior though. However, I can’t help but wonder if the people who designed it knew what car they were working on. The outside is so weird, and the inside so conventional, it looks like two design teams who never met each other.
February 19th, 2007 at 5:43 pm
Thank you so much for putting into words the gut reaction I’ve had to this car since it came out. I was appalled when I first saw it at a car show - thought it was Hyundai Tiburon convertible at first.
Hideous and bulbous, I said at the time that buyers should avoid ordering it in silver. It would look like a foil-wrapped baked potato going down the road!
February 19th, 2007 at 5:59 pm
I sat in one of these at a Taste of Lexus event. I always thought the backs looked weird but it was there and why not sit in it (I couldn’t drive one, it was almost 4 and the line was really long). It was uncomfortable to get into and I was shocked that Lexus would bother trying to convince anyone that the rear seats were usable for anything but storage - unless you ferry around people with the physiques of Cabbage Patch kids. Later, I disappointed the hoonage dreams of some people testing one by driving the hybrid RX SUV(the world’s most luxurious golf cart?) at the course recommended 15 mph. Well, I was nervous about driving such a tall, ungainly vehicle which costs more than I make in a year and a half.)
The only thing I’ve seen that makes the lines look “not bad” is to put 20″ rims on the back wheels. It alters the profile just enough to make it look more aggressive and flow better.
February 19th, 2007 at 6:02 pm
A foil-wrapped baked potato?
A platypus?
Somehow, I don’t think that’s the effect they were aiming for!
My ride this week is the ES350. It’s put together very well, and the interior is nicely appointed, but it suffers terribly from torque steer.
Not my kind of car, but I can definitely see why Lexus is so successful with the boring & rich.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:05 pm
excellent review… this is one of the ugliest cars in the universe, driven by bored, pampared housewives of mid to upper level execs…on their way to the hair dressers and then the olive garden for lunch!
Jerseydevil,
You couldn’t be more wrong, no one with this car would be caught dead at the Olive Garden. More like the Cheesecake Factory.
Seriously though, I liked the design when it was unveiled, but the car really has no reason to exist anymore and hasn’t for a while. The only person I know who drives one is a thirty something doctor who clearly wanted a flashy car for the women.
February 19th, 2007 at 7:49 pm
Re: The vesitigal rear (non-)seats
This is item #16, 487 in Consumer Automotive Preferences That Make No Logical Sense.
For some reason, buyers of these cars *insist* that they
*must* have a back seat, no matter how useless it actually is.
I remember reading a review of the last-generation Jaguar XK convertible where the author complained to the factory rep about the useless rear seats.
The factory rep. replied that sales would drop 70% if it were a pure 2-seater.
Maybe it’s for lower insurance rates, maybe it’s so the buyers can rationalize “It can seat 4″ (no matter how preposterous that is in reality). But for some reason, the makers have to upholster the oversize rear package shelf.
February 19th, 2007 at 9:22 pm
you can’t get one with a manual transmission, so it holds absolutely no interest for me. but my sister got one for her birthday from her husband about four years ago and she likes hers. i’ve only ridden in it once [she's in michigan and i'm in california] but it seemed pleasant enough. certainly not as bad as people here have suggested.
i’m a graphic designer/art director by trade and i think it looks more appealing with its top up than it does with its down. and i will admit that i find its lines more favorable than those of its predecessor, which always left me with the vague impression of a much-too-large, somewhat bloated porsche 928 - but i’m only talking aesthetics.
February 19th, 2007 at 10:01 pm
Oh my, I agree 100% with Jerseydevil about a car! ;<)
February 19th, 2007 at 10:34 pm
Come on guys! What is it with this general consensus??
We are at TTAC, remember?
Where is the combat?
:-)
Boy, the car is that bad!
Excellent article! This is what the automotive press needs! Combat! The raw truth!
February 19th, 2007 at 11:02 pm
philipwitak:
you can’t get one with a manual transmission, so it holds absolutely no interest for me.
I hear what you’re saying, but I think we’d all agree that for some cars the ol slushbox is more appropriate. I mean, this thing would be scary with a stick. I see what Lexus was shooting for with the SC430, a kind of superlux boulevarder, but they totally blew it.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:17 pm
Another thoroughly biased review on Lexus by TTAC, not as worse as one on LS which claimed Audi uses better materials in the trunk than Lexus does for the interior.
February 19th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
drifter:
Dictionary.com: Bias - a particular tendency or inclination, esp. one that prevents unprejudiced consideration of a question;
The articles were written by two different people (who have never met).
I must say I am surprised by your comment. After all, the two Lexus reviews used 1600 words to explain the formation of the authors’ opinions and to show their reasoning. On the other hand, you give us just one sentence to make your assertion. Remind me who is jumping to predetermined conclusions without justification?
February 19th, 2007 at 11:56 pm
I don’t find the syling of this car to be nearly as bad as most of you do. I do think it looks a bit like a bloated 928, crossed with a jellybean though. Its certainly not as predicatble as the uber ugly IS350 (wanted to like that car, I hate it…).
It doesn’t drive like an enthusiast-mobile, instead doing that stealthy, “what? I’m doing 80 already?” thing Lexus’ do so well.
Pretty popular here in seattle, Driven mostly by women, but maybe that was the point… it looks like a very fertile egg.
February 20th, 2007 at 12:22 am
i realized that the world had changed irrevocably when I watched the movie “Three Kings” eight years ago. In it, two american-as-apple-pie GI’s carried on a running commentary over which dream car they wanted to buy, specifically arguing about which brand, Lexus or Infiniti, had a convertible in their lineup.
Just ten years earlier the object of a young man’s affection (in addition to his bride-to-be) was a thinly disguised knockoff of a Lamborghini Countach (the “Trovari”) in the movie “It Takes Two.”
Oh how the mighty have scaled back their dreams.
Toyota, you’re a heart breaker, dream maker, don’t you mess around with me.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:21 am
This car is 6 years old, we all know what its about. Why are we holding it to the same standard of refinement, technology, and power of cars developed 4 months ago? It is time to be replaced, Lexus is aware, and im sure the new one will be better in every category. It must not be negatively effecting the bottom line since Toyota doesn’t appear to be rushing a replacement to market. Convertibles arent serious sports cars anyway, this is for those warm nights cruising down Ocean drive with the Mark Levinson crankin’ or for the short drive over to the country club for some mid morning golf. I own a lexus, and would this model, as-is be my top choice at 65k?—-no, but it still serves a purpose and is sold for a profit…automatically putting it ahead of about half the vehicles available in showrooms today.
February 20th, 2007 at 1:46 am
from biturbo:
Come on guys! What is it with this general consensus??
We are at TTAC, remember?
Where is the combat?
:-)
Boy, the car is that bad!
I don’t think the consensus is that the car is ‘bad’, I think the consensus is that the car is boring! I infer that the driving experience is essentially ES 300 and the styling is….odd.
If the SC 430 sold for $30k, I bet we’d praise it as an uber-Solara, but at $65k+, I think we’re right to ask for more. Especially since the SC 300/400 predecessor did offer a mix of luxury and performance.
from webob:
Just ten years earlier the object of a young man’s affection (in addition to his bride-to-be) was a thinly disguised knockoff of a Lamborghini Countach (the “Trovari”) in the movie “It Takes Two.”
I love that movie! Every enthusiast should watch it at least once.
http://www.amazon.com/Takes-Two-George-Newbern/dp/6302923093/
February 20th, 2007 at 7:20 am
For enthusiast this car doesnt offer anything. But for the target buyer arguments in this article are irrelevant and for them it sounds like confusing automotive-technical blabber. I have driven many soft and hard top convertibles (SL, 645i etc) and SC430 is by far the quietest of them all top down and the difference is especially huge when the top is up. Mark Levinson in SC430 is uncomparable with any other stereos in other convertibles. The ride is silky smooth and effortless, V8 has plenty of torque and is ultra quiet, 6-speed auto shifts seamlessly . None of the owners will toss this car around corners tires squeeling. This car is the ulitmate open air luxurious chill out lounge on wheels. When you are driving it the car leaves you a feeling that you have reached a total peace of mind (sounds corny, but this was the feeling I was left with). Lexus offers this kind of feeling also with other larger models.
When will car journalists understand that they cannot judge ALL cars by the same standard? Sharp handling, sporty roadfeel when cornering, firm suspension etc. If those were the standards by which everyone would choose their car, then the whole planet would be driving BMW’s. Seems that if car journalists could have their way this would be the situation :) I own a E36 M3 for weekend fun on our local twisty roads/tracks, so don’t get me wrong, my attitude isn’t against BMW’s, I’m just pissed that so called “automotive journalists” cannot see the broader picture.
February 20th, 2007 at 7:48 am
This review clearly delineates between the pistonhead perspective and that of the SC430’s target market.
It also states that the SC430 does not succeed as a luxobarge. Having driven a large number of vehicles in that category, both foreign and domestic, I agree.
February 20th, 2007 at 9:01 am
I couldn`t agree with you stating that this car is ugly or disproportionate. this lexus coupe was the first retractable hardtop coupe in the world that had professionaly and nicely aligned c-pillar to rear fender. most hardtops looked comletely ugly, for examlpe bmw z3 with its plastic roof cladding, or even mitsubishi 3000gt had awkwardly bulging rims over the fenders.lexus made it aesthetically tolerable. and of course most of american roads are straight, and not serpentous, that`s why this is a luxury coupe rather than sports coupe. just because there are 10 die hard fanatics who would even prefer minivans to be thrown around racetracks, doesn`t mean lexus must comply.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:21 am
jurisb:
just because there are 10 die hard fanatics who would even prefer minivans to be thrown around racetracks, doesn`t mean lexus must comply.
You don’t give me enough credit. I appreciate a luxury cruising car as much as you do, but if you’re going to make a straight line luxury coupe, do it properly. The SC430 has too much road noise, poor pedal feel, and an uncomfortable seating position - all of which make long distance straight line trips difficult.
February 20th, 2007 at 11:37 am
lexus is the new buick. every time i see one of those re-badged toyotas ahead of me, my heart sinks. some old git in rubber underpants driving at least 10mph under the limit. all they’re missing are the silly portholes …
February 20th, 2007 at 12:26 pm
I was in grad school at the time and had to do a short essay on the marketability behind this new offering. At the time, it was SOOOOO HOT and everyone was touting the Japanese designer’s use of sailboats in the design cues.
I panned it as a lame, me-too ripoff of the CLK convertible. If you look at the stats, they were neck-in-neck in every way (on paper). At least the Merc has more cachet and better dynamics.
By the way, this gets my top ranking for ugliest car on the road in America, which is weighted against vehicles that come from otherwise respectable manufacturers or have a bloated sense of their own importance. At least the Aztek is humble about its ugliness.
February 20th, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Some of you are answering a question nobody asked. The SC430 is a “bad” sports car because well …. it’s NOT a sports car at all, and doesn’t try to be.
Strange then, that Lexus’ kooky coupe soldiers on, even though its competitors have sharpened their creases, Bangled their butts and added Billy the Big Mouth Bass grills.
Strange then, comparing this dated, old coupe in terms of features and technology to newer designs, that obviously have more technology.
This coupe is old. Lexus is aware of that. The next generation SC will soon be unveiled at an upcoming autoshow.
As for the SC430 “failing as a luxobarge”, wrong. All one needs to do is look at the owner satisfaction of the car, which is pretty high, and the spooky reliability of it. Owners love this car, so it must be doing something right.
February 20th, 2007 at 3:04 pm
When will car journalists understand that they cannot judge ALL cars by the same standard? Sharp handling, sporty roadfeel when cornering, firm suspension etc. If those were the standards by which everyone would choose their car, then the whole planet would be driving BMW’s. Seems that if car journalists could have their way this would be the situation :) I own a E36 M3 for weekend fun on our local twisty roads/tracks, so don’t get me wrong, my attitude isn’t against BMW’s, I’m just pissed that so called “automotive journalists” cannot see the broader picture.
I’ve always felt that overall competence on the road was part of the luxury price tag. What good is cruising at 70MPH on the highway and then having to dramatically slow down in order to negotiate a bend?
What has been proven is that a smooth ride, good performance, and decent roadholding, are not mutually exclusive. That should be especially so at $65K and better.
That it looks ugly to boot…
February 20th, 2007 at 7:13 pm
Wasn’t it Lexus design that was into designing these cars…SC300 and this one….by putting plaster into balloons and shaping it with their hands to create the basic form of the cars? I remember reading about it back then.
Pretty much explains it all, doesn’t it?
February 21st, 2007 at 10:21 am
I’ve always felt that overall competence on the road was part of the luxury price tag. What good is cruising at 70MPH on the highway and then having to dramatically slow down in order to negotiate a bend?
What has been proven is that a smooth ride, good performance, and decent roadholding, are not mutually exclusive. That should be especially so at $65K and better.
Nino have you driven the SC430? I’ve driven the SC430 at speeds 200kmh+ on French highways and German autobahns. The suspension is very competent taking any bends (German autobahns are designed so that you can take any bend with 250kmh) to on those roads at those speeds. I felt secure, the suspension worked flawlessly and the car felt confident and like glued to the road. Dramatically different (and stupid) thing is to throw this car around on tight bends on mountain roads near Monaco - fast cornering speeds on those roads are more suitable for Evo Lancers or M-series BMW’s.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:57 pm
Nino have you driven the SC430?
I’ve driven a two year old example with 24,000 miles on it on two lane roads that, while not tight and twisty, curvy enough to have some fun with.
I found the handling a bit flaccid with too much body roll. At speeds approaching 65MPH, the car didn’t inspire confidence in the turns. I blame part of it on the tires which were tall touring tires. The seats lacked good lateral support as well.
I also found that the tires were rather noisy as well as the ride being more of the isolated, floaty kind, as opposed to being sure footed. At highway cruising speeds, the car was OK, but the floaty feeling kept me from trying to go faster (over 70MPH) as I never really felt that I knew the road or what the car was going to do next.
In my opinion, you make too many compromises in this car that costs over $65 large.
February 21st, 2007 at 2:58 pm
You know, it could be that European versions of this car have a better suspension than the US version.
February 21st, 2007 at 5:35 pm
really there is no excuse for any car not to feel “safe” at 70mph +. I mean a camry feels perfectly stable at 80mph, why shouldn’t this beast?
February 21st, 2007 at 5:48 pm
really there is no excuse for any car not to feel “safe” at 70mph +. I mean a camry feels perfectly stable at 80mph, why shouldn’t this beast?
I didn’t say it didn’t feel “safe”. It was more like the car saying, “Hey man, do we really NEED to go faster than this? I didn’t bring my running shoes today.”
February 26th, 2007 at 3:16 pm
I was on the list to get the first one in my state. However, before it arrived I had seen it at a dealer in another state and found out that the rear seats would not physically accomodate a human being which was enough for me to cancel the order. I also wasn’t too keen on the run flat tires either. The looks were OK and the killer sound sytem was the best thing on the market at the time. I really think if the wheelbase had been stretched to accomodate rear seat passengers that this car would have been a fantastic success.
Too bad the concept of a three-piece folding hardtop got deferred to Volvo, VW and BMW with their current generation folding hardtops. A three-piece would have allowed for both a decent rear seat and better looks overall.
March 3rd, 2007 at 12:31 pm
The SC430 is 6 years old! Save your judgements for the new SC460 which is coming soon. Lexus will continue to eat the lunch of all competitors. Look at the sales numbers, dummy.
March 6th, 2007 at 3:53 pm
If it ain’t broke don’t fix it! This could be the reason there have few changes made to this model. Lexus did it right the first time. The SL is a super coupe too and also has a super price tag; not to mention it doesn’t have the reliability that Lexus does. This has been and still is one of the best coupes ever made! Lexus WILL continue to stomp the competition. Like Gekko said, look at the numbers.
March 7th, 2007 at 5:50 pm
The SL typically outsells the SC averaging 1,100 per month to 850 per month totals.
March 12th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
The car is slow, heavy, not many toys, and gets boring.
November 3rd, 2007 at 5:48 pm
Michael
This review could not be more wrong. I own a 2002 SC430, and it is a fine, attractive and fun car. Some degree of compromise exist in most any vehicle. The SC is not a beemer (thank God)and it is not a Ferrari, and it is not a Vette. For the same money as the Vette, is is not as fast, but it’s interior is far more classy than a Vette, and it’s 2+2 configuration spared me from having to explain to my two children, which one of them was not going to be able to ride.
The car is fast enough, attractive to anyone not blinded by jealousy because they don’t have one, and altogether fun to drive.
February 9th, 2008 at 4:47 pm
Wow! I could feel the hate while reading. I guess this would be one of the easy questions in a standardized reading comprehension section. What were the author’s feelings about this car?
I have just started to consider a SC430 as a used car choice. I read 16 reviews so far and this is the only one with more than one negative thing to say about the car. Everyone else raves about almost everything about the car. From reading tons of reviews on things, it seems that journalists often choose to like or dislike whatever they are reviewing. They tend to go to extremes with these choices. I’m sure the car is not as great as the 15 glowing reviews nor as bad as this review, but probably lies somewhere in between.
It’s crazy how polarized Lexus makes people. It’s almost as bad as the new versus used car debate.
I’m a used car guy myself. I’m not a mechanic but I do all of the repairs on my cars. If you are a used car person, you would really have a hard time buying a mercedes, bmw, jaguar, etc because of all the extra costs and time you’ll have to invest in repairing these vehicles. IMO if you want one of these you’d be better off buying a new one so you aren’t stuck with $$$ in repairs. Or if you do buy one, just be prepared with extra $$ for repairs before you buy one.
I own a 1990 lexus ls400 with 240,000 miles on it. In the last 4 years I’ve only had to replace two calipers (were stuck from not properly greasing the sliders) and one of the two coil packs for a grand total of $240. This car is 18 years old and probably has a lower repair record than many new cars.
I will never buy an unreliable car. If reliability is a factor, the choices for buying a car are whittled down quite a bit (consumer reports has the most accurate and objective ratings of used cars). It’s eerie how right they are about a cars problem spots.
I’d like to buy a 2004 LS430 which can be had for about $25K (not bad for a 72K when new car). The luxury of these cars (like the LS400 I own) is very hard to give up. I’m 33 and think a more sporty car would be appropriate. I already race a 450cc motocross bike for fun (been racing for 13 years) and own a CBR929RR sport bike that can beat any car in acceleration (try 2.7 second 0-60 and 10.6 quarter mile times). Something that blends the reliability and luxury of the LS430 with a bit of sportiness sounds about perfect to me.
Lexus has never been known for great styling, but this car can be dolled up with different wheels to great effect. A 2002 model with about 70K miles can be found for about $22,000 if you look everywhere. I’m willing to take a plane trip for $400 to save 4 to 10K on a car.
SC430- reliable, awesome sound system, sporty, turns heads, quiet and comfortable, lexus quality,
May 9th, 2008 at 12:35 am
[...] http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/lexus-sc430/ [...]
May 10th, 2008 at 10:58 pm
When I bought my first LS 400 in 1990 I was happy to be rid of the tiresome and rough ride of my BMW 530. I loved the isolation from the road. When the SC 430 first came out I loved the looks and would have bought one but didn’t want to spend 60 grand. Recently I’ve been driving a 4.6 X5 BMW… Plenty aggressive with 340 HORSES. I recently spent 4 days driving Napa valley in a rented mustang convertable… I loved the open air but wanted a cushioned ride and a convertable hardtop… Enter a used 2005 SC 430 for $30,500. direct from an auction house. (The local dealer wanted 46 grand .. so sad). I simply love the car. Relaxed, convertable, GREAT sound system. 0-60 in 5.9 seconds, bluetooth. You naysayers may drive your gutwrenching agresso cars… give me some civilization and simple relaxed joy in driving. Call it numb if you want… I call it extremely fun yet peaceful.
July 28th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
My parents have a 2006 model. I’ve borrowed it on occasion. It’s not a car that I would borrow if I wanted to blow off some steam. Something about it is just so calming and relaxing. And I don’t mean boring. Makes me wonder why the sports cars are racing past me to the next inevitable red light, wasting gas and brake material. What’s the rush? And I own a 2007 Z06 Corvette so I normally do understand the allure of that silly race. On occasion upon seeing somebody smokin’ up the tires a friend has commented “Oh, aren’t they cool.” And my response may be “Well, in all fairness, have you ever tried that?” But even though I’ve been frequently guilty of such childishness, how much better if I didn’t feel the need. I like that the Lexus calms me, and it would be my choice of a car to take on a date. You know, so I could lie and pretend to be mature.
It is an older person’s car. Something about it just feels mature. Like the driver has nothing to prove. No pretentions. They like how it looks or feels and are self-actualized enough not to care what others think. Just my feeling for the demographic. Maybe like a Volvo driver.
I hated the early rims. Deal-killer bad, but I like the new ones. And a run-flat tire is a run-flat tire. Trade-off between peace of mind and comfort/performance. Color seems to impact how portly the car looks. I like it in the graphite - as opposed to silver. I don’t find the wind noise to be bad. Better than my hard-top convertible. It’s a bullet-proof design. I don’t think there has been a single repair in the 2 years my parents have had it. The Levinson sound system is the best factory system I’ve ever heard. And I spent over $10,000 in aftermarket audio upgrades on my last car, including vacuum tube based amplifiers.
I would own one. As much as I enjoy being frightened by that carbon-fiber/magnesium/aluminum animal of a Z06, I feel that there is a certain stigma in how corvette owners are viewed. I have to enjoy the ride despite, rather than because of, how the corvette makes me look. NOT a car I would ever take on a date. Not until I had a chance to well-establish a good impression (read “lie”), perhaps with the Lexus. Sometimes you don’t want to be frightened by the prospect of over-throttle in a turn. Sometimes you want comfort and confidence which, again, is not the same as boring.
You may disagree, but ask yourself, what would your first assumptions be about 4 otherwise similar people who owned a BMW 650i, Merc SL500, Cadillac XLR or Lexus SC430? It wouldn’t be a conclusive or driving (no pun intended) impression, but I would have the most positive assumptions about the Lexus driver. So I disagree with the above perceptions of Lexus SC430 owners.