Ls 430 And Snow

ragskne · October 21, 2004

I am considering buying a 2002 LS 430. Can anyone tell me how it drives in winter snow?

silvermate · October 21, 2004

not sure abou the 430, but i'll tell you you don't want to drive the 400 in the snow......

long, heavy, RWD, not a good combo for inclement weather

if you absolutely have to, put some weight in the back ie.......sandbags ect........

99lsguy · October 21, 2004

You know,

some guys swear the LS does pretty well in snow with the Blizzak WS-50 snow treads on them.................

If you go that route, I'd put them on some different rims and just store them from March-October.

:whistles:

1990LS400 · October 21, 2004

You know,
some guys swear the LS does pretty well in snow with the Blizzak WS-50 snow treads on them.................

If you go that route, I'd put them on some different rims and just store them from March-October.

:whistles:

←

I may be one of the guys 99lsguy is talking about with my Blizzaks on inexpensive Mille Miglia wheels from Tire Rack. My 2000 LS with this setup seems to get around substantially better in heavy snow than our front wheel drive V6 Camry with traction control and ABS. I have passed a whole lot of stuck SUVs in my life while driving a rear drive car with four snow tires. My 00 LS seems to get around a lot better in heavy snow than my 90 LS which had less ground clearance.

SW03ES · October 22, 2004

The LS is extremely poor in the snow with all season tires.

I have heard several people though like 1990 who have snows on them though and are very happy. RWD is a preferable drivetrain to FWD in the snow, once its moving so I can see how snows would improve it drastically. I'd say my ES is substantially better than the LS in the snow, but thats only because the FWD drivetrain lets you get going from a stop, thats the main problem with the LS.

90LS400Lexus · October 22, 2004

We do not get much snow here in northeastern Tennessee, but I did get caught in a snow last winter in my LS. It was extremely tricky. I was sliding everywhere, but it was not so much the going, but the stopping. The ABS was activating like crazy, but the braking was extremely poor. It was like I had NO brakes. Nothing like the ABS brakes on my 92 Buick or old 94 Lumina- which both had ABS and stopped very well on snow. I do not know what the deal was, but even on wet roads, my LS would activate the ABS very often and stopping was POOR. Whn dry, I could not ask for better brakes, despite the "grinding/growling" sound they would make from stopping from high speeds and it had good pads.

If I SLOWLY accelerated from a stop, it would not spin that bad. I was suprised I made it up the hill on my road. Like SW said- I think once you get going it is OK. The car went up the hill with ease at about 25 MPH. It does have a curve right on the steepest part of the hill, so it can be tricky. :unsure: :)

99lsguy · October 22, 2004

I may be one of the guys 99lsguy is talking about with my Blizzaks on inexpensive Mille Miglia wheels from Tire Rack. My 2000 LS with this setup seems to get around substantially better in heavy snow than our front wheel drive V6 Camry with traction control and ABS. I have passed a whole lot of stuck SUVs in my life while driving a rear drive car with four snow tires. My 00 LS seems to get around a lot better in heavy snow than my 90 LS which had less ground clearance.

←

You're the one Jim!! :cheers:

Have you put those on yet?

silvermate · October 22, 2004

RWD is a preferable drivetrain to FWD in the snow

i would have to strongly dissagree there...........FWD is Way more safe than RWD in the snow.... and i'll tell you why

you don't get the "sidways", or the rear end drifting left and right, effect with FWD, like you do in RWD, and thats the biggest problem driving in the snow......(control of the vehicle)

the engine is in front so you have all the weight bearing down on the front 2 wheels for traction and control of the vehicle

SW03ES · October 22, 2004

Is that your name 1990, Jim? Thats good now I won't have to call you "1990" anymore lol.

1990LS400 · October 22, 2004

I think something that is being missed here is that later LS cars with VSC, ABS with more channels, and "snow mode" transmission settings handle snow completely differently and far better than the early LS.

There is very little similarity between how my 1990 LS drove in snow and how my 2000 LS drives in snow. Go too fast around a corner in snow in a 1990 LS and you will spin. Go too fast around a corner in snow in a 98-00 or newer LS and VSC intervenes like magic.

Early and late LS400's are different in many other ways. Seating positions, space, noise level, ground clearance, overall height, materials, handling, braking, and accelleration are all very, very different. About the only thing they seem to have in common is the model name - LS400 - and that a few of the switches work the same way.

SW03ES · October 22, 2004

i would have to strongly dissagree there...........FWD is Way more safe than RWD in the snow.... and i'll tell you why

you don't get the "sidways", or the rear end drifting left and right, effect with FWD, like you do in RWD, and thats the biggest problem driving in the snow......(control of the vehicle)

the engine is in front so you have all the weight bearing down on the front 2 wheels for traction and control of the vehicle

←

Thats the common belief, but if you ask precision driving instructors or people who REALLY know how to drive in the snow they'll tell you thats not actually true. The reason people think FWD is better is because its easier to start from a stop for just that reason, the weight bearing down on the front wheels and the extra stability of pulling not pushing the vehicle. BUT thats where any edge FWD has over RWD ends. When the car is moving and you aren't applying gas, all vehicles are the same in the snow whether they're RWD, AWD, or FWD it doesn't matter. They've still got to turn and they've still got to stop. The drive wheels don't help them do that.

The problem with FWD in the snow is that the drive wheels are also the steering wheels. If the drive wheels on a RWD car loose traction you can still steer right? Meaning you can steer out of a skid if one happens. In a FWD car, if the drive wheels have lost traction or are sliding, you CAN'T steer! All that extra weight to the front (FWD vehicles have way front heavy weight distribution) makes it more likely to break into understeer when cornering than a RWD car, and once that happens in the snow, all control of the car is lost. Its just a sled going wherever momentum takes it.

Another problem with FWD is that you can't use the throttle to help steer the car. In a RWD car you can use the throttle to help steer the car around corners, because when the drive wheels are spinning you can still steer. Can't do that in a FWD because you'd loose the ability to steer.

The differences are subtle, but the RWD definately has more control in slippery conditions. I've driven both RWD and FWD skid cars and RWD cars are easier to bring out of a skid once one happens.

So THAT is why snow tires on a RWD are preferable. You get the going power of the snow tires and the control of the RWD.

silvermate · October 22, 2004

I think something that is being missed here is that later LS cars with VSC, ABS with more channels, and "snow mode" transmission settings handle snow completely differently and far better than the early LS.
There is very little similarity between how my 1990 LS drove in snow and how my 2000 LS drives in snow. Go too fast around a corner in snow in a 1990 LS and you will spin. Go too fast around a corner in snow in a 98-00 or newer LS and VSC intervenes like magic.

good point, i missed that one.......

but the point that the only thing the early and late model LS's share is the same name is stretching it a bit...

SW03ES · October 22, 2004

No I'd agree with that, in 95 they made a lot of changes to the LS, it looks and feels a lot bigger for instance, it drives heavier. Similar changes made between 00 and 01.