CanadaCraig

Hi Guys!! :) I blame Lexus for this. THEY are 'selling' the new LS as a 'Performance/Luxury' car - and that's a mistake. AND - I think - completely unnecessary. The LS is a luxury car - period. And there is no need to apologize for that. So I would just stick to emphasizing LUXURY [if I was Lexus] and let potential customers be pleasantly surprised by how well it PERFORMS. There are plenty of people [as we all know] who WANT an extremely reliable LUXURY car. They are not looking for performance - they are looking for solitude. And THAT is where the LS beats them all. Just my opinion. Craig!! :)

Hi 93ls400walt!! :) I've been reading your messages in this thread with great interest. My 93 LS is now averaging 15.82 MPG. That's down almost 1 MPG from the last time I checked. [A few weeks ago] My car also [very often] accelerates poorly. [Taking 12 or so seconds to reach 60 MPH] I'd like to try something like Seafoam. But I share rtd111's concern. What happens to any of the gunk and carbon that something like Seafoam might loosen up? Is any part of the car put at risk because of that loosened 'gunk'? [O2 Sensors - or whatever] Also... would Seafoam help my car perform better considering the fact that my injectors have already been cleaned - several times - by the Lexus mechanics I go to? Does something like Seafoam clean more than just the injectors? A lot of questions - I know - but if you [or someone else] could answer at least some of them - I would appreciate it. Thanks, Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) AJAC [Automobile Journalists Association of Canada] have completed their extensive tests of 'all-new' vehicles for model year 2007. Click on THIS to see how well the LS460L did. Then click on the categories to the right and see how other vehicles did. Craig!! :) PS I can't help but wonder... just how expensive is the LS600hL going to be?! YIKES!!

Hi Guys!! :) IF you do [Re: Subject line] then click on THIS!! Either way - do you think OnStar should have said something - back when they knew!! Craig!! :)

Hi 1990LS400!! :) I hope you're OK. I have to assume [Or should I really say... 'I HOPE I can assume...'] that your experience with Mercedes AND those of your friends and neighbours - are unique and not typical. I once owned both a 1998 SLK230 and a 1998 ML320 and they were fine. Other than the SLK needing its roof realigned - no problems at all. I understand - however - that Mercedes has fallen - quite dramatically - reliability wise - but to become THE LEAST reliable vehicles on the road? According to Consumer Reports 'Predicted Reliability' charts [i'm sure you've seen them!!] the Mercedes SLK [V6], SL, CLK, C-Class [V6], E-Class [V6 and V8], CLS, S-Class, R-Class, M-Class [V6 and V8] are ALL battling for position as THE MOST UNRELIABLE vehicle in the entire Consumer Reports survey. Given that '0' is 'Average Reliability' - the SL is 120% less reliable than the average vehicle sold in the U.S. The E-Class [V8] is 159% less reliable. The CLS is 163% less reliable. The S-Class is 176% less reliable. And the M-Class [V8] is a whopping 202% less reliable then the AVERAGE vehicle. [Which makes the M-Class THE most unreliable vehicle one can buy] Keep in mind that this is not a comparison to the MOST reliable vehicle - but just the average one. THAT IS SCARY!! The only vehicles rated at 100% or more [on the 'less reliable side'] are the Pontiac Solstice [185%], the Jeep Grand Cherokee V6 [102%], Cadillac STS V8 [189%], Volkswagen Touareg [119%], Cadillac SRX V8 [152%], Lincoln Navigator [114%], Infiniti QX56 [135%], Nissan Armada [137%], Land Rover LR3 V8 [155%] and the Buick Terraza, Chevrolet Uplander and the Saturn Relay at 152%. And that's IT. Every other vehicle is LESS than 100% more unreliable than the average vehicle. Has Mercedes REALLY sank THAT low?! That all said... There is something that has always puzzled me when it comes to Consumer Reports. I own - as you probably know - a 2006 Chrysler 300C SRT8. My particular model wasn't rated for reliability - but the 300C was. Consumer Reports is quite clear about the 'fact' that the 300C [That's the one with the HEMI] is 'Much Worse than Average' when it comes to its predicted reliability. [No where near as bad as ANY Mercedes - but very poor none-the-less] Yet if you take a look at the little chart with the red and black dots - the 300 is a sea of red dots. TRUE - the 300 model that was rated is the V6 version. But all you have to do is flip over to the Dodge Charger [with the HEMI - just like the one found in the 300C] and you will see more red dots. I'm confused. How can a car have so many red dots and be consider 'worse than' or even 'much worse than'?! Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to read the story. Do you support MB or CR? Personally - I've always been frustrated by how CR's ratings lack specific information. What exactly does 'unreliable' mean to CR?! To ME - an unreliable car is one that will - quite possibly - force me off to the side of the road in wait of a triple-a truck for help. It is not a car that needs to be taken back to the dealership several times to have the front end re-aligned. I think CR should be taken to task. They should have to explain themselves. Especially given the obvious influence they have. What do YOU think?! Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) According to J.D. Power - customers are gradually becoming MORE satisfied with the 'sales experience'. BUT.... there is still a long way to go. Click on THIS to read the story. Many years ago - I walked into a Toyota showroom to take a look at the [then] all-new Toyota Supra. [The last version they made] It was roped-off in the showroom like some ancient artifact. After circling the car for about 20 minutes or so - I was finally acknowledged by a salesman. It was immediately apparent that I was wasting HIS time. [You know the 'look' - I'm sure] I ignored his 'attitude' and asked if I could sit in the Supra to see if it had enough headroom. He told me that only 'serious buyers' were being permitted to sit in the Supra. I told him that I'm not about to become 'serious' about ANY car unless I know that I can actually SIT in it comfortably. [being 6'3" tall - I often don't 'fit'] Not good enough. I then asked for a brochure. NOPE!! They didn't have any. In a huff - I walked away. As I approached my NSX [which was just out of view of the showroom] I could hear someone running in my direction. It was that same salesman. He was running towards me while stapling his business card TO a Supra brochure. Imagine that. "I found a brochure, SIR!!" I just ignored him and drove off. Someone once said, "You can easily judge the character of a man by how he treats those who can do nothing for him." I would add to that quote by saying, ".... by how he treats those who he ASSUMES can do nothing for him." Do you have any stories about how YOU were turned off buying a car [or even just seriously thinking of buying a car] by the actions [or in-actions] of a salesman?! Craig!! :)

CONGRATULATIONS RICHARD!! I hope you'll have many happy miles [!!] with your wonderful new car!! Craig!! :) PS I would be nice to see some photos!!

Hi SW03ES!! :) I also appreciate what you're saying. But I'm a 'never give up' sort of person. Besides - if I DID get rid of the car - at least before October 14th, 2006 - and bought another old LS400 - I would also given up a rather extensive [and expensive] warranty. Besides - my car as a LOT of new parts. And I found it hard to believe [as I still do] that the 'problem' is UNresolvable. A solution [as I see it] just hasn't been found yet. [i'm the same when it comes to dealing with difficult people in my life] I certainly don't expect OR demand perfection - from anything. But I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that a car that is ONLY 14 years old to drive as it should. I've owned cars a lot older that had no problems at all. Which brings me to your 'could have been a lemon from day one' idea. THAT - I think - is a possibility. As Blake said - a little old lady isn't likely to complain about a slower-than-it-should-be LS. And to be very honest - I wouldn't have noticed either - IF the car didn't - on occasion - accelerate NICELY!! [Or at least 'smoothly'] But that doesn't mean I haven't seriously considered getting rid of the LS. I've thought of that a lot. But for what?! The 1st generation LS is one of my dream cars. And the one I've got is in great condition - inside and out. In fact - I've never seen a better one. But it's not worth much. And do I really want to buy some other guys 'problems'? Don't forget - my LS drove VERY nicely [and still does - if you don't ask too much of it] on the test drive. At least I KNOW what's been done to my car. The plan is - therefore - to just keep it. Even if it never gets any better - at least it's fine for around town. I'll just drive like a little old lady until it gets fixed. Craig!! :)

Hi Threadcutter!! :) The Lexus dealer just happens to have a 1991 LS for sale. It has 225,000 kilometres [or so] AND [i'm assuming] an ECU!! It's possible that the dealer would let me use THAT cars ECU to see if THAT is the problem with my car. [i haven't talked to them about any of this yet - but they might be OK with that idea] This is why I was wondering if it would be a big deal to replace the ECU. [Or rather - take mine out - replace it with that 1991's - and then put mine back] OR would that even work?! Are ECU's year specific?! [As you can probably tell - I don't know very much!!] The fuel injectors have been thoroughly cleaned several times since I've owned the car. And the fuel pump and fuel filter have been replaced with new. And so have all the spark plugs [although I don't know what condition they're in NOW] spark plug wires, rotors and distributors. Even the throttle body was taken off and cleaned. But I'm sure there are many places that deposits could 'hide'. As for the idea of having the exhaust analyzed - that's a good idea. The puzzling thing about all of this is that my car DOES accelerate very nicely - every now and then. I can't say for sure if it's actually quicker during those 'nice times' - but there is certainly none of the typical [for my car] 'being held back by one thing or another' feeling. I used to think that the brakes were dragging. But they've been checked. Thanks again, Craig!! :)

Hello Everyone!! We must never forget the sacrifices made by those who came before us. We must never forget what OTHERS have gone through [in ALL wars] in order to afford all of US the relatively peaceful existence we often take for granted. And we must never forget those who are - to this day - fighting on our behalf. To honour veterans has absolutely nothing to do what what we may think of war itself. It has nothing to do with whether or not we feel that a particular war was or is justified. Honouring, respecting and remembering veterans is about the people of war - not the policy behind it. It's about our brothers and fathers and uncles and sons and best friends. It's about our sisters and mothers and aunts too. November 11th is 'Remembrance Day' in Canada and 'Veterans Day' in the United States. Many Canadians show their respect by wearing a poppy. November 11th was the day chosen to remember [although we should 'remember' EVERY day] because it was the END of the FIRST World War. [which ended on November 11th, 1918] In Flanders Field In Flanders fields the poppies blow Between the crosses, row on row, That mark our place; and in the sky The larks, still bravely singing, fly Scarce heard amid the guns below. We are the Dead. Short days ago We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow, Loved, and were loved, and now we lie In Flanders fields. Take up our quarrel with the foe: To you from failing hands we throw The torch; be yours to hold it high. If ye break faith with us who die We shall not sleep, though poppies grow In Flanders fields. Be respectful. Be thankful. And always remember. Craig

Hi Threadcutter!! :) Thanks for the ideas!! I never thought about the possibility of an electrical 'surge' possibly effecting the ECU. I think that's very clever. [No kidding] But how does one check that? Hmm... Would it be easy enough to temporarily use a different 1st generation ECU? [from a 1991 LS the dealer has for sale] As for whether or not someone disconnected the battery cables before attaching the charger - I have no idea. Probably not though. Especially if the 'little old lady' did it herself. [Or asked her grandson to do it or whoever] As for the mechanics attaching a computer to the car - they never really did explain exactly HOW they did that or WHAT they ended up discovering. I was never told of what was RIGHT with the car. And I never did see a list of any of the 'findings'. Hmm.... I also doubt any fuel stabilizer was used. In fact - for the first couple of months of owning my LS - there would often BE a 'bad fuel' smell. The exact same 'varnish' smell my motorcycle had when the fuel in its tank went 'south'!! [Hey - just like the old lady!! lol] It's why I insisted on having the fuel filter changed. Since that time - however - there has never been a repeat of that 'smell'. But like you said [And like I've often suspected] maybe the problem DOES have something to do with 'lacquer coating' throughout the fuel system. The car runs FINE - after all - IF I don't push it hard!! Yet another 'Hmm.....'!! Thank you very much. You have given me LOTS to think about!! Craig!! :) ---------------------------------------------- Hi daffy!! :) I bet your car never gets COLD!! lol No.. my car doesn't 'run on' when 'turned off'. It's an interesting 'puzzle' - that's for sure. I'm thinking maybe Threadcutter is onto something with perhaps BOTH of his ideas. [The ECU being 'zapped' by a power surge and/or the entire fuel system being lacquered up] The next time I see my Lexus 'guy' - I'll ask him about the ECU and 'Seafoam'. Thanks!! Craig!! :) ---------------------------------------------- Hi dsmlexus!! :) Thanks for taking the time to reply. I like your idea - but I don't even have the valet key. Wouldn't it be GREAT if THAT was the problem!! lol Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) I hope you're OK. Click on THIS to see what CanadianDriver.com thinks of the 2006 Lexus IS350. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to see the 'test data' [so far] from the AJAC 'Canadian Car of the Year' competition going on right NOW!! Winners to be announced early next year. [i think] Take note of how SLOW the LS460 is. That can't be right - can it?! Craig!! :)

Hi Ralph!! :) I hope you're OK. I truly appreciate your kind response. I'm TRYING - I really am - NOT to be so frustrated with my LS. And I have to keep in mind that when I drive at or near the speed limit on the freeway - with some beautiful music [Classical or 'Blues'] playing through that fantastic Nakamichi sound system - I like my LS. And if I drive just like the previous owner [the 'little old lady'] all is well. But if I try to push it - it quickly becomes frustrating. But... you're right. There is a 425 h.p. Chrysler sitting next to it. [Which truly is an unbelievable car - I kid you not] So I have to put things [or keeps things] in perspective. The LS has never failed to start or stop - so that's something!! Thanks again, Craig!! :)

Hi blake918!! :) I hope you're OK. I'm sorry I've been causing you so many sleepless nights!! lol :P I think the fact that the 1st generation LS's use the OBD 1 diagnostic computer thing has - perhaps - made it more difficult to figure out the 'problem'. The OBD 1 [i hope I'm saying that right] isn't nearly as sensitive as the OBD 2 system that all cars have these days. [since 1994?] Then again - the Lexus 'guys' have often attached computers to it while they test drove it. And nothing ever came back as a 'fault'. But IF it IS just a carbon issue - would any computer pick that up?! I really don't know. For the first 10 years of its life - my LS was driven by a little old lady. I strongly suspect it was rarely - if EVER - driven above 60 km/h. AND probably never got the chance to fully 'warm-up'. The car only had 50,000 miles or so on it when I bought it. That's only 5,000 miles a year. The car also had a battery charger 'thing' on it to keep the battery charged while she went away for several MONTHS during the winter. [The car just sat there] If that leads you to any thoughts - let me know. I'm determined to see to it that you get your rest!! lol Have a great day!! Craig!! :)

Hi daffy!! :) I hope you're OK. Your LS has 200,000 miles MORE than my LS has. I think that's amazing. And it's why [in part] I find my LS to be quite frustrating. I WANT to keep my LS until it literally blows away in the wind!! lol But I also want it to perform as it SHOULD in the meantime. The only thing that I can think of [that's left to do] is to try something like 'Seafoam'. So I'm going to look into that more seriously. I'm worried about something like 'Seafoam' making things worse and/or damaging one thing or another. [Which is why I haven't used something like that - yet] The fuel injectors have been thoroughly cleaned several times. And the throttle body was cleaned not too long ago. But maybe there is a carbon-deposit problem somewhere. I just thought of a question: I've often heard that one can 'blow-out' the engine [of carbon deposits] by merely driving it aggressively for an extended period of time. [is that true?] But are there carbon deposits that - once there - are always there - until you actually get at them to clean them out?! [iF that makes sense] And is that where something like 'Seafoam' comes into the picture?! OR would someone actually have to take the engine apart to thoroughly clean it?! Take care of yourself, Craig!! :)

Hi SRK!! :) I'm glad to hear that all things are good your way!! [is that proper English?! lol] I'm OK too - I think!! Your car is getting 18.32 miles per U.S. gallon in the city and 24.97 miles per U.S. gallon on the highway. That seems to be about what most guys are getting with their 1st generation LS. The 300C SRT8 is getting - on average - 20.31 miles for every Imperial gallon. If you click on THIS you'll find a handy-dandy MPG conversion 'thing'. The 6.1 liter engine in my 300C does not have what's called 'MDS'. [Multiple Displacement System] Only the 5.7 liter engine has that cylinder deactivation 'thing'. Granted - the 300C is a newer car and has a more up-to-date engine management system AND it also has an extra gear - being a 5-speed. But it is also geared for performance and it weighs about 400 lbs more. I also drive it considerably more aggressively than I do the LS400. [Comparatively speaking] Take care of yourself, Craig!! :) PS Are you enjoying the RAIN RAIN RAIN WIND RAIN WIND RAIN?! lol

Hi SW03ES!! :) I'm willing to bet that most guys would disagree with you. My 1993 LS400 only has 86,000 miles. Lots of parts have already been replaced that have to do with gas mileage and performance. [As you probably know] The idea that I should merely accept how my car performs AND be OK with the gas mileage it's getting because it's a 14 years old car - is an idea that doesn't hold water. [Or at least not nearly as much 'water' as you seem to think it does] I went back through many of the previously posted messages - here at LOC - and this is what I found. 'akewlguy' - 1993 LS400 - 19 MPG city/23 MPG highway 'Dust' - 1992 LS400 - 20 MPG - on average [195,000 miles on his car] 'VBDenny' - 1990 LS400 - 18 MPG city/24 MPG highway [150,000 miles on his car] 'branshew' - 1993 LS400 - 22 MPG - on average 'PK Lex' - 1994 LS400 - 19 MPG - on average '93LSOwner - 1993 LS400 - 18 MPG city/21 MPG highway 'OmarG' - 1993 LS400 - 18 MPG - on average 'AustinGT' - 1990 LS400 - 17 MPG city/25.5 MPG highway 'frodo1028' - 1992 LS400 - 18.8 MPG - on average 'SRK' - 1992 LS400 - 18.32 MPG city/24.97 MPG highway 'daffy' - 1991 LS400 - 26 MPG [highway - I'm assuming] As you can see - most guys with 1st generation LS400's ARE getting better gas mileage with their car than I am with my car. I think I have a right to be irked by that. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) I hope you're OK. I've done this a few times now and it always turns out the same. My 1993 Lexus LS400 [as you all know] has a 4.0 litre V8 that makes 250 h.p. and 260 lb/ft of torque. My particular LS400 takes a leisurely 12 seconds to reach 60 MPH and has a top speed of 117 MPH. My 2006 Chrysler 300C SRT8 has a 6.1 litre V8 that makes 425 h.p. and 420 lb/ft of torque. It can reach 60 MPH in less than 5 seconds and has a top speed of 173 MPH. [According to Car & Driver magazine - at least] On average - my 1993 Lexus LS400 gets 16.79 MILES PER U.S. GALLON. On average - my 2006 Chrysler 300C SRT8 gets 16.91 MILES PER U.S. GALLON. Something MUST be wrong with the Lexus? Don't you think?! Oh well... A brief update: The extended warranty on my LS400 is over. It cost me $2,000 when I bought the car just over 3 years ago. I haven't added everything up - just yet - but the warranty company ended up paying for more than $4,500 in repairs. So I certainly got my money's worth. [Extended warranty wise] During the last service - the other ignition coil was replaced and so was the tachometre needle. I think it drives a little better - maybe - but the gas mileage is still horrible [at least I think so] and it still takes 12 seconds to reach 60. But I'm not planning on doing anything about it. [At least not right away - now that the warranty is gone] It's too bad though. At least I can't accuse my Lexus dealer of being unfair. I lost count of how many courtesy cars I had. And the last one I had - the Toyota 4Runner - I had for over 3 weeks!! [At no cost to me] If I ever do get to adding everything up - I'll let you know exactly what was done. AND just how much it cost. BUT.... This was a message about gas mileage!! Have a great day. Craig!! :)

Hi SW03ES!! :) I agree with most of what you said. Even though it would be interesting to find out IF, "Excessive reckless speed contributes to accidents", that wasn't the point of the study. [i underlined 'reckless' because it can't be assumed that excessive speed is always 'reckless'] People are being given 'speeding tickets' for going 5 to 10 MPH over the posted limit and branded as the CAUSE of accidents. And that's the problem. [i think] The term 'speeders' has become a generic term to cover everything from 'going 1 MPH over the posted speed limit' to 'having total disregard for the safety of others'. When someone is going 5 to 10 MPH over the posted speed limit - it's unlikely that most other driver's would consider them to be 'reckless'. And as such - any 'campaign' against 'speeders' looses credibility. Just last month I had to pay $113.00 for being 'caught' going 12 MPH over the speed limit on a bone-dry, completely deserted FREEWAY!! Just how many lives were saved by giving ME that ticket?! None. So one can only conclude that I was given that ticket to bolster up revenue. I believe that there is such a thing as an inappropriate enforcement of the law. For example - if someone was j-walking across a busy street at 2 O'clock in the afternoon - interfering with the natural flow of traffic - a ticket for j-walking would be warranted. But is that same someone j-walked across that same street at 2 O'clock in the morning - with no cars in sight - a ticket for j-walking would be an INappropriate enforcement of the law. This theory of mine also applies to the situation in which a person is exceeding the posted speed limit. IF I got that speeding ticket because I was going 12 MPH over the posted limit in a school zone in the middle of the day - I'd say - I got what I deserved. But not on a bone-dry, deserted freeway. In Victoria, B.C. 'we' have a lot of elderly drivers. Many are going just slightly below the posted speed limit. Sounds safe enough - doesn't it?! Well... if you follow behind some of these 'safe drivers' for any length of time - you'll soon realize [in many cases] that what you're actually following is a slow-motion nightmare!! It's almost comical. Almost. But will THEY ever get a ticket? Probably not. I say... Surrounded by other vehicles? Then adopt the 'go with the flow' style of driving. But if you're on your own - and it's safe to do so - you should feel free to exceed the posted limit by 10, even 15 MPH [Or ever faster on a 'super-highway'] without having to worry about some cop pulling you over just to help fill up the gas tank on his new Dodge Charger HEMI police cruiser. Craig!! :)

Dear Josh, I am also very sorry to hear of the loss of your friend. My heart goes out to you and to his family. Craig

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to find out what CanadianDriver.com thinks of the all-new for 2007 Lexus LS460. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Exceeding the speed limit is what causes most accidents. RIGHT?! Click on THIS to read the latest report from the U.K. Department of Transport. Craig!! :)

Hi LS400 lover!! :) That was interesting!! And now I know for SURE that something IS wrong with MY 1993 LS400. It can't go any faster [so I've been told] than 117 MPH. That said... I think LIFE allows each of us to be super silly at least ONCE. So now that you've done that - don't do it again!! lol Craig!! :)