CanadaCraig

Hi Everyone!! :) As rumour has it - a Chrysler Imperial Concept will be at the Detroit Auto Show in January of 2006. If you click on THIS you can see some of what MotorTrend Magazine's February 2006 issue believes to be renderings OF the new Imperial. Notice the suicide doors. Would such a car be a success - do you think?! Craig!! :) PS I've always loved Imperials - so I for one hope it ends up being made.

Hi W201 sweden!! :) Congratulations on your 'new' car. And I say that - even though I DID just read your message. So why would I dare to say such a thing? I think it's because I can appreciate how you feel. When I first got my LS400 - I felt just as you do now. The LS400 is a car [i think] that you DEVELOP [over time] a 'relationship' with. It's not an emotional car. It's a car that earns your respect. The very first time I remember thinking to myself, "this is actually an impressive car!" - was when I drove it along a narrow, winding road. I was driving quite fast and was pleasantly surprised by how well the car handled. Before that time - I couldn't help but think that I just bought myself a big comfy-chair with wheels - and that it had no other redeeming qualities. So give yourself some time with your new car. Appreciate it for what it IS and you will LEARN [over time] that it's more than you might think. [and I'm saying all this even though MY particular LS has an acceleration problem] Let us know how you feel in a month or so. Craig!! :)

Hi thieaux, michjm AND swordfish!! :) I hope you guys are OK. I'm glad this topic thread was brought back to life!! I'm still dealing with the same problem. But I think I know what MIGHT be causing it. As swordfish said - it's not always just one thing. But in my case - I think there's only one thing left!! lol What I'm going to have replaced when I bring my LS back in for service [which will probably be early February of 2006] are all four O2 Sensors. [Oxygen Sensors] From what I've been reading... my 1993 LS uses the OBD-I computer. The OBD-I is not nearly as sensitive as the OBD-II. [the computer that all cars made since about 1996 have] The OBD-I will NOT necessarily trigger the CEL ['check engine light'] IF an O2 Sensor is FAILING. The O2 Sensor has to actually FAIL before the CEL comes on. With the more modern OBD-II computer - a FAILING O2 Sensor is likely to cause the CEL to come on. [does that make any sense?!] At least that's the impression I've been given. I'm also going to have the MAP thing cleaned and the PCV valve replaced. [none of the O2 Sensors have ever been replaced and neither has the PCV valve] Even if the the problem is NOT caused by the O2 Sensors - it probably wouldn't hurt to change them anyways. O2 Sensors DO become less sensitive as time and mileage add up. I don't think the PCV valve has anything to do with anything. I just want it changed. I mean - why not. Everything else has been!! :P Let me describe - once again - how my car performs. When I start the car cold - I always turn the key to the 'run' position and wait for the fuel injectors to get ready. [you can hear them] Once they have stopped - I start the car. More often than not - the engine seems to 'choke' on something just before turning over. I'm not sure how to describe it any other way. As the engine warms up during the high-idle phase, it feels and sounds 'rough'. Not 'truck-engine' rough - but not nearly as 'smooth' as I think it should be. There is a 'surge' feeling which [at one time] lead me to believe that it was 'missing'. Apparently - that's one of the signs of a failing O2 Sensor. The engine also seems to take a longer time than it should to drop down to a warm idle. [whether that means anything - I don't know] Once I'm one my way - everything seems OK. [basically] In fact - that car drives quite nicely. That is - unless I accelerate hard. When I push the gas pedal to the floor from a dead stop - it still takes 12 to 13 seconds to reach 60 MPH. [just as it always has - at least since I've owned it] Oddly enough - it takes the same 12 to 13 seconds to reach 60 mph with the gas pedal pressed down only 3/4 of the way down. This would lead me to believe that the engine is running 'rich' AND that the timing is being negatively effected in some way. [correct me if I'm wrong please] And IF it's running 'rich' and the timing is being effected [which is how the computer might respond to the misleading information coming from a failing O2 Sensor] than the engine WOULD have a more difficult time dealing with a sudden flow of incoming fuel. [Oh yeah!! I've been THINKING about this!! lol] A failing O2 Sensor might also be the cause [or at least the indirect cause] of abrupt gear changes that my car experiences when accelerated hard. The reason Lexus transmissions usually shift so smoothly is because the computer retards the timing as each gear moves to the next. Trouble is - that timing is being effected [possibly] BY the computers response to the failing O2 Sensor. I'm the first to admit that I was never good at math - but all of my cars problems SEEM to add up to a failing or faulty O2 Sensor. [perhaps all 4 of them aren't working as they should] Also of note if that the engine 'surge' is always considerably more noticable right after I have accelerated hard. I appreciate the advice swordfish [and I enjoyed reading your message] but apparently the 'cats' on my car are OK. [just as everything else is OK - so say the Lexus mechanics] Trouble is - I think far too many mechanics THESE DAYS relay too much ON dash board 'idiot lights'. If the computer doesn't have a 'code' for them to read - they seem lost. My 1993 LS400 now has just under 125,000 Km's. Oh no. I better get to bed. If I'm not sleeping when Santa comes - it will be nothing but lumps of coal for ME!! MERRY CHRISTMAS EVERYONE!! Craig!! :)

Hi 93LSOwner!! :) I hope you're OK. No - actually - I didn't get the LS photos from LOC archives. I think I got them from Lexus directly. [on their 39th Tokyo Auto Show webpage] You would think I'd remember - wouldn't you? Oh well... I'm getting old. :P Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) The dimensions for what will most likely be the 2007 Lexus LS460 are as follows: Length ........ 199.2" Width ............ 73.8" height ........... 57.7" Wheelbase ... 117.0" Craig!! :)

Two more!! :) I don't know about YOU - but I see quite a bit of the VW Phaeton up front and the BMW 5 and 7 series at back. Still... looks pretty nice.

Hi Guys!! :) Apparently - the photos below are of the all-new for 2007 Lexus LS460. What do you think? Craig!! :)

Thanks Guys. I appreciate the replies. Hi Curt!! :) Wow!! Now THAT IS helpful!! Thank you. You understood exactly what I was asking. I was starting to wonder if it was just ME!! My Lexus dealer can't seem to 'get it'. No matter how many times I bring it up - the only answer I get back is, "That's how all DRL's work!!" NO IT'S NOT. But try getting them to understand that. Grr... It's almost to the point that I just want them to understand what I'm saying. [whether or not they do anything about it] Oh well... At least now [thanks to you] I can point them in the right direction. [the next time I bring my car in] As for the rest of the car... The 'TRAC' light caused a code to come up. [#19 I think] Apparently the TRAC pump is running more often than it should. They cleared the memory and asked me to drive if for a couple of week to see if the TRAC light comes back on. I don't want to get all excited over what will probably end up getting me no where - but IF a TRAC pump applies the brakes [when there is no call for it do to so] would that not interfere with how quickly the car accelerates? [a 'no-brainer' perhaps - but I'm losing my confidence in what makes sense to ME] Is it possible that the problem all along has been [and continues to be] a faulty TRAC pump? And what makes a TRAC pump PUMP?! Oh oh..... Thanks again. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) My 1993 LS400 has daytime running lights. It is at the Lexus dealer as I 'speak'. One of the things that I've asked them to do is to change my 1993 DRL's setup for a 1994 LS setup. It's different - apparently. On my car - ALL exterior lights come on when the DRL's are on. Starting with the 1994 LS - only the headlights come on. [using half power - just as on my headlights] THIS is according the LexLS.com site. [i hope he's right] My question is... could I pop my hood and say, "THERE IS THE DRL THING!!" Or is it hidden away somewhere? Is it a single 'thing'? [a plug-in or box or whatever] OR is it more complicated than that? I hope this makes sense. Thanks. [and yes - I did a search!!] Craig!! :)

Hi Lexusfreak!! :) Thank you for responding. I really appreciate it. It's good to know that the engine computer will most likely 'remember' that the TRAC light came on. As for the tires - they are the same ones that I put on the car in January of 2004. [or was it February?] That was the last time they were balanced. A day or two after that - the car had its one and only [since I have owned it] 4-wheel alignment. They have been rotated once at or near 20,000 km's of the just under 40,000 km's that they have been on the car. The tires are Bridgestone Turanza LS-V's. My Lexus service manager has always thought that the Turanza's had a far too aggressive tread pattern for my LS. He believes the vibration in the car is caused by the tires. He might be right after all. I'm suddenly struck by the overwhelming desire to go 'oops'. Should wheel alignments and tire balancing have been done more frequently? Thanks for your help. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) I hope everyone is OK. My TRAC light came on and stayed on all day yesterday. But now it's off. I have an appointment to bring my car in on Monday. Does it matter if the TRAC light does not come on for the service guys to see? Does the engine computer [or whatever] 'remember' that the light came on? [and WHY it came on] My car is still not performing as it should - but I'm slightly hopeful. The dealer finally noticed what I've been noticing all along. [that my car is not performing as well as it ought to] So MAYBE they'll be able to fix it - finally. [sheesh - it's been almost 2 years] Also my front tires are [so I've been told] 'cupping'. I've rotated the tires as I should and have checked the air pressure on a regular basis. Any reason a tire should 'cup'? [and what exactly IS a 'cupping' tire? lol] Thanks, Craig!! :)

Thanks Guys!! I appreciate it. :D Craig!! :)

SW03ES. I'll say it again. WE are going to have to 'agree to disagree'. [i will not post again in this thread] Craig

Hi SW03ES!! :) This may come as a shock - but a person who agrees with YOU is NOT necessarily smarter than a person who DISAGREES with YOU. [or the scientists that concluded something that YOU just happen to agree with] I read the research AND read EVERY word written in every message posted in this thread. [including every word you have written] And inspite of that - I still believe that it would be safer to drive without talking on a cell phone. [yes - I know. It's unbelievable - isn't it] If I really knew what I was talking about - I would agree with YOU. [isn't that what you think?] We will just have to agree to disagree. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) [this is to anyone who disputes the notion that talking to someone on a cell phone increases the risk of getting into an accident] Some of you may be especially gifted - and talking to someone on a cell phone while driving has NO effect whatsoever on your ability to safely drive a car. If that's the case - I think that's great. Good for you. But most people are NOT so gifted. It has been argued that holding a cell phone to your ear is no more distracting than reaching out to change the radio station. Well... I don't know about some of you - but I don't press my head against the radio and leave it there. I change the radio station when it's SAFE TO DO SO. When you are talking to someone on a cell phone [something that has already been mentioned - I believe] some OTHER PERSON has become part of the equation. You can choose to ignore what you hear on a radio but most people can NOT ignore the person talking to them on a cell phone. [or any phone - for that matter] Most people that I've seen on a cell phone will NOT interupt the conversation they are engaged in - NO MATTER WHAT they may be dealing with on the road. God forbid they say, "Hang on a second - I'm trying to save my LIFE and keep OTHERS from dying!!" Try talking to someone while they are having a conversation on a regular phone and take note of how well they can deal with TWO things going on at the SAME time. Oh well.. just another opinion. Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to read the story. According to J.D. Power - Lexus comes in 4th place on their 'Customer Satisfaction Survey'. Can you guess who came in 1st? Can you guess who came in 2nd and 3rd? Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to read the story. In the 'world' of performance cars - we are living in the so-called 'good old days'. When I first really got into cars - one of the 'hottest' vehicles a person could buy was a Ford Mustang King Cobra. [with laced-spoked 13" 'mag' wheels] Believe me when I tell you this - I thought I was born a decade too late. Now I realize - I just had to be patient!! [very patient - as it turns out - but here we are] Craig!! :)

The difference being that windshield wipers are a part of the car. We need them to see out of the windsheild on a rainy day. A cell phone is an UNNECESSARY DISTRACTION. I'm sure that your professor was/is a very smart person. But other equally smart people are disagreeing with him. Craig

SW03ES I found your message confusing. You said, "This honestly is total BS. Cell phones are no more dangerous than anything else you do in the car while you're driving......." Like WHAT - for instance? Steering? Braking? Using a turn signal? To suggest that using a cell phone is NOT distracting and does NOT contribute to the lack of attention that causes many accidents - simply flies in the face of logic. Would you care if your surgeon was talking to friends on his cell phone while making his first cut into your chest? Craig

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to read the story. It comes as NO surprise to ME. I've always been against the idea of anyone talking on the phone WHILE DRIVING. Driving a car takes ALL of your attention. Not just what you're willing to spare. I'd make it illegal to talk on any phone while driving. PERIOD. What do YOU think? Craig!! :)

Hi Guys!! :) Click on THIS to read the story. So those rumours of the death of the NSX turned out to be true after all. The 2005 NSX is the end of the line. It's actually kinda sad. It's unfortunate that snobbery [for the most part] kept so many people from buying one. They truly only cheated themselves. [i know - I've owned my '91 NSX for just over 10 years now] Reading through the article - one could conclude [as I did] that when the 'current generation NSX' ends - so too will the NAME. The replacement vehicle is referred to as an "ultra high-performance vehicle". It is not being called "the next NSX". [at least not by John Mendel, the senior vice president of automobile operations] Perhaps a new name would be more fitting anyways. I wouldn't call any kid of mine Elvis Presley - would YOU?! lol Honda had it easy - relatively speaking - back in 1991. The automotive landscape has changed dramatically since then. You can now buy a 425 horsepower Chrysler sedan - for goodness sakes!! [the most h.p. you could get in 1991 Chrysler Imperial - for instance - was 150 h.p.] To say that the next Honda/Acura supercar will be 'as groundbreaking as the first' is kinda like saying the 'Titanic is unsinkable'. It's very UnHonda-like to even say such a thing. [so I was surprised to hear it] Besides - no one should dare to flatter themselves. I wonder what Honda/Acura has up its sleeves. Hmmm....... Craig!! :)

Well... it's not MY 'thing' - but I love it when someone does what THEY want to do. It's the same feeling I get when I see someone with purple hair. Besides - suddenly MY LS looks even better!! :P Craig!! :D