lol, unless by 'good as new' you mean it can RUN just fine, and maybe could go back and forth from LA to NY a dozen times without problems, but that doesn't mean it's like or as good as new. after 200k the seats aren't the same, the suspension bushings (not to mention shocks) aren't the same, the door seals aren't as good, etc. but yes, the LS is probably the most reliably higher end luxury sedan ever made.

and a beautiful interior as you know...

 

And the chances of a mechanical break down are significantly higher for a car with 200k that is 20 some of years old. I have never really understood the fascination of people having to tell other people that they have "whatever KM and I would trust it any day of the week" etc etc. I have a two older SUVS, they sure do need their maintenance and they are not the same as when they are new. I would argue that its is foolish choice driving your own personal car across the United States, you are better of renting a car and driving the rental.

As for the Continental, to me its a superior car.

 

I don't think many people would argue that a Continental isn't a superior car to a 20+ year old LS400.

 

One person already has.

 

I think that falls under the "don't think many"

 

Agreed. But that person may have one point, though. If any luxury car can remain reasonably reliable at 200K, it's probably an LS. But, no, it's not going to be like a brand new car.

 

No disagreement there, the only high-end Sedan I would really want to own for longer than the warranty period is the LS, and possibly a Lincoln or Cadillac (not because the domestics don't break but they are much less expensive to repair.) No way I own a German Sedan outside of the original or an extended warranty. But that is just me, I keep my cars 10 years or more and value reliability over flash or the newest wizbang features. Don't get me started on "self driving", I view that as the anti-christ of automobiles.

 

The old Lincoln Town Cars are just getting broken in at 200k miles. I'd say they are just as durable, if not more so than an old Lexus LS. Now would I trust this new Contiential at 200k miles, or any of the other newer transverse engine Lincoln models at that mileage. HELL NO!!

 

Well, even brand-new, sitting on the lot, the compact Lincoln MKC SUV seems to have a few glitches in overall fit/finish and assembly-quality.....much less so with the MKX mid-size SUV and Continental which followed it. The MKC's reliability has also been below average....a shame, since it is much a nice design. I liked it very much when it debuted, and still do.

 

Very simple cars with components designed for taxi and police use. That's the secret to their longevity.

 

Pretty much, that and they never changed them. When I had Cadillacs, I only owned the old body on frame boats, simple cars, very reliable. FWD Northstar Cadillacs, great when they were new, total piles after they got over 75k miles/5-6 years worth of use on them

 

That's part of it......also the fact that major drivetrain components like the transmission casing, differential/live-axle, etc....(and perhaps the engine-block, too, though I'm not sure about that part) are not lightweight aluminum, but solid cast iron. That (and low cost) was one reason why the Mustang delayed so long in dumping the live axle.....durability when the kids were doing all of those Friday and Saturday-night burnouts.

 

Having had one in the family I would concur

 

Exactly. Town Cars were horribly outclassed, space inefficient cars from a retail perspective for the last decade of their production. They were simply built and very cheap to repair. I wouldn't want Lincoln to be producing that type of car in 2017.

 

Idk what's so great about the interior of the original LS. It resembles my old 97 Camry almost entirely, right down to the steering wheel and control stalks. Doesn't even seem that luxurious, there's hardly any wood.

I know it was a bargain compared to the 7er and S-class of the time, but like always you get what you pay for.