In the 80s I had a girlfriend who had a 66 Electra convertible that someone had given her. It needed some minor work, so I opened up the hood and saw that it had a 455 V8 with a carburetor the size of a motorcycle engine.

I said, "let's go for a ride". I puttered along on back roads till I came to a quiet section of freeway. I got on the on ramp, checked that the coast was clear and floored it.

Instantly the front of the car rose up, we were smacked back into the seats so hard I had to stretch to hold on to the wheel. The speedo needle jumped to the right (the gas gauge needle went to the left nearly as fast) and by the time I could sneak a glance the speedo said 80 and it was still accelerating hard. I decided it was time to back off. The sucking sound of the intake stopped and I realized that my girlfriend had been screaming the entire time.

She had never used more than 1/8 throttle and had no idea....

Those old pre-smog big V8s were something else.

 

Thanks for sharing. Yeah...those were the days. I really wish, in some ways, that I had kept and restored my old '65 Electra....but it would be simply too big for the parking and driving conditions I live with today. And, after my 1Gen Lexus IS300, I decided that I'd probably never have another RWD car again.

BTW, how did your GF have the 455 (7.2L) in a '66 Electra? That engine was not available from the factory until a couple of years later. Must have been installed aftermarket.

 

nice UK flag.

 

I looked and it was definitely a 66, so the engine was probably a 425. I doubt it had an engine swap. Memory plays tricks after 40 years.

 

Yes, that makes more sense. The "Nailhead" 401 c.i. was standard in both '65 and '66, with the 425 optional.

 

so realistically how fast would one of these feel today? compared to say, my LS with a roughly 300 hp 4.0 liter V8

also i feel like the 3 speed would make it feel quite sluggish at times, 3 gears aren't very many

 

Having grown up wth these cars, I can tell you that, even with the top engines, they would not be particularly fast by today's standards, partly for the reasons you mention, partly because of the weight of the heavy body-on-frame structure, and partly because, in those days, the manufacturers used REAL sheet steel.....not the plastic and coke-can stuff today that buckles if you so much as press it with one finger. Yes, they had torque and no turbo lag...but they also had weight, bulk, and poor aerodynamics.

An additional factor with those old big Buicks (before 1967) was the extreme smoothness of the 3-speed automatics...along with quietness, one of their main selling-features. The Super-Turbine 400 transmission and Buick-designed V8s were used through the 1966 model year.....GM divisions each did things differently in those days, and the corporation did not standardize all of their 3-speed Turbo-Hydra-Matic automatics until 1967. The Super Turbine 400 was an offshoot of the old Dynaflow from the 1940s/50s, which was mostly pure fluid-drive and had no mechanical gears at all. The fluid provided a driving sensation that was just like pure whipped cream, and a couple of adjustable vanes in the fluid imitated two separate "gears"...low and high. The Super Turbine 400, which replaced it, was a little more conventional, and provided three separate driving ranges, but still kept the creamy-smooth fluid-drive where you could virtually not feel the shifts at all. It was, IMO, a remarkable driving experience, and, in some ways, smoother than even the best automatics on today's luxury benchmarks like the LS460 and Mercedes S550. That smoothness, though, and the slippage that accompanied it, cost some efficiency/acceleration and gas mileage, particularly in stop and go driving. The competing A707 and A904 Chrysler Torqueflite three-speed automatics, for example, lacked the quietness and shift-smoothness of GM units (and had a characteristic first-gear whine), but were significantly more fuel-efficient and responsive.

 

that's kind of what i figured... i've always wanted a 1969 corvette and or camaro with the 454 big block making 400+ hp and the whole shebang, and i've often felt that one of those engines would give impressive initial response, but after that start to feel slow compared to more modern stuff

and yea i imagine anything called the super turbine 400 would be a very smooth operating device in terms of just going through the gear shifts (all 2 of them lol), but how about the response when you put your foot down? the brilliance of the A650E in the LS is not only how shifts are imperceptibly smooth under casual acceleration, but the sharpness and near immediacy of the downshifts when you step on it... toyota themselves knew exactly how to phrase it lol, the transmission "brings instant gratification as your slightest wish is immediately answered with a combination of sheer power, precise control, and smooth sophistication"

i'm kind of surprised you haven't owned an LS 400 amongst the lexii you've owned, it's like the best buick ever! world class velvety smooth ride, fantastic n/a V8 response and sounds, quite roll-y but great handling and steering feel especially for those long sweeping bends, excellent outward visibility and ergonomics, a perfect balance of technology that seamlessly and quietly improves the overall experience without intruding on it, all while having the maintenance frequency of a camry (albeit with some significantly more expensive oem parts)

 

In a big 4300 lb. Electra, you're usually not going to have muscle-car response even with a muscle-car engine, though it did have enough response to get out of its own way. Mine was old and worn, though, so it was probably losing at least some of the power and compression through worn rings and valves (couldn't afford a new car until I got older and got a full-time job and career). I'd carry a extra can of oil in the trunk with me.



I wasn't as well-heeled in those days, when the 400 first came out, as I am today. Besides, with the exception of the IS300 I owned, I was also leery of RWD vehicles in the winter, and the AWD LS had not come out yet.

 

Still prefer my '01 LS430 over anything I have been in so far (either driving or riding). Rides extremely well after the recent suspension maintenance (after 228K on the original parts).

 

Yes, the LS430, from a pure luxo-viewpoint, was (arguably) the best vehicle that Lexus ever produced...particularly when compared to today's LS500.

 

Yep. They're everywhere around where I live; obviously people hold onto them. Not just enthusiasts like us, and that is saying something. LS430 just drives and drives and never causes a fuss.

500 makes me just want to keep my 430 just that much longer. Although I saw a 500 today, and I will admit the looks are sort of growing on me which I never thought would happen. The lack of a V8, however, was, is, and always will be unforgivable. The LS always had basically the world's smoothest engine, not so anymore.

 

even as a used purchase i meant, they're so cheap now you could just pick one up and sell it a year or even years later for like no loss assuming you keep it well (which i imagine you would)... but like anything old i'm sure you'll have to attend to something at some point and i get not wanting to deal with sudden and unknown repairs

 

i can't do the looks of the early 430s, and even by 06 the car got essentially no engine upgrades whatsoever, so i'd have trouble knowingly buying a car that's no faster or more efficient than the model that was available 8 years prior... the extra features added by the ultra luxury package in the 430 seem quite tempting however

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/ls-...004-ls430.html

 

I am THRILLED to have found this forum topic. My favorite car is the one I still drive, the 2000 Cadillac STS. I bought it new in Dec 2000 and it currently has less than 51,000 miles. We have decided it might be time to get a new car and the Lexus ES350 UL has been highly recommended. We finally went to the, poorly lighted, showroom to have a look. They had very little inventory and nothing in the model and trim that we wanted. They also did not have the interior color we desire on any model so we could at least see if it is something we would want. Fortunately, they had the Palomino color and I was immediately able to dismiss that color as a possibility. When I sat in the car, I felt claustrophobic; it seems so small and dark. The experience was a huge disappointment. But, when I am, eventually, able to sit in the trim model I wish to purchase, maybe I will be happy with it. It has certainly received excellent reviews and is seems to have an excellent maintenance record.

We have driven rental cars over the years so we are familiar with the improvements along the way. But, my STS has so many luxurious features that are not offered in the ES350 UL. Of course, the 350 UL has some features not available in my current car. At an auto show a few years ago, I commented to the salesman that the Lexus did not seem particularly luxurious and I was told that people don't want luxury anymore and prefer the sportier feel of a car. I have considered looking at other cars... Jaguar, Mercedes, BMW, and Audi. Probably, I could still get the luxury that I currently have in my STS but for a price I am not willing to pay. The sticker price of our 2000 STS was $53k. That's a lot for 23 years ago.

It is a silly thing, but what irks me the most in the Lexus UL is that the seat belts are black and the dashboard is black, same as in most cars of this time, I suppose. It is hard for me to accept that as my STS interior is all cream and the dash is a taupe color. It is bright and spacious.

My friends and family are sick of hearing me say how much I love my (current) car, but it's true. Nothing I can afford equals the features in my current car. We have decided to keep driving it at least for next year. If Lexus discontinues the V6, we will likely purchase the Lexus before that happens. Thank you all for letting me "vent."