no1gsxr

Just wondering. Which one is faster, first gen ls400 or first gen gs300. Is the first gen GS as smooth as the LS. Also, did they make a fist gen gs400 like the 93 gs body. I'm starting to like the first gen gs300 style but don't want to give up the smooth ride and the power of the v8. What you guys think?

Och

iTrader: (3)

I used to have a 94 gs300 and still have 94 ls400, so i'll answer from my experience.

1) LS400 should be faster... if it is running right. Many of them do not run right, and therefore feel sluggish.

2) The first gen GS300 used Supra's I6 engine, which is pretty damn smooth. Not as smooth as the 1UZ, but still very very smooth. Also the stock suspension and exaust are not agressive, and with 16" rims the ride is great, and surprisingly it handles very well too. It handled way better than my 2nd gen GS430, wich much better steering feedback.

3) No they didn't have 1st gen GS400. I hear there was a twin turbo version in Japan, but I cant confirm for sure.

4) All in all, if your LS is running the way it should, keep it. The LS is better built interior wise, while the GS has some interior issues. However the exterior is better on the GS.

PureDrifter

iTrader: (10)

1UZ was intro'd into the GS line in 98, not before anywhere else in the world.

the JZS147 was available in japan and abroad with the 2jz-gte (twin turbo supra engine) but NOT in the united states.

Kingsoup

As I've read the GS/Aristo actually came with the 1UZFE in 93 as the 4WD/1UZ Aristo, or it came with the N/A 2JZGE or the 2JZGTE in the higher spec Aristo.

I'd wager the GS has a firmer ride and the LS is a bit quicker given that both have the same Tranny and final drive (not sure on that one)

no1gsxr

Just test drove a 93 gs300. Nice car but I didn't feel any power. My 91LS must be running right cause it really is fast. No lie, I was driving home and i saw a BMW 3 series M3 and figured lets see what my car can do. I thought he would blow me away but I stood next to him the whole time. I was amazed. My car has chrome 20s and it's all stock except for suspension. And the temp didn't go up at all. Maybe I'll keep my Ls for a little while longer

junjdm

put em on the track!...lol

jcrome04

LS no question

no1gsxr

Imagine an Ls on the track. The LS is a big car. But I don't think it's that heavy. What you guys think. I heard an LS is about 39??lbs. That's close to a mustang isn't it. And the power to weight ratio is pretty close. Mustang being what 225hp and the LS 10/11 being 250hp.

JBrady

The 1985-2005 Mustang weighed 3200-3400 depending on trim. Its 225hp/300tq 5.0 HO engine made about 190rwhp. 1st gen LS400s weigh about 4000 and the engine is over-rated at 250hp/260tq but only makes about 175rwhp (in reality it is about 230hp flywheel not 250).

The 1st gen GS300 makes around 170rwhp so the peak power is similar with a lighter weight but the LS has more torque giving it more power under the curve and a slight advantage.

Christian

Hi,

it is not true, there was a GS400 first Gen.

http://www.tradecarview.com/used_car...risto/1327189/

It was also the Supra TT engine available.

Christian

PureDrifter

iTrader: (10)

hahah, sorry guys, my mistake, should have payed better attention.

to my credit, ,there is no such thing as a JZS147 with a 1uz, it would be a UZS147

no1gsxr

I test drove a 93 GS300 from a used car lot. It was slow. It felt like a four cylinder. I used to have a 98 Mazda 626 2.0 and it felt similar.

MEANDAFAKA

don't matter to me, LS is still a flagship.

akitomk3

iTrader: (2)

ls hands down. I dont like the 1st gen gs body. the 2jzge is not that powerful at all. 1uz ftw!

avalon42

iTrader: (1)

I like my LS. My uncle had a first gen GS and that thing was slow because the power to weight ratio is ridiculous. The 98-00 LS hit the spot though in terms of power compared to the first gen LS...so I would say LS.