I have recently read posts with people calling the SC(400) only average in speed or even slow.
I just thought I make a small comparison to show that even an 11 year old car can easily
run along side 2003 cars from luxury makes comparable in price. These cars may not be rockets
but are undeniably quick.

1992- SC400 0-60 6.8 sec.



2003 BMW 330i $40,300 7.3 sec.

2003 BMW 530i $51,200 6.7 sec.

2003 Mercedes-Benz E-320 $54,000 7.4 sec

2003 Audi TT 1.8T $36,400 7.3 sec.

2003 Audi A4 3.0 $38,000 7.4 sec.

2003 Jaguar S-Type 3.0 $46,700 7.9 sec.

2003 Cadillac CTS $36,000 7.2 sec.

2003 Acura RSX Type-S $29,000 7.8 sec.


.
(info from Car and Driver)

 

cannot compare a 1992 to a 2000+ models... and still faster 1/4 and 0-60 ... i think the SC does fine =)

 

damn, nice list

either the SC's are faster than i thought, or they're just starting to make cars slower

nice choice of cars to compare the SC to

 

2003 BMW 330i $40,300 7.3 sec. - GOOD KILL

2003 BMW 530i $51,200 6.7 sec. - GOOD KILL

2003 Mercedes-Benz E-320 $54,000 7.4 sec -

2003 Audi TT 1.8T $36,400 7.3 sec. - 1.8?

2003 Audi A4 3.0 $38,000 7.4 sec. - .1 slower?

2003 Jaguar S-Type 3.0 $46,700 7.9 sec. - BOAT

2003 Cadillac CTS $36,000 7.2 sec. - ANOTHER BOAT

2003 Acura RSX Type-S $29,000 7.8 sec.- PFFFFFT

 

Most of those cars will pull away in the 1/4. 0-60 is more subjective to road condition, tires, and driver skill than anything. I dont think 0-60 is really an accurate measure of a cars performance. IMO

 

I think my SC300 is slow, but I don't really care cuz it is smooth as butter, more for luxury than speed. Though people like to try to race me at stoplights all the time thinking my SC is a race car. I save the racing for my Eclipse.

 

The power in my '95 feels a little sluggish nowadays from stop, but I can feel all that horsepower and torque when I'm on the freeway and need to pass some slow a$$ in the middle lane. This car defintely has been a blast to own.

 

i think you need to check your numbers again....a 330i is going to be faster than a 530i....A 330i does 0-60 in 6.1 seconds....A RSX type S goes 0-60 in 6.1 also....I dont know which TT your looking at but the 225hp goes 0-60 in 6.4 sec....those are the only ones i double checked, the others seem right to me but who knows.

 

92 SC400 can do 6.8 from 0-60???

 

All of these numbers are exactly as printed in Car and Driver. I assume
them to be correct but misprints are possible.

Also, I realize there are many factors in performance, but I think 0-60 appplies best
in every day driving when talking about speed more so than the 1/4 mile.
1/4 sprints takes you over a 100mph which we typically don't do everyday especially
from 0mph.
Plus, I think our cars are more impressive after 60mph particularly with the 400's.
I love how these V8's pull going 75-125mph.

 

Yea, after 60 mph, the car pulls away more impressive...for some reason, my car seems slow from off a still start, but after 60, its all good.....

 

JLSC4: 1/4 miles over 100mph? i wish our SC did that stock
our stock speed trap in the 1/4 mile is about 89-91mph @ 15.8-16.2
and yes, SC are very slugish from a stop, it starts gettin fast after 40mph. sad huh?
lexsc3: i agree with you.. something fishy about those numbers...
i think all sc400 are about adverage compair to any other v8. unless the other v8 is blown heh.
wish vortex made a supercharger for our car.. i would love 400whp at 7psi, with a huge FMIC under my bumper

 

Compared to what V8's . Cause there are more than enough V6's faster than our SC400's. It is not really fair to our lexus though to compare our 10+ year old car to brand new cars.

 

sorry man, but these #'s are WACK!

2003 BMW 330i $40,300 7.3 sec.

2003 BMW 530i $51,200 6.7 sec.

2003 Mercedes-Benz E-320 $54,000 7.4 sec

2003 Audi TT 1.8T $36,400 7.3 sec.

2003 Audi A4 3.0 $38,000 7.4 sec.

2003 Jaguar S-Type 3.0 $46,700 7.9 sec.

2003 Cadillac CTS $36,000 7.2 sec.

2003 Acura RSX Type-S $29,000 7.8 sec.

I can't agree with a single time listed above. Diff conditions and time can greatly affect the times, but all of your listed cars are slower than what most mag print. Are they all automatic or something? Something is diff not right. Just look at 530i vs 330i. NOT!
If you ask me, same driver, same course, all of those cars listed are FASTER than a 92 SC4 (with the exception of MAYBE the S-type Jag). Period.

 

Legends6spd,

I just printed what Car and Driver printed. I agree the 330i and RSX-S doesn't
seem accurate but the rest of the list I'm confident about. Also, remember that these
are the automatics and not manuals being tested to be fear to the SC.
Please feel free to look in Car and Driver yourself.
Trust me, I didn't make these #'s up.









1993 SC400 like new with a 175k!