SC430 - 2nd Gen (2001-2010)

Car & Driver (SC430 vs. CLK430)

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 04-16-02 | 09:02 PM
  #46  
JAC JZS's Avatar
JAC JZS
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,772
Likes: 1
From: California
Default

Originally posted by JohnnySC
i had a clk for a little bit and we traded it for an X5. The car is terrible and I would never even want a ride in one again. The dealership experience is terrible and the interior is very spartan.
The CLK chassis is based on the last gen(94-00) C-class, which is a very poor design. It offers a substandard ride and poor handling. It is an(poorly) aging chassis that was not very good to begin with. It couldn't compete with many models of it's day(i.e. SC3/400) and surely cannot compare with most of todays models(i.e. SC430).

Last edited by JAC JZS; 04-16-02 at 09:10 PM.
Old 04-17-02 | 08:32 AM
  #47  
LexusPride's Avatar
LexusPride
Lead Lap
 
Joined: Mar 2001
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
From: Massachusetts
Default

But I did ask one question that never got answered. C/D reports the SC430s 0-60 time of 6.7. Why do they get times like this if Lexus claims a time of 5.9?
The reason that it didn't get answered is because this is what you asked:
my major concern is how the hell they got the sc's time of 0-60 in 6.6 and not the lexus claimed 6.6? Whats wrong with them?
It made no sense, so no one replied.
Old 04-17-02 | 03:32 PM
  #48  
LexFather
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Default

The CLK chassis is based on the last gen(94-00) C-class, which is a very poor design. It offers a substandard ride and poor handling. It is an(poorly) aging chassis
Thank goodness someone pointed this out. 50k (hell 70k AMG) for a C-class platform , no thanks....
Old 04-17-02 | 04:29 PM
  #49  
Toog4me's Avatar
Toog4me
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 0
From: California
Default

woops my bad.. imusta been doing something while i was typing.
Old 04-18-02 | 02:07 PM
  #50  
JAC JZS's Avatar
JAC JZS
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,772
Likes: 1
From: California
Default

Originally posted by 1SICKLEX


Thank goodness someone pointed this out. 50k (hell 70k AMG) for a C-class platform , no thanks....
No problem
Old 04-19-02 | 07:23 AM
  #51  
letS4nicate's Avatar
letS4nicate
Driver School Candidate
 
Joined: Apr 2002
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
From: MA
Default What is the answer to this question had it been worded correctly?

Originally posted by LexusPride

The reason that it didn't get answered is because this is what you asked:

It made no sense, so no one replied.
Old 04-19-02 | 11:00 AM
  #52  
JAC JZS's Avatar
JAC JZS
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 1,772
Likes: 1
From: California
Default

The point is don't ever go solely by what magazines say. Go by what you or your friends get at the track(E.T. 1/4 mile). Occasionally magazines will show real world numbers for there cars but only use that as a second reference. Every car magazines #'s are going to vary(location, temperature, altitude, driver, condition of the vehicle, how the test was done, etc...) so you can't really question why one magazine gets this # and another magazine gets another #.
Old 04-19-02 | 05:40 PM
  #53  
Toog4me's Avatar
Toog4me
Lexus Champion
 
Joined: Mar 2002
Posts: 2,357
Likes: 0
From: California
Default

So i realize you cant go solely by one mag. but no other mag. has gotten the lexus claimed 5.9


Im not raggin on the car or anything, but have any of you ever gone to the track and gotten specific times?
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Solman
SC430 - 2nd Gen (2001-2010)
22
08-23-10 08:44 AM
gpz
SC430 - 2nd Gen (2001-2010)
28
04-08-09 09:11 AM
MikeinLA
SC430 - 2nd Gen (2001-2010)
12
05-24-07 08:23 PM
ES3
SC430 - 2nd Gen (2001-2010)
10
08-09-05 07:55 AM
jimmit
SC- 1st Gen (1992-2000)
5
09-17-02 02:31 AM




All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:20 AM.