LS430 vs. F50 has anyone driven both

[ahmed_wasim]

I have read the reviews and people rate LS430 ride quality far superior than latest gen Q45s. As I prefer ride quality over handling I test drove an 03 LS430 and couldn't feel much difference. Also LS430 felt sluggish as compared to my Q, although the numbers say that 0-60 on an LS is better than Q45.

Anyone else has driven both? How do you compare them?

[maxnix]

BadQ45t has.

If you read the reviews, most prefer the F50 for not being a float.

[Q45man1]

I test drove two models of 03 LS430 (ultra luxury package and base). They are both nice riding cars and very smooth. But when I drove the 02 Q45 I felt at home. I rate first handling over ride quality although the Q is not to be outdone with luxury amenities.

If you like luxury go with Lexus. But performance + luxury + value = Q45

Good luck!

[IceCubeFoSho]

I prefer the style, and the technology in the Q alot more. Things so simple like voice activated radio can impress so many people even though its in a 6 year old car.

The ride quality in the Q feels more "Tuned" while the Lexus sort of makes you feel like you aren't on the road anymore, instead your on a cloud or a row of tempur pedic matresses. I don't like the latter so much.

[Q45tech]

Mostly tires and alignment numbers. Either car can be changed easily except for steering feel/boost/isolation.

[BadQ45t]

I have drove both. The LS430 is like an electric car driven by a gas engine. IT does everything with great insulation in just just perfect fashion. The Q is more aggressive in ride, they both felt equally powerful. The LS will do a bit better gas mileage wise and has more back seat and trunk.

If you want a more sporty car and the back seat is not that big of a deal, the Q i s a great choice.

If you want a very big back seat and don't drive "spirited" than the LS cannot be beat.

[qship96]

The LS interior overall feels/looks like you are riding in a car a couple steps above the Q class and price wise.

It has been said overall the Q is the better vehicle for the driver....and the LS is the better car for the passangers

Certainly the Lexus has more panache {Infiniti needs to wake up if they want to play with the bigboys at this level}

[tmak26b]

I thought you were comparing a Ferrari F50 for a second there.

[Q45tech]

"a car a couple steps above the Q" Very true by the time you equally equip a LS460, you are paying over $10-15,000 more than the budget Q45.

A properly equipt LS460 will MSRP $72-$76K

[StarPD]

Mostly tires and alignment numbers. Either car can be changed easily except for steering feel/boost/isolation.

Please explain in detail, at least for the F50.I suspect I'm not the only F50 owner who would like to alter and improve handling.

Thanks.

[szh]

Back in 2004, my boss compared the Lexus 430 to the Q45 ... for a number of "one after the other" test drives.

He does not push his car much at all, but the handling of the Q was so much better (the 430 felt numb) that it was a no-brainer for him. So, he drives a 2004 Q45 ...

Z

[Q45tech]

Assuming F50 owners have the 18" option wheels Michelin PS2 tires in 245/45/18..........inflated to 80% of max cold especially on front.

Assuming the F50 have over 30k new oem shocks front and rear along with new rubber bushings.

Since the questioner resides in Arizona rubber has an extremely short peak life due to heat.................tires and bushings

[StarPD]

Assuming F50 owners have the 18" option wheels Michelin PS2 tires in 245/45/18..........inflated to 80% of max cold especially on front.

Assuming the F50 have over 30k new oem shocks front and rear along with new rubber bushings.

Since the questioner resides in Arizona rubber has an extremely short peak life due to heat.................tires and bushings

I have very recent Bridgestone RE050A Pole Position 245/45/18 tires, which are reputed to be among the best for handling, so not much improvement can be had with tires. I run them at 35 PSI front and 38 rear. You made mention of alignment numbers though. It's my understanding that very little can be changed with respect to alignment on F50s. Can you please elaborate on how alignment can be changed to be effective in improving handling?

Thanks.

[maxnix]

I run them at 35 PSI front and 38 rear.

Since a preponderance of the wheight is on the front, I think your tire pressures should be reversed when not loaded. Might partially explain your car's tendency to understeer. You could go as high as 40 psi in the front.

Adjustable RUCA could set your camber closer to O° to counteract a little of the understeer also.

[StarPD]

Since a preponderance of the wheight is on the front, I think your tire pressures should be reversed when not loaded. Might partially explain your car's tendency to understeer. You could go as high as 40 psi in the front.

Adjustable RUCA could set your camber closer to O° to counteract a little of the understeer also.

Adjustable RUCA? Not sure what that means.As for tire pressures, Dennis Q45Tech previously suggested running around 3 PSI higher over factory all around, and rears around 3 or 4 PSI higher in rear to increase rear roll stiffness to reduce understeer. I think higher front pressures than rear would improve steering response, but I don't want to aggravate the already almost unacceptable understeer. I had to muscle the car around sharp curves at speed in the mountains on my trip, and we went through a LOT of mountain ranges. My '94 "t" with HICAS was a joy in curves, with just the right amount of slight oversteer to allow accurate tracking in long high-speed curves and beautiful bite in decreasing radius curves. This F50 is a real monster in the same kind of curves, and decreasing radius ones are a real bear. The front end pushes far too much for a car of it's type. Somehow, I HAVE to reduce the excessive understeer. There is no alternate rear sway bar, so that's out of the question. I suspect that possibly the VDS is contributing to the understeer too, but turning it off every time I get in curves is a non-starter. Besides, that doesn't really help much.

Comments please on all of this from yourself and Dennis?

[Q45tech]

Adjustable suspension can be created with CUSTOM aftermarket parts or just shims and creativity.

Think nominal front camber is -0.25 which might be 0.5 degrees too little for your tires.........old Q used -0.75 degrees.

Study your rear suspension you will see it is also set mild for tires.

Most performance tires are designed for -0.5 ngative camber minimum with negative 0.5 to 1.0 camber as ideal.

Tires should be inflated based on weight on them.

[StarPD]

Adjustable suspension can be created with CUSTOM aftermarket parts or just shims and creativity.

Think nominal front camber is -0.25 which might be 0.5 degrees too little for your tires.........old Q used -0.75 degrees.

Study your rear suspension you will see it is also set mild for tires.

Most performance tires are designed for -0.5 ngative camber minimum with negative 0.5 to 1.0 camber as ideal.

Tires should be inflated based on weight on them.

Okay, so now I need to have special suspension components made to enable camber adjustment. Sounds pretty expensive to me, and I don't have that kind of money. Which parts would have to be custom made to allow for camber adjustment?

Knowing which tires I have, what pressures would you suggest that won't make understeer even worse than it already is, and might even mitigate it somewhat?

Also, do you suspect the VDS is a major contributing cause of understeer? Or is it suspension settings alone?

I really need to find some affordable way to kill the excessive understeer on this car, and I can only suspect that other F50 owners either don't appreciate the way a good HICAS equipped G50 steers and handles, or don't drive fast on curvy roads at higher speeds. That I haven't seen any other F50 owners compaining asbout understeer makes me wonder if something is wrong with just my car.

Again, comments appreciated.

[maxnix]

1.) Adjustable RUCA? Not sure what that means.

2.) As for tire pressures, Dennis Q45Tech previously suggested running around 3 PSI higher over factory all around, and rears around 3 or 4 PSI higher in rear to increase rear roll stiffness to reduce understeer.

3.) I think higher front pressures than rear would improve steering response, ...

1.) Adjustable rear upper control arms. Most good and strong ones from aftermarket suppliers like SPL will have one that will accomodate a Q45 suspension.

2.) Never read the part about rear tire pressure requiring higherpressure than heavier front unless load is a factor (2 rear passengers and a trunk full of luggage).

3.) Try it and see what happens. Think about the correlation between load carrying capacity and reduction of slip angles when a tire is at higher psi within its specified operating range.

[StarPD]

1.) Adjustable rear upper control arms. Most good and strong ones from aftermarket suppliers like SPL will have one that will accomodate a Q45 suspension.

2.) Never read the part about rear tire pressure requiring higherpressure than heavier front unless load is a factor (2 rear passengers and a trunk full of luggage).

3.) Try it and see what happens. Think about the correlation between load carrying capacity and reduction of slip angles when a tire is at higher psi within its specified operating range.

Okay, so do you or anyone else know of anyone who makes an adjustable RUCA for the F50?

And what about the front end? Q45Tech suggest increasing front camber. What specifically do I need to accomplish that?

I'll try resetting tire pressures in the reverse of what they are now, 38 front and 35 rear instead of 35 front and 38 rear.

[maxnix]

Best way to increase camber front and rear would be to find some Eibach Pro springs if any are made for the F50.

[Q45tech]

The problem with using lowering to increase camber is you change the nominal point on the camber curve..................when the opposite wheel body raises 1" in a curve that camber goes more positive.

http://www.auto-ware.com/setup/cam_curv.htm

[tmak26b]

What performance tires want .5 degree? With camber, it's usually the more the better. Of course you have to be careful as you start wearing tires out after about 1.2 degree camber. On a big car like the Q, it's not going to turn it into a 350z going from stock to a more aggressive alignment. The car will feel more lively, but you have to see if it is worth your time.

Adjustable suspension can be created with CUSTOM aftermarket parts or just shims and creativity.

Think nominal front camber is -0.25 which might be 0.5 degrees too little for your tires.........old Q used -0.75 degrees.

Study your rear suspension you will see it is also set mild for tires.

Most performance tires are designed for -0.5 ngative camber minimum with negative 0.5 to 1.0 camber as ideal.

Tires should be inflated based on weight on them.

[Q45tech]

Don't confuse the inability of the vehicle suspension to hold a tire perfectly in a vertical line.

PREnegativeCAMBER is added to fix the inferiority of the street suspension.

A race car will have very little body roll so there is very little camber change and the tire can have minimal camber.

A street car can have 3" of body roll which can change camber 5 degrees unless like the early Q the twisted upper link matched body roll to correct camber.

If the suspension design is not up to snuff all one can do is dial in excessive static camber to make the tire correct at what ever load [G's] one desires.

The problem with excessive PREnegativeCAMBER is that anything over 1 DEGREE radically reduces straight ahead braking performance by distorting the tread patch.

[Q45tech]

You are correct however NOTHING can make a 4,000 pound vehicle handle as well as a 3,400 pounder.[NASCAR]

Unfortunately street cars are designed with inadequate front tires [load index] and too wide rear tires to create understeer to avoid power on oversteer...............and to fit into a front end design for parallel parking.

Upgrading the front tires from a 6-7" tread width to a 9-10" width can do wonders.

255/50/16 with a tread wear of 160 and Hoosier Comps with a 40 are still available.http://www.racegoodyear.com/tires/pdf/asphalt.pdf

[tmak26b]

I dont know about the Q45 specifically, but unless the car has some f%&*ed up suspension (my 1st gen doesnt feel that f%&ed up) . It is not going to have a 3 degree change in camber. If anything, toe is going to change more dramatically than camber.

If you put wider and more aggressive tires, you make the car faster simply because of more grip through the tires. Yet you are not going to change the geometry of the suspension by changing your tires or even wheels alone.

I have a set of R compounds on my other car, they simply increase grip and hide some of the issues like understeer. They are not going to turn a boat into a rocketship, I think people has to realize that.

You are correct however NOTHING can make a 4,000 pound vehicle handle as well as a 3,400 pounder.[NASCAR]

Unfortunately street cars are designed with inadequate front tires [load index] and too wide rear tires to create understeer to avoid power on oversteer...............and to fit into a front end design for parallel parking.

Upgrading the front tires from a 6-7" tread width to a 9-10" width can do wonders.

255/50/16 with a tread wear of 160 and Hoosier Comps with a 40 are still available.http://www.racegoodyear.com/tires/pdf/asphalt.pdf