Lexus IS 300
04-22-2013, 02:13 PM
#21
04-22-2013, 04:24 PM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Orange Park
Posts: 4,127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I bought one the first year they came out with the manual and hated it...traded it shortly after for an 03 Cobra. The IS300 had a lot of body roll and was just too slow for my tastes. I liked the seats and bought it with the intention of going forced induction but it just seemed to need way too much done to be a fun car so I swapped it for the Cobra. They are rock solid reliable, comfortable and look good...I always preferred the wagon version.
04-22-2013, 05:25 PM
#23
had one the S replaced and when i see them on the road today i always think i should've gotten rid of the wife’s car instead of the IS. or the thought of teaching her to drive a manual sooner which would be a year and half later.
what made the car great.
one, the size...some may argue it was too small especially in the back seats but we never had anyone back there and if we did they were there for 1/2 an hour tops. if it’s just you and one other person it’s a great car.
two, the handling...it was a hoot to drive for a sport sedan with double wishbone all around. it was nimble and quick footed for a sedan, it loved quick left to right transition type roads and the car never exhibited any oversteer at 7-8/10th driving, it was very neutral near the limit depending on how you drove, it rewarded you if you were smooth with your inputs. with its 215/45-17 all around you would think the car would be tail happy during such driving but it wasn't and all the 1st gen IS manuals had no VSC just trac. the car at the limit had more understeer and oversteer was only felt if coaxed via the throttle or wheel.
three, the engine... i couldn't fully appreciate it then but i do moreso now because they are nowhere to be found, inline 6. i will always be a high revving motor guy but that inline six was the epitomy of turbine smooth. when it revved from idle to 6400rpms it was unlike any V6 today or in the past 7 years. it was a low to mid-range motor that revved freely to its 6400 cutoff which i rarely touched, i always liked it between 3-5000rpms and it had enough power for me. it also sounded nice when rev matched with the windows up or down. mine had no bolt ons but when the IS did have an exhaust they sounded nice. it was aluminum heads with an iron block and that 2JZ was the last of the bullet proof Toyota engines.
four, the styling... i still think its best looking IS. it was clean and timeless the design, and the styling wasn't trendy even though it spawned a lot of copycat taillights. the 3 series of its time was the same way. you see a well taken care of 330i sedan or coupe on the road today it still looks good and not dated. i just loved the size from the length and width compared to the 2nd gen, which also made it more fun to drive. i also loved the stance. i lowered mine with tanabe nf springs that lowered it about .8" all around and i always said it should've came out the factory that way. it wasn't slammed but it was aggressive and the gunmetal wheels looked better as well. nice offsets when you look at directly from the front or rear or 3/4 rear view, it helped that the rear didn't have too much negative camber. the car looked nice standing still.
five, the little things...the manual wasn't the best but it was pretty precise, you always knew what gear you were in and it would be in the medium category in terms of throws. the gearing though was loooong, 3rd was at 93-5mph and 4th was 120mph plus. one thing i also miss, the car was just as stable at 70mph or 120mph, the car loved long stretches of freeway. it pulled in every gear, 5th was the overdrive but it still had enough without having to downshift to pass. the ride even lowered was great, it was luxury sport sedan smooth and ate every bump it hit without a shake inside. the driving position was great, not sports car low but low for a sedan. the dash was low as well which i miss in today’s cars and gave you a great view out during any type of driving. the pedals were perfectly placed for heel toe and was the first lexus to have drilled aluminum pedals i think. the clutch was effortless and was great in traffic. it wasn't electric the rack but i didn't find it slow or uncommunicative for a sport sedan, for a sedan it was great. the interior materials was ok for $25k car but not for $32-33k car, lexus could've used slightly better materials especially in the interior door area. loved the gauge cluster bin and who can forget the chronograph speedo. the seats was pretty good in the day and could've used a little more side bolsters which is one good thing in today's cars.
overall a great car that was very underrated during its time and i wish i had kept mine.
what made the car great.
one, the size...some may argue it was too small especially in the back seats but we never had anyone back there and if we did they were there for 1/2 an hour tops. if it’s just you and one other person it’s a great car.
two, the handling...it was a hoot to drive for a sport sedan with double wishbone all around. it was nimble and quick footed for a sedan, it loved quick left to right transition type roads and the car never exhibited any oversteer at 7-8/10th driving, it was very neutral near the limit depending on how you drove, it rewarded you if you were smooth with your inputs. with its 215/45-17 all around you would think the car would be tail happy during such driving but it wasn't and all the 1st gen IS manuals had no VSC just trac. the car at the limit had more understeer and oversteer was only felt if coaxed via the throttle or wheel.
three, the engine... i couldn't fully appreciate it then but i do moreso now because they are nowhere to be found, inline 6. i will always be a high revving motor guy but that inline six was the epitomy of turbine smooth. when it revved from idle to 6400rpms it was unlike any V6 today or in the past 7 years. it was a low to mid-range motor that revved freely to its 6400 cutoff which i rarely touched, i always liked it between 3-5000rpms and it had enough power for me. it also sounded nice when rev matched with the windows up or down. mine had no bolt ons but when the IS did have an exhaust they sounded nice. it was aluminum heads with an iron block and that 2JZ was the last of the bullet proof Toyota engines.
four, the styling... i still think its best looking IS. it was clean and timeless the design, and the styling wasn't trendy even though it spawned a lot of copycat taillights. the 3 series of its time was the same way. you see a well taken care of 330i sedan or coupe on the road today it still looks good and not dated. i just loved the size from the length and width compared to the 2nd gen, which also made it more fun to drive. i also loved the stance. i lowered mine with tanabe nf springs that lowered it about .8" all around and i always said it should've came out the factory that way. it wasn't slammed but it was aggressive and the gunmetal wheels looked better as well. nice offsets when you look at directly from the front or rear or 3/4 rear view, it helped that the rear didn't have too much negative camber. the car looked nice standing still.
five, the little things...the manual wasn't the best but it was pretty precise, you always knew what gear you were in and it would be in the medium category in terms of throws. the gearing though was loooong, 3rd was at 93-5mph and 4th was 120mph plus. one thing i also miss, the car was just as stable at 70mph or 120mph, the car loved long stretches of freeway. it pulled in every gear, 5th was the overdrive but it still had enough without having to downshift to pass. the ride even lowered was great, it was luxury sport sedan smooth and ate every bump it hit without a shake inside. the driving position was great, not sports car low but low for a sedan. the dash was low as well which i miss in today’s cars and gave you a great view out during any type of driving. the pedals were perfectly placed for heel toe and was the first lexus to have drilled aluminum pedals i think. the clutch was effortless and was great in traffic. it wasn't electric the rack but i didn't find it slow or uncommunicative for a sport sedan, for a sedan it was great. the interior materials was ok for $25k car but not for $32-33k car, lexus could've used slightly better materials especially in the interior door area. loved the gauge cluster bin and who can forget the chronograph speedo. the seats was pretty good in the day and could've used a little more side bolsters which is one good thing in today's cars.
overall a great car that was very underrated during its time and i wish i had kept mine.
04-23-2013, 05:03 AM
#24
Damn man, I've always liked the IS300, but after your write up now I want to own one! 
04-23-2013, 06:35 AM
#25
Registered User
Thread Starter
Same here. That was a great write up TRD, from a real seat time perspective. Hopefully I will be able to fine a good condition IS in manual in the next month or so while I get my Forester ready for a sell or trade. The IS sounds like it would be a fun little daily, especially since I'm 90% highway driving.
04-23-2013, 08:02 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I remember test driving one when I owned my Contour SVT. The Lexus had a nicer interior (it cost ~50% more, go figure) but that was about it. Both had horrid rear seats. The Ford motor felt just as strong thanks in the lighter Contour chassis. The Ford chassis was really tuned better and aside from a bit of FWD feel the Ford was just the better car to drive. No real shame there as the CSVT made it to C&D's best handling under $35k comparo. Still, I think the IS300 was a car that was better in theory than in practice. It was Toyota's attempt to take an existing JMD car and try to fill a perceived hole in the Lexus lineup.
04-23-2013, 10:26 AM
#27
I remember test driving one when I owned my Contour SVT. The Lexus had a nicer interior (it cost ~50% more, go figure) but that was about it. Both had horrid rear seats. The Ford motor felt just as strong thanks in the lighter Contour chassis. The Ford chassis was really tuned better and aside from a bit of FWD feel the Ford was just the better car to drive. No real shame there as the CSVT made it to C&D's best handling under $35k comparo. Still, I think the IS300 was a car that was better in theory than in practice. It was Toyota's attempt to take an existing JMD car and try to fill a perceived hole in the Lexus lineup.
to each his own. its like a Z owner telling an S owner that their car is better or vice versa but in this case its not the same. i drove the SVT contour in 2000 and while i didn't get a chance to push it, it had more in common with a gsr, itr, spec-v sentra and even its little brother the focus svt than a rwd sport sedan. the only thing they had in common was they both had sixes but dynamically they weren't even close. each had its pluses and minuses but nothing beats rwd braking at entry, mid corner and exit.
when the toyota released the news that they were coming out with a compact rwd sedan in 97-98 the car world took notice. at the time the only toyota sedan that was rwd in the u.s. market was the GS - too big, the LS - aarp, so for a lot of enthusiast the compact rwd sedan was a big deal. then i saw pics of the toyota rwd sports sedan in a magazine unveiled at an auto show. mind you we had internet but it wasn't like it is today and it was called the toyota progres, lets just say i was like wtf. it wasn't until a european auto show a few months later that the Lexus IS200 was shown and i must've looked at the pictures over and over and i remember one of my buddies saying "that car isn't making it here its for the european market only". he eventually ate his words in June of 2000 at the Lexus IS300 Tour at englishtown NJ.
yes, it did make it here but we didn't get the 2.0L V6 or the engine i wish it had which was 2.0L I4 3S-GE that revved to 7600rpms. i even remember reading a european (99) car mag that brought the altezza version to the UK and they referred to it as the true successor to the E30 M3 moreso than the E36 M3. i read that review more than a few times but the words that still sticks today is how "tossable the car was" how "lively the chassis was", but all that changed when they got their version which was the lexus IS200 that was down by about 50hp.
the car was developed with a lighter 4 cyl engine in mind and the 2JZ and 1G-FE was an afterthought when the american and euro market wanted the car. could they have built a better IS if the 2JZ was the engine of choice from get go, i'm sure they could have... but the US market IS should've gotten the 3S-GE or the 3SG*T*E if it were me. the car was headed by the right people (AE86, Supra) and tested relentlessly by the nurmeister.
Altezza Story: http://gazoo.com/racing/english/grmn...l_06/index.asp - great development read
04-23-2013, 10:39 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Palo Alto
Posts: 5,387
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I just didn't feel like the IS300 was as well tuned for performance driving. Do keep in mind that while RWD is a good thing, it's not the only thing when it comes to handling. The car that won the shootout to which I referred was not the Miata, BMW 318ti or the Camaro. It was the FWD Prelude. I don't recall what year the IS300 came out here but I first checked on out at Toyota's Tokyo showroom (an impressive affair if you can make it) in 1999.
My point in mentioning the Ford wasn't so much to trumpet my old car. I wouldn't generally suggest people go CSVT hunting as all of them are at least 13 years old now. No, my point was really that I didn't find the Lexus to be anything overly special. I liked it but I also have liked a number of Volvos. Secure but heavy.
You mentioned the I4 motor. That might have saved the car. The Ford, despite being FWD didn't feel heavy. The I6 in the Toyota was many great things but light it wasn't. I could see a motor that dropped say 200lb of front axle weight would probably really help the car. But that's not what we had here and not what I drove.
to each his own. its like a Z owner telling an S owner that their car is better or vice versa but in this case its not the same. i drove the SVT contour in 2000 and while i didn't get a chance to push it, it had more in common with a gsr, itr, spec-v sentra and even its little brother the focus svt than a rwd sport sedan. the only thing they had in common was they both had sixes but dynamically they weren't even close. each had its pluses and minuses but nothing beats rwd braking at entry, mid corner and exit.
when the toyota released the news that they were coming out with a compact rwd sedan in 97-98 the car world took notice. at the time the only toyota sedan that was rwd in the u.s. market was the GS - too big, the LS - aarp, so for a lot of enthusiast the compact rwd sedan was a big deal. then i saw pics of the toyota rwd sports sedan in a magazine unveiled at an auto show. mind you we had internet but it wasn't like it is today and it was called the toyota progres, lets just say i was like wtf. it wasn't until a european auto show a few months later that the Lexus IS200 was shown and i must've looked at the pictures over and over and i remember one of my buddies saying "that car isn't making it here its for the european market only". he eventually ate his words in June of 2000 at the Lexus IS300 Tour at englishtown NJ.
yes, it did make it here but we didn't get the 2.0L V6 or the engine i wish it had which was 2.0L I4 3S-GE that revved to 7600rpms. i even remember reading a european (99) car mag that brought the altezza version to the UK and they referred to it as the true successor to the E30 M3 moreso than the E36 M3. i read that review more than a few times but the words that still sticks today is how "tossable the car was" how "lively the chassis was", but all that changed when they got their version which was the lexus IS200 that was down by about 50hp.
the car was developed with a lighter 4 cyl engine in mind and the 2JZ and 1G-FE was an afterthought when the american and euro market wanted the car. could they have built a better IS if the 2JZ was the engine of choice from get go, i'm sure they could have... but the US market IS should've gotten the 3S-GE or the 3SG*T*E if it were me. the car was headed by the right people (AE86, Supra) and tested relentlessly by the nurmeister.
Altezza Story: http://gazoo.com/racing/english/grmn...l_06/index.asp - great development read
My point in mentioning the Ford wasn't so much to trumpet my old car. I wouldn't generally suggest people go CSVT hunting as all of them are at least 13 years old now. No, my point was really that I didn't find the Lexus to be anything overly special. I liked it but I also have liked a number of Volvos. Secure but heavy.
You mentioned the I4 motor. That might have saved the car. The Ford, despite being FWD didn't feel heavy. The I6 in the Toyota was many great things but light it wasn't. I could see a motor that dropped say 200lb of front axle weight would probably really help the car. But that's not what we had here and not what I drove.
Originally Posted by rockville' timestamp='1366732925' post='22493014
I remember test driving one when I owned my Contour SVT. The Lexus had a nicer interior (it cost ~50% more, go figure) but that was about it. Both had horrid rear seats. The Ford motor felt just as strong thanks in the lighter Contour chassis. The Ford chassis was really tuned better and aside from a bit of FWD feel the Ford was just the better car to drive. No real shame there as the CSVT made it to C&D's best handling under $35k comparo. Still, I think the IS300 was a car that was better in theory than in practice. It was Toyota's attempt to take an existing JMD car and try to fill a perceived hole in the Lexus lineup.
to each his own. its like a Z owner telling an S owner that their car is better or vice versa but in this case its not the same. i drove the SVT contour in 2000 and while i didn't get a chance to push it, it had more in common with a gsr, itr, spec-v sentra and even its little brother the focus svt than a rwd sport sedan. the only thing they had in common was they both had sixes but dynamically they weren't even close. each had its pluses and minuses but nothing beats rwd braking at entry, mid corner and exit.
when the toyota released the news that they were coming out with a compact rwd sedan in 97-98 the car world took notice. at the time the only toyota sedan that was rwd in the u.s. market was the GS - too big, the LS - aarp, so for a lot of enthusiast the compact rwd sedan was a big deal. then i saw pics of the toyota rwd sports sedan in a magazine unveiled at an auto show. mind you we had internet but it wasn't like it is today and it was called the toyota progres, lets just say i was like wtf. it wasn't until a european auto show a few months later that the Lexus IS200 was shown and i must've looked at the pictures over and over and i remember one of my buddies saying "that car isn't making it here its for the european market only". he eventually ate his words in June of 2000 at the Lexus IS300 Tour at englishtown NJ.
yes, it did make it here but we didn't get the 2.0L V6 or the engine i wish it had which was 2.0L I4 3S-GE that revved to 7600rpms. i even remember reading a european (99) car mag that brought the altezza version to the UK and they referred to it as the true successor to the E30 M3 moreso than the E36 M3. i read that review more than a few times but the words that still sticks today is how "tossable the car was" how "lively the chassis was", but all that changed when they got their version which was the lexus IS200 that was down by about 50hp.
the car was developed with a lighter 4 cyl engine in mind and the 2JZ and 1G-FE was an afterthought when the american and euro market wanted the car. could they have built a better IS if the 2JZ was the engine of choice from get go, i'm sure they could have... but the US market IS should've gotten the 3S-GE or the 3SG*T*E if it were me. the car was headed by the right people (AE86, Supra) and tested relentlessly by the nurmeister.
Altezza Story: http://gazoo.com/racing/english/grmn...l_06/index.asp - great development read
04-23-2013, 10:45 AM
#29
Originally Posted by WolfpackS2k' timestamp='1366722218' post='22492557
Damn man, I've always liked the IS300, but after your write up now I want to own one!
Same here. That was a great write up TRD, from a real seat time perspective. Hopefully I will be able to fine a good condition IS in manual in the next month or so while I get my Forester ready for a sell or trade. The IS sounds like it would be a fun little daily, especially since I'm 90% highway driving.they could use a smaller IS to compete with the compact affordable rwd cars that's coming and they wouldn't have to go far in finding one. use the current GT86/FRS chassis and give it another 20-30hp with a slight bump in redline and hopefully weight would only increase by 100lbs. 2800lbs, 4 doors, compact rwd, high revving N/A motor to 7800rpms. hhhm...sounds like a perfect sport sedan for me. it would be the real "4 door sports car".
04-23-2013, 10:54 AM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: North Austin
Posts: 391
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
heres mine:
BlueStone Metallic (super hard to fine)
5spd
torsen lsd too
had her forsale on here as i wanted to buy a fd rx7, but no interest lol owell. Just ordered stance coils
BlueStone Metallic (super hard to fine)
5spd
torsen lsd too
had her forsale on here as i wanted to buy a fd rx7, but no interest lol owell. Just ordered stance coils