Last post on Jul 24, 2010 at 8:52 AM
You are in the Lexus SC 430
What is this discussion about?
Lexus SC 430, Convertible
#243 of 1200 Edmunds TMV SL500$79k vs. SC430$61k
May 01, 2002 (1:56 am)
2003 Mercedes-Benz SL-Class Luxury Convertible (2002)
True Market Value:
$79,143 - $122,816
What Edmunds Says: The most technologically advanced two-seater currently sold (despite its navigation system).
Pros: Seductive style, retractable hardtop, commendable performance, ride and handling.
Cons: Heavy for a "sports car", limited cargo capacity, nav system is old-tech CD-rom format.
2002 Lexus SC 430 Luxury Convertible
True Market Value:
What Edmunds Says: This is the bragging rights car du jour, and if you're willing to sacrifice a bit of driving dynamics for the latest cool gadgetry, this is the car for you.
Pros: Luxurious comfort and convenience features, avant-garde styling, wonderful engine performance, retractable hard-top, Lexus quality.
Cons: Sparse cargo space, cramped (nearly useless) rear seats.
#244 of 1200 Yeah, but . . .
May 01, 2002 (4:53 am)
After almost a year, I must say that I find the cramped, nearly useless rear seats highly preferable to no rear seats at all.
May 02, 2002 (12:13 am)
#246 of 1200 Let me count the ways
May 02, 2002 (4:25 am)
Why do I like the back seat?
The little kids love it back there;
my groceries prefer it to the trunk, and it's much easier to put them there when the top is down;
my briefcase loves it back there, and my gym bag rides there all the time;
the doggie bag rides home there from the swell restaurant that served me too much food last Saturday night,
and it's pretty good luggage space for a trip to the beach.
I would like a bigger back seat, of course, like the seats in my old SC430, but if I wanted a 4 passenger car, I would have bought one. I consider the SC430 a two passenger car, and find the back useful on occassion. If the configuration were as a two seater, like a boxter or an SLK, or even the SL500, then the option to use that space is gone, and the car is less versitile.
. . . and what's the alternative, making the less accessible trunk a little larger?
I got no complaints.
May 02, 2002 (7:11 am)
Well other than having small kids to ride back there I can't see the need for them. Lexus did it mainly for insurance reasons. Other than kids all the things you listed can ride on the rear shelf of the SL, so the seats seem pretty useless like they said.
#248 of 1200 Back Seats
May 02, 2002 (7:48 am)
Agree with Squidd99 on the value of back seats.When driving in warm weather groceries such as ice cream will not melt because the A/C keeps it cool. My wife keeps her sun shield and Yoga mat on the back seat- much easier to use when needed- and you do not clutter the passenger area-a good safety point. Also it is thrilling place for small children to enjoy especially with the top down. She has nothing but happiness when driving this remarkable machine-even after nearly 11 months of ownership.I only get a ride to Church and help cleaning it on the weekends!
#249 of 1200 ..I agree with Squid99...
May 02, 2002 (4:06 pm)
..on the backseat. I consider the car a two seater, but I can't wipe off my umbrella's smile, when it rides back there.
May 03, 2002 (2:01 pm)
"The little kids love it back there;"
Goodness, hardly a viable place to stash kids under 3 for any length of time... unless they are being punished
"my groceries prefer it to the trunk, and it's much easier to put them there when the top is down;"
Because the trunk can't hold many groceries in the first place. Kind of a waste of two sculpted leather seats, don't you think? Believe the SL500 "shelf" behind the seats will do quite a decent job holding grocery bags.
"my briefcase loves it back there, and my gym bag rides there all the time;"
Does a briefcase or gym bag really know it's riding on a useless seat, or would it be as comfortable on a carpeted "shelf"? Seems like a waste of good leather!
"the doggie bag rides home there from the swell restaurant that served me too much food last Saturday night,"
Probably the silliest reason I've ever heard to have useless seats
"and it's pretty good luggage space for a trip to the beach."
Again, hardly a reason not to consider a true 2-seater. A primary reason for the back seat in this car, as stated by merc1, is to reduce insurance fees for the vehicle. Have not checked, but guessing the SC430 is cheaper to insure than the SL (discounting the obvious replacement cost differential due to sticker differences)
A 2-seater does not necessarily mean useless space behing the front seats. The Corvette has over 20 cu. ft. of storage in the Coupe. Believe the back seat has little to do with the decision to drive the SC430... it's a very emotional decision vs. pragmatic. In our home, my wife would love the SC... I would lean toward the SL. Both very nice, just would rather be a passenger in the SC with my wife driving.
Saw a red SC with pale ivory interior at the Atlanta Auto Show... couldn't get the image of Elton John driving this car down Peachtree out of my head. Not a "man's" car! Beautifully finished machine, however.
#251 of 1200 ...lovemyclk.....you
May 03, 2002 (2:55 pm)
...have no sense of humor...lighten up.
May 03, 2002 (5:43 pm)
That guy has too much time on his hands to type that serious reply to my little comments about the little back seat.
And the point he made about the seats was . . .
well.. . .
er . . .
Let me read it again when I have the time and I'll get back to you.