Objectively, there’s a lot to like about the Lexus SC430. There’s Lexus’ superlative reliability and build quality, a creamy smooth 4.3 V8, a secure and convenient folding roof and the fact this was Lexus’ first luxury convertible. It sounds like a real winner on paper but, when it comes to subjective measures, it loses its appeal.
Perhaps the most bothersome part of the SC is that it was even called an SC. The first SC (nèe Toyota Soarer) was a smooth, well-proportioned and understated coupe, carrying on the proud tradition of the prestigious Soarer line. In part because it was the first Soarer designed in the Calty Design Research center in California, it fit perfectly into the Lexus line-up. Like the SC430, it wasn’t overtly sporty. Nevertheless, it was a grand tourer per the European definition – smooth, comfortable, but dynamically adept.
Then along came the SC430. Forget about grand touring, European-style. This car was designed for long, straight, smooth roads and little else. Body roll and understeer were abundant. The steering was numb. Ride quality wasn’t even that great, early models hobbled with run-flat tires.
Some minor mechanical tweaks a few years into the SC430’s run helped improve ride quality and tie down (moor?) the handling a little bit. There were running suspension changes in late 2002 and 2004, at least in European markets.
Despite its heavy American emphasis, the SC430 was actually designed at Toyota’s design center in France. Sotiris Kovos was the chief designer but, although he had done a fine job penning the pert and perky first-generation Toyota Yaris hatchback, his work on the SC430 was met with decidedly less critical acclaim. Despite measuring 14.7 inches shorter than the last generation of SC and a few inches shorter than a Mercedes-Benz CLK-Class, the car looked bloated (the SC430 was 1.1 inches wider than before).
There are perhaps two things about the SC430’s design that stand out the most, and for entirely the wrong reasons. Firstly, there’s it’s – oh, how do I put this delicately? – its enormous, fat ass. Unfortunately, the folding metal hardtop is partially to blame for that and Kovos wasn’t the only designer to struggle at gracefully styling a rear end that had so much junk in its trunk. The Great Coupe Convertible Epoch of the 2000s brought us many ill-proportioned designs, like the Ford Focus CC. Alas, it also yielded a few cars that managed not to look so rear-heavy, like the final Volvo C70. It was a difficult task but it was possible. The SC430, unfortunately, managed to look bad with either the roof up or down. From extreme angles it could look passable, but that was merely a ruse, like how an overweight person might hold their phone far up above their head when taking a selfie to disguise their bulk.
What was much easier for automotive designers was styling an attractive front-end. Here, in my opinion and in many others’, Kovos failed. It certainly looked contemporary with its overly large headlights, reminiscent of the frumpy Lexus LS430. Lexus’s grille design of the era was forgettable, however – some may argue they’ve overcompensated since then – and the SC430’s face was bland.
Then there was the SC’s image. Sure, the Germans and Jaguar generally had the luxury of heritage and entrenched cachet in their favour. An SC430 could’ve been almost as desirable and coveted but, thanks to its visual avoirdupois and cushy dynamics, it instead seemed tailor-made for middle-aged, female Realtors in Florida or wealthy snowbirds.
Although this was the most global SC yet, offered throughout European and Asia-Pacific markets, it was ironically the most niche, made-for-America Lexus to date. American critics, even those typically more dynamically-minded ones at Car & Driver, were a fan of the SC430 at launch. Critics elsewhere in the world, not so much.
At launch, the SC430 was priced around $4k higher than the Mercedes-Benz CLK430 convertible. Against the BMW 645ci convertible and Cadillac XLR, however, the SC430 was the value play – in 2004, it undercut both by around $13k.
Only the Cadillac matched the Lexus’s folding metal hardtop, the Bimmer and the Benz sticking with soft tops. With 300 horsepower and 325 pound-feet of torque, the SC430’s engine was competitive against the A209-series Mercedes-Benz CLK500, the XLR and the 645ci.
To the SC430’s credit, it sold considerably better in the US than its dated predecessor had in years. In its first couple of years, Lexus sold over 14,000 examples. The last time the previous SC had managed that feat was way back in 1993, though the SC430 never matched the SC300/400’s debut year figures of over 20,000 units.
Apart from the introduction of a six-speed automatic in 2006 to replace the five-speed and some minor visual tweaks, the SC430 was left more or less unchanged for the rest of its lengthy run. That gave it the bizarre novelty of being the last automobile from any major manufacturer to be sold in the US with a cassette player. With the introduction of the Lexus brand to Japan, this was the last generation of Toyota’s posh Soarer line, the car switching to Lexus badging in 2005. The SC430 was left to slowly peter out, quietly disappearing after 2010. Sales declined each year with just 328 sold in the US market in 2010.
Lexus eventually developed a flagship that earned international acclaim. The Lexus LC has drop-dead gorgeous styling, almost identical to the LF-LC concept that previewed it. It actually handles. It offers a choice of buttery smooth 5.0 V8 or a 3.5 V6 hybrid. Its cabin – Lexus’s fussy Remote Touch interface aside – is exquisitely detailed and bereft of the fake-looking wood afflicted on early-2000s Lexus models like the SC430. Although on paper it appears much pricier than the SC430 was, if you adjust for inflation it costs only a few thousand more.
This year, Lexus confirmed a convertible version – again, largely identical to the LC Convertible Concept – will be produced.
It was a pleasure to see Lexus finally offer a convertible, especially one with a V8 engine. Despite its virtues, however, the SC430 was disappointing. The lure of Lexus build quality and reliability was tempting but the car was unattractive. The promise of a plush boulevardier was enticing but ride quality, at least at first, simply wasn’t as good as one would expect. The clever hardtop took only 25 seconds to retract but that party trick was soon replicated by countless convertibles. You bought an SC430 because you wanted a Lexus convertible, not because it was the best convertible. Toyota’s luxury brand could do better. Fortunately, it appears to have done so with the upcoming LC convertible.
Related Reading:
Curbside Classic: 1997 Lexus SC 400 – V8-Powered Coupes From Japan Are Indeed A Rare Breed
Future Curbside Classic: 2004-2009 Cadillac XLR – The Allanté, Part II
I have seen these cars up-close. The build quaility is peerless. Yes, the rear seats are ludicrous and there are faster cars. However, overall, this is a real statement car. If Lancia were still in existence and independent, this would have been the kind of thing they would have made.
Agreed. The deviation from grand tourer coupe to open top cabriolet wasn’t an issue in my mind. The 1988 AeroCabin Soarer comes to mind. These were impeccably built, and very forward thinking for the time. The styling is an acquired taste, but best believe you got an infailabley reliable luxury GT at a relatively low price point. Two seater in reality, for sure, but an amazing experience for the price.
I’m going to play devil’s advocate here and say that I don’t find the SC 430 to look all that bad, especially not to the extent so many critics deride it. While I wouldn’t call it beautiful, I don’t think it’s ugly. It’s bland, like most Lexus’ were of the era. I also don’t find the rear to be all that bad considering it’s a folding-hardtop. Designers certainly did a better job with it than the hunch-back IS convertible that followed.
I agree with you I don’t think nondescript or bland = ugly. Sure not the most beautiful looking car in the world but I’d much rather look at it than pretty much anything Lexus offers now. Certainly not bland or nondescript but that doesn’t mean they are beautiful.
From a mechanical and quality of execution perspective, this was the best of its ilk. Dynamically it was either perfect or terrible, depending on the eyes of the beholder. But stylistically it had a serious case of the mumps; the author picked the right word… “bloated.”
What company promotes the guy who designed their subcompact to design the PLC for their Luxury division immediately afterwards?
I was a Toyota/Lexus fan until these and the 2001 Lexus ES debuted. These two cars marked the beginning of the watering-down of Lexus in my eyes. I remember the 2001 Lexus ES “$299 a month Lease Specials” vividly. Lexus knew they had a loser that had to sell on incentives.
It is no surprise that Infiniti made the greatest leaps and gains in the US market during this time period. Lexus was caught in an “Iacocca inspired era.” Cadillac still had mostly Northstars powering their cars. Lincoln had the choice of Jaguar derived LS or a re-worked chassis from 1977 under the Town Car. Acura was killing the golden goose by re-naming Legend RL and Intergra RSX.
Sad times when the preferred full-size sedan for me during this era was a toss-up between a 1977 chassis Mercury Marauder and a first gen Infiniti M45.
I always thought of that generation of ES as the best Century that Buick never built.
Seeing this car brings to mind the one couple I knew who owned one. Their tastes and motivations made them ideal target customers for the car, but not necessarily in a good way, at least as far as a luxury brand was concerned.
The husband was rich but cheap. He liked flash, but didn’t want to pay top dollar for it. For him, the Lexus was a “deal” compared to the German competition, and was loaded with gizmos. That plus Japanese reliability made it perfect in his mind.
But the car was the wife’s. Late middle-aged, with expensive tastes that somehow missed being stylish. From her attire to her home, it was clear she spent money, but the look was never right. Thus, once again, the SC430 was perfect.
Hers was white with the light beige interior and the bizarre orange burled wood trim (what was Lexus thinking with the orange-toned wood stains on this car?). It was just plain awkward and unattractive. It would never prompt anyone to turn their head to get a second look, or to dream “one day I’ll have one of these.” Thus it failed as a luxury car, even if it did everything “right” on paper.
While the couple has moved away, so I’m not sure what graces their driveway now, but I’d reckon that today they could be Genesis customers. They’d love the value and think that it has all the same features as luxury leaders, oblivious to the fact that valets would still park it in the back. Cachet is more elusive than features, no matter how much you spend.
We agree – I am not a fan of this design. Is it too much to call it a Lexus convertible wearing a sweatsuit? The car is simply shapeless – there is no tension in the design at all.
Also, isn’t a retracting hardtop that looks awkward with top both up and down sort of the norm?
A Sergio Tacchini track suit doesn’t make you Usain Bolt.
Blob. With hideous wheels. Don’t get me started on the down side.
These were among the first cars with TPMS. (Tire pressure monitors).
Story I heard was about somebody who purchased aftermarket wheels for this car and did not transfer the sensors to the new wheels. He tries to start the car. The car does not start because the car thinks all four tires are flat.
I’ve never heard of the TPMS system affecting the operation of the car, but I could be wrong.
It didn’t affect “start-ability”. I owned one and it was a fun car that was extremely reliable.
I visited Grapevine in Texas in 2006 and these were quite plentiful. I remember someone referring to it as a ‘grown up Audi TT’ when it first came out. In all honesty, it doesn’t look as striking as it ought to from a luxury brand, and it more calls to mind the Daihatsu Copen which came out in Japan around the same time.
Although I really don’t care much for him, Jeremy Clarkson really nailed it in his review of this car on the old Top Gear. It was the worst car ever for him, and he claimed it was designed perfectly for elderly Americans. Noted was the crap performance and handling, and the kicker was that it was the last car offered with a cassette tape player.
And, living in Retiree Central (a/k/a central Florida), I can attest that the ones I see on the road, both currently and when they were new, were piloted by elderly folks.
When you look at the car thinking that was what it was designed for, it makes sense. Very conservative styling, no real pretense at sporty, comfortable, and reliable. A metal top for those cold or rainy days when a cloth roof just does not seem enough. And room in that enormous rear for golf clubs. Retiree Nirvana!
For what it’s worth, all the British press I’ve seen was equally critical of the first generation SC/Soarer, which we in America (myself included) liked a lot. But this one … yuck. The only person I knew who owned one, got it as a replacement for a Mercedes 230 SLK. From compact supercharged 4 cylinder Mercedes to bloated V8 Lexus.
Could just be because I’m in the office, but top up it kinda looks like this to me.
Top down, a bit more like this…
OMG, you really do learn something new on CC each day!
Totally off topic here (Sorry), but I could never understand why the Post-It notes in my wife’s office supplies at home had the adhesive on alternate ends. The idea just seemed DUMB to me. The adhesive should be on the same end, like on a pad.
I had no idea such a device existed. Now her “stupid” post-it notes seem really “smart”.
Mechanical Designer/Engineer Here. Face Palm. Embarrassed. D’OH!
“it instead seemed tailor-made for middle-aged, female Realtors in Florida or wealthy snowbirds.”
I try not to let the vehicle’s stigma distract me from its virtues, e.g. “Miata’s a chick car!”, but this is about spot-on for this Lexus. The powertrain and build quality may have been exceptional, but the rest is a blunder and the Florida Realtor stigma is really too pungent to ignore.
The LC500 is a stunning car in person. That’s a masterclass on how to style a desirable luxury car.
I wish they hadn’t positioned it as a successor to the well-loved SC300/400 coupes. I wonder if the SC430 would have been less reviled then, but then again, it wouldn’t have made it a better car.
I have a 2003 it is a nice riding car the stereo is absolutely amazing and it shit and gets so opinions are owned by the one with it to each their own but to put down this car like some have done they obviously haven’t owned one I think they are great
Mark, you are totally right!…I am retired , and i do own a condo in Florida,!…and I love the 2002 silver one so much i also have a 2003 in Upstate New York…Also I was able to remodel that condo and get all the kitchen cabinets in the trunk, after multiple trips of course.!
I’m sorry but the LC is far from drop dead gorgeous in person. The overall shape is good, but you want to talk about rears that look overly large and misshapen look no further than the LC.
I remember the first one I saw in the flesh. It was in a parking lot and the elderly driver had to have his grandson?, late in life son? hop out and guide him into the parking spot and they weren’t particularly small spots either.
I just had to laugh as that near $100k car doesn’t have the simple parking sensors found on my wife’s lowly Ford.
I’m with you, but amplified. The LC is a geegaw, gimmicky design, in my opinion. It seems desperate and likely to look dated in about 6 minutes.
The SC 430 is no beauty, and perhaps, it’s even kind of campy, now, but it sure looks more timeless than the LC.
The best Lexus interiors came in the early to mid 2000s, and the SC430 is no exception.
Nice SC430 examples are easy to find in temperate California, and if you can live with the practicality shortcomings, I think this would make an excellent budget luxury car. The internet loves the LS430, but these deserve a look, too.
My parents just bought one to replace a motorcycle that was getting too hard for them to handle. Every time I see it, I’m still baffled how Lexus could make such an ugly car. BUT: I love driving it! The gadgets are out of date, of course, but the material quality is matched by few cars even today. It cruises mountain highways with aplomb, the wind protection is good, the stereo can fill the valleys with music… as long as you’re sitting inside and can’t see the outside, it’s spectacular. The experience of actually driving it is so good that I almost considered getting one for myself. Almost.
I see these are commanding about the same money here as the last-gen Thunderbird. Not that I’m about to spend the $$$$$, but anyone wanna advocate for one rather than the other?
Well, the SC430 definitely has a better interior.
And a better powertrain.
These never interested me because they were not an enthusiast car but Lexus apparently aimed at the Mercedes 380 SL replacement demographic and scored a bullseye because they sold a lot of them despite never really developing it over the model run.
The SC430 sticks in my mind as the last car sold in the US with a factory cassette deck and one of the most unlikely pro drift cars ever.
You could argue that enthusiasts were predisposed to dislike it, since it replaced the achingly-beautiful and thoroughly-competent SC300/400/Soarer. I used to think that was a large part of the reason I disliked it so. The Japanese seemed to have this thing about going from the heights of beauty to the depths of mundanity; think of the lovely Jaguaresque HD-series Mazda 929, and the soulless lump that replaced it later in the nineties. Wheels quoted some psychobabble from a Mazda exec trying to explain the style change; like me, they were Not Amused.
Then I remembered I have actually seen one of these, parked on a street in Geelong soon after release. It just sat there, blobbish. It’s not just an unworthy successor, it’s unattractive by any measure. There are faint traces of a kind of Mercedes/Bentley thing going, but without the latter’s finesse. It must take real talent to make such a dimensionally-small car look so big and heavy. that may have been the design brief, but why? Paint it green and it would look like a frog. Except for that spoiler; maybe that’s why it’s there…
Believe it or not, I have thought about finding one of these SC430’s in mint condition as my daily driver convertible in Texas. They are still a bit costly in nice shape (Im retired and cheap) . Plus, I’m getting too old for getting in and out of an older Vette (age 76), but I can’t seem to pull the trigger on any nice one if these SC430’s I find.
Maybe I’ll have a look at the IS convertible model that followed.
I don’t think any car has ever said, facelift, wrinkle cream, pictures of grandkids, pink sparkly phone case, day pass at Elizabeth Arden, and recent expensive divorce from wealthyish doctor/lawyer/orthodontist husband who dumped me for a trophy wife like this car does.
People deride the Reatta but isn’t this basically a bloated Reatta? it has a back seat only useful for a purse or purse dog, a two seater, premium convertible, with drivers totally uninterested in whatever performance capabilities it might have had.
Even with other convertibles, I can imagine a man driving a LeBaron or to somewhat less of an extent, a Solara. Perhaps even a Beetle or PT Cruiser if in a darker colour. I CANNOT for the life of me imagine a man driving this car. MTN said it looks just like a mouse and is correct. I have read that women will buy cars targeted to Men or Macho cars but men won’t buy feminine cars, and given the current craze for Wranglers and other SUVs, that is apparently true.
This would not make a good Realtor car as there is no back seat.
Then Buick went and copied this car for the Cascada.
Then Nissan decided to copy the hazy thinking for the convertible Murano.
If I remember correctly, the designer took cues from yachts on the French Riviera, which always struck me as an easy joke involving the equally bloated last generation Buick Riviera. Similar pricing and target markets, both having unfortunate connotations with boats. The launch wheel design was hideous, like a decent five spoke alloy with a small hubcap nailed on. And every Toyota from this era and the one or two previous eras had awkward rear wheel placement – a slightly too-short wheelbase, too-narrow rear track, bodywork that flared out over the rear wheels, and rear wheels that sat just a tad too far forward in the wheel wells. Very odd. This pervaded pretty much all Toyota/Lexus designs across multiple platforms and drive setups.
I quite like the first metre or so from the front, but everything after that is just awful. And the wheels – yuk.
I actually drove one of these a few years ago and the ride seemed quite jiggly – disappointing for a car of this kind.