Why he left Lexus Ownership

[emjay82]

This guy ran the largest F group on Facebook with 14,000 followers. Interesting to get everyone's thoughts.... It's a 2 part video.... 

 

[noby76]

This guy might have over 14,000 but he is not a true performance guy. we was comparing apples and oranges.. he kept on going on about how the RC-F lacks tourqe... No it doesnt lack torque for an NA engine. infact the 5.0 in the RCF produces the maximum torque per litre an NA engine produces which is between 100 to 110 NM per litre.

most high performance NA engines do not produce anymore torque per litre than this figure. The ZL1 hes currently driving is supercharged. the new M3, M5, E63, C63, RS6 are all Bi-Turbo engines which translates to having more power and  the ability to artificially generate ample torque at low-mid RPM. 

The RC-F is indeed a heavy car and could do with some weight loss... lets wait and see the turbo engines Lexus releases for their new F performance models...

Video below proves a TRACK car as he puts it does not need to have a lot of torque or 650 BHP to be fun to drive. 

 

 

[emjay82]

Good points made there @noby76. Obviously Lexus realise they need to up their game with the V8 twin turbo LCF. 

[Guest]

The attraction of an NA engine isn't it's figures - it's the engine character, throttle response, predictability in the wet and dry, maintenance and servicing, reliability. 

 

[Big Rat]

I doubt very much the American will have the reliability from his American car just wonder if he will tell the long term truth about that, theier build quality is a joke, so much for his large following and many track days and so on have clearly not taught him very much about engine characteristics and long term reliability.

Big Rat

 

[mrfunex]

It's very easy to get sucked into chasing numbers with this sort of car. I personally, couldn't care less whether the ISF/RCF/etc has 400bhp or 600bhp. The difference on the road will be negligible and after a track day at Silverstone which is a big power circuit , I would suggest not massively important there either. It's all in the balance and the delivery.

That being said, the ZL1 is supposed to be rather good!

[Wellsey]

I do agree with him. Even though I have just got into the F brand. When the time does come to replace my car, I can't see myself getting another lexus if they keep producing cars in a similar vain with this engine. 

Yes, the tech keeps improving but the driving dynamics haven't moved on much. It'll be a completely different matter when/if the twin turbo becomes available or they produce a lightweight special.

[Guest]

21 minutes ago, Wellsey said:

 

Yes, the tech keeps improving but the driving dynamics haven't moved on much. 

What, regarding the dynamics on the RC-F, would you alter?

[Big Rat]

Driving dynamics of the RCF well I've driven it and the GSF 'Spiritedly ' on numerous occasions and they are a very well sorted cars, GSF has the edge IMO.

Just watch this video especially from 3.35 onwards...... controllability in all conditions on a public road even when having fun is the name of the game 😏

 

Big Rat

[Big Rat]

25 minutes ago, Comedian said:

What, regarding the dynamics on the RC-F, would you alter?

@Comedian My twopennyworth.. none 😊

See my next post 

Big Rat

[Wellsey]

46 minutes ago, Comedian said:

What, regarding the dynamics on the RC-F, would you alter?

I'm not saying the RC-F and GS-F are bad cars, they just don't seem to move the game on too much from what I already have. Driving characteristics wise.

I absolutely love driving mine (which is shown by my average of 17 mpg from most tanks) and I'm looking to keep it for a good few years yet. When I do come to replace it though, it'll be for something a bit lighter footed. Just feel that the sense of mass does dull the experience somewhat. I tend to mix up my cars a bit and don't look for the same recipe with newer ingredients.

Saying all this though, if anyone asks me what to buy with mid 30k/40k, I do always mention the RC-F as a great used proposition.

[Big Rat]

@Wellsey A normally asperated large capacity rear wheel drive petrol car that's a bit Lardy suits this grey old man. 😂

Big Rat

[Wellsey]

3 minutes ago, Big Rat said:

@Wellsey A normally asperated large capacity rear wheel drive petrol car that's a bit Lardy suits this grey old man. 😂

Big Rat

And there's nowt wrong with that!! 

[Guest]

I'm not saying the RC-F and GS-F are bad cars, they just don't seem to move the game on too much from what I already have. Driving characteristics wise.

I understand your point of view. Not critiquing your view in any way. I'm genuinely curious about your comparison between them having driven both (I assume). I have read other people say they are night and day different yet you seem to disagree.


There are some advantages to a bit of weight on a road car.



Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[emjay82]

I wouldn't say it's night and day, an upgrade,  sure, along with a much more modern interior. I do see it as an upgrade to a newer version rather than a considerable step up. Currently 20k on top of the ISF is alot for a visual upgrade. 

[Guest]

I wouldn't say it's night and day, an upgrade,  sure, along with a much more modern interior. I do see it as an upgrade to a newer version rather than a considerable step up. Currently 20k on top of the ISF is alot for a visual upgrade. 

You've driven both? I haven't you see.

How do you get to 20k difference?


Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[emjay82]

Yep driven both within 30 mins of each other. 

Cheapest 2008 ISF £15K, cheapest RCF 35k. I don't think I'd feel the £20k difference, in my opinion. I love Lexus but it would feel like a natural upgrade because the ISF is looking a bit old, rather than representing a considerable step up the ladder. 

[emjay82]

Obviously if you have a younger ISF, the cost to step up to a more modern looking F car is much less, maybe £10k and more justifiable. The ISF, RCF and GSF 0-60 times are pretty much the same. 

[Flytvr]

For me -

1. He says he is an expert track driver, but doesn't want to turn off the traction control..........hmmmmmm!

2. I do however agree with some of what he says. The F models don't seem to have evolved like the German equivalents. Don't get me wrong,  in the real world the Fs have ample grunt (especially for people at my skill level), but he does have a point from a marketing perspective, Lexus have not kept up.

Personally, I think the IS-F with its NA V8 was born at the tail end of that era, whereas the the RC-F and GS-F missed the boat. Arguably they should never been built as V8s. The world apparently demands forced induction. I've said it so many times, apart from a modern interior the GS-F offers very little over the IS-F (especially for the money).

As others have said, after the IS-F, would I buy another Lexus........possibly a GS450h as a daily and when LC500 prices drop........

Finally, 'geeeeez' that guy loves his own voice!!!

[Chuckie478]

5 minutes ago, Flytvr said:

1. He says he is an expert track driver, but doesn't want to turn off the traction control..........hmmmmmm!

 

I've just seen that bit and thought similar.

The problem is that he wants a car to do everything.  The ISF (or even the Camaro he's gone to) are relatively heavy for track cars because they're really road cars.  What he should have done is got something like a Caterham for the trackdays (if such a thing exists in the US) and kept a road car. 

I've seen a couple of reviews of the Camaro and it seems like it's generally well liked.  In the end you buy the car that suits you.  Having had a look at the Lexus offering, I'm not sure I'd stick with the brand simply because there isn't currently anything that meets my requirements.

Another interesting video I've seen is Chris Harris comparing the GSF to the M5 (below).  While the big 3 German manufacturers seem to be chasing numbers, with the GSF Lexus seem to have gone in a different direction and for road use it seems to be plenty (not that I've driven either).

 

[Guest]

I've still no idea from all the above what driving dynamics have or haven't altered. One would assume with a stiffer chassis and a dedicated design it should have. But is it different at speeds and forces most of us will never use?

Anyway, I bought it mostly because I think it's pretty and sounds good. I can't justify it, on any logical and pragmatic argument I would lose. Emotional choice, that's all there is to it.


But...just for a different take....When I was buying from a blank sheet the newest isf with lowest mileage was 4k cheaper than an rcf 2 years newer in the same location. (Screen prices). That's 2 cars as close in age and Miles I could find. Although I like the isf, swapping from the is250 seemed like paying more for an older/similar age and looking car. So I can understand your logic too.





Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[NemesisUK]

Evolving "driving dynamics" (whatever that means) all well and good but look at the one car all the journos rave about, the Mazda MX5. Over it's 4 generations it has bucked the trends and almost reverted to it's genesis. All agree it's the most 'pure' driver's car out there.

Horses for courses, no car can fulfill every aspect of a driver's desire.

[Martin F]

5 hours ago, Flytvr said:

Finally, 'geeeeez' that guy loves his own voice!!!

Doesn't he just, and is full of his own self-importance. 

Maybe he should consider buying a car where he actually fits in the seat 

He does have some fair points, but I think as others have said if you are a serious track guy you tend to look for something a lot lighter and chuckable, hence I have my MR2. But i am by no stretch of the imagination a serious track guy.

I see the RC-F and IS-F more as GT cars. 

[Mark G]

You can read all the road tests you want, Lexus haven't moved the game on, the Germans are so far in front, the F models are underpowered, the guy in the video has his own agenda.

Well here is mine, when I park mine up, I still turn around and look back as I walk away and when I am out in it, early morning in the summer time and I am "making progress" I have never thought, damn, this thing needs another 100 or 150 bhp, it cant go around corners, it understeers too much or the LSD is pointless.

I love the car, for the money, show me something that can cover the ground as quickly, as well equipped, without shouting about it, and give you the confidence that it will never let you down....................

[DAW]

24 minutes ago, Mark G said:

You can read all the road tests you want, Lexus haven't moved the game on, the Germans are so far in front, the F models are underpowered, the guy in the video has his own agenda.

Well here is mine, when I park mine up, I still turn around and look back as I walk away and when I am out in it, early morning in the summer time and I am "making progress" I have never thought, damn, this thing needs another 100 or 150 bhp, it cant go around corners, it understeers too much or the LSD is pointless.

I love the car, for the money, show me something that can cover the ground as quickly, as well equipped, without shouting about it, and give you the confidence that it will never let you down....................

Couldn’t agree more Mark.

I would also add that the ISF was quick enough around Silverstone to come second to an M3 & ahead of a C63 who  were only separated by less than 2.5 seconds in total if I recall (on around a 2 minute lap) and both the German cars had mechanical LSD’s. The F would probably have been even closer to the M3 had it have been fitted with one at the time . The ISF Ring taxi is also about 30 seconds quicker than an M5 Ring taxi - to me that’s a seriously quick car by any standards & how much more can you actually ever use anyway!!

I went back to MB World recently & spent an hour in a 600hp CLS AMG which is a mighty impressive car but the difference is marginal I suspect in most situation. I’m perfectly happy with the F which has more than enough for me. Still each to his own👍🏻