is250 quick acceleration

[peachy]

Well I can now safely say the is250 is a fair bit quicker than the 8.4 official figures.

This afternoon along a long duel carriageway with lots of traffic lights along the way I encountered a young lad in his fiesta ST who thought he could outrun my 250.

Now the fiesta ST on paper hits 60 in 6.9 seconds. A fair bit more than the Lexus figures.

On his first attempt at the lights he gave me the nod and off we went. Absolutely nothing in it up to about 60 until we had to stop for the lights.

Again off he roared and the 250 kept right up with it.

This happened for several sets of lights and the ST could make no gains on the 250 whatsoever.

I now know for certain the 250 does the sprint in 7 seconds flat.

[NemesisUK]

All you know is the IS250 is as fast as that young lad was driving this afternoon.

I'd put more credence on the official figures myself. Why would Lexus understate the performance? 

[peachy]

8 minutes ago, NemesisUK said:

All you know is the IS250 is as fast as that young lad was driving this afternoon.

I'd put more credence on the official figures myself. Why would Lexus understate the performance? 

Trust me that lad was ringing the neck out of his ST and the 250 kept right up with it to 60. Infact the 250 made a slight gain on it past 70.

[Ben1001]

Interesting - time it 0-60 with a stop watch and I'll time mine next time I'm out. I don't think mine would beat an ST.

[iwonder]

The other guy cant drive, the is250 is slow

[doog442]

 

56 minutes ago, peachy said:

On his first attempt at the lights he gave me the nod and off we went.

h

[Rebecca]

I think the fiesta ST reaches 60mph in 6.7 seconds so I doubt the is250 would match it to 60. Maybe he wasn't shifting up at the right time.

But yes the Lexus is quicker than 8.4 seconds. About 7.5 tops.

[peachy]

1 hour ago, Rebecca said:

I think the fiesta ST reaches 60mph in 6.7 seconds so I doubt the is250 would match it to 60. Maybe he wasn't shifting up at the right time.

But yes the Lexus is quicker than 8.4 seconds. About 7.5 tops.

Well I'm not making it up sweetheart, the 250 matched the ST on several traffic light starts. 

[NemesisUK]

Matches the driver of the ST ...

[Rebecca]

18 minutes ago, peachy said:

Well I'm not making it up sweetheart, the 250 matched the ST on several traffic light starts. 

Actually @peachy your story is quite believable if the ST was the 2005-2008 model as this vehicle had 150bhp and a 0-60 time of 7.9 seconds. In this case the 250 would certainly keep up with the ST.

However the later ST is turbocharged with more power and torque and would leave the 250 standing.

[peachy]

I didn't catch the reg Becky but thanks for spoiling my party lol 😅

I was quite happy knowing the is250 could keep up with a car in the high sixes.

 

[Rebecca]

3 hours ago, iwonder said:

The other guy cant drive, the is250 is slow

Totally disagree. The 250 is not slow. It has power.

Ok I probably wouldn't want to race anybody in one but it can hardly be described as slow.

 

[NemesisUK]

A car, any car, is only as fast as the driver behind the wheel. ...

Official performance figures are always more reliable than anecdotal 'on the road' experiences 

[Rebecca]

3 hours ago, NemesisUK said:

 

I'd put more credence on the official figures myself. Why would Lexus understate the performance? 

It's a well known fact that Lexus understate the performance figures.

[iwonder]

20 minutes ago, Rebecca said:

Totally disagree. The 250 is not slow. It has power.

Ok I probably wouldn't want to race anybody in one but it can hardly be described as slow.

 

By todays standards the car is slow. Even looking at cars of its era. the type r with 200bhp 4 cylinder can hit 0-60 in mid 6s. 1.8l 5 cylinder Corolla with 190bhp can match the performance of the is250. I would consider that slow for a 2.5l v6

[scudney]

Don't forget it is also a bigger and heavier car than the ones you are comparing it with 😁 My IS250 f sports does what I want in style and comfort and has the power if I need it,wasn't designed to be a boy 👦 racer car 🚗 anyway lol 

[NemesisUK]

6 hours ago, Rebecca said:

It's a well known fact that Lexus understate the performance figures.

Ah! Love those "well known facts" 😏

[Rebecca]

6 hours ago, iwonder said:

By todays standards the car is slow. Even looking at cars of its era. the type r with 200bhp 4 cylinder can hit 0-60 in mid 6s. 1.8l 5 cylinder Corolla with 190bhp can match the performance of the is250. I would consider that slow for a 2.5l v6

That's a bit rich coming from you. I believe you drive a RX450H don' you.

Take a look at the performance figures for your 3.5 litre V6.

Now your car really is slow.

[NemesisUK]

Slow really is just a subjective term...

[iwonder]

13 minutes ago, Rebecca said:

That's a bit rich coming from you. I beleive you drive a RX450H don' you.

Take a look at the performance figures for your 3.5 litre V6.

Now your car really is slow.

Wrong and I never claimed RXs were fast, although quicker than the 250. It's just my opinion that a N/A V6 with performance figures like the 250 is slow. I rarely do 0-60 sprints but I do push hard when in gear and I find them under powered in that respect. Agreed it's not really its purpose but this thread was about racing a hatchback. I would of thought having an ISF, everything would feel slow to you 

[Linas.P]

Just to be more specific IS250 is 8.4s official to 0-62, not 0-60. So to begin with 0-60 figure is 8.1s, not 8.4s.  Now, it is known fact that Lexus always understates the acceleration and they have done so for every single car so far except maybe LFA. I believe that is because they are not "boy racer company" where it matters e.g. Ford always understated Mustang acceleration from very first model in 1964. But there is more to it... In US MPG and pollution tests includes "real life like" test which includes "rapid acceleration" - this means that MPG and pollution figures would be higher if you would push the car to the limits and Lexus cares mores to keep these down. That is quite logical - typical Lexus buyer would care more about MPG and pollution rather than 0.5s acceleration. Now theoretical stuff ends here....

In UK reviews are pretty rubbish and there are certain amount of political correctness e.g. you would rarely see acceleration figures being measured for the car, because such thing would be considered as" bad behaviour"... almost "dangerous driving"... "racing"... simply bad taste for car journalist in UK...  All very stupid... "can you just bloody tell me how long the car takes 0-60 in practice!?".... no... they just come up with some vague description e.g. they claim RC300h is "not as fast as rivals", but "acceleration does not matter". Anyway the point is - because of car culture "limitations" in UK we don't know what the real 0-62 times is. However, we can easily find that out from reviews over the pond where getting car 0-60-0 is standard test and nobody gets offended by it. There we can find out that 0-60 time is 7.4s, which translate into 7.64s for 0-62mph/100kmh... 

I have personally tested that on OBD2+GPS and I consistently get 7.6s for metric and 7.4s for imperial acceleration. I definitely doesn't do anything under 7s (unless modified)... but neither it is 8.4s. I would summarise that  IS250 is not fast car (but it never intended to be), but it had reasonable acceleration for it's age, weight and power/weight. It is definitely no underpowered, but it is slightly overweight (again something which was intentional). Again looking historically... I could match hot-hatches of the day as illustrated by @peachy and I believe that is sufficient.

"Slow"... is really relative. Yes it is slow compared with the cars which have 100hp more or the cars which weights 300kg less... otherwise it is pretty normal. What is slow is IS300h/RC300h - based on claimed power (227hp) they are slow, because IS250 is faster with less power (204hp) IS250 is slightly lighter, but not as much to have as much advantage. That for me indicates there is inherent inefficiency in the hybrid system so that it cannot "put-down" all the power. Same goes for IS200t/RC200t - cars with 241hp, but just slightly faster than IS250... something is not right. What is worse if you look to BMW430i (2.0t as well) it only has few more horse power and few less kilograms, but it is whole 2 seconds faster (5.6s). Why? Because BMW somehow managed to deliver that power to the road where Lexus failed with it's current gen cars. That is why I say "slow" is relative and you can only call something slow or fast based on some sort of comparison and relation to peers, as such IS250 is not "slow" for NA 2.5l v6.

[peachy]

Well said @Linas.P 

@Rebecca how long have the ISF? Thought you were a IS250 diehard.

[Linas.P]

It is IS250 F-Sport.... shortened to IS250 F -Sport 

And I meant to say:

Quote

e.g. Ford always OVERSTATED Mustang acceleration from very first model in 1964.e.g. Ford always understated Mustang acceleration from very first model in 1964.

 

[J Henderson]

2 hours ago, Linas.P said:

It is IS250 F-Sport.... shortened to IS250 F -Sport 

Nope, @Rebecca has a full-fat V8 beast now. 

As for IS250 performance, I find it adequate. Acceleration feels pretty good from a standing start, but mid-range acceleration (ie: for an overtake) feels a bit sluggish.

[Rebecca]

4 hours ago, peachy said:

 

@Rebecca how long have the ISF? Thought you were a IS250 diehard.

Indeed I am a 250 diehard. I still have my F-sport which I use for my daily commute. 

The ISF only comes out to play at the weekends.