2018 RC F

[Chafford1]

2018 RCF specifications now on the Lexus website. Reduced price for base model but also slight reduction in power from 477 DIN hp to 463 DIN hp due to EU emissions regulations.

[MNMJ]

Ours will be worth LOADS more than in the future than these sluggards

[Chafford1]

I wonder what difference a reduction of 14hp will make to the performance.  0.1second over a standing quarter mile?  

[Guest]

That's peak performance reduction at peak horsepower. 

We don't know what the reduction is across the curve (if there is one) - it could be an unnoticeable difference or it could be larger - say if they was a 30hp loss at 4000 revs they wouldn't need to mention that as they only quote the rather pointless peak figures that one rarely uses.

 

[NemesisUK]

It'll not be noticeable in normal road use. Track days perhaps...

[Guest]

the 14hp might not but throttle response may be. Without knowing more ....... impossible to say if it's a problem of not.

Does explain the Nurbergering testing of the disguised but identical RCF last year.

[NemesisUK]

Unless one drives the old and new back to back I doubt it'll be a concern. 400+ horses is still a lot on the public highway.

[Guest]

That's kind of twisting the argument into another matter. 300hp is probably more than enough.

I'm simply saying that the 14hp peak loss might not be the full story. 

The engine doesn't make 470hp everywhere, below 2000rpm probably less than a 100. 

So I'd be curious from a technical perspective to see how the new technical changes affect the performance more broadly - not because it matters to Billy Talltales on his way to a conference ,sat on the M6 doing 22mph

I have a technical interest in engines that goes beyond 'enough for highway use'. 

 

[rayaans]

1 hour ago, Comedian said:

the 14hp might not but throttle response may be. Without knowing more ....... impossible to say if it's a problem of not.

Does explain the Nurbergering testing of the disguised but identical RCF last year.

Why would throttle response have changed?

Either way - I like how the previously optional forged wheels are now standard - much better design IMO.

Standard wheels look pretty good too - those would be my first choice.

[Guest]

17 minutes ago, rayaans said:

Why would throttle response have changed?

 

If the emissions control is restrictive. Probably hasn't but you might be confusing my use of examples of concerns with assertions - and I'm not making any of those.

Where are the official new pics? I can only see current wheels on the UK site.

[rayaans]

37 minutes ago, Comedian said:

If the emissions control is restrictive. Probably hasn't but you might be confusing my use of examples of concerns with assertions - and I'm not making any of those.

Where are the official new pics? I can only see current wheels on the UK site.

These bad boys are now standard.

and it looks like these are on the Plus pack and above grades:

Its on the RC-F UK configurator anyway but it could be wrong I suppose

[Big Rat]

That is a nice looking wheel that does suit the Rcf IMO, there is a 3rd style that is not available here but has been in all other markets since 2014 for the RcF and was featured on some of the Goodwood festival cars in 2015, shown here on the Grey car in the top picture, the other two cars showing the 3rd design which is very popular in Europe, maybe it's because it's easier to clean !

 

[Guest]

Its on the RC-F UK configurator anyway but it could be wrong I suppose

I didn't use the configuration so it's probably me :)

I think they look nice but at the same time aftermarket. I could buy a similar design off the shelf.

I actually prefer my common Base alloys to the lexus L to spokes. Less fussy.

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[Guest]

3rd design which is very popular in Europe, maybe it's because it's easier to clean !
 

That's a nice design. Easier to clean yes :)

20 spokes not much fun for that.

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[Big Rat]

I've been trying on the various European eBay's for these wheels make a great winter wheel me thinks 🤔

🐀

[Guest]

I've been trying on the various European eBay's for these wheels make a great winter wheel me thinks [emoji848]
[emoji232]

My car doesn't care what wheels it's standing still on :D

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[ColinBarber]

8 hours ago, Comedian said:

That's peak performance reduction at peak horsepower. 

We don't know what the reduction is across the curve (if there is one) - it could be an unnoticeable difference or it could be larger - say if they was a 30hp loss at 4000 revs they wouldn't need to mention that as they only quote the rather pointless peak figures that one rarely uses.

 

It's made a real mess of the power delivery. I'll post something up later.

[ColinBarber]

I've overlaid the two as best I can, there is a slight difference in the two graphs so it gets one or two pixels out in places on the scale.

Red is the the 2018 engine with the GPF cats replacing the two pre-cats. Black is the older engine with standard pre-cats.

[Guest]

Odd.

Doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Power curve looks reasonable and better than I expected, good midrange, loses over 6000. But as power is a function of torque x rpm / number for nm or lbft , then a wild T curve versus a smooth P curve is hard to comprehend. It's like one is smoothed and one isn't.

As dynamometer measure torque and calculates power then if this is official then the power curve has maybe been artificially smoothed (by the look of it).

Interesting.

Thanks for sharing.



Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[Guest]

Colin, could you pm me the numbers please?

Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk

[ColinBarber]

So this is a bit difficult to see but I've added the GS F to the picture (in blue). I suspect the original RC torque graph is heavily smoothed.

[Big Rat]

9 hours ago, Comedian said:

Odd.

Doesn't make a great deal of sense.

Power curve looks reasonable and better than I expected, good midrange, loses over 6000. But as power is a function of torque x rpm / number for nm or lbft , then a wild T curve versus a smooth P curve is hard to comprehend. It's like one is smoothed and one isn't.

As dynamometer measure torque and calculates power then if this is official then the power curve has maybe been artificially smoothed (by the look of it).

Interesting.

Thanks for sharing.



Sent from my STV100-4 using Tapatalk
 

@Flytvr Hey Davi did you get all that Sean will be asking questions later, and test papers are being sent out  

Big Rat

[Guest]

1 hour ago, ColinBarber said:

So this is a bit difficult to see but I've added the GS F to the picture (in blue). I suspect the original RC torque graph is heavily smoothed.

I suspect you are correct. Most if not all usually have some smoothing. This is fine as long as both are smoothed in the same way. 

I though it was odd one was smoothed and one not. But if we use a GSF then the new engine has lost everywhere as I suspected. The dip at 5 looks bad. Be interesting to see if noticeable to the driver.

[Guest]

1 hour ago, Big Rat said:

@Flytvr Hey Davi did you get all that Sean will be asking questions later, and test papers are being sent out  

Big Rat

I sent Davi an interesting CVT with launch gear video and he said it was boring!!!!! I watched it twice for fun.

I think we will have to stick to aeroplanes. 

[Chafford1]

Presumably the same changes will be needed for the GSF and LC500