TE Review

April 24, 2019

https://www.topgear.com/car-reviews/usa/lexus/rc-f

So....the fancy car has the torsen diff out the stock model.

They are selling it as a positive of course :naughty:

Note - USA review - EU cars expected to be around 455hp iirc

I still think the fancy diff put journalists off when all the press cars had it. How much of this review is:

A: Paid for

B: due to 120lbs

3: Diff

(if you type c and colon it make a smiley grrrrr)

Flytvr · April 24, 2019

Vanilla review.

Understeer? Never bothered me.

Personally, I'd stick with a standard RC-F. They've tried to fix the wrong problems IMHO.

April 24, 2019

32 minutes ago, Flytvr said:

Vanilla review.

Understeer? Never bothered me.

Personally, I'd stick with a standard RC-F. They've tried to fix the wrong problems IMHO.

To be clear I was being more critical of motoring press/system than the car itself.

Looking forward toy our upcoming review Dav.

B1RMA · April 24, 2019

I'll wait until someone Chris Harris gets hold of one and reviews it as I consider his opinion to be far more relevant. His initial review of the RCF on track then on the road finally convinced me to buy an RCF. Not for it's track work anyone knows it's way too heavy but for how it performs as a road car.

I still think at this moment in time Lexus have not done enough to the Track Edition to turn it into a decent track car perhaps they should have called it something else.

I still say for the price which I expect will be over £85K for those not worshipping the God of PCP would be far better off buying a late high spec RCF for say £40K then spend £25K on a decent track day car and afford to run them both for a few years and still have change.

I have been replying to a thread on Pistonheads about someones possible purchase of an RCF and I not sure if it's me or my car but I almost get the impression my experience of the RCF must be of a completely different car. I've noticed a few people saying it is gutless in what must be standard driving mode but I haven't noticed that in mine when say wafting along at 50 when I put my foot down it goes in a way I don't find gutless.

April 24, 2019

I've noticed a few people saying it is gutless in what must be standard driving mode but I haven't noticed that in mine when say wafting along at 50 when I put my foot down it goes in a way I don't find gutless.

Owners?

A lot of confusion is maybe caused by the gearbox. Its too tall. 8 gears but 100 in 3rd means you only get to use 2nd and 3rd when going quick. Its not gutless then. But yes, foot down at 1500 revs in 8th gear it is.

Sent from my BV5800 using Tapatalk

B1RMA · April 24, 2019

35 minutes ago, Comedian said:

Owners?

A lot of confusion is maybe caused by the gearbox. Its too tall. 8 gears but 100 in 3rd means you only get to use 2nd and 3rd when going quick. Its not gutless then. But yes, foot down at 1500 revs in 8th gear it is.

Sent from my BV5800 using Tapatalk

Yes two people have posted both ex RCF owners.

I need to do an actual test this week to try and replicate this situation.

Linas.P · April 24, 2019

It seems whoever has been behind the article.... well.. he has weird opinions... or say preferences..

To start with... I cannot believe 79kg makes any bloody difference in the car as heavy as RC-F. If RC-F would be 790kg.. then I guess 10% weight reduction would be felt... Secondly, isn't RC-F Carbon already has all the bits in carbon, less the wing? Surely, wing just adds couple of kg as far as weight is concerned. So how track edition differs from current carbon? Is it 79kg lighter compared to standard RC-F?! because if so that only makes 39kg when compared with carbon...

.. besides I am confused how he measures passenger weight - surely average amurican is at least 150kg.

Then whole thing about PS4s and Cup2s... who in their right mind fits Cup2s on street car? Even though it is called "Track edition" I am sure nobody going to drive it on the track, except occasionally, Lexus RC is still primarily GT car... what king of b*** he is talking about.. perhaps he is comparing it agaist something like Porsche GT3 or BMW M4 GTS... I know it kind of "looks like", but clearly it isn't comparable to those case... or actually it is in the sense that you have to pay much more for the car which is basically worse version of the same...

Overall... I don't see how the new version could be better then the current one. I mean surely - Lexus had 4 years to make minor adjustments here and there, but how does that make it from arguably "car-press most hated performance car" into something now "able to compete with M4", still basically the same car. It is rather always been good, but only now people starting to realise reliability and build quality matters, start looking into RC-F with different priorities.. not only 0.1s difference 0-60 on paper and 0.2s difference around the tracks...

Stuno1 · April 24, 2019

Any naturally aspirated car will feel gutless at low rpm. That’s not the point of them. People are getting too used to heavy torque turbos with lunch low down the range. Also, the rcf has different gear box settings depending on mode and any proper reviews show in sport and sport plus the gear change is a lot sharper.

Sadly most who speak about cars on pistonheads have rarely driven the cars they are speaking about.

ColinBarber · April 24, 2019

27 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

To start with... I cannot believe 79kg makes any bloody difference in the car as heavy as RC-F. If RC-F would be 790kg

Some of that weight is unsprung weight and so improves handling, not just a weight saving to increase power/weight ratio

27 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

Secondly, isn't RC-F Carbon already has all the bits in carbon, less the wing? Surely, wing just adds couple of kg as far as weight is concerned.

The RC F Carbon has a wing, the TE has a larger fixed wing which is lighter. Improves track handling.

27 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

So how track edition differs from current carbon?

Different wing, carbon side sills, carbon rear diffuser, carbon ceramic brakes, titanium parts in the rear exhaust boxes,

Linas.P · April 24, 2019

1 hour ago, ColinBarber said:

Some of that weight is unsprung weight and so improves handling, not just a weight saving to increase power/weight ratio

The RC F Carbon has a wing, the TE has a larger fixed wing which is lighter. Improves track handling.

Different wing, carbon side sills, carbon rear diffuser, carbon ceramic brakes, titanium parts in the rear exhaust boxes,

And does that all convert "press most hated car" from "M4 beating car"? It is like being ugliest person in the world, getting hair removal from the back (not even haircut) and claiming to be most beautiful now!

I think it makes no difference what so ever, on the road it doesn't and on the track it doesn't matter - RC-F is not really a track car. I am sure back to basics Caterham would run circles around it on any track.

I mean... I am just surprised same people were crying 4 years ago "what a missed opportunity was the car"... and now after 4 years, they say it is actually good, because it added few minor tweaks... ohhh and it looks far uglier (obviously just my personal taste).

Overall, for me it just seems reviewer either forgotten how old RC-F looks and driver or newer knew in the first place... or have terrible double standards. So if they gave old car 4/10.. say 40%.. and now it is 0.5% better... which makes... ehhh 40.02% car, how it is so much better than 40% car 4 years ago.. just doesn't make sense by their own scoring.

What I would expect them to say if they were honest and true to their own standards are either:

1. Face-lifted RC-F Track edition got refined over 4 years and now it is more interesting/slightly better to drive, however it is still fundamentally not competitive when compared with M4.

or

2. We were previously wrong about RC-F and after driving new Track edition car we now realised we were wrong, biased, paid, ignorant or incompetent and didn't give the car recognition it deserved, after revisiting this car we now consider it has always been great car just perhaps in a different ways and not necessary on the dry numbers on the paper.

ColinBarber · April 25, 2019

The reviews were never as bad in the US as in Europe, and even the European reviews have improved over the years so there isn't a sudden change from most hated to M4 beater. There are quite a few changes the this year's RC F suspension, driveshafts and custom P4S tyres that have all improved the handling to justify better reviews but they are never going to say your option 2 are they 😉

7 hours ago, Linas.P said:

on the track it doesn't matter - RC-F is not really a track car. I am sure back to basics Caterham would run circles around it on any track.

there are many different categories of racing and people wanting a car they drive daily on the road and then take to the track.

Twellsie · April 25, 2019

11 hours ago, Linas.P said:

It seems whoever has been behind the article.... well.. he has weird opinions... or say preferences..

To start with... I cannot believe 79kg makes any bloody difference in the car as heavy as RC-F. If RC-F would be 790kg.. then I guess 10% weight reduction would be felt... Secondly, isn't RC-F Carbon already has all the bits in carbon, less the wing? Surely, wing just adds couple of kg as far as weight is concerned. So how track edition differs from current carbon? Is it 79kg lighter compared to standard RC-F?! because if so that only makes 39kg when compared with carbon...

.. besides I am confused how he measures passenger weight - surely average amurican is at least 150kg.

Then whole thing about PS4s and Cup2s... who in their right mind fits Cup2s on street car? Even though it is called "Track edition" I am sure nobody going to drive it on the track, except occasionally, Lexus RC is still primarily GT car... what king of b*** he is talking about.. perhaps he is comparing it agaist something like Porsche GT3 or BMW M4 GTS... I know it kind of "looks like", but clearly it isn't comparable to those case... or actually it is in the sense that you have to pay much more for the car which is basically worse version of the same...

Overall... I don't see how the new version could be better then the current one. I mean surely - Lexus had 4 years to make minor adjustments here and there, but how does that make it from arguably "car-press most hated performance car" into something now "able to compete with M4", still basically the same car. It is rather always been good, but only now people starting to realise reliability and build quality matters, start looking into RC-F with different priorities.. not only 0.1s difference 0-60 on paper and 0.2s difference around the tracks...

it all depends where the weight is saved, example if you save 15kg of unsprung weight on a 1500kg car, you would notice the difference!

April 25, 2019

The weight saving is in the discs, the stock wheels are already forged so while they may save a few grams the critical amount is the discs, also rotating mass which will improve steering response at high speed.

Titanium exhaust is another area to save weight but add huge cost.

I have recently swapped from pilot super sport to PS4s and front does feel better, ride is also improved.

RCF rear active wing is very heavy esp when including motor and hinges etc. But the new lighter wing looks silly.

I do like the new front bumper and rear diffuser. Oh and the Torsen diff as now all of a sudden it might make it more desirable in the base model :thumbsup: Although they put it in the track car for "improved feel" I bet it's really coz it's 50kg lighter.