Just Test Drove A Isf

[sofasurfer]

I'm with the majority saying give this one a miss I'm afraid! :(

The cheap tires, need for new rotors, repainted alloys etc, wouldn't worry me too much.

The lack of servicing and the above issues would be a big concern. It shows the last owner didn't look after the car properly at all.

Whilst I agree to an extent that the car is pretty bullet-proof, abuse will still have an effect at some point.

With prices as they are, you would be better off waiting for something that has been looked after the way these cars deserve.

The facelift options are a big factor I concede, but not at the cost of proper care and maintenance.

You can just imagine the idiot thrashing the life out of the poor thing before it warms up, not giving it time to cool down before switching it off etc.

Negligence will kill a car no matter how well built.

I'm sure something else will turn up as more RC-F's come on the market (saw a good priced silver 08 on Autotrader for this reason the other day).

Just my opinion. :)

One thing...Not giving it time to cool before switching off? This isn't an old school turbo here. Why would you need to do that?

The dealer told me this too when I bought my car.....haven't heard it before with a NA engine.

[rayaans]

I'm with the majority saying give this one a miss I'm afraid! :(

The cheap tires, need for new rotors, repainted alloys etc, wouldn't worry me too much.

The lack of servicing and the above issues would be a big concern. It shows the last owner didn't look after the car properly at all.

Whilst I agree to an extent that the car is pretty bullet-proof, abuse will still have an effect at some point.

With prices as they are, you would be better off waiting for something that has been looked after the way these cars deserve.

The facelift options are a big factor I concede, but not at the cost of proper care and maintenance.

You can just imagine the idiot thrashing the life out of the poor thing before it warms up, not giving it time to cool down before switching it off etc.

Negligence will kill a car no matter how well built.

I'm sure something else will turn up as more RC-F's come on the market (saw a good priced silver 08 on Autotrader for this reason the other day).

Just my opinion. :)

One thing...Not giving it time to cool before switching off? This isn't an old school turbo here. Why would you need to do that?

The dealer told me this too when I bought my car.....haven't heard it before with a NA engine.

Load of porkies - Just switch the car off no harm done with N/A. If im right in saying, the new NX200t has to be cooled down before switching off, its written in the owners manual :)

[Number86]

Maybe. I just wouldn't be comfortable paying 50% of rrp for a car that's 6.5 years old. Admittedly that blue one is obviously not a great example, but it is a facelift with the improvements that carries. But perhaps you're right...

I'm noticing a similar trend with the 370z. Despite the cost of it new dropping to 26k for a base model. 4+ year old examples are sticking at around 18k. As they're almost as rare as the isf!

That's it chap. Very few about and good examples well looked after with possible extended warranty as an option are always going to command a higher premium and hold value pretty well.

You never know, if you are in no rush something may crop up eventually.

Stu

I meant to address this post before...

Rarity is one thing. However, it's pretty much universally accepted that while the ISF is good, it's not 'quite' as good as the others, which is fine normally. As they were going used cheaper than the competition, and had lexus reliability tipping the favour. But now, with some jokers asking 25k for 08's, they're costing more than the competition, and I'm sorry that's not justified, when it's inferior in anything but reliability.

[Peter P18]

Sorry but where do you come up with that one?!

The ISF beats the M3 and C63 AMG on 0-60, MPG, top speed.... and reliability.

Rarity as well.

[Number86]

All the reviews I've ever read put the lexus behind the rest.

Perhaps my post sounded harsh. I prefer the lexus to the others, because I've always been a lex fan, but this is a public opinion. It doesn't handle as well as the BMW, it doesn't have the power to match the C63, and it certainly doesn't have the looks to match an M3 coupe.

[Peter P18]

I think you'll find a lot of the reviews deliberately underrated the ISF.

Looks I would disagree. Albeit mine isn't stock.

Once I add my carbon vented bonnet, carbon wald spoiler, carbon roof spoiler, and add my Wedsport alloys, it'll look a lot nicer than an M3. ;)

I've run with a C63 before. 0-60, it was dead even. After that, I was pulling away.

Each to their own. :)

[Number86]

deliberately underrated it? For what purpose?

[sofasurfer]

I think you'll find a lot of the reviews deliberately underrated the ISF.

Looks I would disagree. Albeit mine isn't stock.

Once I add my carbon vented bonnet, carbon wald spoiler, carbon roof spoiler, and add my Wedsport alloys, it'll look a lot nicer than an M3. ;)

I've run with a C63 before. 0-60, it was dead even. After that, I was pulling away.

Each to their own. :)

Try getting a C63 around a corner..when I test drove one before I bought the ISF all that power made it very hard to even try to attempt a corner that an M3 or ISF could breeze round.

Sometimes the whole top trumps 'my engine is bigger than yours' means nothing in the real world.

p.s. Peter...I'm going to be so jealous of that Wald spoiler of yours.

[Peter P18]

Let's just say BMW were known to grease a few palms! ;-)

Even Top Gear have changed their tune about the ISF if you look.

[Peter P18]

Lol. Wald in carbon looks stunning mate. :)

Will complement my Arkym rear carbon diffuser really well.

Just checked my wheels, blacked out headlights, FIGS suspension mega arms, lug nuts, and carbon paddle shifters in at Tampa airport! ;)

Flying back tonight. :)

[stevet]

I remember the first reviews knocked the gearbox because it had 8 gears. Now they all have them but the mags don't knock them.

Magazine reviews will always put the Germans first. Simple law of economics as they spend more on advertising.

[Stuno1]

Obviously we will all back the f and that's why we bought them. Supply and demand though re pricing. If an 08 sells for 25k that's what the market will bare. Also, as these cars get older c63 and m3 ownership costs will be far heavier in terms of worse reliability. Looks is subjective and the later isf was as good as the c63 and m3 around tracks from what I recall. Also far better spec as standard.

I really do believe it is the best all round option when compared to the competition and that coupled with rarity will always stand in its favour when considering depreciation.

Stu

[sofasurfer]

Lol. Wald in carbon looks stunning mate. :)

Will complement my Arkym rear carbon diffuser really well.

Just checked my wheels, blacked out headlights, FIGS suspension mega arms, lug nuts, and carbon paddle shifters in at Tampa airport! ;)

Flying back tonight. :)

I wany to to see your F Peter...must arrange a meet soon.

[Number86]

I'm just thinking it sounds a bit like post hoc rationalisation. As you're all f owners, and it's the same thought process I had with the f, and that I've observed in every other car forum, with almost hilarious predictability.

This and other threads here also smack of vested interests justifying prices to prop their own car up in the back of it.

Sometimes stepping back and trying to be objective is a good thing...

<\controversial>

[Peter P18]

Maybe so.

People will pay whatever they feel they want to pay.

At the end of the day, you are talking new Fiesta money with a few extras.

These have always been underrated and overlooked.

The fact we as owners found this hidden gem, is lucky for us.

Look at what you'd need to spend to get a Honda NSX. Limited supply means higher costs.

The R34 GTR is another prime example. A few years ago I was looking at them around £15-17K. Now you need to part with £23-25K to get a nice one.

I don't plan on selling mine anytime soon. Besides which, I'll have probably spent closer to £35K including the base cost by the time I'm finished! ;)

No one would pay me close to that for it.

[MNMJ]

Whilst I don't agree with Number 86, he (or she) is probably more representative of the general public and their perceptions of the IS-F than us lot who own them. So thank you for sharing those views.

I imagine that is why so few IS-F sold in the UK.

Part of the reason I didn't even bother testing an M3 or RS4 is that they are the obvious choice and so very common here in Cheshire. Most people will happily lap up the great M3 and RS4 reviews and consequently aspire to them as they trundle round in their company A4s and 3 series. I'm not sure many of us moved up from an IS250 or 220d, but we do leap on positive F write ups or videos

Of course because I tried and seriously considered a C63 I shall use typical Internet double standards to justify that it is not all all like the M3 and RS4, but is in fact a spiritual cousin of the IS-F.

[noby76]

not sure why we are even debating this..we all know most European car mags and on-line reviewers always bias towards German cars. Lets be honest, the Germans can build a fine auto-mobile and they deserve all the praise but so can the Japanese. on paper there is nothing between E90 BMW M3 Saloon, C63 AMG, Lexus IS-F and Audi RS4, as they all hit 60 between 4.4 - 4.6 mark so there is really nothing in it. we all know the BMW will take the handling when compared to the rest but by how much these days?

BMW's used to be king when it came to tackling bends and corners at the limit but not so much these days heck even hot hatches like your Megane RS's and Seat Leon's front wheel drives have posted official faster times at the ring compared to these 4 high performance cars neither can all 4 out run a Nissan GTR from a rolling acceleration nor from a stop.

so the decision to pick one say an RS4 over IS-F or BMW over C63 or vice verca will depend on personal taste but saying that the IS-F is a breath of fresh air since most not in the 'know' will always opt for a Merc, BMW or Audi based on information read from most reviews and articles but personally nothing beats the IS-F in terms of second hand buy(reliability) and its still exclusive when compared to the German counterparts who seem to be everywhere.

[Stuno1]

I don't think the view of one non owner represents the general public perception! Like others I'm not sparing for a fight here but you can't argue with supply and demand! If the prices are too high they will come down. I'm not surprised they are more expensive than the m3 and c63 at similar age and mileage, as already stated it offers more reliability so cheaper to run out of warranty, exclusivity which people do value and compatible performance.

Obviously we will say its a great car as we all chose it for the above reasons but I tried to believe owners on here singing the cars praises will impact values.

Stu

[aviator888]

I've run with a C63 before. 0-60, it was dead even. After that, I was pulling away.

Just enlighten us, how did You manage to pull away? The driver in the Merc must of taken his foot off the accelerator pedal..

C63 has got a few more horsepower and a lot more torque @ about the same weight.

[Peter P18]

Hi Mel,

I think you'll find the C63 is a bit heavier than the IS-F.

He may also have lifted.

Point was the German offerings don't have much more go, and are a lot costlier than the IS-F to run/maintain.

Once I get my H&S exhaust and PPE headers, it would be interesting to see how it did against the M3 and C63.

Whilst I appreciate that's not a fair contest, the IS-F with mods is still bullet proof in terms of reliability.

[JonP]

Might have been the Merc's traction control, that knocks the turbos right back and it takes an age to get going again. Unlike the IS-F where the TC is much less obtrusive.

[aviator888]

Hi Mel,

I think you'll find the C63 is a bit heavier than the IS-F.

He may also have lifted.

Point was the German offerings don't have much more go, and are a lot costlier than the IS-F to run/maintain.

Once I get my H&S exhaust and PPE headers, it would be interesting to see how it did against the M3 and C63.

Whilst I appreciate that's not a fair contest, the IS-F with mods is still bullet proof in terms of reliability.

Agree. I personally would prefer IS-F or GT-R over same class Audi, Merc, BMW and Jaguar any day. And in real life, everyday motoring it makes no difference if the "official" figures for 0-60 is 4.0 or 5.0 seconds. Same goes for cornering, because by the end of the day it will all come down to skill, tyres etc.

Back in a day when Toyota entered the Luxury market, many journalists always found "something" to slate the Lexus models: they moaned about the styling, design, refinement etc. Looking at IS-F revies it still goes on today..

Most of these BMW/Merc paid car journalist are complaning on subjective matters and if everything else fails, they simply come up with conclusion Lexus xxx is a good car, but BORING

It always makes me laugh, because like many of us, i have owned my fare share of "German marvels" and they are indeed not boring at all- there's always something waiting to be fixed.

[noby76]

On paper performance figures could sometimes not show a true performance of a vehicle but does help to give an indication all the same. So here are the figures below taken from carfolio.com

2011 C63 AMG SALOON (Not the Performance Package).

Gearbox 7 speed

Engine compression ratio = 11.3 : 1

BHP 450 @ 6800rpm

Max Torque 600NM(443 lbft) at 5000rpm

Power generated by engine at max torque rpm = 421bhp

Kerb weight = 1730KG

Power to weight ratio = 260bhp per ton.

2007 LEXUS IS-F

Gearbox 8 speed

Engine compression ratio = 11.8 : 1

BHP 417 @ 6600rpm

Max Torque 505NM (372 lbft) at 5200rpm

Power generated by engine at max torque rpm = 368bhp

Kerb weight = 1690KG

Power to weight ratio = 246bhp per ton.

Difference in power to weight ratio between C63 and IS-F is 260bhp – 246bhp = 14bhp

based on these paper figures, the C63 betters the IS-F by about 14bhp when we factor in the cars weights against their horse power. Will this explain why there is nothing between them when it comes to 0-60 times of 4.4 and 4.6 secs?? The C63’s engine generates 100NM of torque more than the IS-F but does this really make a difference??

Below is a vid of them around a track. Ignore the M3 since it’s manual box and both Merc and IS-F drivers were not using manual mode shifts.. skip vid to 1.40 secs to see race start. These guys were going for it without being biased.

[aviator888]

You need a better understanding of Torque and Horse power before you can discuss this further, as it doesnt really sound like you understand correctly.
An engine makes torque, and depending on how many rpms it is doing while making this torque it produces horsepower.
Horsepower is important figure, because we use gearboxes to transmit this power to make torque at the wheels. Thats why a 200bhp 200nm civic is faster than a 150bhp 300nm turbo diesel for example :) The reason TDIs make more torque than power is because they cant rev high enough for the high torque figure to turn into huge power.

In this case (on paper) C63 engine is not only producing more torque, but more importantly is capable of transmitting more torque into horsepower.
Between 2 cars torque advantage alone does not mean anything if You know how to use the gearox properly.

[noby76]

not sure if the your post was directed to me Mel but this was exactly what i was trying to prove in my last post in that although the C63 makes 100NM of torque more than the IS-F, it only shifts 2 thousand of a second quicker from 0 to 60 than the IS-F and as witnessed in the video it was not able to shake off the IS-F round the race track even though it had 1.2 litre , 33bhp and 100NM tourque advantage over the IS-F going by on paper figures. the time attack results proved it was around 0.482 of a second ahead of the IS-F. nothing in it if you asked me..

i do understand hp and torque correctly so can you point our where i went wrong with the figures??