SW17LS

No, I don't see where you are going with this. Lexus has talked about an F-S line above the F Cars that would be even higher performance. This is what Audi does...why is it not a problem with Audi but a problem with Lexus?

It holds value because its true lol. The S6 is based on the A6...no? What is the base drive configuration of the A6? FWD...not RWD. The S6 is at its core a FWD car with AWD.
I like the A6/S6 very much, I'm just saying that nobody bags on Audi for approaching cars their own way. Let Lexus approach cars the way they want to...not copy the way BMW or MB approaches them.

My guess is this will be the case.

xioix

GS450 h F-Sport starts at $70k. No way a GS-F starts at the same price.

SW17LS

The GS450h F Sport is a very niche model, and my guess is once you have this vehicle out there...the 450h will disappear in the US. I would base pricing off the 350 F Sport, not the 450h F Sport

Lexuslvr91

Maybe they have maybe they haven't mentioned this F-S line that you speak of but what you should know is that BMW offers standard, M-Sport, M and M Competition package. MB offers standard, AMG Sport, AMG and AMG S. Jaguar offers standard, Supercharged, R and RS. Audi offers standard, S and RS. As far as I know these other companies are offering extra packages on their top spec sport trims to better compete with the Audi RS. Where does this leave Lexus?

The S6 punches above its weight. This lowly FWD based car managed to beat out the M5 and E63 AMG in Caranddriver and wasn't even the top spec RS6 model lol. That's why no one bags on the Audi lineup. Even the BMW 335i had to play catchup to the S4. If Lexus or for that matter any company tries to approach the competition with a product that lacks a certain competitiveness that it will always be called out. Lexus didn't let the IS-F sit around because everyone complained of the choppy ride and steering and they went back and retuned everything and made the IS-F much more competitive.

And believe me I believe many are currently trying to accept the fact that Lexus IS bringing a near 500 hp sport sedan to a 550-600+ hp gun fight. We're just betting on significant weight control. To achieve a similar power to weight ratio as a standard issue 560 hp BMW M5 the GS-F will need 500 hp and around 3928 lbs of mass.

SW17LS

Who cares what the competition has done? Why should Lexus judge themselves by the path thats been laid out by BMW and MB? If someone wants a BMW M Car...they aren't going to buy a Lexus F or an MB AMG or anything else...brand loyalty in this arena is huge. What Lexus is doing is creating their own performance division their own way and under their own terms...betting the Lexus enthusiast is there or will be over time. If all you want is a BMW M Car with a Lexus badge, why aren't you just driving a BMW M Car?

I'm not denigrating the S6...I'm just saying its a different car that Audi has done their way. There are plenty of reviews out there that put the S6 below the M5 and E63, there are plenty of reviews that prefer the RC-F to the M4...plenty that prefer the M4 to the RC-F.

The point is, Lexus is telling you what they see as the epitome of what a performance Lexus is. It differs from what BMW and MB are offering as what their epitome of what a BMW or MB is. If it appeals to you great, if it doesn't buy something else. I find the feel and sound of the NA V8 and the easier to drive personality hugely appealing...and thus I would not purchase an M4 over an RC-F or an M5 over a GS-F whether they had more power or not. If you want the power over the NA V8 and the more forgiving feel...go for it.

But the M5 is still a turbo car, still doesn't sound as great, still less rewarding to drive normally (if the M4 vs the RC-F is an indication)...why do I care if the power to weight ratio on paper isn't as good? I'm not a drag racer. I'm driving the frigging thing to work.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

sure i also think that's the problem. but then just come out right, it's not like we haven't waited for a long time already.

for those who keep on saying lexus is just creating their own performance segment. i am not going to argue at all, i just feel that's very funny. like there are still so much room for another segment. i honestly feel that's just excuses and sandbag to brace for the car(s). you are either in it or you are not. you don't have to win, but you are in. 08 isf was not comparable to the m3, but i still consider that in the same game.

one can dispute as much as they want on how this gsf is going to be on its own game and not against anyone else, reality is how everyone is going to compare it against m5 and e63. not saying it is going to lose every comparo, but i don't think it will get off to a pretty start

either way, this topic comes up every single time and i am pretty much done with it anyway. how many of the talkers are real buyers in this segment (the way i call it)? i call myself one, and i am looking between m5 and e63. would i love and most importantly consider a gsf? of course (just read my other posts on concerns over bmw m and mb amg). but would i consider a 480hp gsf? i am just saying it gets a lot less attractive (and that's already with a bottomline of how much i love the 4gs chassis)

SW17LS

I don't see how you can feel this way, but feel that the RC-F and upcoming GS-F are not "in the game"? The IS-F was "not comparable, but still in the game", while the RC-F is comparable, but is not in the game? What is this game?!?

When comparing the specs of the RC-F to the M4, differences in track performance are measured in tenths of a second...but its not "in the game" lol

Everybody is saying the GS-F will be around 500HP, weight should be just beneath 4,000 lbs if the GS350 is any example, we've been demonstrated to that the GS-F at 500hp with a weight beneath 4,000 lbs equals the M5's power to weight ratio...but its not "in the game" because it doesn't have 50 more HP on paper?

rominl

iTrader: (4)

when did i say the rcf is not in the same game?! please quote below you lol. i have been the one who says rcf is right in the game with m4 and c63. it's bunch of other people in the rcf forum who keep on saying the car is not competing with the m4, it's a car of its own. i always call them silly.

to me, car in this segment has to be special. i am just saying how i feel about it given that i am a buyer. is 480hp special? not at all. 550hp is what i consider special to be in this segment. if driving feel is the only thing lexus is trying to sell with this car, i will just say it's going to be a very tough sell. again, hey, you guys can all be in the tiny new segment, that's fine by me.

SW17LS

Then you're saying the GS-F is not going to be in the same game? What is it you feel isn't in the same game? You said you felt the IS-F was in the same game and you want to at least "be in the game"...

The RC-F competes well with the M4, but it is a slightly different car too. A little less overtly aggressive, a little more forgiving. That either appeals to you or it doesn't. The general consensus is that on the track, the M4 is the better car...on the road it may be the other way around. This is why I don't think the weight issue is as big an issue as the car's detractors make it out to be.

So you're saying that if the GS-F is putting up performance numbers in the same ballpark as the M5, as is the case with the RC-F vs the M4, you don't think its special because the HP isn't some number above 550? Thats what doesn't make any sense to me. Why should we care about some meaningless number on a page when the car is performing where we want it to be and is the most rewarding drive in the segment?

And again...we have no idea what the GS-F is going to put out in terms of power. My guess is about 500 HP. Not gonna be 550 like the M5.

TF109B

Thats it, all there is right now are "guesses". It wont be long now, maybe it's 20hp up from the RC F at 487hp, maybe it's 50hp more at 517hp? If its sub 4000lbs. it should be at the top in handling. The GS already is. It wont matter, C&D, MT, R&T etc. will pick a german in their comparisons. Thats what people commenting are worrying about, sadly. Magazine reviews and sub 4 second 0-60's.

peteharvey

The Germans and Japs have different personalities.
The Germans are good at innovation, and love quick pose, however they do not refine their designs well, hence lots of long term reliability issues.
The Japanese are very good at refinement, hence smoothness, quietness, and reliability, but that does take longer to get their designs onto the market.

Hence, the all new C Class with near 50% aluminium is already on sale, while the midsize E Class version with near 50% aluminium content is due 2016.

Also, due to small size and congestion, gasoline is very expensive in Europe, hence the Europeans have been using small capacity turbos for quite some time.
Lexus mainly sells in the US where land is plentiful, public transport infrastructures are difficult to erect over millions of square miles, hence the US has a preference for large cars with relatively cheap gasoline.
The Japanese attention to detail personality, combined with the US' relatively cheap gasoline means that small capacity turbo Lexus engines will take longer to get onto the market.

Lexus first 50% aluminium car, and their first premium small capacity turbo [with more than 4 cylinders] - may not be released till roughly 2017 with the next generation 5LS, and then onto the next generation 5GS due roughly 2019, provided they stick to their 7 year model cycles.


Since the oil crisis in the 1970's, cars have grown bigger and heavier.
Presently, they are probably at their heaviest.
Mercedes has created a turning point into mass production of cars with high aluminium content in the all new C Class.
Hence the current 4GS is at its heaviest in history, and because the RC-F coupe is 3,958 lbs, it is very likely that the new 2016 GS-F will be just over 4,000 lbs, unless Lexus comes up with aluminium boot lids, and aluminium doors for the GS-F.
Just as the GS350 isn't in the turbo power game, nor the power to weight ratio game, the all new 2016 GS-F is unlikely to be in the power game either, with both the GS and GS-F being designed to appeal to a slightly different tastes - more for handling and refinement, than outright brute power.


Audi is quite interesting.
They were purchased by VW in the 1960's.
The 3rd gen Audi 100 of 1982 was the first mass produced car with CD figure of 0.30.
The Audi 100/200 [A6/A7 predecessor] shared platforms with the front drive VW Passat, though the Passat used transverse front drive, where the 100/200 used longitudinal front drive.
In the old days, the Audi 100/200/A6/A7's AWD was a very heavy weight premium, so not the best for either performance, nor handling, but the AWD did have excellent grip under power, esp good for slippery conditions.

However, over the decades, horsepower has increased, and increased.
Today, we have so much horsepower and torque, with cars accelerating from 0-60 in under 5 seconds, that AWD has finally hit the forefront, because AWD applies power to all four wheels for more traction and grip, rather than just two wheels.
In the past, front drive was chosen for economy purposes because there were fewer parts hence lower production costs, while rear wheel drive was the holy grail of motoring.
However today with so much power and torque to apply to the ground, the traditional rear drive manufacturers like Benz, BM and Lexus will have to reconsider the future of full time four wheel drive, otherwise Audi with the likes of the A6/A7/RS6 etc will really hit the forefront in this market segment, especially in terms of performance...

GoHuskers

I found it's SILLY that 550 HP is in the "special club" but 500 HP is NOT. To me when you pass the "magical" 500 HP line you are in the "special club". It's all about how the car drives and handles instead of just HP.

OR may be....IF you don't hit 707 HP then you are NOT in the game....

LOWFAST

Remember back when over 300hp was in the "special club." The GS-F would appeal to me even it is us just under the 500hp line if they can keep the weight in check. We love our ISF because it is fun to drive on the streets, reliable, and comfortable. The design has aged very well in my opinion, still looks fresh 6 years later, and doesn't have the douche factor that seems to follow the M and AMG crowd around here.

SW17LS

Yup lol. I remember when my Dad got his 95 STS, it had 300 HP!

rominl

iTrader: (4)

no worry, one thing i learn here is that there is no point in really explaining yourself, whether you are agreeing with a point or now.

just like how you had the 535 (iirc) and hated it and now love the gs350, which i respect but doesn't mean everyone understands or agrees. and same thing to some people in rcf forums who are so set on the car that nothing else matters, it's ok and needs no explanation but doesn't mean everything is true.

if you think buyers in the m4/c63/rcf and gsf/e63/m5 and s63/b7/rs8 are all looking at the same perspectives and priorities when shopping their cars, i think that's where the discrepancy is.

as an enthusiast in general with no brand attachment, your last sentence only tells me one thing

reminds me of that time when i was driving my e93 m3 and this reckless isf thought i would bother to be a douche like him.