bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

great post

exactly.

bravo.

right on.

they are all influenced by one another, but since lexus is basically a non-player in europe pretty much, mb, bmw, audi have enough to do keeping up with eachother, and lexus tends to look for unique niches (perfect for a brand that, despite its giant parent, is not as large as those others).

lol, well lexus has a challenge there because they obviously have a much bigger hybrid program in place than other brands, and now they're talking about hydrogen fuel cells, and so building very high horsepower turbo v6/v8's will be VERY expensive proposition. probably necessary though, as i think an ls350 turbo of sorts would do very well.

true.

you mean like l-tuned? and while f-sport has moved forward and expanded, i think putting it on the CTh and RX were flat out ridiculous. and if you look at the actual lexus f-sport accessories, say for the GS, it's a couple of rims, a flat tire kit, and a case for the key. http://www.lexus.com/models/GS/accessories - f-sport is still very light on credibility. even on the f-sport cars, they went 2 steps forward and 1 back, by adding 'sporty' features, and then taking away many luxury features.

oh and, is the is-f done (finished) now there's an rc-f? seems a bit odd.

if lexus had named this gs-f the gs500 f-sport as many would want here, wouldn't that cause an 'issue' with the rc-f (having the same drivetrain, a bit bigger, but barely any heavier)?

but again, all these discussions and nit-picking don't mean much as toyota is making a load of money with its lexus brand, and is expanding it cautiously and slowly. not a bad plan, and it's working.

see above. and mercedes has been at it a century longer.

surely you jest. while a turbo can be 'slapped onto' most any engine, to make it reliable, smooth, efficient, is far from easy, especially with emissions regulations, weight restrictions, fuel economy standards, and on and on. it's immensely complex. that's why the new 2.0T for the nx has taken a LONG time to develop.

remember lexus got dinged for not have diesels in europe... now they might end up looking smart because the europeans are finally realizing a 'clean diesel' is an oxymoron.

but those engines are a) derivatives of engines before - in some cases not dramatically different, and b) they will be used across several models. chrysler/dodge for example uses their v6 3.6 and their v8 5.7 'hemi' across a whole bunch of vehicles.

another excellent post.

yes, i know there's a f logo slapped on the side. but you know full well what i mean that it should be in the name if the BRANDING is to have benefitted from having a model as incredible as the LFA. while some enthusiasts know the lfa has an f logo on it, it's not the same as having it in the model designation.

G Star

iTrader: (2)

I don't really get most of the people disatisfied with the "lower than competitor" numbers. The entire F line has always had less power than their competitors and Lexus has always been proud of that and never saw the necessity to change.

Lexus practiced great restraint with power figures with the LFA which had a seemingly endless R&D budget.

Either Lexus truly believes there is some magical ratio of handling & power to achieve a truly joyful driving experience or there is some mega strategy at play here.

Gojirra99

No not at all, I mean actual F cars. They IMO should not hastily introduce another F car at all if they are not ready. This GS will be a fantastic addition to the GS model if it were just marketed as a "regular" Fsport V8, much better than if they just introduce a GS500 with only 416 hp of the ISF and I am sure would have exceeded all expectations.

Gojirra99

Really? the IS F/ RC F has exceeded the hp of the M3/M4 when introduced

gymratter

i wish they give it more torque

rominl

iTrader: (4)

what are you talking about? both the isf and rcf have more power than the m3 and m4

Mr Bond

I may vary on different markets, but in europe IS-F had more power than M3 and Audi RS4, and thats the case with the RC-F as well. Only AMG has stronger engines, but they are a lot more expensive. The problem was never the claimed power, it never perfomed anywhere near the other cars in reality. Lexus GS-F may very well be different in this case.

spwolf

but once again, GS-F is not just the engine. Do you think that only difference between 528i and M5 is the engine? Or that only difference between GS 350 and GS-F is engine?

As to offering it as GS500, I just checked 550i and people who complain that Lexus will be expensive at $80k - 550i equipped like top end GS350, costs $93k.

Gojirra99

At this level, it's not just the chassis either, the engine is just as important. You have to be competitive in EVERY aspect. You don't have to lead or even match in every department, but you cannot be too far behind in ANY department AT ALL.

The expectation for this GS is already very low for most from the discussion about rumours of the specs. of this car in the previous thread. Virtually nobody expect it to match the 550+hp of competitors, but I guess very few expect them to do absolutely nothing and just put the EXACT SAME engine as the RC F in it, and that never happens in any of their competitors equivalent classes of cars either, that's the really disappointing part, absolutely no excuse for that IMO ...

obturator

Bingo!

And the member that thought all previous Fs had lower power than the competition, this just shows how much people know about the F brand. A lot of people probably don't know that the last ISF equal the time of the M3 at the Nurburgring, a testament to how far F has gone in a short period of time. So, to just put the untuned RCF engine in the GSF is simply lazy especially for a long and much anticipated GSF (after Akio stated that more power can be extracted from this engine).

SNiiP3R

iTrader: (3)

So, is the bottom of the headlight part of the DRL or is that a turn signal ?

patgilm

That's exactly how I felt, it just seems lazy on Lexus' part to use the same engine. The one good thing is at least it is lighter than most of the competition which could be a big deal. As most have said, pricing this will be key.

Vladi

It's not a DRL most likely a turn signal.

Lexuslvr91

When the IS-F came out it had 416 hp 371 lb-ft. M3 414 hp 295 lb-ft. C63 451 hp 443 lb-ft. RS4 420 hp 317 lb-ft. Power figures were extremely close minus the heavier C63 but at least the IS-F was in the ball park. You would have heard complaints if Lexus would have offered the same 389 hp tune from the LS600hL

Many here aren't worried about turbos or superchargers on the GS-F. Lexus really should have been able to pull 500+ hp from that engine.

situman

I'm sure 500+ hp from the 5.0 isn't hard. High revving engines is a Yamaha forte. However, its a 2 ton vehicle and the available torque is already at the high end of the RPM range in its current tune and it made it feel slower than it really is even though it had more HP than its competitors, per RC-F reviews. It was the same thing in the IS-F, per Top Gear at least. I do agree it was lazy of Lexus to just drop the same engine into the GS-F as the RC-F especially when the GS will be a a class higher and costs more! At a minimum they could have slapped a small turbo on the thing to give it more low end torque and more HP.