rominl

iTrader: (4)

precisely, if they care. or i should say if accounting department cares, because i know yaguchi-san cares.

it's quite funny that when the news were out that the 5 is based on the 7 (thus the weight), it's the worst possible thing. but when the rc (compact luxury) is "based" on the gs (mid-size), it's a great thing (btw, what makes the rc based on gs when technically only 1/3 of the car -- front -- is based on the 4gs?). i am not talking about the performance results, so i am not dissing rcf nor am i praising the 5. just the observation alone.

truth is, i find it quite entertaining how defensive people on either side get over reviews. i mean, they are just some darn reviews. that itself is an entertainment already, let alone top gear. i am not saying if i agree with their review or not, but it's quite insane some posts i read here (and the rcf forum which seriously i don't dare to post without hurting the feeling of some sensitive ones).

making judgments based on reviews is silly enough already, doing so without even driving both cars and have your OWN preference and conclusion is just quite mind blowing.

yowps3

According to Australian data, the ISF weighs in at 1700kg and the RCF at 1860kg

That's a 353 Ib increase! The equivalent of having two extra adult passengers in the car!

TF109B

What does weight matter so much in a Luxury sport coupe? If it was a luxury sports car thatd be different. The RC F as is, is not a sports car and wasnt intended to be. They could take away some plush, some sound proofing, put an I-6 in there, some half *** back seats and itd be 3700lbs. like the M4, but then it wouldnt be a Lexus. All the 'overweight being a hinderance' talking points are garbage sportscar bias. Not a Luxury GT cruiser. This is why Lexus is what it is and not BMW or Audi.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

not a problem if lexus didn't have this car to go against the m4. yes, head into lexus corporate and talk to people before trying to say they don't target the car at m4

mmarshall

That may be true for car people like us, but millions of car buyers (and potential car buyers) nationwide rely on organizations like Consumer Reports, J.D. Power, or even Edmunds for primary advice. Some even may rely (or partially rely) on what WE say.....people often ask me for advice. But, yes, no matter how good (or how lousy) that advice can be, I agree that there is no substitution for a personal test-drive. I can complain, in a car review, for example, about seats that are too sharply or narrowly-bolstered for my big tall, wide torso and rump. (VW GTI seats are a good example). But the majority (perhaps the vast majority) of car-buyers aren't going to have a torso or rump my size....they are much more likely to be comfortable in a seat like that.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

maybe you can show me proofs on how these auto reviews really affect sales numbers. last i checked bmw can make a complete garbage and people would still buy. millions of people READ, yes. millions of people base their decisions largely on reviews? i highly doubt.

mmarshall

Well, I agree with you that the latest BMW products, compared to previous models, are clearly on the way down, and not the Ultimate Driving Machines they were for decades. But, as you note people continue to buy them. And one reason why they continue to buy them (though it is not the only reason) is the years and years of past good reviews and them (usually) winning the comparison tests in the enthusiast magazines. Once a vehicle (or lines of vehicles) get a reputation, with good or bad, in the marketplace, that reputation trends to stick, even after the vehicles themselves change and the old reputation still hangs on. That is why Kia and Hyundai took a long time getting accepted by the American car-buying public even after they had clearly changed and were no longer the junk of the 1980s and 90s.

yowps3

What plush? There is absolutely nothing plush about the RCF's interior. The ISF is far more plush, has two extra seats & doors, bigger boot and interior.
Yet it's almost 400 pounds lighter!

QuentinB

Cars.com has the 2014 IS-F at 3780lbs. The RC-F is 3958lbs from the same source. That is under 200lbs difference.

xioix

Camry reviews have always been behind competition, but sales are not affected at all.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

So it is brand loyalty, reputation, heritage. Reviews? Very limited effect. Thanks for reiterating my point.

Yup exactly. We all know why Camry sells. And we also know why they don't do well in reviews.

pman6

seems like RCF is for those who just want a stable drive with no tricks. Back end doesn't break loose easily from all the reviews I've seen.

It's too bad when people think of the M4, they just remember the one dude at Cars and Coffee who spun out his car and hopped over the center island and drove off in shame.

But surely there's a way to drive the m4 without it being hard to control ... for those who don't like to drift ?

baddis es

iTrader: (3)

saw this monday, and it's probably been mentioned here already, but I thought I was looking more at an LFA review than an RCF.

bottom line from Carson, to me, is he expected the LFA in the RCF's body...can't wait to see the GS-F review next

DrRick

It's called learning how to drive or leaving traction control on until you DO learn how to drive...

bitkahuna

iTrader: (20)

disagree with both of you. in enthusiast car mag reviews, the camry may not always fair very well, but look at the 'journalists' and target audience. so the camry doesn't win the drifting competition, who cares? that's not its intended audience or market.

however, it's always one or two in reviews its intended market are likely to read like consumer reports (ugh), popular mechanics, usa today, etc. and i believe those reviews ABSOLUTELY have an impact on reinforcing people's decisions to buy.

of course that's not a reasonable request because no one can, this is an opinion-based discussion.

bmw has not ever made 'complete garbage' in my opinion, but they've certainly had cars that don't do very well, probably an x6 comes to mind, i don't know. yes the automotive reviewers have usually given bmw a pass or very kind treatment even when the bangle butt came out, when the 5 series got heavier than a whale, and similar questionable design traits. still, i'd never say a bmw is complete garbage - they still all have wonderful traits. when i've driven a bmw, and audi, a lexus, and a mercedes, they all have distinctive traits to me... pros and cons.

i agree with you there, it's simply an influencing factor. and i think it might be different somewhat for mainstream vs. enthusiast vehicles but i don't know. about the rc-f and clarkson - i DO believe that someone who was considering an rc-f before his review and it matters to them what their peers think (as most do) may be put off now. of course there will be others who couldn't care less and get an rc-f anyway, and contrarians who get an rc-f just to be 'different'.

another example, if you don't think all the GLOWING press for the new mustang is having an influence in sales, well, i disagree. i believe some will consider a mustang now who never would have.