Kurtz

iTrader: (1)

Except that these are results from people in the SAME cars, running the SAME gas, on the SAME tires... who all see better 1/4 mile times on the SAME day at the SAME track, when they run in ECT-Normal versus ECT-Power.


And Lexus stated 5.3 seconds for several years... they changed it to 5.6, I dunno, maybe for 09 or 10 models I think?

Lexus times are states with traction control turned on though (since that's how they sell the car and recommend you drive it), and as I mentioned this can easily add at least half a second of slowdown.

machefai

ah okay, thanks kurtz. the thread you fwd'd seemed to reference several different people, with different set ups and multiple runs over a period of several trips to the track. I assumed you were just referring to, folks over time experiencing better performance.

It's not that i'm denying that it's possible or that they're not right in their assumptions I was just surprised there isn't more hard data. I'm a sucker for line graphs and consistency in reporting!

Why is Lexus so cagey with their findings?

vital

on a RWD, what does switching the ECT PWR button to SNOW do?

syzygy

Actually, Lexus's current estimate is 5.3 seconds. From 2006 to 2010, Lexus cited the IS350's 0 to 60 in 5.6 seconds. Then, in 2010, they somewhat arbitrarily reduced that figure from 5.6 seconds to 5.3 seconds, despite there being no change in the powertrain. The only reasonable conclusion is that Lexus felt 5.6 was too grossly underrated.

Here's the official Lexus press release where they clearly state the "5.3" figure -

http://pressroom.toyota.com/pr/tms/l...ogy-98597.aspx

The IS sedan line offers four models: The rear-wheel-drive (RWD) IS 350, the rear-drive IS 250, an all-wheel drive IS 250, plus the high performance RWD IS F. The IS 250's 2.5-liter V6 engine delivers 204 horsepower at 6,400 RPM and 185 lb.-ft. of peak torque at 4,800 rpm. The IS 350's 3.5-liter V6 delivers 306 horsepower at 6,400 RPM along with 277 lb.-ft. of torque at 4,800 rpm and can accelerate the car from zero-to-60 mph in just 5.3 seconds. Both engines use aluminum cylinder blocks and heads and employ dual Variable Valve Timing with intelligence (VVT-i), which controls timing on both the intake and exhaust camshafts.

Your claim that sub-5 second 0 to 60 times can only be achieved by "highly modified IS350s" isn't accurate either. Here's a bone stock 2008 IS350 achieving 0 to 60 in 4.72 seconds (with brake torquing) -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dj-ZvmRivzg

Notice he holds the brake and revs the engine to about 3500 RPM before letting the brake go. The car doesn't begin to move when the RPMs rise. The car begins to move once he releases the brake at 3500 RPM.

syzygy

Now, interestingly enough, despite having an official press conference stating 0 to 60 in 5.3 seconds, Lexus didn't bother to change the figure on lexus.com. I don't know why. I have a couple of hypotheses -

1) The performance of the IS350 isn't the focal point of the car, it's merely a bonus. And so, it isn't terribly important for Lexus if their listed performance figures for the IS350 aren't optimal.

2) Lexus doesn't want to "step on the toes" of the ISF. Lay people unfortunately judge performance by 0 to 60 figures alone, and so it's in Lexus's interest to keep the 0 to 60 differential between the IS350 and the ISF as large as possible.

Perhaps it's a combination of these reasons. Perhaps it's neither. There's really no way to tell. This is why I usually go by an assortment of 3rd party car magazines to derive performance figures for cars.

machefai

Great find! Man that was fast! I noticed he had traction off, but to the point of the thread, wonder what he had his ect set to!

As far as that press release, was that the only place they had 5.3? If so, typo maybe? I imagine with each release, they'd need to update and check the site info considering the traffic to the site. And I gotta say, that's such a huge thing in my mind! Wow, i just gained .3 sec's or more than I thought I had! SWEET!

As far as your thoughts on why they would talk down the speed of the car, I really can't imagine they'd want to make their 350's any less attractive. Especially with the amount of competition in this class. Although the 3 series may have the stronghold, the infiniti's, audi's and mb's are all jockeying for market share! Every little bit could change a potential buyer's mind!

ISF4life

iTrader: (30)

if u mods are right and some lighter wheels, take off the spare tire and jack... u can get better than 4.6... if the weather permit even faster check out my threads lolz.. brake torque...

Crispy

iTrader: (3)

I don't see "SNOW" or "PWR" lit up on the dash, so I would assume Normal...

dsigs83

iTrader: (1)

i read all 9 pages and dont see anything regarding snow mode as actually SAVING mpg vs normal/power. anyone?

Noeh

iTrader: (3)

less responsive throttle + low rpm = slightly better mpg in stop & go traffic

dsigs83

iTrader: (1)

is it that simple? if so, id assume it'd be recommended to drive in snow mode all the time unless you want performance.

Noeh

iTrader: (3)

Yeah similar to ECO mode on newer cars

rxonmymind

WOW! Glad I read this thread. Made a HUGE difference merging with traffic while getting on the on ramp. You see I have this rather steep slow sweeping 100 yrd on ramp that curves to the right which only leaves you maybe 100 ft to merge with traffic once past the curve. (Photo taken with nobody around. A great Sunday morning!) Brilliant engineering. Anyway, just a few minutes ago I decided to test this out twice and BANG the car shot like a rocket in that short span. Yesterday I had two passengers with me in the back seat with half a tank of gas car felt anemic. Now with a full tank with the ECT button on (weighs more) it pulled like I had it when I first got it. I was wondering why this car had "slowed" down after I bought it and I had at some point turned it off. I cold care less about mpg and would rather have the result I experienced.

Thanks to everyone contributing.