lantu0312

How do you guys compared these two performance cars? Which one is faster? I like both of these cars, but I can't decide which one I will buy. I have a starfire white ISF, but I'm not sure if the new RCF has a lot more improvements based on the ISF model.

natnut

According to this review, RC-F > M4 > C63 AMG > RS5 :

ISF001

Alas, a non-idiot who can drive the F car. Long-term reliability, aspirated engine sans turbos, ... fun factor.

Any other non-idiots out there doing objective reviews?

NYKnick101

I can agree with that. Mercedes (IMO) hasn't really been the best track machines as they are more GO FAST cars like most muscle cars. And I haven't really seen any RS5 owners eager to take their cars out on the track

obturator

Sadly, he pinned his decision on two factors: reliability and NA vs turbo. Wished the RCF would have blown away the M4 on pure performance. The RCF's weight is its downfall. It's heavier than my GS. But let's wait for the comparos to come out.

chilipalm

http://www.torquenews.com/1083/are-2...ly-competitors

ISF001

Great article--the M4 and RCF are different animals.

The comparison will be on reliability, overall driveability, and the fun factor.

The RCF will win hands down, IMO.

Furge

The RCF beats the M4 on Reliabilty. Sadly, that's it.
Technology - M4 (carbon fiber parts, huge performance and great effeciency, HUD, and more)
Looks - I vastly prefer the M, but it's subjective
Interior - M.
Manual trans - M
Practicality - M, folding rear seats, sunshades
Performance - M

KS13

I can't wait to test drive this bad boy. Anyone know when Lexus is going have a similar event as when they released the GS?

Furge

What a ridiculous article!
The M4 is a "race car that can be licensed and driven on the street"?! Huh? It's a 3 series with many performance enhancements. Not a Race Car! A lotus Exige S is a race car for the street. How stupid.

Then they claim that since BMW used a V8 just a few months ago in their M3, there's no way bmw buyers would have determined that a v8 is not for them. Makes sense. Meaning the 2 cars are targeting the same driver. But then they say they agree with BMW. Huh?

It's one thing to say the RC F is more of a luxury GT car with a great engine, and the M4 is more of a track car. But is the RC F really better on the Street as a DD? Suspension seems to be more harsh than the M, back seats don't fold, and of course you can get 4 doors with the M3... Seems to me that that more practical DD is the M. Oh and it gets much better fuel consumption.
I really wish Lexus had knocked it out of the park here - if not in outright performance, then in a winning blend of comfort and sportiness for the street.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

much better fuel consumption? M4 DCT gets 1mpg better than RCFs 16/25. Worse highway if you get the manual. The "6mpg" difference claim is euro standards which arent that accurate. EPA rating is actually quite accurate for real world

Furge

I meant in actual use. Lexus achieves the EPA numbers running in the Prius-like Atkinson cycle -- unlikely that most owners would drive that way.
Under spirited driving, the Lexus consumption will increase more than the BMW's. It has to, look at the specs. The weight difference alone is almost 12%.

MRxSLAYx

Sucks that the M4 is going to be so much faster though. Lexus really slipped up with the motor...

TimboIS

There's absolutely nothing wrong with the motor. It's a technological masterpiece.

05RollaXRS

The engine is perfect. Much more responsive and sonorous than the boring, bland and awful sounding twin turbo 6 in the M4, which has been criticized for lack of character. When the hardcore bimmer fans call it "lawnmower", you know there is an issue with it.

RC-F makes big horsepower and revs up to 7300 rpm. The only issue that is being talked about is the 400 lbs extra weight.