RCF vs 2015 Mustang GT
11-19-14, 02:40 AM
#80
I was recently in LA at a Porsche press event. I spent time with the German Auto Magazine editor, and he said it is quite common the be given cars that are detuned for many of their test drives. He was not at all surprised to hear that Lexus detuned the RCF and actually stated it was warranted given many of the editor's driving skills.
The last thing a manufacturer wants associated with a new car launch is a crash. We take it for granted that everyone can manage a 467 HP rocket on a track.
The RT RCF was almost certainly a pre-pro vehicle, detuned, and not ready to be strapped up with instrumentation. The results nonetheless are impressive.
The last thing a manufacturer wants associated with a new car launch is a crash. We take it for granted that everyone can manage a 467 HP rocket on a track.
The RT RCF was almost certainly a pre-pro vehicle, detuned, and not ready to be strapped up with instrumentation. The results nonetheless are impressive.
Cool.
I quoted that RC-F nannies issue in the other 'review' thread, BTW. Lexus had put a restrictor on the ECU for these press cars that prevents burn outs and crazy stuff. Lexus later removed that detune. However, this test must have happened before Lexus applied the reflash.
Although, I would take the R&T Motown lap with a grain of salt since their numbers are highly inconsistent. Their M4 lap is a full 2 seconds slower than that of the M3, which is ridiculous. They are basically the same car, yet they got hugely inconsistent numbers.
They say, the Motown track is extremely rough and bumpy, which does not allow the chassis to settle especially if the car is stiff. It favors cars with adaptive suspension rather than fixed suspension cars so it could be possible that the M3 had the optional adaptive suspension while the M4 did not.
I quoted that RC-F nannies issue in the other 'review' thread, BTW. Lexus had put a restrictor on the ECU for these press cars that prevents burn outs and crazy stuff. Lexus later removed that detune. However, this test must have happened before Lexus applied the reflash.
Although, I would take the R&T Motown lap with a grain of salt since their numbers are highly inconsistent. Their M4 lap is a full 2 seconds slower than that of the M3, which is ridiculous. They are basically the same car, yet they got hugely inconsistent numbers.
They say, the Motown track is extremely rough and bumpy, which does not allow the chassis to settle especially if the car is stiff. It favors cars with adaptive suspension rather than fixed suspension cars so it could be possible that the M3 had the optional adaptive suspension while the M4 did not.
11-19-14, 12:35 PM
#82
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Nov 2014
Location: United States
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still the RC F is in the lead ATM
11-22-14, 10:19 AM
#83
Lead Lap
I'm comparing these 2 cars personally because they fit most of my requirements: NA V8, performance, backseat, useable trunk, great styling.
Bec of the engine and styling - im not considering M4 personally.
Obviously RCF is more refined and better built but will it offer better performance?
Also aftermarket support will me much more robust for the Mustang.
If price was the same, obviously i would get RCF but its about $25-30k more.
Anyone else cross shopping these 2 cars?
Bec of the engine and styling - im not considering M4 personally.
Obviously RCF is more refined and better built but will it offer better performance?
Also aftermarket support will me much more robust for the Mustang.
If price was the same, obviously i would get RCF but its about $25-30k more.
Anyone else cross shopping these 2 cars?
While I love it and want one, I can't fathom the price tag considering what you're getting (which IMO is only styling) since it's underpowered for the $$$. While I realize the info below is comparing apples to oranges in overall class/design, it's worth noting that there is a $30,000 difference for roughly the same power with a Mustang GT 5.0.
2015 RC F specs:
V8 5.0-LITER
467 HP
380 lb-ft
4.4 0-60 MPH (SEC)
V8 5.0-LITER ENGINE
Curb weight: 3958 lbs
Price: $62,400 (starting)
2015 Mustang GT specs:
V8 5.0-LITER
435HP
400 lb-ft
4.5 0-60 MPH (SEC)
Curb weight: 3810 lbs
Price: $32,100 (starting)
If you want to compare apples to apples however, take a look at the Chevrolet Corvette Z51 2LT.
V8 6.2 LITER
460HP
455 lb-ft
3.7 0-60 MPH (SEC)
Curb weight: 3362 lbs
Price: $63,160
Or for a little more money, take a look at the Chevrolet Corvette Z06.
V8 6.2 LITER
650HP
650 lb-ft
2.95 0-60 MPH (SEC)
Curb weight: 3524 lbs
Price: $78,995
Or you can take a look at the link below on other Bang For Your Buck cars with good HP. You can have twice as much power and with a much wider variety of aftermarket parts since Lexus seems to be the bastard child for tuner parts outside of gaudy body kits.
Top 11 Fastest Cars For The Money
The fact that Lexus carried over the same 3.5L engine from the 2IS to the 3IS and now RC 350, and the same 5.0 from the IS F to the RC F is very disappointing and is the reason I won't pony up the cash for an RC F. The fact that you can get similar power or more power for less from other car makers, to include some great styling makes the RC F a no-go for me.
11-22-14, 11:31 PM
#84
Lexus Test Driver
I have similar sentiments as you do. I love the RC 350 and RC F design but you don't get much bang for your buck with exception of aesthetics (and the RC F looks much nicer than the RC 350)...The fact that you can get similar power or more power for less from other car makers, to include some great styling makes the RC F a no-go for me.
11-23-14, 04:50 PM
#85
If we're going purely on specs, one might as well get a KTM X-Bow and call it a day. With the chance to drive these cars, we can all agree that there are subtle differences that really matter. That's why a less powerful 911 could still be called the better driver's car.
The RC F has run a 3.9 in the Road & Track PCOTY testing with a skilled driver, and it's outrunning the M4 and RS5 on a track by seconds. Even German loving MT ended up with virtually a dead heat between the RC F and M4. The Mustang can't compete with either car.
The RC F will out run the new Stang and crush it on a track.
In the PCOTY, Road &Track could not break the 4.5 second barrier with the New Stag.
Last edited by ISF001; 11-23-14 at 04:55 PM.
11-23-14, 04:56 PM
#86
Toystry,
The RC F has run a 3.9 in the Road & Track testing with a skilled driver, and it's outrunning the M4 and RS5 on a track by seconds. Even German loving MT ended up with virtually a dead heat between the RC F and M4. The Mustang can't compete with either car.
The RC F will out run the new Stang and crush it on a track.
The RC F has run a 3.9 in the Road & Track testing with a skilled driver, and it's outrunning the M4 and RS5 on a track by seconds. Even German loving MT ended up with virtually a dead heat between the RC F and M4. The Mustang can't compete with either car.
The RC F will out run the new Stang and crush it on a track.
All with cooled seats and a 17 speaker stereo system lol. I keep going around and around with cars for 80-100k the GTR / GT 350 / M5/6 etc but I keep cars forever so 10 years from now they will all be on the side of the road plus to maintain them is going to be 10k+ over the years.
It seems the maintenance on the RCF is the same as any Toyota, and that's why I miss something like my old NSX, it was fast, never left me, and was cheep to maintain.
11-23-14, 05:00 PM
#87
All with cooled seats and a 17 speaker stereo system lol. I keep going around and around with cars for 80-100k the GTR / GT 350 / M5/6 etc but I keep cars forever so 10 years from now they will all be on the side of the road plus to maintain them is going to be 10k+ over the years.
It seems the maintenance on the RCF is the same as any Toyota, and that's why I miss something like my old NSX, it was fast, never left me, and was cheep to maintain.
It seems the maintenance on the RCF is the same as any Toyota, and that's why I miss something like my old NSX, it was fast, never left me, and was cheep to maintain.
11-23-14, 05:06 PM
#88
Lead Lap
Toystry,
The RC F has run a 3.9 in the Road & Track PCOTY testing with a skilled driver, and it's outrunning the M4 and RS5 on a track by seconds. Even German loving MT ended up with virtually a dead heat between the RC F and M4. The Mustang can't compete with either car.
The RC F will out run the new Stang and crush it on a track.
In the PCOTY, Road &Track could not break the 4.5 second barrier with the New Stag.
The RC F has run a 3.9 in the Road & Track PCOTY testing with a skilled driver, and it's outrunning the M4 and RS5 on a track by seconds. Even German loving MT ended up with virtually a dead heat between the RC F and M4. The Mustang can't compete with either car.
The RC F will out run the new Stang and crush it on a track.
In the PCOTY, Road &Track could not break the 4.5 second barrier with the New Stag.
I'm not bashing the RC F.....I want one, just can't justify the cost comparison.
11-23-14, 05:19 PM
#89
Concur the RC F will beat a mustang, not arguing that at all......hell I love the RC F, just not the price tag considering what you can get in comparison to other cars currently on the market. My point with the Mustang was that it's closely match HP wise and $30k cheaper. If you were to drop even as little as $10-$15k on a S/C'er, headers, exhaust and tune it would destroy the RC F though.......but at the end of the day it's still a Mustang, not an RC F. If money were no object hands down I'd buy an RC F but for that kind of money I think "for me" it's smarter to buy something close in comparison and use the $30k difference on upgrading it.
I'm not bashing the RC F.....I want one, just can't justify the cost comparison.
I'm not bashing the RC F.....I want one, just can't justify the cost comparison.
Ultimately, we are talking about expensive toys for big boys.
11-23-14, 05:26 PM
#90
Lead Lap