RC F automotive reviews thread
#571
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
wonder if they got it mixed up with the RC 350 F Sport which has bridgestone potenzas. RCF is suppose to have PSS stock. In the gallery they clearly shows both cars have PSS
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_28.html
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_28.html
#572
Lexus Test Driver
That is definitely disappointing that Lexus did not send it with the Michelin Pilot SS tires. They are bar none the best summer performance tires on the market right now this side of racing slick tires.
In regards to the Motor Trend article with the M4 beating the RC-F around the Streets of Willow track by 0.3 seconds, I noticed that on the Motor Trend spec sheet, it lists the Lexus RC-F being equipped with Bridgestone Potenza tires and the BMW M4 with Michelin Pilot Super Sports:
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/specs.html
Doesn't the RC-F come standard with Michelin Pilot Super Sports? I'm an advocate that tires play a huge role in regards to lap times (when driver skill level remains constant) so assuming that the Michelin Pilot Super Sports are stickier than the Bridgestone Potenzas that the test RC-F was equipped with for this comparison, it's very likely that the pendulum might have switched and that the RC-F could have been the one to win the Motor Trend lap time comparison that day by 0.3 seconds if it was using Super Sport tires as well.
Just my two cents...
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...son/specs.html
Doesn't the RC-F come standard with Michelin Pilot Super Sports? I'm an advocate that tires play a huge role in regards to lap times (when driver skill level remains constant) so assuming that the Michelin Pilot Super Sports are stickier than the Bridgestone Potenzas that the test RC-F was equipped with for this comparison, it's very likely that the pendulum might have switched and that the RC-F could have been the one to win the Motor Trend lap time comparison that day by 0.3 seconds if it was using Super Sport tires as well.
Just my two cents...
#573
wonder if they got it mixed up with the RC 350 F Sport which has bridgestone potenzas. RCF is suppose to have PSS stock. In the gallery they clearly shows both cars have PSS
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_28.html
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/.../photo_28.html
Streets of Willow segment starts at the 10:10 mark. I'm not sure if the reference to the Potenzas for the RC-F on the spec sheet is a typo or not...
Last edited by redspencer; 12-09-14 at 07:14 AM.
#574
Lexus Test Driver
You are telling others to take physics lessons, but it is really you who needs physics lessons
For one, for your information, Randy Pobst does multiple laps in each cars. It is extremely naive of you to think he just gets in the car and goes for a timed lap right off the bat. He does an outlap, flyer and then a timed lap in order to first get adjusted to the car properly before he does a timed lap. R&T also said they did multiple laps in the RC-F.
He is talking about GTR and has a perfectly valid point. Braking comes down to only tires and brakes. There are tons of other examples of 3900 - 4000 lbs cars that do just fine lap after lap without any brake fade. The IS-F was 3815 lbs and it did just fine with inferior brakes lap after lap.
It is just that you continue to look for excuses to criticize the RC-F.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 12-09-14 at 07:22 AM.
#575
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
People constantly complain about the weight, but can never explain away the .3 sec difference which is within driver error. M4 shouldve beat this car by 3 seconds considering specs, not .3
#576
There will be a lot of tests on "real" tracks in the future, I personally dont care a bit for results on the two tracks RC-F were tested at. Both of them are very slow and R&T:s really uneven. Uneven sufaces at lower speeds gives a more soft and heavy car advantages in the same way a Toyota Landcrusier will handle a lot better and be faster than a Lexus NX F sport on a bad country road. Its not always a bad thing to have softer chassis.
Lets se Nurburgring , Silverstone, Monza , Laguna Seca and other tracks where you really torture brakes and suspension.
Lets se Nurburgring , Silverstone, Monza , Laguna Seca and other tracks where you really torture brakes and suspension.
#577
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
barely faster and .3 sec on a near 1.5 minute lap is within driver error. Not a decisive victory when looking at specs. If a veteran driver has this much trouble being consistent in the new M imagine a novice driver at an HPDE. M limits can only be exploited by experienced drivers. Evo and R&T both reported this instability at the limit on the M. Smoothness and predictability is how the RCF was able to get within half a second of an M with superior specs. That is the hallmark of NA engines and the learning curve on turbocharged engines.
#578
Lexus Test Driver
There will be a lot of tests on "real" tracks in the future, I personally dont care a bit for results on the two tracks RC-F were tested at. Both of them are very slow and R&T:s really uneven. Uneven sufaces at lower speeds gives a more soft and heavy car advantages in the same way a Toyota Landcrusier will handle a lot better and be faster than a Lexus NX F sport on a bad country road. Its not always a bad thing to have softer chassis.
Lets se Nurburgring , Silverstone, Monza , Laguna Seca and other tracks where you really torture brakes and suspension.
Lets se Nurburgring , Silverstone, Monza , Laguna Seca and other tracks where you really torture brakes and suspension.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 12-09-14 at 08:32 AM.
#579
#580
Lexus Champion
These lap times are useless unless youre the guy setting them. Who goes racing in their m4 or RC F? Tracking is not racing. You might be able to run 90% of Pobst, and a guy in the M4 might be able to run 85%. Its up to the driver and car. He might have a better feel with pushing the m4 than the RC F. No one single driver is going to get 100% from both cars at the same time. Thats why Nurburgring lap times are done with factory drivers.
#581
These lap times are useless unless youre the guy setting them. Who goes racing in their m4 or RC F? Tracking is not racing. You might be able to run 90% of Pobst, and a guy in the M4 might be able to run 85%. Its up to the driver and car. He might have a better feel with pushing the m4 than the RC F. No one single driver is going to get 100% from both cars at the same time. Thats why Nurburgring lap times are done with factory drivers.
If you wanted a track car I say again get a GTR, you can get a 2013/14 for mid 80's. But I got the RCF for my daily because it works for that well.
#582
Lexus Champion
Thread Starter
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._f_comparison/
A few comments:
1. Carlos conveniently did not mention the 3/10s difference in the 0-60 runs.
2. He does not discuss the near dead heat hot lap. It seems like Randy over braked the RCF on the corners and lost lots of tenths. Watch the hot lap video link.
3. Aesthetic comments about cars are always based on personal preference. To me, the bimmer designs all look alike and blend together. To others, they are stand out cars.
Overall, it's a reasonable article.
A few comments:
1. Carlos conveniently did not mention the 3/10s difference in the 0-60 runs.
2. He does not discuss the near dead heat hot lap. It seems like Randy over braked the RCF on the corners and lost lots of tenths. Watch the hot lap video link.
3. Aesthetic comments about cars are always based on personal preference. To me, the bimmer designs all look alike and blend together. To others, they are stand out cars.
Overall, it's a reasonable article.
Last edited by ISF001; 12-10-14 at 05:03 AM.
#583
The 0-60s were mentioned in the video along the 1/4 mile time, figure 8, G force and braking all won by the M4. The 0-60s and other tests were on the summary page at the end of the article also.
Motor trend has never liked the looks of the RCF, I don't agree with them either, I think the RCF has a modern and very sporty look to it. The M4 looks good also but you can only do so much with a kidney bean grill.
Motor trend has never liked the looks of the RCF, I don't agree with them either, I think the RCF has a modern and very sporty look to it. The M4 looks good also but you can only do so much with a kidney bean grill.
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._f_comparison/
A few comments:
1. Carlos conveniently did not mention the 3/10s difference in the 0-60 runs.
2. He does not discuss the near dead heat hot lap. It seems like Randy over braked the RCF on the corners and lost lots of tenths. Watch the hot lap video link.
3. Aesthetic comments about cars are always based on personal preference. To me, the bimmer designs all look alike and blend together. To others, they are stand out cars.
Overall, it's a reasonable article.
A few comments:
1. Carlos conveniently did not mention the 3/10s difference in the 0-60 runs.
2. He does not discuss the near dead heat hot lap. It seems like Randy over braked the RCF on the corners and lost lots of tenths. Watch the hot lap video link.
3. Aesthetic comments about cars are always based on personal preference. To me, the bimmer designs all look alike and blend together. To others, they are stand out cars.
Overall, it's a reasonable article.
#584
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (1)
The 0-60s were mentioned in the video along the 1/4 mile time, figure 8, G force and braking all won by the M4. The 0-60s and other tests were on the summary page at the end of the article also.
Motor trend has never liked the looks of the RCF, I don't agree with them either, I think the RCF has a modern and very sporty look to it. The M4 looks good also but you can only do so much with a kidney bean grill.
Motor trend has never liked the looks of the RCF, I don't agree with them either, I think the RCF has a modern and very sporty look to it. The M4 looks good also but you can only do so much with a kidney bean grill.
#585
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (3)
Having now seen a few RCs in person, including the F, I am sort of shocked that Motor Trend so highly dislikes the exterior.
Maybe there are some awkward elements, such as the wide "hips" on the rear bumper, but in person, the RC has street presence and aggression unlike anything else right now. Not only is it aggressive, but I haven't met a single person who doesn't think the front end with tri-LED headlights isn't one of the best faces short of $100k. Lexus did a great job with this car, but alas, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
Maybe there are some awkward elements, such as the wide "hips" on the rear bumper, but in person, the RC has street presence and aggression unlike anything else right now. Not only is it aggressive, but I haven't met a single person who doesn't think the front end with tri-LED headlights isn't one of the best faces short of $100k. Lexus did a great job with this car, but alas, beauty is in the eye of the beholder.