RC F vs M4
09-16-14, 11:35 PM
#121
Lexus Test Driver
I am going to further my claims with some concrete proof that RC-F will be much much faster than 12.9 seconds.
Here is another test
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...fications.html
The E90 M3 6 speed manual sedan and IS-F both ran an identical 12.7 seconds. The IS-F had a slightly higher trap speed of 113.4 mph versus 111.3 mph for the M3.
Now, the IS-F weighed 3820 lbs compared to 3650 lbs for the E90 M3 sedan. About 140 - 160 lbs lighter than the RC-F and it managed to run 12.7 seconds.
Comparing the power to weight ratio:
IS-F: 9.17 lbs/HP
RC-F: 8.4 lbs/HP
It is clear the RC-F has a very significant power-to-weight ratio advantage over the IS-F. The IS-F could easily crack 12.6 - 12.7 in tests with 416 HP and 3820 lbs combined with a slower transmission.
The RC-F has the following advantages over the IS-F:
1 - Additional 50 more horsepower
2 - A more efficient transmission with a shorter overall final drive
3 - A broader torque spread across a wider 7300 rpm (versus 6800 rpm for IS-F). In short, a wider area under the curve
4 - Torque vectoring differential
All of this put together, the RC-F should 100% be able to run a few tenths quicker than the IS-F. My range would be 12.2 - 12.4 seconds and around 115 - 116 mph trap speed.
Here is another test
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...fications.html
The E90 M3 6 speed manual sedan and IS-F both ran an identical 12.7 seconds. The IS-F had a slightly higher trap speed of 113.4 mph versus 111.3 mph for the M3.
Now, the IS-F weighed 3820 lbs compared to 3650 lbs for the E90 M3 sedan. About 140 - 160 lbs lighter than the RC-F and it managed to run 12.7 seconds.
Comparing the power to weight ratio:
IS-F: 9.17 lbs/HP
RC-F: 8.4 lbs/HP
It is clear the RC-F has a very significant power-to-weight ratio advantage over the IS-F. The IS-F could easily crack 12.6 - 12.7 in tests with 416 HP and 3820 lbs combined with a slower transmission.
The RC-F has the following advantages over the IS-F:
1 - Additional 50 more horsepower
2 - A more efficient transmission with a shorter overall final drive
3 - A broader torque spread across a wider 7300 rpm (versus 6800 rpm for IS-F). In short, a wider area under the curve
4 - Torque vectoring differential
All of this put together, the RC-F should 100% be able to run a few tenths quicker than the IS-F. My range would be 12.2 - 12.4 seconds and around 115 - 116 mph trap speed.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 09-17-14 at 08:06 AM.
09-17-14, 04:44 AM
#122
09-17-14, 05:59 AM
#124
LMAO at the "wait for the reviews of the official car' mantra but yet we have to endure these never ending hypothetical expert opinions of how great the car is.
Stop getting bent out of shape because someone makes a positive comment about a BMW. Not the end of the world if someone prefers one over the other.
Cars are evenly matched so it's going to come down to driver ability in the end anyway.
Stop getting bent out of shape because someone makes a positive comment about a BMW. Not the end of the world if someone prefers one over the other.
Cars are evenly matched so it's going to come down to driver ability in the end anyway.
09-17-14, 01:07 PM
#125
Lexus Fanatic
Bottom line...this is a Lexus forum...you're not doing anything but trolling here. If you want to talk about how much you think the M4 bests the RC-F, I'm sure there are people on your BMW forum happy to do that with you.
If someone offered me an RC-F or an M4 free, I'd take the RC-F. Thats the god honest truth.I don't expect you to agree...which is why I don't spend my time trolling around on BMW forums.
09-17-14, 02:38 PM
#126
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: NJ
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lot's of hate for the M3/4 from insecure future owners of the RCF. I don't own an M3/4, and I'm not planning on putting down a deposit on one but it's pretty clear cut and dry who the objective winner is between the two cars. It's faster than the RC-F in almost every measurable metric, and most importantly it weighs a lot less, which in turn means that it'll be better for hooning/tracking as well. Looks are subjective but I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the general populace will prefer the F80 over the RC-F as far as styling is concerned.
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Source - http://jalopnik.com/2015-bmw-m3-the-...1635342844/all
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
As for the rest, well, on the road it's super planted up to absurd, obscene speeds. It changes direction quickly and fluidly. Compared to the 2015 Lexus RC F, the M3's 500-plus pound weight savings make it feel more lithe. More alive. This thing has to be a hoot on track.
Now, you just need to decide if you want a BMW M3, or a BMW M3 fighter. Give me the M3 any day.
09-17-14, 05:12 PM
#127
Lot's of hate for the M3/4 from insecure future owners of the RCF. I don't own an M3/4, and I'm not planning on putting down a deposit on one but it's pretty clear cut and dry who the objective winner is between the two cars. It's faster than the RC-F in almost every measurable metric, and most importantly it weighs a lot less, which in turn means that it'll be better for hooning/tracking as well. Looks are subjective but I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the general populace will prefer the F80 over the RC-F as far as styling is concerned.
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Source - http://jalopnik.com/2015-bmw-m3-the-...1635342844/all
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Source - http://jalopnik.com/2015-bmw-m3-the-...1635342844/all
I will tell you what sums it up. One BMW m4 + one comment from a biased Club Lexus "member" who believes this balderdash = one totally absurd deduction. Come back in December when the production and tuned RCF is on the the roads.Now really, is this logic beginning to penetrate the darkness? Jalopnik--really????
09-17-14, 05:13 PM
#128
dunno insecure sounds like signing up to a new forum for the sole purpose to defend a car by calling us insecure on your first post. You dont see us going to bimmerpost and talking about the RCF, and their comments arent anywhere near as kind as we are. I dont care that much to register. Theres no doubt the M is a great car on the track but the way it does it is not my cup of tea. Numb, sterile, not much excitement like a GTR.
Last edited by 4TehNguyen; 09-17-14 at 05:34 PM.
09-17-14, 05:32 PM
#129
Lexus Test Driver
So you signed up on this board just to post a biased subjective opinion of just one person just like 'exception'?
What is your proof that the M4 is faster than RC-F in every measurable way. Where is the head to head comparison?
You will find none of us on any BMW boards because we don't feel the need to go there to trash talk the M4 while Bimmer forums members do. More than enough evidence as to who is insecure here. At the end of the day, BMW has put the most bland, boring and lacklustre engine of all M cars ever made. The torque curve is plummeting hard after 6000 rpm, the throttle response is incomparable to that of RC-F (according to Sutcliffe of AutoCar and even Chris Harris) and also sounds absolutely rubbish.
I am huge fan of the S54 (especially the CSL variant), S65 and S85 engines and will always be, but this new engine is blah at best.
The article is so biased and so skewed, it is not even funny. You should have realized the guy lost credibility the moment he said "500+ lighter weight". The M4 is around 400 lbs lighter. He never mentions the horrendous sound of the M4 nor does he mention how unexciting and unrewarding the engine is to revs past 5500 rpm.
Let me guess, another BMW brainwashed skewed reviewer who naively believes that the M4 weighs "3400 lbs". LOL. Not in this life time and not in a single magazine test did it weigh anything close to what BMW claimed.
BTW, the M4 was beaten on "Lightning lap" competition lately by the much more heavier and a cruiser GT named, E63 AMG and even the S63 AMG. It is not anywhere close to being a "track weapon". There are tons of cars that cost about the same and would crush the M4 like a nutcracker around the race track. The cynicism of the M4 obsessed people around numbers is comical.
What is your proof that the M4 is faster than RC-F in every measurable way. Where is the head to head comparison?
You will find none of us on any BMW boards because we don't feel the need to go there to trash talk the M4 while Bimmer forums members do. More than enough evidence as to who is insecure here. At the end of the day, BMW has put the most bland, boring and lacklustre engine of all M cars ever made. The torque curve is plummeting hard after 6000 rpm, the throttle response is incomparable to that of RC-F (according to Sutcliffe of AutoCar and even Chris Harris) and also sounds absolutely rubbish.
I am huge fan of the S54 (especially the CSL variant), S65 and S85 engines and will always be, but this new engine is blah at best.
The article is so biased and so skewed, it is not even funny. You should have realized the guy lost credibility the moment he said "500+ lighter weight". The M4 is around 400 lbs lighter. He never mentions the horrendous sound of the M4 nor does he mention how unexciting and unrewarding the engine is to revs past 5500 rpm.
Let me guess, another BMW brainwashed skewed reviewer who naively believes that the M4 weighs "3400 lbs". LOL. Not in this life time and not in a single magazine test did it weigh anything close to what BMW claimed.
BTW, the M4 was beaten on "Lightning lap" competition lately by the much more heavier and a cruiser GT named, E63 AMG and even the S63 AMG. It is not anywhere close to being a "track weapon". There are tons of cars that cost about the same and would crush the M4 like a nutcracker around the race track. The cynicism of the M4 obsessed people around numbers is comical.
Lot's of hate for the M3/4 from insecure future owners of the RCF. I don't own an M3/4, and I'm not planning on putting down a deposit on one but it's pretty clear cut and dry who the objective winner is between the two cars. It's faster than the RC-F in almost every measurable metric, and most importantly it weighs a lot less, which in turn means that it'll be better for hooning/tracking as well. Looks are subjective but I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the general populace will prefer the F80 over the RC-F as far as styling is concerned.
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Source - http://jalopnik.com/2015-bmw-m3-the-...1635342844/all
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Source - http://jalopnik.com/2015-bmw-m3-the-...1635342844/all
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 09-17-14 at 06:31 PM.
09-17-14, 05:38 PM
#130
Lexus Fanatic
Lot's of hate for the M3/4 from insecure future owners of the RCF. I don't own an M3/4, and I'm not planning on putting down a deposit on one but it's pretty clear cut and dry who the objective winner is between the two cars. It's faster than the RC-F in almost every measurable metric, and most importantly it weighs a lot less, which in turn means that it'll be better for hooning/tracking as well. Looks are subjective but I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the general populace will prefer the F80 over the RC-F as far as styling is concerned.
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Here's a excerpt from Jalopnik's review of the F80 M3
I think the ending line really sums it all up.
Nobody here is insecure, and anybody who "hates" on the M3/M4 is a moron, they're great cars. We are however Lexus fans and this is a Lexus forum. If you think we're not going to in general prefer a Lexus over the competition you're missing the purpose of our forum...as is the purpose of your forum.
The fact that you've gone to the effort of joining our forum just to try and prove to us why your car is superior has me wondering who it is thats insecure.
09-17-14, 05:52 PM
#131
09-17-14, 05:56 PM
#132
I guess if there was a 3 door version of IS, it would look a lot less aggressive and unique than RC-F, thats basically what it comes down to and what no drops, photoshop or big wheels can change.
Lexus went extra mile and got the result they wanted.
09-17-14, 05:58 PM
#133
Lot's of hate for the M3/4 from insecure future owners of the RCF. I don't own an M3/4, and I'm not planning on putting down a deposit on one but it's pretty clear cut and dry who the objective winner is between the two cars. It's faster than the RC-F in almost every measurable metric, and most importantly it weighs a lot less, which in turn means that it'll be better for hooning/tracking as well. Looks are subjective but I'm willing to bet you that 99% of the general populace will prefer the F80 over the RC-F as far as styling is concerned.
