Anyone else rethinking their order?
09-17-14, 07:55 PM
#196
Lexus Fanatic
iTrader: (10)
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Under an IS F since 2008
Posts: 13,446
Received 1,058 Likes
on
586 Posts
^^ Just because the cars were prevented from doing standing still burn outs or "fast starts"...
Doesn't change the evaluations of the cars driving experience on the Streets and/or Track..
The Media & Press writers did what they do.. And that's evaluated the car.
Wether or not it creates a snow ball affect, has yet to be seen.
Majority of IS F owners and eventual RC F owners know that are not buying a track monster..
They are buying a very reliable High Performance Lexus V8 with 4 or 2 doors..
Joe Z
Doesn't change the evaluations of the cars driving experience on the Streets and/or Track..
The Media & Press writers did what they do.. And that's evaluated the car.
Wether or not it creates a snow ball affect, has yet to be seen.
Majority of IS F owners and eventual RC F owners know that are not buying a track monster..
They are buying a very reliable High Performance Lexus V8 with 4 or 2 doors..
Joe Z
09-17-14, 08:02 PM
#198
Lexus Test Driver
I doubt it makes much difference. The E92 M3 with carbon fiber roof and the E90 M3 without carbon roof and about 60 lbs extra weight were identical in performance in a straight line and around the track. The difference is very negligible.
09-17-14, 11:32 PM
#199
I admire this group's pursuit for perfection. Does it sound familiar?
Yaguchi is our man. If he says the CF improves the car, ever so slightly, to enhance the accessibility of the RCF for drivers at all levels, I personally am inclined to believe him until I draw a different opinion through personally DRIVING the car for a duration.
So many of the qualitative and quantitative assessments are based on erroneous data based on a prototype drive. Is there anyone other than me who is looking for the production car, instrumentation-based performance metrics and driver experience? Chime in please. I am all ears. Since when are critical car evaluations based on a lesser car handed over to journalists that was tuned to prevent fast starts?
Can we give Yamaguchi the respect he deserves? The bloody guy is an automotive genius.
Yaguchi is our man. If he says the CF improves the car, ever so slightly, to enhance the accessibility of the RCF for drivers at all levels, I personally am inclined to believe him until I draw a different opinion through personally DRIVING the car for a duration.
So many of the qualitative and quantitative assessments are based on erroneous data based on a prototype drive. Is there anyone other than me who is looking for the production car, instrumentation-based performance metrics and driver experience? Chime in please. I am all ears. Since when are critical car evaluations based on a lesser car handed over to journalists that was tuned to prevent fast starts?
Can we give Yamaguchi the respect he deserves? The bloody guy is an automotive genius.
i respect yaguchi-san a lot, there is a reason why i went out of my way setup an exclusive interview with him. but i am also not blinded enough to just believe everything as is
it's absolutely ok to have subjective beliefs and opinions and it's definitely ok to be biased. i think that's what make us human and why we have discussions.
but i think it's also pretty clear how biased you are on the rcf and how you are trying to defend the car in every way possible, right or wrong. again that's ok, i have no problem with it. me personally i have no preference between the two (yet). i had e93 m3, but i love the 2014 isf i reviewed. brand doesn't bother me, i only care which one is more fun, and for sure i won't rely one bit on any of the paper spec or any of the reviews.
09-18-14, 04:04 AM
#200
it's yaguchi.
i respect yaguchi-san a lot, there is a reason why i went out of my way setup an exclusive interview with him. but i am also not blinded enough to just believe everything as is
it's absolutely ok to have subjective beliefs and opinions and it's definitely ok to be biased. i think that's what make us human and why we have discussions.
but i think it's also pretty clear how biased you are on the rcf and how you are trying to defend the car in every way possible, right or wrong. again that's ok, i have no problem with it. me personally i have no preference between the two (yet). i had e93 m3, but i love the 2014 isf i reviewed. brand doesn't bother me, i only care which one is more fun, and for sure i won't rely one bit on any of the paper spec or any of the reviews.
i respect yaguchi-san a lot, there is a reason why i went out of my way setup an exclusive interview with him. but i am also not blinded enough to just believe everything as is
it's absolutely ok to have subjective beliefs and opinions and it's definitely ok to be biased. i think that's what make us human and why we have discussions.
but i think it's also pretty clear how biased you are on the rcf and how you are trying to defend the car in every way possible, right or wrong. again that's ok, i have no problem with it. me personally i have no preference between the two (yet). i had e93 m3, but i love the 2014 isf i reviewed. brand doesn't bother me, i only care which one is more fun, and for sure i won't rely one bit on any of the paper spec or any of the reviews.
I bought into the M philosophy and paid dearly for it in many respects well beyond cash. So if that is your definition of biased, I plead guilty as charged.
09-18-14, 04:29 AM
#201
^^ Just because the cars were prevented from doing standing still burn outs or "fast starts"...
Doesn't change the evaluations of the cars driving experience on the Streets and/or Track..
The Media & Press writers did what they do.. And that's evaluated the car.
Wether or not it creates a snow ball affect, has yet to be seen.
Majority of IS F owners and eventual RC F owners know that are not buying a track monster..
They are buying a very reliable High Performance Lexus V8 with 4 or 2 doors..
Joe Z
Doesn't change the evaluations of the cars driving experience on the Streets and/or Track..
The Media & Press writers did what they do.. And that's evaluated the car.
Wether or not it creates a snow ball affect, has yet to be seen.
Majority of IS F owners and eventual RC F owners know that are not buying a track monster..
They are buying a very reliable High Performance Lexus V8 with 4 or 2 doors..
Joe Z
There is a direct impact on quarter mile and slalom run times--not on the car reaching its 170 mph limit. That's all that I am saying, but there is a perceptible impact to be gained by driving a tuned versus detuned car in any brand.
Yes, I dropped the $85K because I want a very reliable high performance car with a screaming V8--guilty again as charged.
09-18-14, 09:11 AM
#202
There is a direct impact on quarter mile and slalom run times--not on the car reaching its 170 mph limit. That's all that I am saying, but there is a perceptible impact to be gained by driving a tuned versus detuned car in any brand.
Yes, I dropped the $85K because I want a very reliable high performance car with a screaming V8--guilty again as charged.
Yes, I dropped the $85K because I want a very reliable high performance car with a screaming V8--guilty again as charged.
09-18-14, 12:37 PM
#203
09-18-14, 08:41 PM
#205
Pole Position
This man speaks the truth. Euro reviewers are incredibly biased against Lexus and often stick to a pre-arranged script about German superiority despite the actual evidence indicating the complete opposite.
09-19-14, 07:00 AM
#206
The Audi RS4 was the German King until the ISF arrived and snatched the crown. I am certain that we will see plenty of comparisons with its rivals as soon as the production car lands in November.
In the time being, we can wear ear plugs that filter out the German cries of unending superiority and value.
09-20-14, 04:32 AM
#207
Driver
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: HI
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nissan GT-R.
at the end of the day
you can not beat physics
a car cannot be a handling machine with that sort of weight
i really coudlnt care less about power that much
the ISF was already heavy
but adding more weight to that is just ridiculous
i dunno how to put this but i actually feel betrayed by lexus atm
they put so much hype into this thing and initla stats just fail
a heavy car will feel like a heavy car and go through consumables like a heavy car should
you just can not beat physics
you can not beat physics
a car cannot be a handling machine with that sort of weight
i really coudlnt care less about power that much
the ISF was already heavy
but adding more weight to that is just ridiculous
i dunno how to put this but i actually feel betrayed by lexus atm
they put so much hype into this thing and initla stats just fail
a heavy car will feel like a heavy car and go through consumables like a heavy car should
you just can not beat physics
09-20-14, 05:30 AM
#208
I do not believe anyone is arguing the explosive power of the GTR.
With regard to the M4 and RCF discussion, you need to explore the math...
I expect to see, as a result of independent testing, the low-end acceleration of the production (non-pre-production prototype) car to be closer to the M4 and pull at least a 4.1 0-60. Why? The ISF has a power-to-weight ratio of 9.08 hp per pound versus the RCF with 8.47 hp per pound. The ISF is spec'd by Lexus at 4.6, yet it runs a 4.2 in the right driver's hands. We'll see if this extrapolation holds water in the months ahead. BTW: As a point of comparison, the M4 has a power-to-weight of 8.30 hp per pound versus the 8.47 of the RCF.
The top end is 170 for the RCF and 155 for the M4--stock for stock.
Let's get the M4 and RCF in a side by side and see how it plays out. I am expecting plenty of close shaves.
With regard to the M4 and RCF discussion, you need to explore the math...
I expect to see, as a result of independent testing, the low-end acceleration of the production (non-pre-production prototype) car to be closer to the M4 and pull at least a 4.1 0-60. Why? The ISF has a power-to-weight ratio of 9.08 hp per pound versus the RCF with 8.47 hp per pound. The ISF is spec'd by Lexus at 4.6, yet it runs a 4.2 in the right driver's hands. We'll see if this extrapolation holds water in the months ahead. BTW: As a point of comparison, the M4 has a power-to-weight of 8.30 hp per pound versus the 8.47 of the RCF.
The top end is 170 for the RCF and 155 for the M4--stock for stock.
Let's get the M4 and RCF in a side by side and see how it plays out. I am expecting plenty of close shaves.
09-20-14, 07:39 AM
#209
Driver
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: HI
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm keeping my GTR as a secondary weekend vehicle. The RCF will replace my FRS as daily driver. I use to daily drive my GTR for the first 6 mos of ownership. But I racked up the normal windshield rockchip, paintchip, door ding and wheel rash. I had to put it on the sidelines now for the most part. It's also an extremely stiff ride and you always hear the awd working away. So I wouldn't recommend the GTR as a primary vehicle, everyone ends up getting another ride soon after to relieve it from everyday wear.
Not hating on that FRS, just looking to spark a conversation about not having a niche RWD, light sports car like the S2000 in the 30-50k$ range in today's market, at all.
09-20-14, 04:05 PM
#210
All my 2-door vehicles have atleast a 2+2 configuration (gt-r, fr-s, g35 coupe before as well). I prefer to maximize interior load capacity if possible and I only purchase new typically. I use to only drive rwd sports sedans (is300, is350, is-f). I'm not a fan of strictly 2-seater sport cars unless it's a LFA or other exotic.
