test-drove the new RC F and M4
12-06-14, 12:04 PM
#31
2015 BMW M4 vs. 2015 Lexus RC F – Head 2 Head Ep. 59 - YouTube
I was watching this comparison video between the RC-F and the M4, and they did a lap on both cars. There was only a .2 second difference in lap times, which doesn't seem like a big difference to me. I do feel the M4 may be a faster car, but the RC-F is more agile.
I was watching this comparison video between the RC-F and the M4, and they did a lap on both cars. There was only a .2 second difference in lap times, which doesn't seem like a big difference to me. I do feel the M4 may be a faster car, but the RC-F is more agile.
We have certified results that show even better instrumentation based results:
Road & Track's 3.9 0-60 (highly repeatable based on what the test driver told me about his testing)
AMCI: MotorTrend's testing was nearly a dead heat. The AMCI testing revealed the RC-F is faster the the M4 and RS5 on a closed circuit track.
I am perfectly find with the slight variances in times, but folks discussing the new RC-F need to consider much of the early testing was with non-production cars.
The Road & Track testing was with the carbon TVD--I verified that fact. The AMCI was also run with a TVD production car.
Both are exceptional machines. One big problem with all of the M six cylinder cars is the requirement to overhaul the engines at 20,000-30,000 miles. This I was told by a BMW executive a couple of months ago.
So when something "feels" faster, consider what you are feeling. These two cars are superbly matched for straight line acceleration.
In the Motown mile, the RC-F ran it in 56.08; the M4 ran it in 57.47; the RS 5 ran it in 58.83 This performance is quite in line with the AMCI testing where the RC-F led by more than 2 seconds.
The two cars run the 0-60 in 3.9.
Which car is faster?
12-06-14, 12:29 PM
#32
Lexus Test Driver
This thread is such a downer. Some of you are really spoiling it for the rest of us. Let's have fun discussing sports cars and comparing perfomormance, yes.
Truthfully, if you can't take everyone's opinion with a grain of salt, then I have no idea how you function in the real world. It's a sign of maturity if you can calibrate others' opinions with a sense of where they are coming from. It's called perspective.
For me I'm biased towards Toyota products and I have an RC F on order partly for this reason:
"The RC F was designed for the majority of real-world drivers who commute. The comparisons consistently rate the RC F as a better daily driver, the track times prove it is competitive"
Truthfully, if you can't take everyone's opinion with a grain of salt, then I have no idea how you function in the real world. It's a sign of maturity if you can calibrate others' opinions with a sense of where they are coming from. It's called perspective.
For me I'm biased towards Toyota products and I have an RC F on order partly for this reason:
"The RC F was designed for the majority of real-world drivers who commute. The comparisons consistently rate the RC F as a better daily driver, the track times prove it is competitive"
12-06-14, 12:40 PM
#33
This thread is such a downer. Some of you are really spoiling it for the rest of us. Let's have fun discussing sports cars and comparing perfomormance, yes.
Truthfully, if you can't take everyone's opinion with a grain of salt, then I have no idea how you function in the real world. It's a sign of maturity if you can calibrate others' opinions with a sense of where they are coming from. It's called perspective.
For me I'm biased towards Toyota products and I have an RC F on order partly for this reason:
"The RC F was designed for the majority of real-world drivers who commute. The comparisons consistently rate the RC F as a better daily driver, the track times prove it is competitive"
Truthfully, if you can't take everyone's opinion with a grain of salt, then I have no idea how you function in the real world. It's a sign of maturity if you can calibrate others' opinions with a sense of where they are coming from. It's called perspective.
For me I'm biased towards Toyota products and I have an RC F on order partly for this reason:
"The RC F was designed for the majority of real-world drivers who commute. The comparisons consistently rate the RC F as a better daily driver, the track times prove it is competitive"
The M3/M4 never became an option because I know BMW is not going to last long term and I do not feel like wasting money on over priced services. I looked at the service guide for the RCF before I ordered it and it's the same as any Toyota, oil changes and air filter changes.
Also I hate how the M3/4 does not have a parking brake or a oil dip stick, too many computers in that car and yes I have owned a M5 that's why I went with the Lexus
This is nice to look at
http://www.cars.com/bmw/m4/2015/costofownership
12-06-14, 12:42 PM
#34
Lexus Test Driver
Yep, and how many on here can even drive it to get that track time? Who cares, what good does it do when you are in stop and go traffic or the speed limit is 65? What I wanted is something that is nice inside where my *** sits and to have good tunes to listen to and a car that is not exhausting to drive in traffic / around town.
The M3/M4 never became an option because I know BMW is not going to last long term and I do not feel like wasting money on over priced services. I looked at the service guide for the RCF before I ordered it and it's the same as any Toyota, oil changes and air filter changes.
Also I hate how the M3/4 does not have a parking brake or a oil dip stick, too many computers in that car and yes I have owned a M5 that's why I went with the Lexus
This is nice to look at
http://www.cars.com/bmw/m4/2015/costofownership
The M3/M4 never became an option because I know BMW is not going to last long term and I do not feel like wasting money on over priced services. I looked at the service guide for the RCF before I ordered it and it's the same as any Toyota, oil changes and air filter changes.
Also I hate how the M3/4 does not have a parking brake or a oil dip stick, too many computers in that car and yes I have owned a M5 that's why I went with the Lexus
This is nice to look at
http://www.cars.com/bmw/m4/2015/costofownership
12-06-14, 01:30 PM
#35
Lexus Test Driver
12-06-14, 01:48 PM
#37
You just don't give up do you, someone says anything even remotely negative about the RCF you have to post the same response over and over and over and over again to make sure you get the last word in. If I read the right article the RCF did not get a great review from PCOTY test despite your contact there said they were gushing over the car. It didn't even get into the final three and the Mustang did believe it or not. Im a Toyota/ Lexus fan and have been for many years, we have bought 14 of them over the years, but it is really hard having to see your same posts over and over and over again. Lighten up just a little, so reading this forum is enjoyable again.
Lots of understandable confusion here.
We have certified results that show even better instrumentation based results:
Road & Track's 3.9 0-60 (highly repeatable based on what the test driver told me about his testing)
AMCI: MotorTrend's testing was nearly a dead heat. The AMCI testing revealed the RC-F is faster the the M4 and RS5 on a closed circuit track.
I am perfectly find with the slight variances in times, but folks discussing the new RC-F need to consider much of the early testing was with non-production cars.
The Road & Track testing was with the carbon TVD--I verified that fact. The AMCI was also run with a TVD production car.
Both are exceptional machines. One big problem with all of the M six cylinder cars is the requirement to overhaul the engines at 20,000-30,000 miles. This I was told by a BMW executive a couple of months ago.
So when something "feels" faster, consider what you are feeling. These two cars are superbly matched for straight line acceleration.
In the Motown mile, the RC-F ran it in 56.08; the M4 ran it in 57.47; the RS 5 ran it in 58.83 This performance is quite in line with the AMCI testing where the RC-F led by more than 2 seconds.
The two cars run the 0-60 in 3.9.
Which car is faster?
We have certified results that show even better instrumentation based results:
Road & Track's 3.9 0-60 (highly repeatable based on what the test driver told me about his testing)
AMCI: MotorTrend's testing was nearly a dead heat. The AMCI testing revealed the RC-F is faster the the M4 and RS5 on a closed circuit track.
I am perfectly find with the slight variances in times, but folks discussing the new RC-F need to consider much of the early testing was with non-production cars.
The Road & Track testing was with the carbon TVD--I verified that fact. The AMCI was also run with a TVD production car.
Both are exceptional machines. One big problem with all of the M six cylinder cars is the requirement to overhaul the engines at 20,000-30,000 miles. This I was told by a BMW executive a couple of months ago.
So when something "feels" faster, consider what you are feeling. These two cars are superbly matched for straight line acceleration.
In the Motown mile, the RC-F ran it in 56.08; the M4 ran it in 57.47; the RS 5 ran it in 58.83 This performance is quite in line with the AMCI testing where the RC-F led by more than 2 seconds.
The two cars run the 0-60 in 3.9.
Which car is faster?
12-06-14, 04:03 PM
#38
Thanks for the review Shaddix, it's good to see another ex-VQer on here I am Sylvan Lake V35 from my350z (I had the 19x10.5/19x12" HRE wheels).
I have recently been looking at the RCF, I personally would avoid the BMW I just had a 2010 X5M and also an X5d both spent over a month at a time in the shop. I loved the X5M like no other vehicle I have owned but I drove loaner cars more than it so although warranty is great paying $1,000/month to drive an X1 loaner car gets old. I do appreciate your review after back to back tests drives.
Personally I have been finding I love the practicality of a sedan so I am waiting to see the new GSF...
I have recently been looking at the RCF, I personally would avoid the BMW I just had a 2010 X5M and also an X5d both spent over a month at a time in the shop. I loved the X5M like no other vehicle I have owned but I drove loaner cars more than it so although warranty is great paying $1,000/month to drive an X1 loaner car gets old. I do appreciate your review after back to back tests drives.
Personally I have been finding I love the practicality of a sedan so I am waiting to see the new GSF...
Last edited by Sylvan; 12-06-14 at 04:07 PM.
12-06-14, 05:46 PM
#39
I recently had an opportunity to drive both the new RC F and BMW M4 and I wanted to share my impressions with those who've been, like myself, drooling and lusting over both of those cars since their announcement a few years back. I've been waiting and checking for them to come into stock for a while... To say that I was excited would be a huge understatement! I got a call about the RC F a few weeks ago to tell me that they had one available for a test drive, at last.
When I first saw the RC F on pictures I didn't much like the front end, even after seeing it on the freeway one time I thought the front was hideous. But once I went and saw it in person it slowly grew on me. It looks more menacing up-close, not as silly and enormous, and the headlights make it look more futuristic than one would expect. Overall, the car looks really mean and has a lot of presence. The quad exhaust looks more subtle than I was hoping for, not as stylish as the ISF design. The interior is just beautiful. The steering wheel is essentially the same as the 3IS, but the seats were just as good as you'd imagine after seeing the pictures. They hug you the same way as the 3IS fsport seats. They have larger side bolsters and softer headrests (the 3IS ones are like bricks...). I still think this is the best interior I've ever seen, hands down. The new digital dash display is awesome with all its fancy hi-tech graphics. Not really a fan of both digital and analog speedo clustered together like that, though.
Now, performance wise, i went in with really high expectations. From what I'd heard and read, it was supposed to be a really quick car. Some said it was just a monster... I've driven two ISF's before and was really impressed, so I thought the RCF should be even better... The car sounds really nice, not too loud, not too quiet, it reminded me of the new mustang GT when you rev it up, it's got that typical v8 rumble and exhaust crackle tones, pure muscle car stuff. I was able to take it onto the freeway to see how it cruises. Just like with the ISF, i wanted to see how it pulls in 3rd and 4th gears (around 4k rpm), as that seems most practical for daily driving. I put it into manual mode, downshifted into 4th, and it dropped the gears almost instantly unlike my 3IS. I gave it full throttle expecting something incredible. But the car didn't really pull all that hard. It definitely felt capable, but there wasn't that wow factor to it, more of a "hmm, that's pretty good", and that's not what I was really looking for in a car of this caliber, and, and it was not much different from doing the same thing in my 3IS in 4th gear. I downshifted into 3rd, and that's when it finally woke up and started to pull, but even so, still not as impressive as I was led to believe. When the windows are up, the car doesn't really sound as aggressive as one would expect from a V8. It's not any louder than my 3IS with intake and exhaust, it's just a bit deeper. And when cruising in higher gears, or even on the street, with the rpm's below 3k, there is little to no torque to play with. When it's in that low rpm range, it feels like a slug. Even the ISF felt a bit more nimble and had a better pull. The brakes were strong, with a great bite. The handling was solid, but once again, not any different from a 3IS. To sum it up, this car is definitely something one could be happy with as a daily driver, but it won't pull your hair back in any way unless your expectations are well within reason and common sense, and mine were set too high, especially when the car costs 75k+ (as equipped). To be honest, I left the dealership disappointed. I spent a long time looking at videos and pics of this car prior to driving it, but it's just not the car I'd truly connect with when there is another option available, and now onto that!
A few days go by and I'm told by a friend that there are a few m4's on the lot at a local dealership. I found the time to go check them out. Well, just like the RC F, this car was something I was drooling over for quite some time, looking at all the concept pics, inquiring about it from dealers, going to its first launch, etc. And respectively, my expectations were through the roof with this car as well. After some hesitation from the salesman about letting me drive an m4, saying how they don't want joyriders driving their cars with no intention of buying (makes sense), he finally comes back with the keys. Unlike the lexus salesman, this guy let me drive it right off the display lot in front of the building. So I start it up expecting the car to sound like a lawnmower as that's what most complaints were all about, but, on the contrary, I was shocked to learn that it did not sound anything as people were saying. It actually sounded much better than the rc f, even just starting it up. What I found interesting was how quickly it revved up when I tapped the gas and the rpms jumped to around 5k almost immediately, it reminded me of my 350z when I had a lighter flywheel and clutch installed. It's quite amazing to see that kind of thing in a car with a dual clutch gearbox that it can still rev like that. The second I drove it off the lot I noticed how responsive the gas pedal was, even in normal mode. It felt exciting and a bit intimidating as I wasn't used to that. I switched the car into sport on all settings, put it into manual mode, and was just trying to get a feel for it on the street. The car had more or less 15 miles on it at the time, and I really wanted to warm it up fully, so I kept cruising for a while with occasional tap on the gas to feel some pull. The car responded really well to the slightest input of gas, even being a turbo engine, it still has that instant torque feel that you get on the 3IS, just not as much of it. You can hear the turbos spool up in a second, and it picks up right away even at low rpm. The torque was just amazing which definitely lives up to all the hype. Even in higher gears the car just pulls so well. It's very loud on the inside, with windows up, ac on, etc, it still sounds like you're cruising with windows down next to concrete walls, all that nice sound is channeled into the cabin, and I thought that was really genius as that still is the real sound of the car, it's just not muffled like on the RC F. Many will not believe when I say this, but the car sounds way better than the rc F, in any gear, mode, throttle input, etc. it sounds much like a V8 car, very deep, lots of exhaust backfire, plus the turbo spool and the blow off valve opening sounds intoxicating when you let off the gas. It was like a 335i on crack. The steering felt really solid. The ride was quite harsh on the stiffest setting, but then I switched it to comfort and it made a huge difference and just floated over bumps. The shifts were incredible: instant and with a lot of kick on its highest setting (3 total). I tried the comfort shift setting as well, and that made the car shift seamlessly, without a kick in the back, but with just the same quickness (not sure what the point is then of the 3 different modes...). The seats are just as nice as on the RC F, plus you can adjust how much they hug you. The dash is very plain and old school, but trust me when i say this, once this car starts moving, none of that matters. It's just an angry car, perfect for those who want that extra sharpness, instant response, etc.
Overall, I have to say, I have found the perfect car for myself. Not sure if I am ever going to get one as it's not exactly affordable for most people, but it is one of those cars that leave you literally speechless. I'm not sure how much faster it would be against the RC F in a drag race, but in all practical cases, the RC F feels like a bus in comparison. Where the bmw just leaps out of that rpm hole when the boost comes in, and it comes in super early, and pulls strong all the way up sounding like an angry lion, the RC F takes its time and just feels heavy and you wanna kick it in the butt to get it moving. It doesn't feel inspiring. The bmw feels like a race car with that sharp, loud, and aggressive feel of the torque, shifting, and steering. The lexus is the perfect car for that person who's just looking for a quick and sporty coupe. But, speaking for myself, the only way I'd consider the RC F now is if the M4/M3 never existed.
When I first saw the RC F on pictures I didn't much like the front end, even after seeing it on the freeway one time I thought the front was hideous. But once I went and saw it in person it slowly grew on me. It looks more menacing up-close, not as silly and enormous, and the headlights make it look more futuristic than one would expect. Overall, the car looks really mean and has a lot of presence. The quad exhaust looks more subtle than I was hoping for, not as stylish as the ISF design. The interior is just beautiful. The steering wheel is essentially the same as the 3IS, but the seats were just as good as you'd imagine after seeing the pictures. They hug you the same way as the 3IS fsport seats. They have larger side bolsters and softer headrests (the 3IS ones are like bricks...). I still think this is the best interior I've ever seen, hands down. The new digital dash display is awesome with all its fancy hi-tech graphics. Not really a fan of both digital and analog speedo clustered together like that, though.
Now, performance wise, i went in with really high expectations. From what I'd heard and read, it was supposed to be a really quick car. Some said it was just a monster... I've driven two ISF's before and was really impressed, so I thought the RCF should be even better... The car sounds really nice, not too loud, not too quiet, it reminded me of the new mustang GT when you rev it up, it's got that typical v8 rumble and exhaust crackle tones, pure muscle car stuff. I was able to take it onto the freeway to see how it cruises. Just like with the ISF, i wanted to see how it pulls in 3rd and 4th gears (around 4k rpm), as that seems most practical for daily driving. I put it into manual mode, downshifted into 4th, and it dropped the gears almost instantly unlike my 3IS. I gave it full throttle expecting something incredible. But the car didn't really pull all that hard. It definitely felt capable, but there wasn't that wow factor to it, more of a "hmm, that's pretty good", and that's not what I was really looking for in a car of this caliber, and, and it was not much different from doing the same thing in my 3IS in 4th gear. I downshifted into 3rd, and that's when it finally woke up and started to pull, but even so, still not as impressive as I was led to believe. When the windows are up, the car doesn't really sound as aggressive as one would expect from a V8. It's not any louder than my 3IS with intake and exhaust, it's just a bit deeper. And when cruising in higher gears, or even on the street, with the rpm's below 3k, there is little to no torque to play with. When it's in that low rpm range, it feels like a slug. Even the ISF felt a bit more nimble and had a better pull. The brakes were strong, with a great bite. The handling was solid, but once again, not any different from a 3IS. To sum it up, this car is definitely something one could be happy with as a daily driver, but it won't pull your hair back in any way unless your expectations are well within reason and common sense, and mine were set too high, especially when the car costs 75k+ (as equipped). To be honest, I left the dealership disappointed. I spent a long time looking at videos and pics of this car prior to driving it, but it's just not the car I'd truly connect with when there is another option available, and now onto that!
A few days go by and I'm told by a friend that there are a few m4's on the lot at a local dealership. I found the time to go check them out. Well, just like the RC F, this car was something I was drooling over for quite some time, looking at all the concept pics, inquiring about it from dealers, going to its first launch, etc. And respectively, my expectations were through the roof with this car as well. After some hesitation from the salesman about letting me drive an m4, saying how they don't want joyriders driving their cars with no intention of buying (makes sense), he finally comes back with the keys. Unlike the lexus salesman, this guy let me drive it right off the display lot in front of the building. So I start it up expecting the car to sound like a lawnmower as that's what most complaints were all about, but, on the contrary, I was shocked to learn that it did not sound anything as people were saying. It actually sounded much better than the rc f, even just starting it up. What I found interesting was how quickly it revved up when I tapped the gas and the rpms jumped to around 5k almost immediately, it reminded me of my 350z when I had a lighter flywheel and clutch installed. It's quite amazing to see that kind of thing in a car with a dual clutch gearbox that it can still rev like that. The second I drove it off the lot I noticed how responsive the gas pedal was, even in normal mode. It felt exciting and a bit intimidating as I wasn't used to that. I switched the car into sport on all settings, put it into manual mode, and was just trying to get a feel for it on the street. The car had more or less 15 miles on it at the time, and I really wanted to warm it up fully, so I kept cruising for a while with occasional tap on the gas to feel some pull. The car responded really well to the slightest input of gas, even being a turbo engine, it still has that instant torque feel that you get on the 3IS, just not as much of it. You can hear the turbos spool up in a second, and it picks up right away even at low rpm. The torque was just amazing which definitely lives up to all the hype. Even in higher gears the car just pulls so well. It's very loud on the inside, with windows up, ac on, etc, it still sounds like you're cruising with windows down next to concrete walls, all that nice sound is channeled into the cabin, and I thought that was really genius as that still is the real sound of the car, it's just not muffled like on the RC F. Many will not believe when I say this, but the car sounds way better than the rc F, in any gear, mode, throttle input, etc. it sounds much like a V8 car, very deep, lots of exhaust backfire, plus the turbo spool and the blow off valve opening sounds intoxicating when you let off the gas. It was like a 335i on crack. The steering felt really solid. The ride was quite harsh on the stiffest setting, but then I switched it to comfort and it made a huge difference and just floated over bumps. The shifts were incredible: instant and with a lot of kick on its highest setting (3 total). I tried the comfort shift setting as well, and that made the car shift seamlessly, without a kick in the back, but with just the same quickness (not sure what the point is then of the 3 different modes...). The seats are just as nice as on the RC F, plus you can adjust how much they hug you. The dash is very plain and old school, but trust me when i say this, once this car starts moving, none of that matters. It's just an angry car, perfect for those who want that extra sharpness, instant response, etc.
Overall, I have to say, I have found the perfect car for myself. Not sure if I am ever going to get one as it's not exactly affordable for most people, but it is one of those cars that leave you literally speechless. I'm not sure how much faster it would be against the RC F in a drag race, but in all practical cases, the RC F feels like a bus in comparison. Where the bmw just leaps out of that rpm hole when the boost comes in, and it comes in super early, and pulls strong all the way up sounding like an angry lion, the RC F takes its time and just feels heavy and you wanna kick it in the butt to get it moving. It doesn't feel inspiring. The bmw feels like a race car with that sharp, loud, and aggressive feel of the torque, shifting, and steering. The lexus is the perfect car for that person who's just looking for a quick and sporty coupe. But, speaking for myself, the only way I'd consider the RC F now is if the M4/M3 never existed.
When the OP said that the M4 sounded like a V8, HE LOST ALL CREDIBILITY IN MY OPINION. I test drove the car myself and upon start up, the M4 sounded like a lawn mower to the point that the BMW sales man got embarrassed. I gave the sales man a ride in my ISF and revved the car for him. The BMW salesman agreed that the V8 in my ISF sounded better than the M4 engine. WHAT more the RC-F! And when the OP said that the M4 sounded great from the inside, does he know that that was artificially produced by the M4? OP, I am not sure what your intentions are regarding this bashing of the RC-F but you are WAY off....
12-06-14, 05:52 PM
#41
"It's not any louder than my 3IS with intake and exhaust, it's just a bit deeper. And when cruising in higher gears, or even on the street, with the rpm's below 3k, there is little to no torque to play with. When it's in that low rpm range, it feels like a slug. Even the ISF felt a bit more nimble and had a better pull. "
If this is not bashing, I don't know what to call it.. I OWN AN ISF..
If this is not bashing, I don't know what to call it.. I OWN AN ISF..
12-06-14, 05:57 PM
#43
I call a spade a spade. I was one of the IS-F owner BASHING the RC-F because of the early reviews. But when the OP mentioned that the M4 sounded like a V8 I had to call him out as I experienced totally the OPPOSITE to his V8 assessment of the M4's lawnmower sound.
12-06-14, 06:00 PM
#44
Lexus Test Driver
When the OP said that the M4 sounded like a V8, HE LOST ALL CREDIBILITY IN MY OPINION. I test drove the car myself and upon start up, the M4 sounded like a lawn mower to the point that the BMW sales man got embarrassed. I gave the sales man a ride in my ISF and revved the car for him. The BMW salesman agreed that the V8 in my ISF sounded better than the M4 engine. WHAT more the RC-F! And when the OP said that the M4 sounded great from the inside, does he know that that was artificially produced by the M4? OP, I am not sure what your intentions are regarding this bashing of the RC-F but you are WAY off....
No matter how many excuses the apologists make, the M4 does sound absolutely horrendous. I have heard it in real life and the tin can raspy sound is abysmal.
I am getting tired of "you want a performance car go with M4, if you want a reliable coupe then get RC-F". No RC-F is a very worthy rival to the M4 and it comes down to preferences of the buyer.
So when people criticize the RC-F, it is called facts and when people criticize the M4, it is called "bashing". Gotcha!
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 12-06-14 at 06:08 PM.
12-06-14, 06:00 PM
#45
They are both good cars, I loved my M5 but when it's in the shop several times a year that just gets old, I don't care if it's covered I can't drive what I paid to drive.
I would say get a M4 if you want to LEASE it, then you cost is fixed and do not keep out out of warranty.
M4 Lease RCF own.
I would say get a M4 if you want to LEASE it, then you cost is fixed and do not keep out out of warranty.
M4 Lease RCF own.