RC-F in Top Gear [22x06] March 1st
03-02-15, 12:28 PM
#91
Driver
Join Date: May 2014
Location: TX
Posts: 185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jeremy Clarkson Finally Reviewed the RC F on Top Gear
Jeremy Clarkson Finally Reviewed the RC F on Top Gear
Well, folks, the verdict is in. We had been wondering what Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson would think of the new Lexus RC F. Now we know ... and wish we didn't.
Read the rest on the ClubLexus.com homepage. >>
Well, folks, the verdict is in. We had been wondering what Top Gear's Jeremy Clarkson would think of the new Lexus RC F. Now we know ... and wish we didn't.
Read the rest on the ClubLexus.com homepage. >>
03-02-15, 12:30 PM
#92
Interesting. Mine is a deep popping noise at idle. The 'lawnmower' affect seems present on the stock exhaust with the valves closed. Maybe it was in the 30s cold start loop?
I know I know more money but I just put the MPE on the car. Seemed to solve sound issues. though.
I see you're in ATL if you want to hear what an MPE + JB4 M3 sounds like let me know we can meet up
I would love to check out an RCF in person too.
I know I know more money but I just put the MPE on the car. Seemed to solve sound issues. though.
I see you're in ATL if you want to hear what an MPE + JB4 M3 sounds like let me know we can meet up
I would love to check out an RCF in person too.Would love to hear the MPE. I'll shoot you a DM...
03-02-15, 12:36 PM
#93
- 2006 Lexus IS350: The debut of the 2IS featured the then-new VDIM system to oversee the full driving dynamics of the vehicle. Lexus marketing touted the system as being beneficial to the driver by allowing the driver to reach the limits of the vehicle with little noticeable interference from the electronic nannies. When the 2006 IS350 was tested by multiple journalists, they kept complaining about how much the nannies would interfere with the driving experience. The worst part was that the VDIM was undefeatable (unless you did the secret pedal dance or purchased a 07+ model).
- 2008 IS-F: Jump forward a few years and the new IS-F made its debut. Once again, Lexus depended on its VDIM system to allow drivers to push the envelope and Lexus arrogantly felt that a mechanical Torsen LSD was not necessary because the eLSD function of the VDIM system would be just as good. This also proved to backfire for Lexus with abrupt on/off braking from the eLSD causing instability to the IS-F during cornering maneuvers. When the 2010 IS-F was finally available with a Torsen LSD, a 2 second lap time improvement was made at Fuji Speedway compared to the non-Torsen IS-F.
- 2015 RC-F: Again, it appears that Lexus is depending too much on its computer systems to allow the RC-F to reach its handling limits. Not only is the VDIM a large part of the nannies, we now have an ECU for the TVD which will dictate what it 'feels' should be the proper torque load for each wheel under specific cornering conditions. If the algorithms of the TVD ECU are not optimal, the performance of the RC-F might possibly be hindered by the current programming of the TVD (in that it performances well on some occasions but causes problems on other circumstances).
03-02-15, 12:59 PM
#94
This was one of my observations as well after watching the TG review. Lexus has an odd obsession with depending too much on its electronic nannies to 'enhance' the driver experience, only to see it backfire after its debut. Here are a few examples that I've noted over the years:
- 2006 Lexus IS350: The debut of the 2IS featured the then-new VDIM system to oversee the full driving dynamics of the vehicle. Lexus marketing touted the system as being beneficial to the driver by allowing the driver to reach the limits of the vehicle with little noticeable interference from the electronic nannies. When the 2006 IS350 was tested by multiple journalists, they kept complaining about how much the nannies would interfere with the driving experience. The worst part was that the VDIM was undefeatable (unless you did the secret pedal dance or purchased a 07+ model).
- 2008 IS-F: Jump forward a few years and the new IS-F made its debut. Once again, Lexus depended on its VDIM system to allow drivers to push the envelope and Lexus arrogantly felt that a mechanical Torsen LSD was not necessary because the eLSD function of the VDIM system would be just as good. This also proved to backfire for Lexus with abrupt on/off braking from the eLSD causing instability to the IS-F during cornering maneuvers. When the 2010 IS-F was finally available with a Torsen LSD, a 2 second lap time improvement was made at Fuji Speedway compared to the non-Torsen IS-F.
- 2015 RC-F: Again, it appears that Lexus is depending too much on its computer systems to allow the RC-F to reach its handling limits. Not only is the VDIM a large part of the nannies, we now have an ECU for the TVD which will dictate what it 'feels' should be the proper torque load for each wheel under specific cornering conditions. If the algorithms of the TVD ECU are not optimal, the performance of the RC-F might possibly be hindered by the current programming of the TVD (in that it performances well on some occasions but causes problems on other circumstances).
- 2006 Lexus IS350: The debut of the 2IS featured the then-new VDIM system to oversee the full driving dynamics of the vehicle. Lexus marketing touted the system as being beneficial to the driver by allowing the driver to reach the limits of the vehicle with little noticeable interference from the electronic nannies. When the 2006 IS350 was tested by multiple journalists, they kept complaining about how much the nannies would interfere with the driving experience. The worst part was that the VDIM was undefeatable (unless you did the secret pedal dance or purchased a 07+ model).
- 2008 IS-F: Jump forward a few years and the new IS-F made its debut. Once again, Lexus depended on its VDIM system to allow drivers to push the envelope and Lexus arrogantly felt that a mechanical Torsen LSD was not necessary because the eLSD function of the VDIM system would be just as good. This also proved to backfire for Lexus with abrupt on/off braking from the eLSD causing instability to the IS-F during cornering maneuvers. When the 2010 IS-F was finally available with a Torsen LSD, a 2 second lap time improvement was made at Fuji Speedway compared to the non-Torsen IS-F.
- 2015 RC-F: Again, it appears that Lexus is depending too much on its computer systems to allow the RC-F to reach its handling limits. Not only is the VDIM a large part of the nannies, we now have an ECU for the TVD which will dictate what it 'feels' should be the proper torque load for each wheel under specific cornering conditions. If the algorithms of the TVD ECU are not optimal, the performance of the RC-F might possibly be hindered by the current programming of the TVD (in that it performances well on some occasions but causes problems on other circumstances).
03-02-15, 01:02 PM
#95
I know you can't disable the TVD that's why I did not get it, but can you disable everything else but say ABS? It seems even expert mode still has some control over the car.
03-02-15, 01:09 PM
#96
Driver
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 128
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't doubt the RCF is less exciting on the track and marginally slower than the M4. I don't doubt that the RCF could be better (and future model years will probably show steady improvements) but to have Jezza refuse to run a laptime in it tells me he knows his review was not completely founded. I expect a similar result as in the MT test with Randy Pobst who was only 0.3 slower in the RCF. I would wager they ran it around and excluded the footage because it wasn't THAT far behind as Clarkson made it out to be.
He also shoulda done a road review like Chris Harris. For most people interested in the RCF, this is the real world review they care about.
Personally, I've owned BMW's in the past and I know they're fickle and unreliable (subframe issues, electronic gremlins, ****ty cooling system) which is why I prefer the Lexus. I had an ISF for several years with no major issues outside the warranty period. The M4 is a crappy track car relative to real track toys you can buy for that money anyway. I'd rather have a useful, reliable daily driving GT car that's unique and rare (less poser bros would get the RCF).
That being said, the RCF isn't the best effort Lexus could have made and the weight is an issue for people expecting it to be a track toy. Enjoy the car for what it is and the money you'll save in the both the short term (MSRP) and the long term (reliability) versus getting the M4.
He also shoulda done a road review like Chris Harris. For most people interested in the RCF, this is the real world review they care about.
Personally, I've owned BMW's in the past and I know they're fickle and unreliable (subframe issues, electronic gremlins, ****ty cooling system) which is why I prefer the Lexus. I had an ISF for several years with no major issues outside the warranty period. The M4 is a crappy track car relative to real track toys you can buy for that money anyway. I'd rather have a useful, reliable daily driving GT car that's unique and rare (less poser bros would get the RCF).
That being said, the RCF isn't the best effort Lexus could have made and the weight is an issue for people expecting it to be a track toy. Enjoy the car for what it is and the money you'll save in the both the short term (MSRP) and the long term (reliability) versus getting the M4.
Last edited by 6i9; 03-02-15 at 01:15 PM.
03-02-15, 02:19 PM
#97
Lexus Fanatic
he bashed the RCF but loved the LFA. He is not bashing it guys. Its just a heavy *** car and the torque difference in the drag race was obvious.......very obvious.
He loves the LFA and we rejoice. He hates the RCF and we call him a liar??? LOL
Oh there will be some panties in a bunch when the GSF makes it on the show.LOL. That car will be slaughtered in a drag race on the show
He loves the LFA and we rejoice. He hates the RCF and we call him a liar??? LOL
Oh there will be some panties in a bunch when the GSF makes it on the show.LOL. That car will be slaughtered in a drag race on the show
03-02-15, 03:10 PM
#98
he bashed the RCF but loved the LFA. He is not bashing it guys. Its just a heavy *** car and the torque difference in the drag race was obvious.......very obvious.
He loves the LFA and we rejoice. He hates the RCF and we call him a liar??? LOL
Oh there will be some panties in a bunch when the GSF makes it on the show.LOL. That car will be slaughtered in a drag race on the show
He loves the LFA and we rejoice. He hates the RCF and we call him a liar??? LOL
Oh there will be some panties in a bunch when the GSF makes it on the show.LOL. That car will be slaughtered in a drag race on the show
03-02-15, 03:17 PM
#99
Pole Position
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: europe
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I really hope that they and other magazines/TV shows compares the GS-F to BMW 550 or similar rather than M5/RS6 or E63 , because that would really be a "complete waste of time" as Clarkson said.
03-02-15, 04:05 PM
#100
What is the weight bias on the RC-F? Worse than the already not-good 53/47 of the IS350 RWD?
Why doesn't Lexus make a 50/50 car, like my old BMW E46?
03-02-15, 04:16 PM
#102
Again, RC-F is a GT 2 + 2 car and not comparable to those cars, but the weight all by itself should not qualify it as "too fat". Yet, it pulls 0.92g on the skidpad and a slalom speed of 70 mph. That was simply unimaginable for so-called "light" sports cars from days of yore from the 90s.
03-02-15, 04:22 PM
#103
b
Clarkson wasn't so caught up in the C63's weight because it has a 6.3L 443flb-ft torque V8 to pull it forward with greater enthusiam. Believe what you want, but the 5.0L doesn't have enough torque to apologize for the curb weight. I knew from day one this car would be panned for its weight. The only surprise here is that other people don't understand the criticism. Heavy cars feel heavy.
I would still choose the RC F over the M4 for a road going car... that turbo 6 has too much torque for its low curb weight and every review I've read of the car says the torque makes the car unstable at the limit.
Clarkson wasn't so caught up in the C63's weight because it has a 6.3L 443flb-ft torque V8 to pull it forward with greater enthusiam. Believe what you want, but the 5.0L doesn't have enough torque to apologize for the curb weight. I knew from day one this car would be panned for its weight. The only surprise here is that other people don't understand the criticism. Heavy cars feel heavy.
I would still choose the RC F over the M4 for a road going car... that turbo 6 has too much torque for its low curb weight and every review I've read of the car says the torque makes the car unstable at the limit.
03-02-15, 04:25 PM
#104
50/50 is a total myth but its great marketing. Guess what some of the best sports cars on the planet are, rear biased GT3 Laferrari are 40/60. What matters is your weight distribution when youre accelerating (rear wheels get more grip) and when youre braking (even distribution so one set of tire arent overworked). 50/50 sounds great and all but that happens during coasting on a track, something you are not suppose to do. Rear biased cars have advantages in accelerating and braking over 50/50 or front biased. What is the weight distribution of open wheel race cars? Heavy rear biased.
03-02-15, 04:52 PM
#105
Man, no matter what model it is (except LFA of course), as long as it has the name Lexus, all these car journalists/entertainers will bash the hell out of it. The typical ones, without even reading their reviews, will be: fat, slow, ugly, outdated lol. It has been continue on and on and on for many many years. It is really really getting old. Come on man, give me a break. Some of their points are right but damn, can't they also focus on something else, something more positive? Who and who still leads the board in the world in term of reliability: Lexus. Period. The review don't even mention about how many repairs bill, how much each, and how often they get when they go with the bimmers??
In another words, it is total biased and incomplete review. Focus on positive things on the bimmers and trash the hell out of Lexus.
To make the lap times any more meaningful. It should be done by several professional drivers and these drivers should have very high consistency and totally unbiased toward any brands to do the testing. Also, the laps have to be repeated several times to say something and all of these professional drivers' time should be consistently close. Then that is much more reliable. A lap time done with couple lap by just one or two drivers really mean nothing much.
In another words, it is total biased and incomplete review. Focus on positive things on the bimmers and trash the hell out of Lexus.
To make the lap times any more meaningful. It should be done by several professional drivers and these drivers should have very high consistency and totally unbiased toward any brands to do the testing. Also, the laps have to be repeated several times to say something and all of these professional drivers' time should be consistently close. Then that is much more reliable. A lap time done with couple lap by just one or two drivers really mean nothing much.