toystry

I have a 2009 IS 350 which I love, it's fast and responsive when I hit the skinny pedal and feels like a torque monster. This weekend I went and test drove a RC 350 F Sport RWD and felt it was considerably slower launching off the line then my 2009 IS 350.

Now I know both cars have the exact same engine so this leaves me to believe that the only difference is the weight since both engines have a 306hp 3.5L V6, or possibly the transmission since they switched over to an 8-speed tranny on the F Sport.

If my research was correct, the RC 350 F Sport weighs 3748 lbs while the IS 350 weighs 3,527 lb which makes the RC 350 221 lbs heavier.

0-60 times I found were different as well:

2nd Gen IS 350 0-60: 5.6 seconds
1st Gen RC 350 0-60: 5.8 seconds

Thoughts from some of the more experienced folks here?

sajonf

Did you have it in Eco? Mine feels much faster with the better throttle response in Sport +

fasteddy91

iTrader: (5)

Faster...no...same top speed. The 2009 is350 is lighter by around 250-300 pounds so it will be quicker.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

2IS Is lighter so will be faster in 0-60 and 1/4. However on a track the RC should beat it, the 2IS chassis, suspension, transmission logic were much to be desired. The 3IS IS350 F Sport nearly matched the laptime of the 08 ISF on C&D Lightning Lap. It's obvious it was due to the chassis and suspension tuning.

I drove an RC350 F Sport at the Houston Asphalt Up event. The chassis was very solid even moreso than my 3IS. It felt very nimble too, it might have had the rear wheel steering and its 3" shorter wheelbase than the 3IS.

toystry

Nope, I had it is Sport + for maximum performance.

Ya, shouldn't have said faster, should have said quicker off of the line and quicker 0-60. It really felt sluggish compared to my 09 IS350 in acceleration to the point where that 221 lbs really was noticeable.

Concur the suspension was much more solid but the big shocker was the lack of acceleration from a dead stop. You'd think that they would have up'd the HP/TQ to offset the extra weight. I'm still puzzled that they made a 2 door car heavier then a 4 door car, you'd think you would have shaved 200lbs by removing two doors but what the hell do I know, lol.

I'm really disappointed that they are using the same engine on the 350 and F as the previous generation IS350/ISF. The least they could have done was to squeeze a little more performance out of the engine if they were gonna reuse it, especially if they were gonna add more weight to it. SMFH.

rparkzy

i have a few mods on my 2nd gen IS350 and you're right..

if you're talking about off the line the 3rd gen IS350s and RC350 which i both test drove recently in the last few months feel a lot slower off the line.

i don't actually know if it's slower though, it just definitely felt a lot less pull when you floor it

aWorkOfArt

^ interesting... is this even with the 3IS in Sport + ? I did find it interesting that in my 2IS if you put the car in PWR on the left, the car seems to move alot quicker, but never ridden or driven a 3IS

dseag2

I believe the GS is actually quicker 0-60 at 5.6 secs than the RC at 5.8 secs.

rparkzy

yeah i pretty much drove the 3IS and RC in sport+ most of the test drive. i think the speeds were pretty much the same as my 2IS it just didn't "feel" fast off the line.

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

RC is actually bigger in length and width than the 2IS, and the chassis is far superior. Supposedly there are significant engine refreshes coming in 2016 MY, like the turbo engine replacing the 250 engine

toystry

Well I'm glad I'm not the only one who thought the same........the only benefit I see with them keeping the same engine is that all of the aftermarket parts from the 2IS/3IS should bolt onto the RC then so maybe I can bump some HP/TQ with some bolt on modifications if I end up buying one in the future.

dchar

There aren't too many bolt on mods for the 350 engine, especially with significantly higher HP/TQ. Not worth voiding warranty. I think the reason Lexus stays away from turbos is because they aren't too reliable. Cousin has a 335is and it's always at the dealer for problems. Have a A4 2.0t at home with higher mileage and it's having a lot of problems with oil consumption now because of the turbos. Kinda surprised Lexus came out with the turbo-4 for the NX. Will see how reliable it is in a few years...maybe Lexus worked its magic on it. I wonder if supercharging is more reliable???

4TehNguyen

iTrader: (1)

NX engine was tested over 600k miles according to Lexus. I still prefer NA though

RoiteTrom

Yes it will be slower. It has the exact same engine but its a few hundred pounds heavy. You can also factor in you drove a new car with a engine that hasn't been broken into yet. After the break in period (or after a few thousand miles) the engine will open up and accelerate faster.

Lexus isn't focusing on fast vehicles; they are focusing on cars that are fun to drive. A car that obeys the driver's every command.

toystry

I'd agree they aren't focus on faster vehicles since they cheaped out and reused the same engine from the 2IS and 3IS which was disappointing to say the least. As for the car obeying the drivers command, I don't drive on a track so IMO they wasted their money since 99.9% of everyday drivers drive on the main roads, not a track.

Regardless, I get your point.......