gengar

Just to be clear - by "it was said to be priced", what you mean is 'the media speculated the price to be'. Go read the 2007-ish news reports on the LFA (or shall we say, "LF-A") when the early concept rumors came out - Toyota didn't promise us anything. It was all just a lot of speculation. At the time, media estimated the base price at around $150,000, probably because at the time the LFA was supposed to use an aluminum chassis. Media also speculated it would be a V8, since media assumed Lexus would use something based on the new (at the time) RVX06/07 V8 engine Toyota was using in F1, which probably also lowered the price estimates. Sure, maybe TMC would have produced a spectacular V8 that also would have won EVO's Engine of the Year award, but even leaving the V10 vs V8 out of consideration, it doesn't make much sense to compare the estimated price of an aluminum chassis car to that of a CF car.

The reality is that Toyota decided to scrap the original aluminum LFA design, completely re-engineer it in CF, bring it to fruition, and sell it to customers (which, you know, is the public) despite the fact that Toyota knew they could not possibly turn a profit on the vehicle. That's "shafting the public"? In this day and age where everyone seems to be railing on big companies for "corporate greed", Toyota made a product the best way they knew how and lost money selling it to customers, and that's "shafting the public"? I've really heard it all now. How can any corporation possibly win with this type of vitriol and demonization?

I've been very critical of TMC in the past couple years, but how they've really "shafted the public" is by not continuing on with development of driver-focused, enthusiast-oriented vehicles. TMC teased us with the FT-86 but then absolutely nothing (especially with recent rumors that the FT-1/Z5 may not come out until 2019 if it does at all). If you want to get on Toyota about "shafting the public", that's what you should be focusing your ire on. But certainly not for making a well-engineered product and selling it to customers at a loss.

As I mention above, Toyota had no intention of making the LFA "cost effective" - they knew they were going to lose money bringing the car to market. If they wanted to make it "cost effective" they would never have gone CF. It was Akio Toyoda's pet project, intended as a demonstration of TMC's capabilities, and only possible in a megacorp with lots of cash flow.

ragingf80

Yes, I plan on tracking and I've already registered for the 2 day M School. If I wanted to dominate on the track, however, you are right, the Z06 and GT4 would be much better, but that's not why I bought it. I preferred a 4 door sedan that I could also have fun in, but a nice coupe wasn't out of the question. I also wanted something stylish, but not boy-racer. The Z06 despite it's numbers, don't do anything for me, and the GT4 was practically impossible to by at the time, you couldn't find any! I also considered the RC-F, Audi S4, Cadillac CTS-V, and a Mercedes C63 AMG. The RC-F, like I said, wasn't worth the 2 door trade-off being so heavy and underperforming. The C63 styling wasn't to my liking, and the Audi S4 was too slow. The Cadillac CTS-V didn't connect with me emotionally. I just couldn't see myself driving one. The M3 seemed to check most of the boxes and I was in love with the aesthetics and power.

Having said all that, and knowing that it isn't the fastest on the track, that doesn't mean you can't have fun on the track with it. No, I don't plan on outrunning Corvettes and out handling Miatas, but that's not the objective. The objective is to have fun and still have a nice daily driver. Lets not forget about the fact that it is, in fact, a "class" of car on the track. Just like there are different classes in professional motorsports, be it F1, kart, FE, Indy, nascar, Rally, GT1, GT2, GT3, Trucks, Motorcycles etc etc, lots of different types of vehicles for different types of races. You can race a shopping car against a shopping cart and it's still a race. In this class, I find the RC-F to be an underperformer compared to it's competitors.

EZZ

The RCF isn't as good but you can get them for way cheaper now. The discounts were insane. It's about the same price as a fully loaded 340

I would buy one in the $60k range but not the $80k range.

gengar

I was about to ask if you were talking about the RC-F or the GS-F, then checked the Lexus website and realized a fully-packaged (not even fully-loaded) RC-F is $77.5k. All this time I just assumed the RC-F was discount-priced to the M4... it's not.

Crazy to think I got my 2008 IS-F for $60k OTD.

To be fair, I think most of the people on this forum complaining about the RC-F weight are wondering why it weighs so much more than the old IS-F.

I consider luxury performance cars like the M3 and IS-F to be compromise cars - I don't think anyone really thinks they are track beasts. But I also don't think it's unreasonable for buyers to want as little compromise as possible even when they know they are buying a compromise car.

Hoovey689

iTrader: (16)

True most RC F's are packaged at about the $76-77K mark. Highest one I've ever seen was an Infared one at $82,073. Of course that's just the MRSP, and there are plenty of members and non members that have gotten an RC F for mid/high sixties OTD because of incentives and dealers trying to move the units. So it's probably similar to your purchase nearly a decade ago when you account for inflation.

ragingf80

I agree. Additionally, we all have a level of compromise in which we are comfortable with. Some of us still want that daily drivability, 4 doors, interior space, weight, power, etc etc.

e325rkh

I thought Yamaha built the LFA V10, or am I mistaken?

S2000toIS350

Yes, Yamaha built the LFA V10 for Lexus.

I believe the motor alone costs more than a complete RC-F.

This thread is a mess.

You can't expect Lexus to build a cheapo toned down LFA for RC-F money.

rominl

iTrader: (4)

that's why i said in my first reply that this thread simply doesn't make any sense. might as well look for a kit car

e325rkh

Agreed. R&D and ability to manufacture a super car when you don't do super cars for a living. Also, it does little as a halo car if they make it inferior to save money.

mk416

Dead on right on all points. Also, the track performance depends on what track for what car. M3/M4 does not excel in every track and the fact is: no cars can perform excellently in ALL kinds of track. Go ahead, put Miata on Nurburgring against, say, a Z06, and see how badly it performs. Why? Because Miata is a FR compact roadster that's designed for extreme agility and handling, not top-speed chasing super saloons/coupes. (Disagreeing with the guy you're quoting)

Always irks me when people say "oh my god my gutted Civic type R can beat Ferrari 360 on track" K.

gengar

Yes, but co-designed/developed by Toyota and Yamaha, just like the F1 engines.

Vitveet

The LCF will have LFA performance, if not better, even though it'll for sure weigh more. Mark my words and come back and visit this thread in 2020☺️. And it'll cost less than the LFA ($150k range) and be easier to get your hands on... everything the OP wanted correct?!? So OP, make sure you put your order in for what since it'll be pretty much what!

V.

EZZ

I think the issue is that for $150k, you could get a 911 turbo S and completely annihilate anything that Lexus could come up with. In fact, a $100k 911 Carrera S may be all thats needed. LFA performance wasn't that special even for its time. A $90k GTR was of comparable performance.

S2000toIS350

Where would one find a new Turbo S for $150K?

the OP started this flunked out of high school thread asking for a $65K version of the LFA

the LCF will in no way cover that request