bnizzle87

If I was solely in the market for a two door sport variant, RC F is on that list. The tech, the way it feels when I'm driving, and the overall update versus the IS F makes it appealing. TVD alone is something that would make for a very compelling case in favor of the RC F. I am just in that mindset that I need four doors no matter what. People can say what they want about 4 doors being ugly and what not, but they're not driving my car. What I've always hated was needing the move the seat for my rear passengers. It was a bit time consuming, and the rear seating is pretty limited too. I'm not saying the IS F has huge seating in the back, but the additional doors make it easier.

It will always come down to personal preference, and I leave it at that. Looks aside, both cars will still be potent and be built well without a drop in reliability. It still makes sense to look at an IS F if the customer wants to purchase one, and from what I've seen lately on the forums, there is still a solid market for used IS Fs. I've never needed to say anything negative on the RC F when I have family and friends ask my opinion on which to get. I've offered strengths and weaknesses to each model, and from then they decide with my being unbiased. As long as the owner gets the car he/she wants, that's all that matters.

kolyan

Not looking as looking right now and not asking for advice, just thinking and curious what ISF owners think. I already know what RCF and BMW owners have to say....

As far as pricing goes, I think paying $45k for CPO RCF is quite attractive for today. Just few month ago I only saw them in upper 40s and low 50s. I assume they will only get cheaper with miles and lease ends.

Ps. I am not a big fan of GTR. 4-doors could be nice, but given how limited the space is in 2IS, I think I can deal with coupe (it's the none folding seats that bothers me the most). Once you have 60/40 split rears, its hard to go back. The cargo capacity is like of a small truck ))

808newbie

yeah having the rear seats that does not fold bothers me as well. and yeah the 2is has limited space. since im taller than 6'0" i have the front seat all the way back and no one can comfortable sit behind me so it becomes a 3 seater haha.

If the RCF was lighter i wouldve been a little more inclined to get it

Rossi

iTrader: (4)

If you go with 2 door coupe, there are so many better options.

Justin727

I still can't love the front of the RC. I've tried to force myself too. It's not happening.

ageslurkin

The LC is what the RC F should have looked like. Unfortunately the RC F and LC are in different price brackets, but my point still holds. I also am not a huge fan of the seat stitching in the RC F, but haven't driven one so can't speak to the dynamics.

Brad3275

Amen. The new Lexus front grills always make me want to buy some meat and grill it....

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

I have the GS F and the IS F. The IS F with a Giken diff is hands down a better drive. Sure I like all the tech updates, but the TVD isn't worth the weight penalty, and the GS F is a pig at just over 4k pounds. Lexus doesn't care about weight, it is inconsequential from their perspective, so their "sports" models keep getting fatter and fatter. The F cars - ALL OF THEM - are too heavy, even the LFA. The LFA for all the carbon fiber and attempts to keep the weigh down SHOULD weigh in at 2800 lbs. They are PIGS and weigh MORE than my 1993 hardtop Supra. MORE. So, Toyota/Lexus have completely lost their minds and keep putting these ridiculously heavy "sports" cars out there with the F badge, and they're truly an embarrassment to all things high performance.

JMHO.

USB2011JAM

Koylan, I thought a nice ISF could be had for high 20s? low 30s? ..... If RCFs are 45-50k and clean ISF is 28-32k seems like 2 very different spectrums of budgets? Just sayin....

I'll say the same thing about the RCF as i did 6-7 years ago with ISF.... NOW would be a good time to buy an RCF, prices will dip a bit more for a year or so, but not much more, then they'll hold steady for several years after that.

This is always what happens 2-3 years after a specialty car is released. 3 years after they come out all the lease returns hit the market and flood it, prices drop, people start picking them up because they are now in peoples budget. Then prices even out, the cars start to become relatively collectible and prices may even go up a bit.
Of course there is always exceptions and always the curve will slide up and down a bit, but in general the rarity of the car will dictate the pricing for sometime to come.

(As a multiple ISF owner) I can assure you the prices are not near ISF level because its RCF is subpar car. There are some things it does A LOT better then the ISF, there is somethings the ISF does better. But prices are not dropping because the car sucks. Dollar for dollar, the RCF is MORE car, not necessarily faster around a track, or as "fun" to drive, or as "pretty", but it is more car, period, just like GSF is. It has more power, more technology, more safety features, more features in general. The fun to drive factor, the looks, the "feel" is all subject to who is reviewing it.

I can tell you 40-42K for a 30k mile 2011-2012 ISF vs 45-48K for a 15k mile 2015 RCF, the RCF is a "better" deal, its more car, not to mention newer. In terms of drivability and feels, and looks, like i said, thats up to who is driving it.

But neither RCF or ISF are "better or worse", its like saying back in the day, which is better?INTEGRA TYPE R or CIVIC TYPE R?", it depends what youre looking for, they're different cars... In terms of investment though, the RCF wins (for now), only time will tell which one will be worth more 10 years from now (all other things being equal). ISF is at the point right now where they aren't moving/dropping much in price and people that have "always wanted an ISF" are buying them up, RCF just hasn't gotten there yet, which is why you'll see more RCFs for sale then ISFs, and prices are dropping purely because of supply (but not for long) not to mention there is still new ones available, but that will change just give it time, especially as prices approach ISF level. There is plenty of people out there that could go ISF or RCF and be happy with either, and those people, will buy RCF, simply because its newer and basically the same price.

You have the ability now to buy and RCF for 45k, keep it clean and nice, and 7 years from now be the guy who has an RCF thats still worth 45k, or the guy who said, "****, I should have bought an RCF years ago for that 45k, could have driven it for 6-7 years basically for free, and get my money back out of it, selling it for 45k now"

lobuxracer

iTrader: (2)

Cars are not investments. They're a depreciating asset unless there is something weird that happens (like Fast and Furious saved the used Supra market, otherwise they'd be as cheap as a 3000GT VR4 or a 300ZX). My Supra now is worth more than I paid for it in 1997, and I've put 120k miles on it since I bought it. It just turned 25 years old.

The RC F seats and the GS F seats are identical. They suck compared to the IS F seats. Been on road trips in both, and never had to move around to avoid numbness in the IS F, and found myself begging for a different spot in the GS F after 3 hours. The RC F and the GS F are less than 100 pounds different in curb weight. While the GS F doesn't feel slow, it doesn't feel in the same class as the IS F with a proper limited slip diff, even with TVD in track/slalom mode.

The RC F and the GS F are a disappointment IMHO. I expected a lot more and barely found parity,

USB2011JAM

Agree, the vast majority of cars are not an investment, they are a means to an end (most of the time), however some are more investment-worthy than others, such as a Lexus ISF who's depreciation rate has done far better the majority of most vehicles at the same price point. With that being said, in terms of losing as much money as you would with say a Camry, or IS250, its certainly an investment. There are very few things in the world that go up in value over time, and even those things are prone to market fluctuations, and at times could be considered a "depreciating asset" which actually be considered more of a liability with that rational, however investments don't ALWAYS mean you make money on it, just means you're getting something of value in return for your money, hopefully that value increases, but no guarantees ... i.e.: property, real estate, gold, stock market, etc etc. People in 2008 would say real estate, or playing on Wall Street wasn't an investment either, but overtime, it is clearly.

Clearly your Supra was an good investment, hence it being worth more then you paid. As well as many other cars out there that cost more now then they did when people bought them, Supra is definitely not unique in that regard, relatively unique for a Toyota yes, but definitely not unique from an investment standpoint. There could be 100s of car models named that would be considered good investments, some not nearly as rare as an ISF also, that have made people a lot of money over time.

I definitely don't think it was Fast and Furious that caused the Supra values to do what they have. It could be one factor, but I certainly think it would be a highly sought after car, with or with out the movie. Just like many many other cars out there.

The seats are subjective to you. For you the IS-F wins that battle, for some others maybe not. For me, i haven't sat in an RCF seat for very much time, but i cant tell you (subjectively) the RCF/GSF seats sure look a hell of a lot nicer then the ISF seats. You said it, in your opinion those cars are a disappointment, to some, the ISF is a disappointment. I'd venture to bet, 20-25 years ago some would find the Supra a disappointment. None of those things qualify it for not being a valuable, collectible, and sought after car for quite some time.

I do wonder why you haven't gotten rid of the GS-F, if its that bad? With all your industry knowledge, and technical ability, why did you buy it? Surely you knew that before you pulled the trigger, no? I don't mean that to be a smart ***, truly wonder what changed from when you purchased it?

Lets Drive

iTrader: (3)

It's an F car and definitely has an appeal to it, but it's not really the car for me. My main gripe/focus with the IS F has been to drop weight, so I find the RC F less appealing, given it's even heavier. I also prefer four doors in general, but if I'm playing with two, my reasons for buying begin to stray from an RC F. There's just too much competition in that arena.

In general, I think Lexus can do a few things differently. They are taking positive risks in the design category (not just IMO, but among people I know who are usually indifferent to cars), but beyond that, they aren't building much that I find especially desirable, atm.

jat0223

iTrader: (1)

I'm in the minority here but I think the RFC looks great inside and out. If it had the driving dynamics of the GSF I'd probably have one in my driveway. Unfortunately, driving the RCF after the GSF at the track, feels like a downgrade, so disappointing.

kolyan

Yes, $10-15k difference is a different budget. But since some are paying $40s for ISF, and like I said 13-14 models are listed for over that, wouldnt it make sense to just get RCF for $45? In my mind besides the car seats, I have no use for 4 doors. I am actually wondering if I could manage a car seat in a coupe (for the future)

As far as weight...4k lbs is alot for sure for a sports coupe, but ISF is what 3800? Do you really feel huge difference considering RCF makes more power and has stiffer body? And what other choices are there? AMGs are heavy too, so we are back to M3/M4.

kolyan

Em.....interesting so RCF is worse then GSF I personally dont track cars, but being able to easily toss the car around feels nice.

I like RCF too, but mostly because its different, well and probably its more reliable. Although I havent heard of many issues on current M cars or Audi S/RS line.