LFA or Porsche Carrera GT?
03-19-11, 02:09 PM
#61
Lexus Test Driver
Well, my comment was really directed towards 07grIS350 so I am not sure how to respond.
I also had explained how LFA's throttle response can only be matched/or come close by Porsche Carrera GT. It has been well established none of the Lamborghini V10s have a comparable throttle response to the LFA since Lexus was far more obsessed with it. I am only reiterating what every independent tester has said. I mean, Lexus has clearly measured the idle - 9500 rpm response in 0.6 seconds, which they believe is the quickest response ever measured on a high-revving engine. Is that even a debate?
Both cars have comparable chassis stiffness due to both using carbon fiber shell with similar curb weights. Both engines have been derived from racing applications. LFA went on to professional racing while Carrera GT racing program was "shelved" and only became a "boutique exotic".
I maintain my argument like has been mentioned by several independent testers that Lexus LFA is closest to Porsche Carrera GT in terms of engine response and chassis stiffness.
Furthermore, we are talking overall track performance. Not just straight line performance.
I understand you come from the Lamborghini world and have the urge to bring in Lambos to the mix somehow into the conversation. You comparing the LFA with your beloved Super veloce makes no sense especially in the context of such a strongly degrading word such as "sluggish" compared to LP670-4. Slower??, ofcourse. Sluggish?? No way in hell. A 12 second car would look sluggish. What about the massive size and weight difference??? Ever think about that???
Feelings aside because of Lexus LFA's linear powerband all across the rev range and your logic of more power being the reason, I am sure the real world comparisons will not support a claim strongly worded like that considering Lexus LFA weighs over 400 lbs less than LP670-4, which brings the power to weight ratio much closer than the sheer HP difference suggest.
I am sure you saw the comparison of Lexus LFA with 620 HP 599 GTB HGTE where 599 had more power, yet Lexus LFA was faster in a straight line was flat out quicker due to weighing over 500 lbs less to 140 mph.
Lexus LFA does not compare with LP670-4 to begin with since the focus is not brutal straight line performance, but overall track performance and driver-oriented dynamics. LP is officially not Lamborghini's best track car, which happens to be LP570-4 Superleggera. We all know how the comparison with that car went down of the Lexus LFA by AutoBild.
I also had explained how LFA's throttle response can only be matched/or come close by Porsche Carrera GT. It has been well established none of the Lamborghini V10s have a comparable throttle response to the LFA since Lexus was far more obsessed with it. I am only reiterating what every independent tester has said. I mean, Lexus has clearly measured the idle - 9500 rpm response in 0.6 seconds, which they believe is the quickest response ever measured on a high-revving engine. Is that even a debate?
Both cars have comparable chassis stiffness due to both using carbon fiber shell with similar curb weights. Both engines have been derived from racing applications. LFA went on to professional racing while Carrera GT racing program was "shelved" and only became a "boutique exotic".
I maintain my argument like has been mentioned by several independent testers that Lexus LFA is closest to Porsche Carrera GT in terms of engine response and chassis stiffness.
Furthermore, we are talking overall track performance. Not just straight line performance.
I understand you come from the Lamborghini world and have the urge to bring in Lambos to the mix somehow into the conversation. You comparing the LFA with your beloved Super veloce makes no sense especially in the context of such a strongly degrading word such as "sluggish" compared to LP670-4. Slower??, ofcourse. Sluggish?? No way in hell. A 12 second car would look sluggish. What about the massive size and weight difference??? Ever think about that???
Feelings aside because of Lexus LFA's linear powerband all across the rev range and your logic of more power being the reason, I am sure the real world comparisons will not support a claim strongly worded like that considering Lexus LFA weighs over 400 lbs less than LP670-4, which brings the power to weight ratio much closer than the sheer HP difference suggest.
I am sure you saw the comparison of Lexus LFA with 620 HP 599 GTB HGTE where 599 had more power, yet Lexus LFA was faster in a straight line was flat out quicker due to weighing over 500 lbs less to 140 mph.
Lexus LFA does not compare with LP670-4 to begin with since the focus is not brutal straight line performance, but overall track performance and driver-oriented dynamics. LP is officially not Lamborghini's best track car, which happens to be LP570-4 Superleggera. We all know how the comparison with that car went down of the Lexus LFA by AutoBild.
I disagree. I found the LFA's power band to be extremely manageable because the car remains so well balanced regardless of what you do. It didn't upset all that easily and while the car revs very quickly at neutral, compared to the SV it feels downright sluggish, but there is a big difference in HP. I also disagree that it's closest to the CGT. I don't get that one at all. I can't think of two cars that are further apart.
I'd say that the LFA is very closely matched with the Scuderia and the Balboni in terms of both balance and response, with the Scuderia feeling very similar. The CGT is in a category all its own and there is nothing like it which is why collectors like it. Even skilled drivers have a very hard time with the CGT on actual road conditions where the car tends to bite very hard if something goes wrong. I can't even imagine the logic of considering the LFA and the CGT as one or the other. That would be like comparing a Lexus LS460 and a Land Rover. Yea they are both luxury vehicles but that's where it ends.
The LFA's strong point is its balance and predictability and it is one of the better well rounded cars out there. I've not driven the F458 yet so I can't say it's better, but Scuderia owners who have moved up to the F458 tell me it's even better balanced. The LFA is even better balanced the SV, but the SV is a brute by comparison, far more powerful at all times, and has a steeper curve to drive well.
You can quote technical differences all day and each manufacturer solves problems differently, but they all have strengths and weaknesses and until you get you butt in some of these cars, it's difficult to know what you're actually going to prefer.
I'd say that the LFA is very closely matched with the Scuderia and the Balboni in terms of both balance and response, with the Scuderia feeling very similar. The CGT is in a category all its own and there is nothing like it which is why collectors like it. Even skilled drivers have a very hard time with the CGT on actual road conditions where the car tends to bite very hard if something goes wrong. I can't even imagine the logic of considering the LFA and the CGT as one or the other. That would be like comparing a Lexus LS460 and a Land Rover. Yea they are both luxury vehicles but that's where it ends.
The LFA's strong point is its balance and predictability and it is one of the better well rounded cars out there. I've not driven the F458 yet so I can't say it's better, but Scuderia owners who have moved up to the F458 tell me it's even better balanced. The LFA is even better balanced the SV, but the SV is a brute by comparison, far more powerful at all times, and has a steeper curve to drive well.
You can quote technical differences all day and each manufacturer solves problems differently, but they all have strengths and weaknesses and until you get you butt in some of these cars, it's difficult to know what you're actually going to prefer.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 03-19-11 at 04:49 PM.
03-19-11, 02:30 PM
#62
Lexus Champion
I disagree. I found the LFA's power band to be extremely manageable because the car remains so well balanced regardless of what you do. It didn't upset all that easily and while the car revs very quickly at neutral, compared to the SV it feels downright sluggish, but there is a big difference in HP. I also disagree that it's closest to the CGT. I don't get that one at all. I can't think of two cars that are further apart.
I'd say that the LFA is very closely matched with the Scuderia and the Balboni in terms of both balance and response, with the Scuderia feeling very similar. The CGT is in a category all its own and there is nothing like it which is why collectors like it. Even skilled drivers have a very hard time with the CGT on actual road conditions where the car tends to bite very hard if something goes wrong. I can't even imagine the logic of considering the LFA and the CGT as one or the other. That would be like comparing a Lexus LS460 and a Land Rover. Yea they are both luxury vehicles but that's where it ends.
The LFA's strong point is its balance and predictability and it is one of the better well rounded cars out there. I've not driven the F458 yet so I can't say it's better, but Scuderia owners who have moved up to the F458 tell me it's even better balanced. The LFA is even better balanced the SV, but the SV is a brute by comparison, far more powerful at all times, and has a steeper curve to drive well.
You can quote technical differences all day and each manufacturer solves problems differently, but they all have strengths and weaknesses and until you get you butt in some of these cars, it's difficult to know what you're actually going to prefer.
I'd say that the LFA is very closely matched with the Scuderia and the Balboni in terms of both balance and response, with the Scuderia feeling very similar. The CGT is in a category all its own and there is nothing like it which is why collectors like it. Even skilled drivers have a very hard time with the CGT on actual road conditions where the car tends to bite very hard if something goes wrong. I can't even imagine the logic of considering the LFA and the CGT as one or the other. That would be like comparing a Lexus LS460 and a Land Rover. Yea they are both luxury vehicles but that's where it ends.
The LFA's strong point is its balance and predictability and it is one of the better well rounded cars out there. I've not driven the F458 yet so I can't say it's better, but Scuderia owners who have moved up to the F458 tell me it's even better balanced. The LFA is even better balanced the SV, but the SV is a brute by comparison, far more powerful at all times, and has a steeper curve to drive well.
You can quote technical differences all day and each manufacturer solves problems differently, but they all have strengths and weaknesses and until you get you butt in some of these cars, it's difficult to know what you're actually going to prefer.
From reading the reviews and watching the videos it does appear that the LFA is closer to the Scud in terms of handling, steering, balance, etc. I found the Scud to be the absolute perfect balance of all of those things. Even though it was an older car in comparison, I was much more comfortable in it and able to push it much harder than the Murci or the Italia.
The Murci was a handful. I imagine that it might actually be closer to the CGT in terms of driver challenge. It was very apparent, very early that the LP640 will bite you in the *** if you don't respect it. It's a big car, with huge power and I didn't feel comfortable getting after it as hard. I'm sure if you owned one and drove it repeatedly on the track, skills would get better and comfort would improve. Close Tommy?
I do find it interesting that the owners you have talked to find the 458 to be better balanced. Perhaps it is the big power increase with the light body, but I actually preferred the Scud. The steering was a little too quick and almost made the vehicle feel jumpy. All of the instructors that I discussed this with had the same feelings. It is a brilliantly quick car but just didn't feel as perfect as the F430 Scud. If they ever do a Scuderia version of the 458 they will be nearing perfection, imo.
If the LFA drives closer to the F430 Scuderia I can't imagine how that could possibly be a bad thing.
Just my thoughts after some seat time in these amazing cars.
03-19-11, 03:08 PM
#63
if the lfa is close to scud, then i think i will like the scud. driving the lfa on the track is a breeze (by comparison). on all the cars i have driven, the m3 is the closest i will put with the lfa. of course the lfa is way faster, but both cars are so linear and balanced, everything is so gradual. that's somewhat the problem i have with the isf. its performance is head to head with m3 the way i see it, but the isf isn't as linear as the m3 when i push it on the track. as i mentioned in my article, the throttle on the lfa is very sensitive, but it's something you can adapt to very quickly after 2 turns. 
ok, i want to go to the track again now
ok, i want to go to the track again now
03-19-11, 03:44 PM
#65
I won't repeat all the opinions and characterisitics of the 2 cars stated by others. I do agree the LFA will be the easier car to drive. Since the intent is to make this car a daily, that strongly puts the LFA ahead. I've read many times that the clutch and tranny make the CGT a difficult driver. Not suitable for daily work. I believe that most exotic car makers are going toward easier to drive cars. The LFA is probably already there. It's certainly roomier and more comfortable to sit in than most exotics. It certainly was for me. Hands down, the LFA would be my choice. It's not even a serious debate.
If looks were a big issue, the debate becomes more serious. That's so subjective the debate could go on forever.
If looks were a big issue, the debate becomes more serious. That's so subjective the debate could go on forever.
03-20-11, 03:25 AM
#66
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WA
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I haven't had the pleasure of driving the LFA or CGT, but I have driven the other cars being discussed here on the track.
From reading the reviews and watching the videos it does appear that the LFA is closer to the Scud in terms of handling, steering, balance, etc. I found the Scud to be the absolute perfect balance of all of those things. Even though it was an older car in comparison, I was much more comfortable in it and able to push it much harder than the Murci or the Italia.
The Murci was a handful. I imagine that it might actually be closer to the CGT in terms of driver challenge. It was very apparent, very early that the LP640 will bite you in the *** if you don't respect it. It's a big car, with huge power and I didn't feel comfortable getting after it as hard. I'm sure if you owned one and drove it repeatedly on the track, skills would get better and comfort would improve. Close Tommy?
I do find it interesting that the owners you have talked to find the 458 to be better balanced. Perhaps it is the big power increase with the light body, but I actually preferred the Scud. The steering was a little too quick and almost made the vehicle feel jumpy. All of the instructors that I discussed this with had the same feelings. It is a brilliantly quick car but just didn't feel as perfect as the F430 Scud. If they ever do a Scuderia version of the 458 they will be nearing perfection, imo.
If the LFA drives closer to the F430 Scuderia I can't imagine how that could possibly be a bad thing.
Just my thoughts after some seat time in these amazing cars.
From reading the reviews and watching the videos it does appear that the LFA is closer to the Scud in terms of handling, steering, balance, etc. I found the Scud to be the absolute perfect balance of all of those things. Even though it was an older car in comparison, I was much more comfortable in it and able to push it much harder than the Murci or the Italia.
The Murci was a handful. I imagine that it might actually be closer to the CGT in terms of driver challenge. It was very apparent, very early that the LP640 will bite you in the *** if you don't respect it. It's a big car, with huge power and I didn't feel comfortable getting after it as hard. I'm sure if you owned one and drove it repeatedly on the track, skills would get better and comfort would improve. Close Tommy?
I do find it interesting that the owners you have talked to find the 458 to be better balanced. Perhaps it is the big power increase with the light body, but I actually preferred the Scud. The steering was a little too quick and almost made the vehicle feel jumpy. All of the instructors that I discussed this with had the same feelings. It is a brilliantly quick car but just didn't feel as perfect as the F430 Scud. If they ever do a Scuderia version of the 458 they will be nearing perfection, imo.
If the LFA drives closer to the F430 Scuderia I can't imagine how that could possibly be a bad thing.
Just my thoughts after some seat time in these amazing cars.
I can see the LFA having similar appeal in someone's collection, but in a different corner. I do think that anyone who likes how the Scuderia feels will also like the LFA. There is a different sitting position, but from a machinery prospective, I think they both have that refined feel that's difficult to describe. To Lambo guys it's going to feel too refined, but that's not at all a negative. It's just a different direction. It's like arguing about a shade of paint.
Most of the criticism I hear about the CGT stems from the short travel of the clutch and the grabbiness that easily upsets the balance. I know one used exotic dealer who claims he will not sell CGTs to inexperienced or young exotic owners after his own scares in the car. Arguing about which is better makes zero sense because some of these guys that own CGTs want that challenge. Two LP640 owners I know drove the CGT and hated it. Both thought it was too twitchy.
As for comparing the CGT with the LP640, I'm thinking it's hard to do that too from what CGT owners tell me because the CGT's motor has a different power band and overall feel to the car, but I've not experienced it myself to say exactly how. I was running with one right next to me once where we had this series of stop and go intersections with two lanes and I was in my LP640 at the time and it seemed like he was dealing with a handful even in braking on a curve, but it could have been the driver. I didn't like being next to him.
Some with absolutely ZERO experience in any exotic want to argue with me and like any other data-quoting keyboard cowboy (all hat and no cattle) can pull specs all day and take veiled personal shots, but in the end everything they think they know goes out the window when you actually start driving a lot of different exotics and start to feel the personality of these cars. Each one hits your senses slightly differently especially after you rack up a lot of miles in different exotics. Some cars have wonderful sounds but will fatigue you after a while because of that same sound. How could you ever quantify the value of that? All exotics create a different overall experience and so you have to decide what thrills you the most by actually putting in some seat time and ignore all the data. After a while something will be a "gota-have" experience.
03-20-11, 06:21 AM
#67
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand you come from the Lamborghini world and have the urge to bring in Lambos to the mix somehow into the conversation. You comparing the LFA with your beloved Super veloce makes no sense especially in the context of such a strongly degrading word such as "sluggish" compared to LP670-4. Slower??, ofcourse. Sluggish?? No way in hell. A 12 second car would look sluggish. What about the massive size and weight difference??? Ever think about that???
Some with absolutely ZERO experience in any exotic want to argue with me and like any other data-quoting keyboard cowboy (all hat and no cattle) can pull specs all day and take veiled personal shots, but in the end everything they think they know goes out the window when you actually start driving a lot of different exotics and start to feel the personality of these cars.
03-20-11, 07:25 AM
#68
Lead Lap
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: ontario
Posts: 727
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
if the lfa is close to scud, then i think i will like the scud. driving the lfa on the track is a breeze (by comparison). on all the cars i have driven, the m3 is the closest i will put with the lfa. of course the lfa is way faster, but both cars are so linear and balanced, everything is so gradual. that's somewhat the problem i have with the isf. its performance is head to head with m3 the way i see it, but the isf isn't as linear as the m3 when i push it on the track. as i mentioned in my article, the throttle on the lfa is very sensitive, but it's something you can adapt to very quickly after 2 turns.
ok, i want to go to the track again now
ok, i want to go to the track again now
Me three, I just want to hear the screaming V10 again.
03-20-11, 10:32 AM
#69
It's not a bad thing at all to compare the two. Every Saturday morning a group of about fifteen exotic owners have breakfast together and we often get into what we want next and why. Everyone seems to like different things in an exotic, regardless of brand. Some want silky smooth machinery, others want just the opposite, some want a handful to drive, while others don't. Collections seem to go in all directions. Some only buy white cars or all black cars, or want one of each model from a particular brand or some other note of distinction. All the CGT guys I know wanted one because it's something different in their collection. For one, it's a very unusual looking car.
I can see the LFA having similar appeal in someone's collection, but in a different corner. I do think that anyone who likes how the Scuderia feels will also like the LFA. There is a different sitting position, but from a machinery prospective, I think they both have that refined feel that's difficult to describe. To Lambo guys it's going to feel too refined, but that's not at all a negative. It's just a different direction. It's like arguing about a shade of paint.
Most of the criticism I hear about the CGT stems from the short travel of the clutch and the grabbiness that easily upsets the balance. I know one used exotic dealer who claims he will not sell CGTs to inexperienced or young exotic owners after his own scares in the car. Arguing about which is better makes zero sense because some of these guys that own CGTs want that challenge. Two LP640 owners I know drove the CGT and hated it. Both thought it was too twitchy.
As for comparing the CGT with the LP640, I'm thinking it's hard to do that too from what CGT owners tell me because the CGT's motor has a different power band and overall feel to the car, but I've not experienced it myself to say exactly how. I was running with one right next to me once where we had this series of stop and go intersections with two lanes and I was in my LP640 at the time and it seemed like he was dealing with a handful even in braking on a curve, but it could have been the driver. I didn't like being next to him.
Some with absolutely ZERO experience in any exotic want to argue with me and like any other data-quoting keyboard cowboy (all hat and no cattle) can pull specs all day and take veiled personal shots, but in the end everything they think they know goes out the window when you actually start driving a lot of different exotics and start to feel the personality of these cars. Each one hits your senses slightly differently especially after you rack up a lot of miles in different exotics. Some cars have wonderful sounds but will fatigue you after a while because of that same sound. How could you ever quantify the value of that? All exotics create a different overall experience and so you have to decide what thrills you the most by actually putting in some seat time and ignore all the data. After a while something will be a "gota-have" experience.
I can see the LFA having similar appeal in someone's collection, but in a different corner. I do think that anyone who likes how the Scuderia feels will also like the LFA. There is a different sitting position, but from a machinery prospective, I think they both have that refined feel that's difficult to describe. To Lambo guys it's going to feel too refined, but that's not at all a negative. It's just a different direction. It's like arguing about a shade of paint.
Most of the criticism I hear about the CGT stems from the short travel of the clutch and the grabbiness that easily upsets the balance. I know one used exotic dealer who claims he will not sell CGTs to inexperienced or young exotic owners after his own scares in the car. Arguing about which is better makes zero sense because some of these guys that own CGTs want that challenge. Two LP640 owners I know drove the CGT and hated it. Both thought it was too twitchy.
As for comparing the CGT with the LP640, I'm thinking it's hard to do that too from what CGT owners tell me because the CGT's motor has a different power band and overall feel to the car, but I've not experienced it myself to say exactly how. I was running with one right next to me once where we had this series of stop and go intersections with two lanes and I was in my LP640 at the time and it seemed like he was dealing with a handful even in braking on a curve, but it could have been the driver. I didn't like being next to him.
Some with absolutely ZERO experience in any exotic want to argue with me and like any other data-quoting keyboard cowboy (all hat and no cattle) can pull specs all day and take veiled personal shots, but in the end everything they think they know goes out the window when you actually start driving a lot of different exotics and start to feel the personality of these cars. Each one hits your senses slightly differently especially after you rack up a lot of miles in different exotics. Some cars have wonderful sounds but will fatigue you after a while because of that same sound. How could you ever quantify the value of that? All exotics create a different overall experience and so you have to decide what thrills you the most by actually putting in some seat time and ignore all the data. After a while something will be a "gota-have" experience.
My opinions are definitely formed by what I read, my preferences as they relate to that information and a tiny bit of experience. I have not driven any exotic but I have sat in many exotics. So I can't say much about driving experience except what I read. Since I love a sporty but comfy ride, need plenty of room and hate shifting gears....plus I would want to drive the heck out of any exotic I had, the clear choice would be the LFA.
Then there's looks. The LFA is not the best looking exotic but it looks very cool, it's right there with the pack imo. Personally, I think the Murcielago is the best looking exotic but all look pretty good.
Yes, the LFA would be my first exotic choice...if I had the cash and it was available.
03-20-11, 08:28 PM
#70
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: WA
Posts: 442
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good post!
My opinions are definitely formed by what I read, my preferences as they relate to that information and a tiny bit of experience. I have not driven any exotic but I have sat in many exotics. So I can't say much about driving experience except what I read. Since I love a sporty but comfy ride, need plenty of room and hate shifting gears....plus I would want to drive the heck out of any exotic I had, the clear choice would be the LFA.
Then there's looks. The LFA is not the best looking exotic but it looks very cool, it's right there with the pack imo. Personally, I think the Murcielago is the best looking exotic but all look pretty good.
Yes, the LFA would be my first exotic choice...if I had the cash and it was available.
My opinions are definitely formed by what I read, my preferences as they relate to that information and a tiny bit of experience. I have not driven any exotic but I have sat in many exotics. So I can't say much about driving experience except what I read. Since I love a sporty but comfy ride, need plenty of room and hate shifting gears....plus I would want to drive the heck out of any exotic I had, the clear choice would be the LFA.
Then there's looks. The LFA is not the best looking exotic but it looks very cool, it's right there with the pack imo. Personally, I think the Murcielago is the best looking exotic but all look pretty good.
Yes, the LFA would be my first exotic choice...if I had the cash and it was available.
03-20-11, 10:01 PM
#71
Lexus Test Driver
I seriously don't care. I also thought E46 M3 felt faster and more ferocious than the E92 M3 when I drove both cars when the facts are completely opposite in real world due to the peaky nature of the E46 motor after 5000 rpm and also due to the E92 chassis having lower "polar moments of inertia".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 03-20-11 at 10:53 PM.
03-20-11, 11:39 PM
#72
I seriously don't care. I also thought E46 M3 felt faster and more ferocious than the E92 M3 when I drove both cars when the facts are completely opposite in real world due to the peaky nature of the E46 motor after 5000 rpm and also due to the E92 chassis having lower "polar moments of inertia".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
hehee, after driving my m3, i feel my gs350 is very sluggish
03-21-11, 12:44 AM
#73
Lexus Champion
I've read from other reviews that the LFA is deceptively fast. So maybe the sluggish feeling is just the linear speed the car gains without much of a fit going on. To put it lightly, the LFA isolates you to the car and lets you get on with the driving. I think what it's down to is the fact that the car is so poised that it's not harsh to you. But it can be as far as I've heard. I haven't driven the car or ridden in it. I'm just going off of other peoples reviews of it from beyond Club Lexus.
03-21-11, 04:12 AM
#74
Lexus Test Driver
iTrader: (1)
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: USA
Posts: 932
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Lower polar moments of inertia" and the straight-line? What???!
Power to weight is a bench racer's tool. It tells you nothing on what a driver feels behind the wheel. There is no denying that you will feel an obvious difference between a 12-cylinder car and a 10-cylinder one, especially one with more power, a higher displacement, and AWD to put all that down. Check out Chris Harris' review of the LFA when he makes commentary on the the 599. As for Tommy, I think he has a little more credibility here, bud.
Power to weight is a bench racer's tool. It tells you nothing on what a driver feels behind the wheel. There is no denying that you will feel an obvious difference between a 12-cylinder car and a 10-cylinder one, especially one with more power, a higher displacement, and AWD to put all that down. Check out Chris Harris' review of the LFA when he makes commentary on the the 599. As for Tommy, I think he has a little more credibility here, bud.
I seriously don't care. I also thought E46 M3 felt faster and more ferocious than the E92 M3 when I drove both cars when the facts are completely opposite in real world due to the peaky nature of the E46 motor after 5000 rpm and also due to the E92 chassis having lower "polar moments of inertia".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
The real world numbers don't lie nor do they give a deceptive perception. Hence in my personal view, the most reliable source. Common sense tells me if a car has a 5.8 lbs/hp power to weight and has proven to pull 0.75 - 0.8 positive g's on a straight line rolling start acceleration burst up to nearly 100 mph, it can't be "sluggish".
03-21-11, 07:35 AM
#75
Lexus Test Driver
Like mentioned before, in real life, Lexus LFA was proven to be a bit quicker than the 599 GTB HGTE in direct comparison tests by CarAndDriver despite what Chris Harris's deceptive mental perceptions were ("does not feel 599 quick"). Hence, my point.
A rigid chassis that has far less inertia to fight due to lesser weight and lower polar moment of inertia would always feel far less "dramatic" and "wild" than a chassis that is not as rigid.
I have studied university level physics so I think I understand "polar moments of inertia" much better than some. It is shift of weight (hence shift of center of gravity) from one extremity to the other. Side to side or one extremity to the other since center of gravity can shift in any direction.
"Polar moment of inertia" could either be side to side (under exertion of lateral forces) or from one extremity to the other (front to back and back to front).
Case in point, if the weight is more concentrated near the center of gravity inside the wheelbase, there is far less polar moment of inertia where inertia causes shift of center of gravity from side to side or front to back and vice versa.
Again, don't question my credibility. If you don't like what I write, just simply put my posts on ignore and think I am stupid.
A rigid chassis that has far less inertia to fight due to lesser weight and lower polar moment of inertia would always feel far less "dramatic" and "wild" than a chassis that is not as rigid.
I have studied university level physics so I think I understand "polar moments of inertia" much better than some. It is shift of weight (hence shift of center of gravity) from one extremity to the other. Side to side or one extremity to the other since center of gravity can shift in any direction.
"Polar moment of inertia" could either be side to side (under exertion of lateral forces) or from one extremity to the other (front to back and back to front).
Case in point, if the weight is more concentrated near the center of gravity inside the wheelbase, there is far less polar moment of inertia where inertia causes shift of center of gravity from side to side or front to back and vice versa.
Again, don't question my credibility. If you don't like what I write, just simply put my posts on ignore and think I am stupid.
"Lower polar moments of inertia" and the straight-line? What???!
Power to weight is a bench racer's tool. It tells you nothing on what a driver feels behind the wheel. There is no denying that you will feel an obvious difference between a 12-cylinder car and a 10-cylinder one, especially one with more power, a higher displacement, and AWD to put all that down. Check out Chris Harris' review of the LFA when he makes commentary on the the 599. As for Tommy, I think he has a little more credibility here, bud.
Power to weight is a bench racer's tool. It tells you nothing on what a driver feels behind the wheel. There is no denying that you will feel an obvious difference between a 12-cylinder car and a 10-cylinder one, especially one with more power, a higher displacement, and AWD to put all that down. Check out Chris Harris' review of the LFA when he makes commentary on the the 599. As for Tommy, I think he has a little more credibility here, bud.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; 03-21-11 at 08:59 AM.