As we all know the LFA is the grandfather for all modern Lexus cars today and some technology from the LFA are reused in the IS, GS, LC, and RC. I'm having a debate with myself as to which one is the closest one that is like the LFA- RC F or the LC 500 due to being coupes. What do you guys think?


LS 500

RC F

LFA

 

The RCF track edition would be next after the LFA. Though, there is still a very sizable gap between LFA and any other F car.

 

None of them are anywhere close to the LFA. Apples and oranges IMHO

 

I'd have to drive the RC F Track Edition and the LC500 on the track to form an opinion, but given the base RC F propensity to understeer and the fact that the LC500 is 4300+lbs, I just don't think these are cars that are in the same universe, much less the same ballpark.

I'd even suggest that a lighter, more handling-focused car like the IS200 would be a better contender. Remember, that thing weighed less than my 981 Cayman does. It'd certainly best the RC F or LC500 in terms of driving dynamics and feedback.

It's really sad that we're talking about a car that came out in 1998 as a contender in this discussion. Just shows that Lexus totally failed to capitalize on the LFA. TMC as a whole didn't do much better, with the 86 being the only even remotely-relevant product.

 

Some understeer is built into all of Lexus cars as a safety mechanism. I am sure we know that well. At the limit, there will be some understeer based on how the driver is approaching the limit. I remember the 997.2 GT3 RS video where TIff was steering the GT3 RS right and it was going straight.

Being the owner of a TVD RCF, the TVD actually moves the axis or rotation aft of the CoG so it greatly minimizes understeer when pushing to beyond 8/1t0ths through rotating the rear under acceleration and braking while turning. With my slightly above average skills, I can easily kick the tail out in my RCF coming out of a turn. Also, understeer can be dialed out cpnsiderably with alignment changes and also more sticky/wider front tires.

If we were to go subjectively by pure driving dynamics, maybe the new A90 Supra would be the closest with small size, 3400 lbs weight and 2 seat etc., but then it does not have that masterpiece N/A high-revving Yamaha-tuned V8 like the Lexus cars do.

If you look at it from strictly objective within Lexus brand and numeric stand point, that is why I said RCF track edition would be the next (I said, next and not close) based on what numbers it can put down like slalom, skidpad etc. All of these other cars are not 2-seater supercars that cost $400K so it is strictly about what would be the next one down after that.

 

Definitely not the LFA, and again that just goes to show how far apart anything is going to be in this comparison. Obviously "closest" is a relative term, but when the closest is this far apart, it deserves to be duly noted.

The Supra is a BMW, not a Toyota. TMC hasn't even tried to hide that fact. Not that that's a bad thing at all - I think it's a great opportunity for buyers to get a BMW without the whiff of snobbery from the badge.

 

Gengar, you have seen how I have always been passionate about the LFA over the years as you have seen my arguments with other people.

I would tell you, yes LFA has "some" minimal understeer at the limit. It might be down to those Potenza tires like I said above. I put PS4S XL on my RCF and they are much more grippier than the OEM PSS tires the car came with and front end has much more grip now.

If you listen to Kinosh'ita who was also part of the Gazoo LFA racing team from BM from years ago around Fuji Speedway when recapping his impressions at the end in Japanese that LFA had some understeer he experienced at the limits on long corners. Chris Harris also said that about LFA NE around Nürburgring. Lexus puts some understeer on purpose to make the car safer. It is much better to start letting the front end go at the limit than the rear because simply because one can wrap the car around a tree if sudden oversteer cannot be controlled.

 

I'm not going to get into a stupid back-and-forth here. You've already modified your argument to "some minimal understeer" - I can't possibly know what that even means. There is a long list of posts on here already talking about all the drivers/reviewers who appreciated the LFA setup for having a touch of oversteer, myself, Formula drivers, Scott Pruett, etc. etc. etc. included. I don't see the need for revisionist history. The only reviewer I can remember suggesting the LFA had oversteer tendency was Sport Auto's Horst van Saurma and he was specifically talking about Hockenheimring. I don't even need to watch the Chris Harris Nurburgring video again to know that he said that the LFA Nurburgring Edition exhibited understeer in some corners and oversteer in others, so let's not misrepresent that.

 

Let me adjust my argument from a different angle. The point I was making originally was, there are many sports cars and supercars that have some understeer built into it. Porsches, Mclarens even Ferrari have understeer built into them. It is a matter of how the driver manages the understeer/oversteer balance. There are lots of reviews saying the new C8 has understeer in it. Do you agree that is a fact or not?

I am not making this up. I am surprised you have known me through years and you are trying to imply I am making this up. I modified it to make it more subtle out of respect, but you are more than welcome to have someone who knows Japanese translate Takayuki Kinosh'ta's impressions after driving it on Fuji speedway (or dig up the original thread from back then on this forum). He is not a hater or a biased journalist. He is a Gazoo racing elite level race car driver who raced for Lexus in both the GT3 RCF and the Gazoo LFA.

 

Is there any reasoning behind choosing the RCF?

 

I am not "trying to imply" anything. I pointed out where what you've said doesn't match reality. I just wasted three minutes of my life re-watching the Chris Harris Nurburgring video since you're being so argumentative about this. He very clearly says in some corners that the LFA exhibits understeer and in other corners he says it exhibits oversteer. To take that to mean that Chris Harris claims the LFA has understeer built in is a complete misrepresentation of the video.

If your argument is that someone, somewhere, on some corner on some racetrack at some point in time said the LFA exhibited understeer and therefore your opinions are fully justified, I'm not going to waste my time on that. You do you.

 

Very interesting points you bring up. Though I am a bit disappointed that the everyday common LFA version isn't around for us to buy. I was really hoping one of these two was in fact the LFA reincarnated due to being coupes.

I would say that Lexus is more so focused on the luxury touring aspect of their cars in comparison to the 90s and 00s (the actual Lexus performance car era). There were quite a lot of recognizable cars that have earned legendary status due to Lexus just rebadging their performance cars from the Toyota lineup. I somewhat miss this time
Altezza => IS300
Soarer => SC300

 

You should go back and read how this argument started. You stated RCF's is not worthy because it understeered based on what Clarkson said, but it is bad when I stated what Lexus own race car driver said about the LFA?

It was in Chris Harris written article for the EVO magazine if you can find it online. You mentioned HvS, here are his impressions. I found HvS with Sport Auto when he tested the Nürburgring Edition. I posted translation back then."slight understeer tendency"

https://www.clublexus.com/forums/lfa...pertest-3.html

 

Yes, this is also my biggest complaint with Lexus (and TMC in general) - that they did not capitalize on the LFA. I thought the 86 was a great sign of things to come, but I never imagined it would be just a few years later and MB of all companies coming out with something like the AMG GT and Lexus having absolutely no sportscars in its entire lineup.

I think TMC/Lexus totally missed the mark with two things: 1) not bringing to production the GRMN Sports Hybrid Concept II (the MR2-based hybrid) and 2) not making a driver-oriented sportscar more accessible than the LFA, perhaps based on the 3.7 V8 from the TS040.

I agree about the early, sporty cars; I love that I still often see first-gen IS models on the road. The fact that they're still being driven around shows how much they are appreciated.

I did not say the RC-F is "not worthy" - I very clearly said that the RC-F doesn't compare well to the LFA. Do not misrepresent what I said. You need to calm down and take things less personally.

 

RCF is a fraction of its cost both from R&D and MSRP perspective. It is a 2 + 2 premium luxury 2 door sports coupe that is supposed to do everything well. Be taken to the grocery store with kids in the back and then can be taken to the race track occasionally (even the track edition). Not a money-no-object supercar.

You got it backwards. F brand was created to kill that very stigma of boredom of the 90s and 00s. Have you driven an IS300 and SC300? It is more of a case of nostalgia than anything. They had absolutely dreadful handling out of the box. Lexus could not even get IS300 to be compared with the E46 325i favorably. Despite being lighter, they roll all over the place by today's standards with chassis flex everywhere. I am not sure about the point when the capabilities of generally F cars is on a different planet compared to those cars that Lexus was making in the 90s and early 2000s. How many cars were pulling close to 1.00g on the skidpad with street tires in the 90s that Lexus built? None.