2016 RC 350 News
 

In Europe (which is probably a leading indicator of what is going to happen here), next year's model will have a turbo 4, 3.5, and 5.0 engine options. Also, F Sport gets the Limited Slip. With the AVS and VGR, that is going to be pretty dope. Wish my RC F had AVS.

http://www.carscoops.com/2015/07/lex...ith-241hp.html

i wouldve waited for that instead

Why is that an idincator of what will happen here?

The engine for the turbo seems pretty small. Regardless, the RC 350 or 200 is not a fast car nor will it be with mods. An aftermarket/ or upgraded turbo will be your best bet in the end. Or buy a faster car to begin with.

That turbo-4 is going to be way to slow for the RC's weight. It will defintely ruin any sportiness that the RC had left. If Lexus is quoting a 0-60 time of 6.9 seconds for the IS200t, the RC200t will defintely be in the 7's, which is horrible for a coupe.

Is the total intent of the turbo, like other cars, to improve on the RC's rather poor gas mileage?

I don't know about poor gas mileage as I'm getting about 22.3 MPG now in mixed driving and driving it wild when getting on freeway ramps. Are you using 91 octane? Do you use Sport+ and in full automatic mode while on the freeway? When I'm on the freeway I use Sport+, but in manual mode which drops the RPM significantly over full Auto. Want even better MPG then use Normal mode or better yet use ECO mode, but neither one is much fun, but you will get great gas MPG.

Just trying to help determine why the poor gas mileage.

Lexus confirms that the turbo 4 will be offered in the US -

http://www.automobilemag.com/feature...o-four-engine/

Considering the size and weight of the vehicle it is a reasonably fast car in its category. But if you want a fast car for just a few $$'s more buy a C7 Corvette. I have a C6 and can get about the same MPG's on the highway from a V8. Did anyone buy the RC for its great gas mileage? The difference is I can beat the pants off my RC. And please don't tell me that it does not have a back seat because it is worthless unless you have little kids.

To me, combined 22 mpg is poor. Even an Infiniti coupe, which is a bigger better performing car, does better. When I had a 2011, I got a combined 26 mpg, mostly city. I rarely drive on Sport mode, and always use PUG in the tank.

A new 'vette and Charger with great performance also do better with mpg. I didn't buy this car for mpg, but it's still lower than anticipated.

I do understand where you are coming from, and I didn't buy it for it's gas mileage either, but it is higher than my 2011 V6 Camaro, and both weighed about the same. With just strictly city driving my Camaro got about 18 mpg, and the Lexus is not much better, but city driving will always get worse mpg than combined and highway. On the highway I average about 31 MPG in Normal mode. I don't know about the Vette getting better mpg as I drove a 2013 Vette and averaged 16 mpg in the city.

The newer 'vette, the C7, is getting low 20's combined mpg. Haven't done that much highway driving, but 31 mpg is pretty good. Still surprised by the RC's mpg cause it is not a rocket by any means.

Isn't the EPA combined mileage for the RC350 22 mpg? I wouldn't be disappointed by that, as I'm always happy if I can actually achieve the test numbers. :)

Good call.

To me, with it's so-so performance, 22 mpg in today's market is just mediocre. This great car could be greater if it had a more efficient engine and wasn't so porky on weight.

No disagreement there. I was just trying to understand why you were surprised at the gas mileage, when you were achieving the EPA estimates. I could understand being surprised at getting mileage lower than the EPA estimates, but not for hitting them. That's all.

Or perhaps I misunderstood your comment? Maybe you meant that you were surprised that the estimates are only 22, rather than the fact that you are only getting 22?

In any case, you've ended up with a very beautiful car.