When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I ended up with the 2026 G87 M2CS in Velvet Blue I found a dealer near my hometown who offered it out the door for 110,000 and I'm good with that number. I believe there are only going to be between 150-200 of these cars in this color. Around 150-200 for each color for a total of around 600 within the United States, which keeps my depreciation low. Pickup is literally tomorrow and I'm lowkey excited... I can't get behind the RCF or the V8 and its weight right now. Hate to say it but once a turbo guy, always a turbo guy. I've always had inline 6 Turbo's and I really don't want to stop now just for the sake it's a Toyota. If anything I'm familiar with the B58 and it's a reliable motor I have nearly 70,000 miles on mine and I don't see any issues yet and just because it's a BMW the S58 is the only thing I care about within the car and the S58 appears to be just a better version of the B58 (Toyota Assisted) with stronger (forged) internals with an additional turbo.
The car goes zero to sixty in 3.2 seconds that's a whole second faster than the RCF which I believe is 4.2. Additionally, the 400lb feet of torque mentioned that the RCF has is trumped by the M2CS as it has 479/480 or at least a number closer to 500. And yes that alone is the reason why the car doesn't come in manual because in order for BMW to retain that high number it had to be Automatic. I appreciated the interior and carbon bucket seats of the BMW over the Large seats in the RCF although comfortable. I just felt the RCF is a Frankenstein of a car put together and while that may be true or untrue it's just how I felt about it. It's as if the designer didn't have a lot of Toyota parts to play with and just did his best with what limited parts he had thus I don't fault the designer but the lack of parts provided to him. The metrics of the car can be found here: https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2...rmance-records and it's a fast car once I watched the following:
Also I'm going to get the GR-GT from Toyota when it comes out which is a V-8 Turbo so this is just a holdover for when that comes out. So my garage in a few years will be a Lexus NX 450 H+, Supra MKIV, Supra MKV, G87 M2CS, and a GR-GT... I'm honestly doing everything I can but one day, one day I might just throw it all away for a Porsche GT3-RS and a Lexus SUV. For now I'm trying to stay away from that possibility/reality but damnit Toyota do something for me already.
I spent some time in the canyons in California (This past week) driving my own cars and it became clear for now I just want to stay with turbo charged cars they just hit differently and sound different.... I literally made the phone call on-top of the mountain to BMW and placed the deposit on the car and left this weekend to do the pickup and drive home. A lot of Supra purists are upset I went off and bought a BMW but I honestly felt I bought the best car you could get for 100k right now or under outside of a Z06 which is around 130 I believe. Not really a Corvette Guy though... https://www.caranddriver.com/ranking...ars/under-100k
The Market for cars in this price range appears to be pretty bad because the options are so low. It seems like there is a low tier and a high tier but the middle tier is vaporizing and will soon be nothing. In other words I felt I should pick it up because it feels like it's now or never.
I I just felt the RCF is a Frankenstein of a car put together and while that may be true or untrue it's just how I felt about it. It's as if the designer didn't have a lot of Toyota parts to play with and just did his best with what limited parts he had thus I don't fault the designer but the lack of parts provided to him. The metrics of the car can be found here: https://www.motortrend.com/reviews/2...rmance-records and it's a fast car once I watched the following: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ibd_gzGuP6k it held it's own here.
Congratulations on your M2 CS. As I had said before, that was the car to fit your requirements. Glad you went that way.
Those were the myths perpetuated by clueless media without understanding the whats and whys. From personal experience, the chassis is one of the best things about the car. That whole 'Frankenstein' narrative has been a total misconception. Yes, Lexus designed the chassis from 3 different chassis of existing cars to create a high performance chassis because Lexus did not have one. I can understand why as I have a 3IS as well and it is night/day with the RCF. They needed to create a new chassis as the chief engineer did not want to start with the 3IS chassis especially since it was going to be homologated for GT3 racing. The RCF GT3 in its most basic form, uses the same exact chassis with modifications. So, does it use the powertrain.
Yes, Lexus did not build a ground-up chassis for the RCF because it was a one-off car meaning, it was not going to be a global architecture used across various models. The cost was hard to justify for something so low volume and below $100K. Lexus does platform sharing for other cars like the 3IS and 4GS are both based on the same architecture. In this case, the base RC chassis, RCF and the RCF GT3 were all designed side-by-side in 2013 and 2014 and was never meant to be used beyond it for any model. BMW does something like CLAR (cluster architecture) where 2-series, 3-series and 4-series all are clustered into the same architecture. It is not the case here for the RCF. However, what Lexus accomplished with a limited platform budget, is shockingly good. The chassis is as stiff as a brick and it pays dividends in body control and stability along with the short wheelbase of only 107 inches (3 inches shorter than my 3IS wheelbase) making it willing to turn.
The front end of the chassis is a strengthened version of the 4GS for the long hood and better engine placement close to the firewall, the middle section is reworked from the convertible IS for a very rigid core and the rear section is a modified version of 3IS for compact dimensions. The front subframe is shared with the 4GS. However, RCF has a dedicated rear subframe for the wider axle that is not even shares with the base RC.
All in all, the chassis' downside is that it is heavy even in racing form. Not because it is not a ground up chassis, but the fact that it has a lot of steel reinforcements to make it extremely rigid and without carbon fiber or aluminum in the chassis, it is going to cost a lot of weight. Going back to what I said above, having both the IS350 F-Sport and the RCF, I can tell it is not even a comparison as to how much more rigid the RCF is. The IS350 F-Sport wants to twist and shudder over every asymmetric bump while the RCF is like one solid brick that does not get unsettled over asymmetric bumps where the left and right are getting challenged differently.
Some of the highlights of the RCF development:
- The high-revving engine was a complete re-design from the ISF and does not share anything with the ISF other than the bottom end block. It was supposed to be a one-off, but Lexus was so happy with the end result, they ended up transplanting the same engine in the GSF then LC500 and then eventually IS500 thus diluting the RCF uniqueness.
- The suspension was bespoke designed and developed for the RCF with all-aluminum parts for more rigidity and for the track. It is 70% different than even a base RC. Dedicated wider rear subframe that is wider and much stronger than the base RC rear subframe. This makes RCF a nearly 1.5G turning capable car even on the very subpar and underwhelming OEM Michelin tires.
- The torque vectoring differential was specifically designed for the RCF and developed on the Nürburgring.
- The seats were developed just for the RCF.
- A rigid column, damperless steering rack and pinion was designed just for RCF.
- The chassis has a lot of difference even with a base RC where it is even further strengthened/stiffened in many places over a base RC platform (don't want to go into details).
- At 184.9 inches length, 107 inches wheelbase and 72.6 inches width, it is a short car with a relatively wide rear axle. That is unique to any other Lexus in that respect.
- The chassis is claimed to be almost twice as rigid as the 3IS and the 4GS chassis (I own an IS350 F-Sport and I can tell it is true).
All in all, despite the chassis being the most criticized by clueless media, it is actually the thing I appreciate the most about the car other than the powertrain combination. It is something you have to live with and truly feel the difference back to back to appreciate.
The car goes zero to sixty in 3.2 seconds that's a whole second faster than the RCF which I believe is 4.2.
Yes, that was always a non-factor and the obvious. We had already said if you want a numbers car then M2 makes total sense. RCF is a 10 year old car. M2 CS as it stands, would easily out-run even a Lexus LFA both in a straight line and around the race track. When RCF came out, 0-60 mph in the tested 4.0 - 4.1 seconds was really quick; Even today, it is still considered quick, but just time moves on. Just like 10 years before RCF, it was the E46 M3 and it is just about as quick today as my 311 HP IS350 F-Sport and my RCF completely mops the floor with my IS350 F-Sport.
Last edited by 05RollaXRS; May 4, 2026 at 10:51 AM.
Congratulations on your M2 CS. As I had said before, that was the car to fit your requirements. Glad you went that way.
Those were the myths perpetuated by clueless media without understanding the whats and whys. From personal experience, the chassis is one of the best things about the car. That whole 'Frankenstein' narrative has been a total misconception. Yes, Lexus designed the chassis from 3 different chassis of existing cars to create a high performance chassis because Lexus did not have one. I can understand why as I have a 3IS as well and it is night/day with the RCF. They needed to create a new chassis as the chief engineer did not want to start with the 3IS chassis especially since it was going to be homologated for GT3 racing. The RCF GT3 in its most basic form, uses the same exact chassis with modifications. So, does it use the powertrain.
Yes, Lexus did not build a ground-up chassis for the RCF because it was a one-off car meaning, it was not going to be a global architecture used across various models. The cost was hard to justify for something so low volume and below $100K. Lexus does platform sharing for other cars like the 3IS and 4GS are both based on the same architecture. In this case, the base RC chassis, RCF and the RCF GT3 were all designed side-by-side in 2013 and 2014 and was never meant to be used beyond it for any model. BMW does something like CLAR (cluster architecture) where 2-series, 3-series and 4-series all are clustered into the same architecture. It is not the case here for the RCF. However, what Lexus accomplished with a limited platform budget, is shockingly good. The chassis is as stiff as a brick and it pays dividends in body control and stability along with the short wheelbase of only 107 inches (3 inches shorter than my 3IS wheelbase) making it willing to turn.
The front end of the chassis is a strengthened version of the 4GS for the long hood and better engine placement close to the firewall, the middle section is reworked from the convertible IS for a very rigid core and the rear section is a modified version of 3IS for compact dimensions. The front subframe is shared with the 4GS. However, RCF has a dedicated rear subframe for the wider axle that is not even shares with the base RC.
All in all, the chassis' downside is that it is heavy even in racing form. Not because it is not a ground up chassis, but the fact that it has a lot of steel reinforcements to make it extremely rigid and without carbon fiber or aluminum in the chassis, it is going to cost a lot of weight. Going back to what I said above, having both the IS350 F-Sport and the RCF, I can tell it is not even a comparison as to how much more rigid the RCF is. The IS350 F-Sport wants to twist and shudder over every asymmetric bump while the RCF is like one solid brick that does not get unsettled over asymmetric bumps where the left and right are getting challenged differently.
Some of the highlights of the RCF development:
- The high-revving engine was a complete re-design from the ISF and does not share anything with the ISF other than the bottom end block. It was supposed to be a one-off, but Lexus was so happy with the end result, they ended up transplanting the same engine in the GSF then LC500 and then eventually IS500 thus diluting the RCF uniqueness.
- The suspension was bespoke designed and developed for the RCF with all-aluminum parts for more rigidity and for the track. It is 70% different than even a base RC. Dedicated wider rear subframe that is wider and much stronger than the base RC rear subframe. This makes RCF a nearly 1.5G turning capable car even on the very subpar and underwhelming OEM Michelin tires.
- The torque vectoring differential was specifically designed for the RCF and developed on the Nürburgring.
- The seats were developed just for the RCF.
- A rigid column, damperless steering rack and pinion was designed just for RCF.
- The chassis has a lot of difference even with a base RC where it is even further strengthened/stiffened in many places over a base RC platform (don't want to go into details).
- At 184.9 inches length, 107 inches wheelbase and 72.6 inches width, it is a short car with a relatively wide rear axle. That is unique to any other Lexus in that respect.
- The chassis is claimed to be almost twice as rigid as the 3IS and the 4GS chassis (I own an IS350 F-Sport and I can tell it is true).
All in all, despite the chassis being the most criticized by clueless media, it is actually the thing I appreciate the most about the car other than the powertrain combination. It is something you have to live with and truly feel the difference back to back to appreciate.
Yes, that was always a non-factor and the obvious. We had already said if you want a numbers car then M2 makes total sense. RCF is a 10 year old car. M2 CS as it stands, would easily out-run even a Lexus LFA both in a straight line and around the race track. When RCF came out, 0-60 mph in the tested 4.0 - 4.1 seconds was really quick; Even today, it is still considered quick, but just time moves on. Just like 10 years before RCF, it was the E46 M3 and it is just about as quick today as my 311 HP IS350 F-Sport and my RCF completely mops the floor with my IS350 F-Sport.
Agreed and also to think about it, that part about how the 2UR-GSE motor from the RC F was given to non F car and thus diluting it, it makes perfect sense.
Given the fact how Lexus TMC operates by not giving much effort unless they really have resources or management approval, all other nonsense. It was a miracle to get that LFA out of the Motomachi factory for sure, this brand will never do such thing ever again. I wonder how Yaguchi even got the RC F project approved. Perhaps the management suits saw how IS F was a classic hit. They thought a coupe would make big bank like BMW. Well too bad the media and word of mouth do heavy lifting and RC F got butchered by the press. A brand that makes luxury cars and no driver centric cars, making one ? That's not possible to lets bash it to death. Also fk emotional experience too, car must be only spec sheet centric. Hey at-least they built it until 2025 and it also got into racing too at IMSA.
For me, after owning both the IS 500 and RC F, I can say with 200% confidence that IS 500 gets all the positive attention, the RC F never gets appreciated by anyone except the owners. The media talk clearly effected everyone, to be honest even myself when I was researching about my Lexus purchase, everywhere I saw IS having the edge, but I was wrong unfortunately I realized it very late. By the time I was into buying the RC F after driving it back to back with IS 500, they killed the TVD and also downgraded the interior and bracing in engine bay.
The RC F is the last Lexus car that is really performance oriented from get go and built from ground up like that. Especially as a person who has never driven a performance car, will never know how it feels like. RC F is very rough on the road its barely a Lexus in Sport S+ mode, IS 500 is very smooth even in Sports S+ I get that many people love it including me but its not a performance focused car even the engine note in the RC F is very loud so loud that you can never listen the ML Audio system when its at the peak 7300RPM, same for the TNGA-L based LC500 another Lexus that got the F engine again. And these marketing heads knew it, they know that V8 sells. So they marketed them properly a soft car for Lexus brand, exactly that's what sells this brand. GS F same fate when released but it was more expensive I think. Although it gets more attention now, plus GS F ride should not be rough like the RC F, on top its a 4 door sedan, add extremely limited numbers so it also retains the high value.
LFA - Flop. Because of same damn reasons as RC F but the car was ultra limited unlike the RC F and IS F. Nobody even cared about it, until that stupid covid hit and the rich elites realized what LFA was and shot it's value to moon to $800M, did you guys see the latest LFA sale on BAT ? It broke the damn 1M, under 1000 miles, 748 on the odo sold at $1.8M this thing is now not even dream car, it's like some rare material in the universe level expensive.
To think again, regarding the RC F I think Yaguchi san wanted to give people an experience in a Lexus car that never existed and it also has more than a part of LFA in it, it has soul and an emotion. But people did not understand the car at all, they will never understand it. That is the fate of the RC F. People hated it what they do not understand. And unlike the LFA which can never be owned unless you have millions in cash and assets, RC F can be owned and driven to it's fullest.
Long time BMW owner here. I have owned about 25 BMW’s from E36 to my current 26 G01 X5. In that mix I have experienced some of BMW’s best N/A inline 6’s, tuned N63 V8’s etc. My favorite BMW engine to date was the S65 in my 2012 E92 ZCP aka as an M3 Compettion. Fast forward to my recent experiences include a 2018 X3M40i my first introduction to the B58, 2020 X3M and 2024 X4MC respectively my first introduction to the S58. Although the latter are SUV’s they handle incredibly well for what they are albeit many complain about the stiffness of the chassis in other words they complain about them riding rough. 0-60 due to Xdrive that X4MC would likely run neck to neck with a G87 CS. Above that unless the X4MC is tuned will lag behind due to aerodynamics. As much as I love the power of the S58 (gotta be in the right mode) I did not feel at a loss when getting back into the RCF. I may be one of the few people who have had the opportunity to drive and experience and S58 and 2URGSE daily. S58 is no doubt/arguably BMW’s best modern engine. But the RCF holds its own performance wise and “value” wise, and like a previous poster stated reminds me very much of my E92 M3. I may have considered a G87 but I am
perfectly fine with the RCF. i still have a B58 in the garage LOL 2012 E92 M3 ZCP F97 X3M F98 X4MC Tail of the Dragon F98 X4MC Tail of the Dragon 2 2022 RCF
