RC F vs M4
Pole Position
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: Prague
When I thin about all the potential the RC F yet has in regards to engine, +500 PS in the RC F GT3...and yet all the potential in chassis once TRD releases some parts....
The same goes for M4 with launch control.
This car is an AUTOMATIC - a blind person can drive it in a straight line with NO experience required. Owners would be happy to match these figures......
The RCF offers less Performance than competition. PERIOD
Ppl should buy it if they want RELIABILITY, V8 engine, and like the styling.
The RCF offers less Performance than competition. PERIOD
Ppl should buy it if they want RELIABILITY, V8 engine, and like the styling.
Lexus Test Driver
Joined: Feb 2002
Posts: 8,207
Likes: 250
From: New York
I never said M4 was any harder to drive with the DCT - although u could have a bit more control on the track if u put it in manual mode especial on downshifts.
Again im not sure how ppl can argue FACTUAL NUMBERS.
We can debate Road Noise, Steering Feel, Material Quality but Scientific Data cant be argued.
M4 has been tested all over the WORLD by now and has had consistent times of around 4.0-4.1 sec.
RC-F has been 4.3-4.5 sec so far.
This DOES NOT make the M4 a better car its just FASTER.
Can we just accept this instead of proposing crazy scenarios that somehow by Miracle in perfect weather with F1 driver at the wheel, the RC-F will do 0-60 is 4.0sec
Again im not sure how ppl can argue FACTUAL NUMBERS.
We can debate Road Noise, Steering Feel, Material Quality but Scientific Data cant be argued.
M4 has been tested all over the WORLD by now and has had consistent times of around 4.0-4.1 sec.
RC-F has been 4.3-4.5 sec so far.
This DOES NOT make the M4 a better car its just FASTER.
Can we just accept this instead of proposing crazy scenarios that somehow by Miracle in perfect weather with F1 driver at the wheel, the RC-F will do 0-60 is 4.0sec
Pole Position
Joined: Sep 2014
Posts: 299
Likes: 0
From: Prague
I never said M4 was any harder to drive with the DCT - although u could have a bit more control on the track if u put it in manual mode especial on downshifts.
Again im not sure how ppl can argue FACTUAL NUMBERS.
We can debate Road Noise, Steering Feel, Material Quality but Scientific Data cant be argued.
M4 has been tested all over the WORLD by now and has had consistent times of around 4.0-4.1 sec.
RC-F has been 4.3-4.5 sec so far.
This DOES NOT make the M4 a better car its just FASTER.
Can we just accept this instead of proposing crazy scenarios that somehow by Miracle in perfect weather with F1 driver at the wheel, the RC-F will do 0-60 is 4.0sec
Again im not sure how ppl can argue FACTUAL NUMBERS.
We can debate Road Noise, Steering Feel, Material Quality but Scientific Data cant be argued.
M4 has been tested all over the WORLD by now and has had consistent times of around 4.0-4.1 sec.
RC-F has been 4.3-4.5 sec so far.
This DOES NOT make the M4 a better car its just FASTER.
Can we just accept this instead of proposing crazy scenarios that somehow by Miracle in perfect weather with F1 driver at the wheel, the RC-F will do 0-60 is 4.0sec
Lexus Champion
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,266
Likes: 2
From: Washington
0-60 in 4.1, 4.3... no one notices .2 seconds. At a drag strip thats made up in reaction time. Doubt M4 or RC F owners will be there to show up the other. Its all about feel and sensation. That big V8's noise and how the RC F drives are its talking points. But it still has numbers right there with the fastest in its class.
0-60 in 4.1, 4.3... no one notices .2 seconds. At a drag strip thats made up in reaction time. Doubt M4 or RC F owners will be there to show up the other. Its all about feel and sensation. That big V8's noise and how the RC F drives are its talking points. But it still has numbers right there with the fastest in its class.
Lexus Champion
Joined: Jun 2007
Posts: 2,148
Likes: 0
From: Aventura, Florida
This.... And .2 Secs is around 1.5 -2 car lengths on the street
Last edited by MRxSLAYx; Sep 22, 2014 at 08:19 AM.
Driver
Joined: Mar 2012
Posts: 139
Likes: 5
From: DMV
Motortrend unintentionally IMO ran a 4.3 in the bloody desert--two tenths down from the prototype car. 
The car is also spec'd at a minimum of 12.5 for the quarter. It will run at least a 12.3 -12.4 with the right driver in cooler climates.
Given the potential to run the RCF in environments other than Death Valley, I expect to see even more impressive times for the big beast.
Even more fair would be testing the M4 and the RCF with the same driver, same day, and same external conditions (temp, fuel, etc.). I am looking forward to the Road and Track results and story.
The car is also spec'd at a minimum of 12.5 for the quarter. It will run at least a 12.3 -12.4 with the right driver in cooler climates.Given the potential to run the RCF in environments other than Death Valley, I expect to see even more impressive times for the big beast.
Even more fair would be testing the M4 and the RCF with the same driver, same day, and same external conditions (temp, fuel, etc.). I am looking forward to the Road and Track results and story.
so looking forward to a ture test
Lexus Champion
Joined: Apr 2010
Posts: 2,266
Likes: 2
From: Washington
.2 seconds is not huge. Its a fraction of a second. No one is going to use their RC F for drag racing. Its just a stupid number that only ONE magazine editor has gotten. That doesnt set the precedent for official 0-60 times. If fractions of a second were the main selling point, the C63 507 would be the best car to have. The justifications some people use are silly.
Please save me the bull****. Porsche on average makes $20k profit on every car sold, among the highest in the industry, thus they are among the most overpriced. Their VW rebadged SUVs and that hideous Panamera are especially bad.
The 911 is perhaps the only respectable Porsche save for the supercars, but the guy's 911 GT3 costs $130k, which unless you track it regularly is a colossal waste of money. There are countless cars for less than half the price that provide similar levels of on-road driving enjoyment while offering more desirable traits in more practical areas. The RC-F is a good example.
The 911 is perhaps the only respectable Porsche save for the supercars, but the guy's 911 GT3 costs $130k, which unless you track it regularly is a colossal waste of money. There are countless cars for less than half the price that provide similar levels of on-road driving enjoyment while offering more desirable traits in more practical areas. The RC-F is a good example.
it's so funny to read here that 0.2 second is nothing between m4 and rcf, but when rcf does 4.4-4.5 some go wild saying it should hit 4.1-4.2. that's only 0.3 second 
to me all these are bs, so many variables and even between a good and bad day it can make all the difference already
to me all these are bs, so many variables and even between a good and bad day it can make all the difference already
.2 seconds is not huge. Its a fraction of a second. No one is going to use their RC F for drag racing. Its just a stupid number that only ONE magazine editor has gotten. That doesnt set the precedent for official 0-60 times. If fractions of a second were the main selling point, the C63 507 would be the best car to have. The justifications some people use are silly.
2012 GTR 0-60 2.9 secs base price 101k
those measly fraction of a second sure is expensive.
Driver
Joined: Apr 2011
Posts: 154
Likes: 0
From: HI
Are you guys serious with this? If only 0-60 times mattered, not a single person would buy an LFA. Yet there was a 3 year waiting list to maybe get a chance to buy one.
That's for new cars. A used low mileage is350 is quite a few more 0.1s faster than a new is250 for a third the price
That's for new cars. A used low mileage is350 is quite a few more 0.1s faster than a new is250 for a third the price