I'm beginning to rethink my position after rewatching every video review, frame by frame. I think the car will be like the LFA, greater than the sum of its parts. I am hopeful that we will be pleasantly surprised. My ISF still gives me goosebumps everytime I drive it. Have faith in Yaguchi-san.

 

I agree with some of this: the RCF and LFA target being the best driver's car in the segment. I expect this to be the outcome.

I disagree with you on performance. I know you are an ISF owner, and I presume that you are pleased with the car. The RCF has superior driving dynamics, stock for stock, more speed, and the same 170 mph top end. It will undoubtedly have the same integrity as the ISF and LFA, proving to be capable of withstanding extreme driving loads.

The M4--DCT issues, blown turbos, odd sounds from the differential--a brand new model launched with the goal of "capturing" the market. How big is this market in general? I will tell you: small. Also, buyer impatience is growing this with M3 and M4 owners. Whenever I took my car in, the reason for the problem was normal wear and tear. There is never anything wrong with a BMW. Of course, when the blown gaskets started because I was pushing the ultimate driving machines, they did not want to hear about that. As an ISF owner, I am sure you will agree the Fs can be pushed to the max and live to do it again the next day. I guarantee the M4, running near it 155 mph limit, will develop a host of undesirable "maintenance" problems. Good luck to all of you who take that path--it's a rough one.

Lexus launched the LFA and the RCF for down stream sales. The low margins on these two cars will be more than compensated for by the Fsport (crafted) and general model sales that are taking off in the US (can't comment on overseas).

My sources have been quite accurate about the F evolution, and I am told the GSF will be launched. It will also have the same effect on GS Fsport sales. Ask any Fsport buyer why they selected the car. They will immediately reference the F models--the brand association is what sells and the trickle down technology.

The RCF is for a new class of buyer and may indeed not be the the hardcore ISF do-or-die owner. I am giving up my ISF because I have outgrown the bad ***/bad boy image--one that I gladly occupied for years. A new, 4 sec, 170 mile/per hour RCF that purrs like a kitten--and they do purr--fits me well. I know the car can be pushed to the limit, deliver on the thrills, and forgive driver error, and I know it will make me excited every time I push the start button, just like my ISF.

Here's to the spirit and purr of the Fs! Something I just can't walk away from at this time in my life. And I expect in two years to purchase the LF-LC, which will not be the faster in its class--but most likely the best overall car in its class.

This all works for me.

 

Its still incredible to me that someone would order the car and then cancel that order based on a few reviews without even driving it first LOL

 

pre production units too that were beat on. RCF isnt that far off from C63 507 AMG coupe and Audi RS5, those dont have TVDs either.

 

I suppose those of us that like to make determinations for ourselves are in the minority lol

 

Why do you guys think that these preproduction cars are slower? Who said that?
Don't delude yourselves, Lexus did not give slower cars to the reviewers!

The car is really really heavy, and the V8, while nostalgic and great sounding, will never match a modern turbo for torque and horsepower.

 

Actually the Rs5 does have a TVD.

 

R&T tested the M3 and it hit the 1/4 mile in 12.3@114 mph. Despite all of hype of "underrating", there is no way this car is underrated. The 114 mph trap speed is consistent for a car with 430 - 440 HP.

http://www.roadandtrack.com/features...group-a-bmw-m3

 

motortrend got 3.9 0-60 and 12.1 @ 117 mph stock m4

 

Practical? With no folding back seat?

 

The cars weight is on par with other V8s like C63 507 AMG, and RS5, ISF was 3800# and 1.6" less length and width and without a TVD. Did people really think this was going to weigh less than an ISF? If so, they were dreaming.

RS5 isnt a TVD like the RCFs. Its a center TVD that splits between front and rear axles up to 85% to the rear. It then simulates an LSD on individual wheels by using the brakes.

 

I have even seen a 119 mph. Which one do you place more weight on? The 113 mph or 119 mph? The 6 mph discrepancy is huge. That is almost 50 - 60 HP apart. Most of the cars might have time discrepancies that could be several tenths depending on conditions, but for the most part trap speed variance is 2 - 3 mph at best. I have been to the track and the trap speed difference between my best run and crappy run is 2 mph or less.

C&D got a 12.4@116 mph from the M3 6 speed. The wild fluctuation of the trap speed looks extremely suspicious. In my opinion, most likely seems like specially prep'ed press ringers involved Ferrari-style in these tests.

(For example. LFA had a huge time discrepancy of 11.4 - 11.8 seconds due to off the line traction issues, quality and method of launch, but the trap speed was always between 124 - 126 mph in every test for all European and American tests. Same thing with the IS-F, the trap speed was always between 111 - 113 mph with 1/4 mile time fluctuating between 12.6 - 12.9 seconds).

 

I've never owned a car that wasn't an SUV that had a folding back seat lol

 

this is also the reason why i feel the RCF will be a tad quicker than manufacture claims.

 

I hear you. I only ask those that don't do it on a regular basis to start Auto x uphill first. A little safer for the novice. I can't tell you how many "rockets" became imbedded in a certain redwood trees by cars modded out but had stock brakes. They had the HP, all the stickers, shocks, camber set etc... but forgot 40>0 is important too