Quote:
Originally Posted by KennyPowers
To each their own but these numbers sound awful to me
-same engine as isf, with minimal revisions
-3958 lbs!!!! (4040 per motortrend article above)
-heavier than outgoing isf!!!
-500 lbs heavier than m3/4
-auto only, no manual
-auto only, no dct
-unattractive
-less performance tech than m3
-slower than m3 (not even close, 8 mph slower trap speed)
-redline not high, reducing benefit of n/a engine IMO
Jmo
Edit : wow, that motortrend review was rough.... I have zero love for this car. Half ass effort from Lexus.
|
It shares only the block with the outgoing ISF. Seems like you're a bit biased towards the BMW which I can understand. Give Lexus credit for not ruining a car with Turbo chargers. I applaud them for keeping natural aspiration. If it was as light as the M3/4 it wouldn't be a competition. It's a shame really, the new M3/4 lost its appeal to me once it got blowers. Hardly as much engineering goes into these cars as they used to when they made N/A motors.