2015 BMW M4 vs. 2015 Lexus RC F – MotorTrend Head 2 Head

[irablumberg]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

On a road course, winning lap times (between similar cars) come from two things:

1) Carrying speed through corners
2) The ability to get on the power early out of the corner

The M4 didn't have the adaptive suspension, and appeared to really struggle with the uneven surface at Streets of Willow. To be fair to the M4, Streets of Willow is really uneven. You can tell by watching the in-car laps. The cars really get tossed around a lot. That type of track will always favor a softer suspension setup.



I have my doubts. Whoever The Stig is, they're a great driver, but Randy Pobst is a great driver. More importantly, Randy is so consistent it's uncanny.



I absolutely love the way MT does the side-by-sides. You can really tell a lot about the difference in character between two cars when you watch them in this format. I listen with headphones because they split the audio in to left and right channels that correspond to the video as well. You can really hear the RCF get on the power earlier in the corners.

The lap times actually make sense when you consider how the cars are set up and the track they were on. For the fastest possible lap time, you want a tiny bit of neutral understeer. A chassis that oversteers freely is fun, but it prevents you from driving at the limit for extended periods of time. This is even more true when the track surface is uneven. It is simply not humanly possible to maintain a car like the M4 on the edge of control in conditions like Streets of Willow. That's not a knock against the M4 or the RCF, it's just an observation of the suspension setups and the side-by-side lap videos.

When it comes to the car you want to own and drive on a daily basis, enthusiasts long for oversteer because it's more fun.

I agree suspension will make a huge difference, but I don't think softer is necessarily better. The Nismo GT-R just set the track record at willow and by all reports the suspension is even more firm than a standard GT-R (which is much stiffer than an M4.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by IS3andME

Dude, it sounds like a V8, not a motorcylce. that is some true haterade you are drinking. And looks cheap, ok.

What is disappointing to me, is the RC-F weight. If they could lower the weight, yet keep that glorious V8, it would be a beast. it's an amalgam of GS and IS chassis, instead of one chassis.

As was said before, it will have it's buyers, and yes that "Lexus reliability" is still a selling point. If that were a selling point with BMW, how many on here would sign that praise?

Ok, it sounds pretty good, much better than the m3/m4- and RC F will be more reliable.

Other than that, I think that's it. for me, it looks really really ugly.

It is disappointing that Lexus follows up the IS F with this car. I am not sure the F brand has an identity. i.e. AUDI Quattro, Merc v8's, BMW chassis balance.

[Rambler]

After watching the full vid, the Lexus took a serious pounding both objectively and subjectively. Easy choice for most. Heck, would anyone honestly even choose this over the E92? No way in hell would I even consider this as an option.

To Lexus, Stick to single player noob!

[nachob]

Originally Posted by nbennettksu

anybody notice the M4 had cloth seats?

Yes...better for the track! BMW knows what they're doing. Did you also notice how they praised the damping....they sent the fixed suspension unit not the EDC. I guess they figured an old guy like Randy would appreciate the feel and predictability of the fixed suspension.

[eMvy]

Originally Posted by 123sub

Why can Lexus produce a N/A V8 in 2014 and not BMW? If Lexus can do this, then i cant understand why ///M will "ruin" the heart With a 3.0 Turbo. Why?

CAFE standards..Toyota is much larger and has many more eco-cars to balance..same is asked about Porsche/Audi..same answer, but do to VW breadth.

[onatuesday]

Originally Posted by eMvy

CAFE standards..Toyota is much larger and has many more eco-cars to balance..same is asked about Porsche/Audi..same answer, but do to VW breadth.

You can believe that load of BS if you want. The reality is that the M4 gets 17city/24hwy (with DCT) while the RC F gets 16city/25hwy. So the M4 has 2 fewer cylinders, smaller displacement, has two turbos and weighs 400lbs less but barely gets any better gas mileage?

Let's be real. BMW put a twin turbo i6 and dropped the V8 because it's cheaper to share an engine with the rest of the 3/4 series lineup. I ain't mad but I'm also not confused about what's really going on.

[luckyse7en]

I was just on a trip to help a buddy pick out a new car over the weekend. He isn't a performance type of guy and one of our stops was Lexus to check out the IS. Coming from an E92 M, I have to say I was pretty impressed by their interiors. The model we checked out had amazing seats and made me quite jealous. The new digital cluster makes you feel like you're flying a space ship and the dash is quite interesting and not flat.

With that being said I think the car is still damn ugly, at least that huge grill is. I still wouldn't buy the IS or RC but it does have some appeal.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by trinim3

You can believe that load of BS if you want. The reality is that the M4 gets 17city/24hwy (with DCT) while the RC F gets 16city/25hwy. So the M4 has 2 fewer cylinders, smaller displacement, has two turbos and weighs 400lbs less but barely gets any better gas mileage?

Let's be real. BMW put a twin turbo i6 and dropped the V8 because it's cheaper to share an engine with the rest of the 3/4 series lineup. I ain't mad but I'm also not confused about what's really going on.

The reality is also that that "cheap" twin turbo outperforms the hell out of the old s65 or the Lexus engine.

Personally, I prefer the power delivery on the track and street, and also the power level. I can deal with the mediocte sound for the driving excitement it provides.

Edit : some of these oversteer comments are too extreme. I would venture to say that none of you who are saying this have any experience with the car on track. The car certainly does not snap oversteer at all, and has very high levels of grip on corner entry and high speed sweepers. The tires can limit corner exit traction, but that just means you need to manage the throttle a little and not mash the gas like an idiot. It's like Carlos Lago says, it will slide on you but it's easy and fun to control. This is not a 1999 dodge viper.

[V1.47fan]

Originally Posted by sahyoun

Last i checked I'm driving a car with a pretty similar behaving engine. When i first started tracking it the car got sideways everywhere so i learned to adapt to the car. Racing accomplishments don't mean everything, either way that was the drivers first or one of his first times driving the car so i don't blame him for not adapting to the cars behavior. Yeah you're constantly on the edge of grip and the trick is to not cross that edge which clearly pobst did numerous times.

Why do you want to make yourself an internet expert on something you know nothing about? 1:23.73 at the streets of willow is pretty good or maybe if Pobst took your pointers He would've been faster than an Italia 458.

[JeffM-Houston]

BMW put a twin turbo i6 and dropped the V8 because it's cheaper to share an engine with the rest of the 3/4 series lineup

What exactly does the S55 share with other BMW engines?

Compare it to say the N55 3.0:

The S55 bore is larger, the stroke is shorter, a closed deck block design, arc sprayed cylinder walls vs. liners. I guess maybe the AC unit is the same? But I don't even know that for sure.

So the basic block design is different, the pistons, connecting rods, heads, crankshaft are all different. Please let us know what they share.

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by nachob

Yes...better for the track! BMW knows what they're doing. Did you also notice how they praised the damping....they sent the fixed suspension unit not the EDC. I guess they figured an old guy like Randy would appreciate the feel and predictability of the fixed suspension.

It's a trick... i am 99% sure that they hand out the lightest base level cars with the CCB's, DCT and passive suspension. They know that setup will probably perform best due to weight and be easiest to setup and drive fast.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by ASAP

It's a trick... i am 99% sure that they hand out the lightest base level cars with the CCB's, DCT and passive suspension. They know that setup will probably perform best due to weight and be easiest to setup and drive fast.

I would be very surprised if passive suspension was faster than active. Specifically on a rough / bouncy pavement like streets of willow.

the weights are basically identical between the two

[ASAP]

Originally Posted by KennyPowers

I would be very surprised if passive suspension was faster than active. Specifically on a rough / bouncy pavement like streets of willow.

the weights are basically identical between the two

Think more about the setup... the passive is optimally setup from the factory. The active needs to be set correctly... what one may think is better here may actually be worse in reality.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by ASAP

Think more about the setup... the passive is optimally setup from the factory. The active needs to be set correctly... what one may think is better here may actually be worse in reality.

I think you need to think more about the setup and how active suspension works. And why its on cars like the 991, including gt3. And why its also on the corvette including z06, and why a car like the Camaro can handle so well even though its 4000 lbs. Hint, magnetic ride aka active suspension.

Active suspension makes constant adjustments to compression rates in the dampers in real time adapting to changing road conditions in order to have ideal tire to road contact. This is very effective technology.

Example of the benefits of active suspension in Formula 1 from 1993. A good educational read.

For 1993 it was clear that active suspension was essential and almost every team had their own version of the technology. Williams, who had an all-new driver line-up of Alain Prost and Damon Hill, continued to dominate. Only the inspired Senna seriously disrupted Prost’s success.

http://www.f1fanatic.co.uk/2007/05/1...ve-suspension/

[onatuesday]

Originally Posted by JeffM-Houston

What exactly does the S55 share with other BMW engines?

Compare it to say the N55 3.0:

The S55 bore is larger, the stroke is shorter, a closed deck block design, arc sprayed cylinder walls vs. liners. I guess maybe the AC unit is the same? But I don't even know that for sure.

So the basic block design is different, the pistons, connecting rods, heads, crankshaft are all different. Please let us know what they share.

From UK Car Mag:
"...the familiar design has allowed BMW to retain the production infrastructure to build it, saving money"

The components of the engine are a lot cheaper to develop and change than having to change the infrastructure to support a completely different displacement/style of engine. In addition, significant cost savings are realized from being able to use similar peripheral accessories that hook up to the core engine.

So I appreciate your point of clarification but the point of my post which you may have missed was two fold:

1) Refuting the statement that BMW dropped the V8 bc of CAFE standards in hopes of drastically improving fuel efficiency. While that is a consideration, on a niche car like the M, the bigger consideration was cost savings...either that or BMW just isn't very good about tuning these cars (or the S65) for fuel efficiency (at least per EPA standards as yes I'm aware that real world mpg does fare better than the sticker). Might I also point out that it seems very likely that the S55 may also be closely related to whatever is in the M2.

2) I understand why BMW did this and I'm not upset that they did. At the end of the day, all I care about is the output and results not the make up of the engine. The S55 is a great engine. I certainly wouldn't say it has the most exciting/character of any engine I've driven, but it's good enough and potentially still better than the RC F (which I haven't driven).

[dondula]

Coming out of a lexus isf, e92m3 and a 2013 c63 coupe within the past 3 years having 1 year leases on all of them and currently in a m4 since mid june, I will put my 2 cents..

The lexus ISF was a fun car, just as fast in a straight line as an e92.. But it felt soft and gushy.. it had the look of a sports car but didn't have the feel.. I have driven slower cars than the ISF and they were more fun to drive with the way I connected with the car. But, my hat off to lexus for a pretty good job being fairly new in the game of sports cars, not to mention the trans wasn't that bad either for a single clutch..

broke the lease on the lexus after a year and got a 2013 m3 last year production. had it for only a few short months before I lost it in an accident, the m3 kept me safe and man did I love it. I loved it and connected with it more than any other cars I have had in the past.. all the little options and preferences you can set really made the car that much more fun to drive. The trans was fantastic and so was the car overall.

I wanted to get into another M3 but availability was scarce and the new M4 being only a year away, I went with a c63 coupe for a year. the quality of the engine was amazing, the interior was dated as most have said, the multi clutch which is really just a wet start-up clutch trans and not a dual clutch, was not so great.. I felt lexus ISF had a better trans.. More cooperative imo..

The c63 coupe was very fast in a straight line and even tight in the corners.. much more tight and right than the ISF for sure.. The benz had terrific brakes.. better than the e92.. The benz brakes slightly automatically move down on the rotors when its raining to remove water incase you need to brake hard.. everything worked in the benz, but then again, not really much to go wrong in the car.. pretty simple in terms of functionality. When my M4 arrived in June, I loved it.. Had much more fun driving it, not to mention the interior is to die for.. all the details get me.. light-up badges in the seats, to the carbon fiber details etc..

To be fair, this M4 is a new generation so I don't want to really compare it to any of the cars I had.. But I will say the e92 took first place for me, the benz took second because of the quality, and the ISF came in last.

I'm sure benz is really going to step their game up big time for the new c63 to come.. I'm sure as always, straight line performance will be unmatched for cars in the same league , but as far as on a track, I'm sure the much better balanced and lighter M4 may just take it.. The lexus RCF which I have seen and been inside of, is pretty much what I expected from lexus.. The shifter and paddles just have that gushy lexus feel... while I like the seats, the interior just doesn't really win me over.. I am impressed with the numbers from the video in this thread. But like few others have said, put a stig in the cars and run them around the same track again and im sure the m4 will come in much more faster than in the video.

I think it just comes down to this for me; there are many cars faster than the m4 out there.. like the GTR for instance, the GTR blows away a lot, even cars three times the price. But as many have said, the GTR isn't that fun to drive.. it's just too easy and does too much for the driver. Look at the video in this thread, look at the smiles and laughing they were having driving the m4 and you didn't really see any of that in the RCF..

I just like fun cars, cars that I can connect with, as well as fun cars that have a good balance of doing everything well instead of doing one or two things great.

Love the video and thanks for sharing. Can't wait to see a head to head review with the new benz next.

[bradleyland]

Originally Posted by Phaeron

I suspect the true reason of hate on the F80 sound has nothing to do with the sound but the knowledge it isn't a V8.

its one of those if they did not know they would be praising it but since they do know they feel the need to hate it.

That's rich. So, everyone who doesn't like the sound of the S55 is actually experiencing some sort of cognitive bias because they know it isn't a V8. How about the fact that it doesn't sound like a V8... because, well, it's not.

I think the F8x is a great car. No, wait, not great; it's a fucking awesome car. However, the sound is bleh. This is (of course) subjective, but you don't get to disqualify dissenting opinions by implying defective thinking.

I don't lament the use of an I6T in the F8x, but I do wonder if BMW could have given the motor a little more character. I know a guy locally with an S14 240SX running an RB26DETT that is clean as hell. Other than the 10" wide wheels on the back, you wouldn't really suspect much of the car. That is, until he lays the hammer down and that RB comes screaming to life. The car sounds absolutely insane at redline.

The S55 is clinical. It produces a broad power band with predictable response. It does everything it needs to do in order to deliver the performance targets BMW set for the F8x. Unfortunately, the same could be said for the engine in a Toyota Camry. With a sports car, it's not enough to achieve your performance targets. You have to do so with fervor.

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by bradleyland

That's rich. So, everyone who doesn't like the sound of the S55 is actually experiencing some sort of cognitive bias because they know it isn't a V8. How about the fact that it doesn't sound like a V8... because, well, it's not.

I think the F8x is a great car. No, wait, not great; it's a fucking awesome car. However, the sound is bleh. This is (of course) subjective, but you don't get to disqualify dissenting opinions by implying defective thinking.

I don't lament the use of an I6T in the F8x, but I do wonder if BMW could have given the motor a little more character. I know a guy locally with an S14 240SX running an RB26DETT that is clean as hell. Other than the 10" wide wheels on the back, you wouldn't really suspect much of the car. That is, until he lays the hammer down and that RB comes screaming to life. The car sounds absolutely insane at redline.

The S55 is clinical. It produces a broad power band with predictable response. It does everything it needs to do in order to deliver the performance targets BMW set for the F8x. Unfortunately, the same could be said for the engine in a Toyota Camry. With a sports car, it's not enough to achieve your performance targets. You have to do so with fervor.

I agree on the sound, its ok. But not on the driving characteristics. Comparing this engine to a v6 camry commuter car is absurd.

Drive one on track, or in an aggressive situation. It pulls hard in a linear manner and shows no drop off at redline.

Its got plenty of character and performance. This car is a blast on track, and the engine is a big reason why.

[dkhm3]

Originally Posted by dondula

Coming out of a lexus isf, e92m3 and a 2013 c63 coupe within the past 3 years having 1 year leases on all of them and currently in a m4 since mid june, I will put my 2 cents..

broke the lease on the lexus after a year and got a 2013 m3 last year production. had it for only a few short months before I lost it in an accident, the m3 kept me safe and man did I love it. I loved it and connected with it more than any other cars I have had in the past.. all the little options and preferences you can set really made the car that much more fun to drive. The trans was fantastic and so was the car overall.

I wanted to get into another M3 but availability was scarce and the new M4 being only a year away, I went with a c63 coupe for a year. the quality of the engine was amazing, the interior was dated as most have said, the multi clutch which is really just a wet start-up clutch trans and not a dual clutch, was not so great.. I felt lexus ISF had a better trans.. More cooperative imo..

The c63 coupe was very fast in a straight line and even tight in the corners.. much more tight and right than the ISF for sure.. The benz had terrific brakes.. better than the e92.. The benz brakes slightly automatically move down on the rotors when its raining to remove water incase you need to brake hard.. everything worked in the benz, but then again, not really much to go wrong in the car.. pretty simple in terms of functionality. When my M4 arrived in June, I loved it.. Had much more fun driving it, not to mention the interior is to die for.. all the details get me.. light-up badges in the seats, to the carbon fiber details etc..

To be fair, this M4 is a new generation so I don't want to really compare it to any of the cars I had.. But I will say the e92 took first place for me, the benz took second because of the quality, and the ISF came in last.

I just like fun cars, cars that I can connect with, as well as fun cars that have a good balance of doing everything well instead of doing one or two things great.

Love the video and thanks for sharing. Can't wait to see a head to head review with the new benz next.

+1 on C63 review. It was great, but something was missing. The engine made me giggle and laugh, but the chassis did not.

+1 million on the connection comment with the m3/m4. That is the essential reason we keep coming back for more.

[hellrotm]

I am not sure if it is the audio, but for a V8 the RC-F doesn't sound that great.

[hellrotm]

Originally Posted by irablumberg

I am curious about the mileage rating on the upcoming C63 4.0l TT V8. I doubt it will come close to the M4, but it will be fast.

Hmm...according to Benz and BMW German sites.

BMW M3 dct

Combined fuel consumption - 8.3l/100km
CO2 emission - 194g/100km


C63S

Combined fuel consumption - 8.2l/100km
CO2 emission - 192g/100km

[dondula]

Originally Posted by dkhm3

+1 on C63 review. It was great, but something was missing. The engine made me giggle and laugh, but the chassis did not.

+1 million on the connection comment with the m3/m4. That is the essential reason we keep coming back for more.

I should have elaborated more when I stated that the engine was fantastic in the c63.. The benz was way better in the corners than the lexus.. but I agree as well about the chassis.. The benz chassis is no match for that on an e92.

Benz does some pretty amazing things with their cars, I just think on that particular model, I was more disappointed then I was satisfied. I just kept noticing what it was missing compared to the e92.

Some people think that bmw gives you too many settings and too many buttons and it becomes too much.. For those kinds of people who don't want to be as involved with their driving experience, I would recommend either an AMG or a GTR for sure.