First Comparison Look at BMW M4 versus Lexus RC F

[M4LF]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

I did an Extended Test Drive in the new C7 Corvette and it had HUD as well. The only problem I found was,
when the seat was all the back, the image would overlay part of the front hood.

Corvettes have had HUD for over ten years in three different generations C5, C6, and now C7. You can raise or lower the readout, it can display more info than that, so you just need to read the manual. For what it's worth, I find HUD overrated. At least for DD anyways.

But at least it's got ventilated seats and it doesn't sound like a lawnmower

[///ADMAN]

Originally Posted by mso4

You can raise or lower the readout, so you just need to read the manual.

You can only raise or lower the display. You cannot reposition it from side to side, so you just need to read the post.
As I said, in any of the other modes, the lower right of the image would overlay the hood. It needed to be fully adjustable.

[///ADMAN]

They look the best in black. Hides the ugly grill. Not so sure about the rest of the colors.
I guess there is one Lexus Demo Vehicle touring in Lambo Orange

[MicrophoneMic]

Finally, the specs were recently released for the RC-F in the Clublexus.com forums and they look great.

4.5 liter V8
467 hp
393 lb-ft of torque
7,300RPM redline
3,958 lbs
16 city / 25 highway

Starting price $62,400

Can't decide b/t this, M4, or C63 replacement. Just really hard to ignore a NA V8 with that kind of power. Hmm....

[Andrew115]

Originally Posted by MicrophoneMic

Finally, the specs were recently released for the RC-F in the Clublexus.com forums and they look great.

4.5 liter V8
467 hp
393 lb-ft of torque
7,300RPM redline
3,958 lbs
16 city / 25 highway

Starting price $62,400

Can't decide b/t this, M4, or C63 replacement. Just really hard to ignore a NA V8 with that kind of power. Hmm....

Wonder what the dynos will say. If that hp and tq figure is 10+% less on the rolling road and the weight is correct I don't think it will be close to the new M down the strip.

[MicrophoneMic]

Originally Posted by Andrew115

Wonder what the dynos will say. If that hp and tq figure is 10+% less on the rolling road and the weight is correct I don't think it will be close to the new M down the strip.

To be honest, I'm more interested in the consistency of the NA V8. IME, you lose something in the drive with turbos and they also tend to bog down at higher RPM's. As a result, pulling on the highway or any speeds where you're actually moving take a hit with forced induction when you really get on it.

And it just doesn't feel quite the same as NA car. The performance of the car is just more balanced/consistent and overall just more enjoyable to drive when you forgo turbos.

Which is the same impression I see many folks here when comparing their E92 M3's versus the current M3/M4's. And regardless, 40+ more hp versus the M3/M4 is significant. You just can't ignore that.

[onatuesday]

I'm hearing the chassis is significantly better than the old ISF. Much stiffer

[Andrew115]

Originally Posted by MicrophoneMic

To be honest, I'm more interested in the consistency of the NA V8. IME, you lose something in the drive with turbos and they also tend to bog down at higher RPM's. As a result, pulling on the highway or any speeds where you're actually moving take a hit with forced induction when you really get on it.

And it just doesn't feel quite the same as NA car. The performance of the car is just more balanced/consistent and overall just more enjoyable to drive when you forgo turbos.

Which is the same impression I see many folks here when comparing their E92 M3's versus the current M3/M4's. And regardless, 40+ more hp versus the M3/M4 is significant. You just can't ignore that.

You raise very good points. NA design is very responsive and a great engine by all accounts. Unfortunately with emissions and efficiency initiatives turbos are in and I am okay with that.

I am less impressed by hp, tq is where it's at. Let's see the dynos maybe it won't have 40 more more on par with the M3/4 is my estimation.

[MicrophoneMic]

Originally Posted by trinim3

I'm hearing the chassis is significantly better than the old ISF. Much stiffer

Yeah man. Right on. That's what I've been reading as well in the Clublexus forums. Also, the Lexus RC-F has a TVD option (Torque Vectoring Differential), which sounds like an amazing feature (we'll see I guess when the car is finally released/reviewed), but as I understand it right now, that option only comes prepackaged with the Performance Package, which includes a Carbon fiber roof, wing, and hood.

I'm just not a real fan of the drastic color contrast on the car with all that carbon fiber versus the rest of car. Actually, it's really only the hood that irks me. But I guess you can just get an all black car and it wouldn't be so loud looking. I'm not sure.

The most intriguing part is that one of the chief guys at Lexus hinted at a manual transmission for the car sometime later. I would def get that if it's offered. Maybe they'll offer it with the new IS-F in 2016.

I just don't know if I can wait that long.

[MicrophoneMic]

Originally Posted by Andrew115

You raise very good points. NA design is very responsive and a great engine by all accounts. Unfortunately with emissions and efficiency initiatives turbos are in and I am okay with that.

I am less impressed by hp, tq is where it's at. Let's see the dynos maybe it won't have 40 more more on par with the M3/4 is my estimation.

Exactly. Which is why I'm still shocked to this day that a seemingly conservative/play-it-safe company like Lexus (Toyota) would KEEP the V8 engine in the new RC-F/upcoming IS-F, when everyone is going turbos to meet CAFE standards.

And if you would have told me a couple years ago that the redesigned BMW M3/M4 would go turbo 6 cyl and the upcoming Lexus RC-F/IS-F would keep the V8, I would NOT have believed you. I would have thought it would be the other way around or at least both going turbos.

Lexus really surprised me with that one and I applaud them for that. Which is why I'm considering one of their cars as my next.

[Andrew115]

Originally Posted by MicrophoneMic

Exactly. Which is why I'm still shocked to this day that a seemingly conservative/play-it-safe company like Lexus (Toyota) would KEEP the V8 engine in the new RC-F/upcoming IS-F, when everyone is going turbos to meet CAFE standards.

And if you would have told me a couple years ago that the redesigned BMW M3/M4 would go turbo 6 cyl and the upcoming Lexus RC-F/IS-F would keep the V8, I would NOT have believed you. I would have thought it would be the other way around or at least both going turbos.

Lexus really surprised me with that one and I applaud them for that. Which is why I'm considering one of their cars as my next.

Could the v8 be a result of exhausted budget and no available v6 tt to compete? Regardless they will have a unique position in the market with MB BMW Cadillac all going turbo route.

[mti]

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/..._f_first_test/

... After reading this, I'm disappointed by the RC F to be honest

[Black Gold]

Originally Posted by MicrophoneMic

Finally, the specs were recently released for the RC-F in the Clublexus.com forums and they look great.

4.5 liter V8
467 hp
393 lb-ft of torque
7,300RPM redline
3,958 lbs
16 city / 25 highway

Starting price $62,400

Can't decide b/t this, M4, or C63 replacement. Just really hard to ignore a NA V8 with that kind of power. Hmm....

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.

[azula]

Has anyone mentioned that it's hideous? LOL

[ixse]

lol.. what did they use for chassis to "acheive" 4k lb sports coupe? its like they are moving back in time.
edit: oh.. just finished reading the posted review.. so they put together parts from gs, IS, rc to keep the cost down.. mostly steel frame.. this car is built by money hungry board members that doesnt have an ounce of petrol in their veins. you can stiffen up the suspension n chassis all you want, but you can never hide 4k lb..
guess it suits a typical lexus buyer..

[///ADMAN]

Pictures and reviews are one thing. I still want to see it and test drive it in person.

I'm fond of the NA V8. Gives me something to supercharge!!!
I hear you, though. A 4,000 lbs "sports coupe" takes that all away.
And if they do make a cabrio, it will be even heavier than that.

As for the grill: I remember seeing an all black demo car somewhere.
The front end and parts didn't seem all that bad. Very good, actually.

[///ADMAN]

Might have been this photo. Can't remember. It was quite a while ago...

[///ADMAN]

Hang on... Hang on...


I keep staring at this photo thinking it's missing something. And, I think I finally figured it out:



Maybe with some BLUE 6 pot calipers?

[/// M sa]

Originally Posted by ///ADMAN

Might have been this photo. Can't remember. It was quite a while ago...

That is one ugly ass car sorry... Glorified Toyota no thanks! Also the dash is like a space ship who needs all those distracting shit while your driving a sports car?

[Eddien123]

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.

[Andrew115]

I saw a review last night that said the front clip is from the IS mid section from convertible and the tear end was GS. Sounds like a Frankenstein to me.

[///ADMAN]

It's actually the other way around.
It is the front clip of a GS.
The mid section from a convertible.
And, the rear clip of an IS.

But, who's keeping track...


Frankenstein??? My Super Duper 335is has a modified N54 engine with an M3 DCT sitting on a chopped E9x frame -
with a bunch of one-off parts and accessories on a vehicle that's not even available in the country in which it is produced.

I'm not sure how I feel about having a speaker in my steering wheel. But, hey...
at least it wouldn't be playing an artificial "engine" sound every time I step on the gas pedal.





It's all good. What a great time to be an automotive enthusiast!!!