Lexus LC F to Debut in 2021 with Over 600 Horsepower?

Levi

It is amazing how Lexus managed to build two cars, that I find worth their high price for only one aspect (not saying all the rest is bad).

The LFA is worth it even only for its V10, and the LC is worth it even only for its design, that no other can compare to: no Mercedes, no BMW, no Porsche, no Bentley, no Lamborghini, no Ferrari, no Aston Martin. I can't think of one car, that is worth it for even only one aspect (-- maybe Land Cruiser?).

Unfortunately its design does not seem enough. The LC F's rivals will be the M8 and the Continental GT, both with turbocharged +600 PS engines, AWD and AWS. Today a luxury car without AWD is not respected. I think the LC F needs AWD and AWS. Wonder if that will be enough on paper. It should.

Yet I personally think the LC is too good looking to be a fast undrivable and bad sounding car. I'm sorry, but supercharger and turbo never has and never will sound as naturally aspirated.

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

mikeavelli

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

mikeavelli

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

mikeavelli

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

mikeavelli

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

mikeavelli

I drove the #LCUL8TR quite a bit recently and in Atlanta, you would think its an exotic car. People could not stop taking pics, asking questions, giving thumbs up etc. They simply nailed the design, it does look exotic for 100k compared to the usual suspects.

It also never gets old to hear people talk about it being a LFA or asking is it a LFA. :)

View attachment 2860

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

RichieRich

Agreed. Waiting on the convertible to pick one up. :)

The interior is worth showing off, and it works better in a convertible. I can't think of a better designed interior, be it in luxury coupe/sedan or supercar category, current or passed.

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

Now CarandDriver is now saying that the LC F is coming in 2022, and will reach the $200,000 price bracket. I wonder where they heard that from? I'm sure they heard the former from our insiders, but the latter I think that is genuine lies. They wouldn't find a single buyer if it was $200,000. That's Audi R8, Porsche 911 Turbo S, Acura NSX money. It doesn't even compete in the same segment. This thing needs to shoot for the Mercedes-Benz S65 AMG and the BMW M8.

One question for the whole forum. Do you think they will make it AWD or keep it RWD? I feel like the drivetrain is the game changer here. Not the powertrain or transmission. How the hell will they manage to put that much power and torque down? If there isn't an AWD system it goes for show how incapable they are of making one. However I do hope one of the proposed AWD systems that was released by the Toyota Newsroom is going to be merged into the LC F.

The link if anyone is interested:

https://www.caranddriver.com/features/2022-lexus-lc-f-more-power-less-weight

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

There are RWD cars with a lot more than that amount of power and torque, you know. In fact the LC-F will have a lower power-to-weight ratio than the LFA, so RWD is definitely doable, although not optimal.

Anyway if they are making it AWD while reducing weight they will have to find at least 200kg to cut from the LC500.

This is the type of engine Toyota should have developed years ago. They’re late and it sounds more like fanciful vaporware than reality. All talk.

Assuming this ever does get released, that price point is way too high. You can get 500 to 600 HP V8 AMG, BMW M or Audi RS NOW for way, way less than that. It won’t sell, especially considering Lexus’ solidified reputation of exaggerating performance numbers. I doubt people who buy these cars would be fooled or at least not research it more than the average Camry buyer and see through the charade, especially since performance is fundamental when you talk about AMG or M cars.

Will Toyota prove me wrong? Doubt it.


Here, Toyota should take lessons in this. They could learn a thing or two if they expect their F cars to compete. Like the LS. Anyone else would publish a 60 time of 5.6 seconds or slower, not Lexus (lol) and it doesn’t take much research to see real numbers.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/12305/...models-are-always-conservative-tech-boss-says

Turns out Audi has been lying to us all these years—but with our best intentions at heart. As it turns out, those impressive performance stats the carmaker trots out with every new RS model are actually kind of, to use the term of the moment, fake news.

So sayeth Stephan Reil, who serves as head of technical development for Audi Sport GmbH. Reil admitted as much to Australia's CarAdvice at the launch of the new, secretly-hybridized Audi RS5.

"“I’ve been in this job for nearly 20 years, and with all the cars I’ve worked on, the performance numbers we published were conservative," Reil said. "So, if we say 3.9 seconds, you will measure, maybe, 3.7 if the conditions are fine, probably 3.8, but even under the worst conditions, you’ll do it in 3.9 seconds. But you will not find a 4.0."


In other words, Audi never wants to see any customers wind up with a car that doesn't live up to its promises. Not just customers, either—journalists, too.

"The reason we are conservative with these numbers is simple," Reil told CarAdvice. I simply don’t want to hear [it] when you guys write ‘Well, they claim 3.9, but we got 4.0.'”

A glance at independent tests of recent Audi RS models proves there's substance behind Reil's words. Audi quotes a 3.6-second 0-60 dash for the 605-horsepower RS7 Performance, for example—but Car and Driver squeezed a 3.2-second version out of their test car. Funnily enough, Audi quotes that same 3.2-second 0-60 sprint for the R8 V10 Plus...but that didn't stop Motor Trend from launching that car from naught to a-mile-a-minute in 2.6.

That said, this sort of number-fudging isn't uncommon among German performance car companies. Porsche, in particular, has become notorious for delivering cars that consistently outdo their quotes 0-60 times, and Mercedes-AMG's models are often known to do the same. While Reil is obviously only speaking for his brand...we wouldn't be surprised if his counterparts at those other companies would admit something similar after a couple glasses of pilsner.

This is the type of engine Toyota should have developed years ago. They’re late and it sounds more like fanciful vaporware than reality. All talk.

Assuming this ever does get released, that price point is way too high. You can get 500 to 600 HP V8 AMG, BMW M or Audi RS NOW for way, way less than that. It won’t sell, especially considering Lexus’ solidified reputation of exaggerating performance numbers. I doubt people who buy these cars would be fooled or at least not research it more than the average Camry buyer and see through the charade, especially since performance is fundamental when you talk about AMG or M cars.

Will Toyota prove me wrong? Doubt it.


Here, Toyota should take lessons in this. They could learn a thing or two if they expect their F cars to compete. Like the LS. Anyone else would publish a 60 time of 5.6 seconds or slower, not Lexus (lol) and it doesn’t take much research to see real numbers.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/12305/...models-are-always-conservative-tech-boss-says

Turns out Audi has been lying to us all these years—but with our best intentions at heart. As it turns out, those impressive performance stats the carmaker trots out with every new RS model are actually kind of, to use the term of the moment, fake news.

So sayeth Stephan Reil, who serves as head of technical development for Audi Sport GmbH. Reil admitted as much to Australia's CarAdvice at the launch of the new, secretly-hybridized Audi RS5.

"“I’ve been in this job for nearly 20 years, and with all the cars I’ve worked on, the performance numbers we published were conservative," Reil said. "So, if we say 3.9 seconds, you will measure, maybe, 3.7 if the conditions are fine, probably 3.8, but even under the worst conditions, you’ll do it in 3.9 seconds. But you will not find a 4.0."


In other words, Audi never wants to see any customers wind up with a car that doesn't live up to its promises. Not just customers, either—journalists, too.

"The reason we are conservative with these numbers is simple," Reil told CarAdvice. I simply don’t want to hear [it] when you guys write ‘Well, they claim 3.9, but we got 4.0.'”

A glance at independent tests of recent Audi RS models proves there's substance behind Reil's words. Audi quotes a 3.6-second 0-60 dash for the 605-horsepower RS7 Performance, for example—but Car and Driver squeezed a 3.2-second version out of their test car. Funnily enough, Audi quotes that same 3.2-second 0-60 sprint for the R8 V10 Plus...but that didn't stop Motor Trend from launching that car from naught to a-mile-a-minute in 2.6.

That said, this sort of number-fudging isn't uncommon among German performance car companies. Porsche, in particular, has become notorious for delivering cars that consistently outdo their quotes 0-60 times, and Mercedes-AMG's models are often known to do the same. While Reil is obviously only speaking for his brand...we wouldn't be surprised if his counterparts at those other companies would admit something similar after a couple glasses of pilsner.

This is the type of engine Toyota should have developed years ago. They’re late and it sounds more like fanciful vaporware than reality. All talk.

Assuming this ever does get released, that price point is way too high. You can get 500 to 600 HP V8 AMG, BMW M or Audi RS NOW for way, way less than that. It won’t sell, especially considering Lexus’ solidified reputation of exaggerating performance numbers. I doubt people who buy these cars would be fooled or at least not research it more than the average Camry buyer and see through the charade, especially since performance is fundamental when you talk about AMG or M cars.

Will Toyota prove me wrong? Doubt it.


Here, Toyota should take lessons in this. They could learn a thing or two if they expect their F cars to compete. Like the LS. Anyone else would publish a 60 time of 5.6 seconds or slower, not Lexus (lol) and it doesn’t take much research to see real numbers.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/12305/...models-are-always-conservative-tech-boss-says

Turns out Audi has been lying to us all these years—but with our best intentions at heart. As it turns out, those impressive performance stats the carmaker trots out with every new RS model are actually kind of, to use the term of the moment, fake news.

So sayeth Stephan Reil, who serves as head of technical development for Audi Sport GmbH. Reil admitted as much to Australia's CarAdvice at the launch of the new, secretly-hybridized Audi RS5.

"“I’ve been in this job for nearly 20 years, and with all the cars I’ve worked on, the performance numbers we published were conservative," Reil said. "So, if we say 3.9 seconds, you will measure, maybe, 3.7 if the conditions are fine, probably 3.8, but even under the worst conditions, you’ll do it in 3.9 seconds. But you will not find a 4.0."


In other words, Audi never wants to see any customers wind up with a car that doesn't live up to its promises. Not just customers, either—journalists, too.

"The reason we are conservative with these numbers is simple," Reil told CarAdvice. I simply don’t want to hear [it] when you guys write ‘Well, they claim 3.9, but we got 4.0.'”

A glance at independent tests of recent Audi RS models proves there's substance behind Reil's words. Audi quotes a 3.6-second 0-60 dash for the 605-horsepower RS7 Performance, for example—but Car and Driver squeezed a 3.2-second version out of their test car. Funnily enough, Audi quotes that same 3.2-second 0-60 sprint for the R8 V10 Plus...but that didn't stop Motor Trend from launching that car from naught to a-mile-a-minute in 2.6.

That said, this sort of number-fudging isn't uncommon among German performance car companies. Porsche, in particular, has become notorious for delivering cars that consistently outdo their quotes 0-60 times, and Mercedes-AMG's models are often known to do the same. While Reil is obviously only speaking for his brand...we wouldn't be surprised if his counterparts at those other companies would admit something similar after a couple glasses of pilsner.

This is the type of engine Toyota should have developed years ago. They’re late and it sounds more like fanciful vaporware than reality. All talk.

Assuming this ever does get released, that price point is way too high. You can get 500 to 600 HP V8 AMG, BMW M or Audi RS NOW for way, way less than that. It won’t sell, especially considering Lexus’ solidified reputation of exaggerating performance numbers. I doubt people who buy these cars would be fooled or at least not research it more than the average Camry buyer and see through the charade, especially since performance is fundamental when you talk about AMG or M cars.

Will Toyota prove me wrong? Doubt it.


Here, Toyota should take lessons in this. They could learn a thing or two if they expect their F cars to compete. Like the LS. Anyone else would publish a 60 time of 5.6 seconds or slower, not Lexus (lol) and it doesn’t take much research to see real numbers.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/12305/...models-are-always-conservative-tech-boss-says

Turns out Audi has been lying to us all these years—but with our best intentions at heart. As it turns out, those impressive performance stats the carmaker trots out with every new RS model are actually kind of, to use the term of the moment, fake news.

So sayeth Stephan Reil, who serves as head of technical development for Audi Sport GmbH. Reil admitted as much to Australia's CarAdvice at the launch of the new, secretly-hybridized Audi RS5.

"“I’ve been in this job for nearly 20 years, and with all the cars I’ve worked on, the performance numbers we published were conservative," Reil said. "So, if we say 3.9 seconds, you will measure, maybe, 3.7 if the conditions are fine, probably 3.8, but even under the worst conditions, you’ll do it in 3.9 seconds. But you will not find a 4.0."


In other words, Audi never wants to see any customers wind up with a car that doesn't live up to its promises. Not just customers, either—journalists, too.

"The reason we are conservative with these numbers is simple," Reil told CarAdvice. I simply don’t want to hear [it] when you guys write ‘Well, they claim 3.9, but we got 4.0.'”

A glance at independent tests of recent Audi RS models proves there's substance behind Reil's words. Audi quotes a 3.6-second 0-60 dash for the 605-horsepower RS7 Performance, for example—but Car and Driver squeezed a 3.2-second version out of their test car. Funnily enough, Audi quotes that same 3.2-second 0-60 sprint for the R8 V10 Plus...but that didn't stop Motor Trend from launching that car from naught to a-mile-a-minute in 2.6.

That said, this sort of number-fudging isn't uncommon among German performance car companies. Porsche, in particular, has become notorious for delivering cars that consistently outdo their quotes 0-60 times, and Mercedes-AMG's models are often known to do the same. While Reil is obviously only speaking for his brand...we wouldn't be surprised if his counterparts at those other companies would admit something similar after a couple glasses of pilsner.

This is the type of engine Toyota should have developed years ago. They’re late and it sounds more like fanciful vaporware than reality. All talk.

Assuming this ever does get released, that price point is way too high. You can get 500 to 600 HP V8 AMG, BMW M or Audi RS NOW for way, way less than that. It won’t sell, especially considering Lexus’ solidified reputation of exaggerating performance numbers. I doubt people who buy these cars would be fooled or at least not research it more than the average Camry buyer and see through the charade, especially since performance is fundamental when you talk about AMG or M cars.

Will Toyota prove me wrong? Doubt it.


Here, Toyota should take lessons in this. They could learn a thing or two if they expect their F cars to compete. Like the LS. Anyone else would publish a 60 time of 5.6 seconds or slower, not Lexus (lol) and it doesn’t take much research to see real numbers.

http://www.thedrive.com/news/12305/...models-are-always-conservative-tech-boss-says

Turns out Audi has been lying to us all these years—but with our best intentions at heart. As it turns out, those impressive performance stats the carmaker trots out with every new RS model are actually kind of, to use the term of the moment, fake news.

So sayeth Stephan Reil, who serves as head of technical development for Audi Sport GmbH. Reil admitted as much to Australia's CarAdvice at the launch of the new, secretly-hybridized Audi RS5.

"“I’ve been in this job for nearly 20 years, and with all the cars I’ve worked on, the performance numbers we published were conservative," Reil said. "So, if we say 3.9 seconds, you will measure, maybe, 3.7 if the conditions are fine, probably 3.8, but even under the worst conditions, you’ll do it in 3.9 seconds. But you will not find a 4.0."


In other words, Audi never wants to see any customers wind up with a car that doesn't live up to its promises. Not just customers, either—journalists, too.

"The reason we are conservative with these numbers is simple," Reil told CarAdvice. I simply don’t want to hear [it] when you guys write ‘Well, they claim 3.9, but we got 4.0.'”

A glance at independent tests of recent Audi RS models proves there's substance behind Reil's words. Audi quotes a 3.6-second 0-60 dash for the 605-horsepower RS7 Performance, for example—but Car and Driver squeezed a 3.2-second version out of their test car. Funnily enough, Audi quotes that same 3.2-second 0-60 sprint for the R8 V10 Plus...but that didn't stop Motor Trend from launching that car from naught to a-mile-a-minute in 2.6.

That said, this sort of number-fudging isn't uncommon among German performance car companies. Porsche, in particular, has become notorious for delivering cars that consistently outdo their quotes 0-60 times, and Mercedes-AMG's models are often known to do the same. While Reil is obviously only speaking for his brand...we wouldn't be surprised if his counterparts at those other companies would admit something similar after a couple glasses of pilsner.