Top Gear Review: Lexus RC F Track Edition

With 60 or so being made that just makes me horny...... lol....

I can't wait to see it in person and now am kicking myself in the head for not going to Detroit...

With 60 or so being made that just makes me horny...... lol....

I can't wait to see it in person and now am kicking myself in the head for not going to Detroit...

All right I will stay cool and whoever made personal jabs is happy they pulled back their words or else it wouldn't be pretty. I will discuss with Gecko only because it seems like some new members *COUGHS* @CRSKTN don't know what they're talking about. I'll let it slide this time.

I don't feel like making sentences so I will speak via a list.

1. Infinitely more modifiable (downpipe and an average tunes takes this thing to 400whp).

2. It is extremely lighter than any RC F.

3. The RC F Track Edition is the final form of the RC F before it bows out for this generation (however not the Supra ;))) ).

4. @Faisal Sheikh I know we do disagree on this but in terms of platforms, the Supra platform is more taut and more planted than the RC F's platform. The platform is lighter, more rigid and is a lot more dialed in (in terms of balance).

5. There is a extremely high chance for a stick. Unlike the RC F.

6. Almost an extension of number 3, but we took the BMW CLAR platform (not going to call it a Z4 platform because it was codeveloped) and the engine and we can outsource them later. Who says we can't build a Toyota engine out of that? All we needed was a stupidly good block at the bottom end and everything else it can be done by Gazoo Racing/Toyota. Toyota wasn't going to spend a billion dollars on an engine. If you see fangirls screaming about that fact, roll your eyes, scoff at their idiocy and leave them to be by themselves. If you actually are feeling nice, comment why thats not true.

7. There is a lot more riding on this car (in terms of expectations) than any other Toyota/Lexus product. Ever. Maybe Some Lexus products like the LS, GS, IS, LFA, F cars.

8. And if you guys don't think it's better than the RC F now, ultimately it will. Toyota will not be leaving the Supra alone like it did with the FRS/GT86/86. They will be injecting so much R&D cash and intel into the Supra like never before.


This is just part of why I believe it is better (and if you guys don't think it is, it will be better than the RC F very soon). This is the dawn of a new legend. Just, please trust Toyota this time. They never skimped on the fundamentals of a sports car.

All right I will stay cool and whoever made personal jabs is happy they pulled back their words or else it wouldn't be pretty. I will discuss with Gecko only because it seems like some new members *COUGHS* @CRSKTN don't know what they're talking about. I'll let it slide this time.

I don't feel like making sentences so I will speak via a list.

1. Infinitely more modifiable (downpipe and an average tunes takes this thing to 400whp).

2. It is extremely lighter than any RC F.

3. The RC F Track Edition is the final form of the RC F before it bows out for this generation (however not the Supra ;))) ).

4. @Faisal Sheikh I know we do disagree on this but in terms of platforms, the Supra platform is more taut and more planted than the RC F's platform. The platform is lighter, more rigid and is a lot more dialed in (in terms of balance).

5. There is a extremely high chance for a stick. Unlike the RC F.

6. Almost an extension of number 3, but we took the BMW CLAR platform (not going to call it a Z4 platform because it was codeveloped) and the engine and we can outsource them later. Who says we can't build a Toyota engine out of that? All we needed was a stupidly good block at the bottom end and everything else it can be done by Gazoo Racing/Toyota. Toyota wasn't going to spend a billion dollars on an engine. If you see fangirls screaming about that fact, roll your eyes, scoff at their idiocy and leave them to be by themselves. If you actually are feeling nice, comment why thats not true.

7. There is a lot more riding on this car (in terms of expectations) than any other Toyota/Lexus product. Ever. Maybe Some Lexus products like the LS, GS, IS, LFA, F cars.

8. And if you guys don't think it's better than the RC F now, ultimately it will. Toyota will not be leaving the Supra alone like it did with the FRS/GT86/86. They will be injecting so much R&D cash and intel into the Supra like never before.


This is just part of why I believe it is better (and if you guys don't think it is, it will be better than the RC F very soon). This is the dawn of a new legend. Just, please trust Toyota this time. They never skimped on the fundamentals of a sports car.

I never thought I'd live to see this day. The numbers don't disappoint.

I never thought I'd live to see this day. The numbers don't disappoint.

None of that supports your argument "Supra is better in every way than any variant of the RCF" because it isn't. In some respects, yes it is. I will leave it at that.

p.s. Its final test weight with all fluids will be over 3500+ lbs (dry weight is 3384 lbs). It is light, but not "extremely light".

F1 Silver Arrows

All right I will stay cool and whoever made personal jabs is happy they pulled back their words or else it wouldn't be pretty. I will discuss with Gecko only because it seems like some new members *COUGHS* @CRSKTN don't know what they're talking about. I'll let it slide this time.

I don't feel like making sentences so I will speak via a list.

1. Infinitely more modifiable (downpipe and an average tunes takes this thing to 400whp).

2. It is extremely lighter than any RC F.

3. The RC F Track Edition is the final form of the RC F before it bows out for this generation (however not the Supra ;))) ).

4. @Faisal Sheikh I know we do disagree on this but in terms of platforms, the Supra platform is more taut and more planted than the RC F's platform. The platform is lighter, more rigid and is a lot more dialed in (in terms of balance).

5. There is a extremely high chance for a stick. Unlike the RC F.

6. Almost an extension of number 3, but we took the BMW CLAR platform (not going to call it a Z4 platform because it was codeveloped) and the engine and we can outsource them later. Who says we can't build a Toyota engine out of that? All we needed was a stupidly good block at the bottom end and everything else it can be done by Gazoo Racing/Toyota. Toyota wasn't going to spend a billion dollars on an engine. If you see fangirls screaming about that fact, roll your eyes, scoff at their idiocy and leave them to be by themselves. If you actually are feeling nice, comment why thats not true.

7. There is a lot more riding on this car (in terms of expectations) than any other Toyota/Lexus product. Ever. Maybe Some Lexus products like the LS, GS, IS, LFA, F cars.

8. And if you guys don't think it's better than the RC F now, ultimately it will. Toyota will not be leaving the Supra alone like it did with the FRS/GT86/86. They will be injecting so much R&D cash and intel into the Supra like never before.


This is just part of why I believe it is better (and if you guys don't think it is, it will be better than the RC F very soon). This is the dawn of a new legend. Just, please trust Toyota this time. They never skimped on the fundamentals of a sports car.

None of that supports your argument "Supra is better in every way than any variant of the RCF" because it isn't. In some respects, yes it is. I will leave it at that.

p.s. Its final test weight with all fluids will be over 3500+ lbs (dry weight is 3384 lbs). It is light, but not "extremely light".

F1 Silver Arrows

All right I will stay cool and whoever made personal jabs is happy they pulled back their words or else it wouldn't be pretty. I will discuss with Gecko only because it seems like some new members *COUGHS* @CRSKTN don't know what they're talking about. I'll let it slide this time.

I don't feel like making sentences so I will speak via a list.

1. Infinitely more modifiable (downpipe and an average tunes takes this thing to 400whp).

2. It is extremely lighter than any RC F.

3. The RC F Track Edition is the final form of the RC F before it bows out for this generation (however not the Supra ;))) ).

4. @Faisal Sheikh I know we do disagree on this but in terms of platforms, the Supra platform is more taut and more planted than the RC F's platform. The platform is lighter, more rigid and is a lot more dialed in (in terms of balance).

5. There is a extremely high chance for a stick. Unlike the RC F.

6. Almost an extension of number 3, but we took the BMW CLAR platform (not going to call it a Z4 platform because it was codeveloped) and the engine and we can outsource them later. Who says we can't build a Toyota engine out of that? All we needed was a stupidly good block at the bottom end and everything else it can be done by Gazoo Racing/Toyota. Toyota wasn't going to spend a billion dollars on an engine. If you see fangirls screaming about that fact, roll your eyes, scoff at their idiocy and leave them to be by themselves. If you actually are feeling nice, comment why thats not true.

7. There is a lot more riding on this car (in terms of expectations) than any other Toyota/Lexus product. Ever. Maybe Some Lexus products like the LS, GS, IS, LFA, F cars.

8. And if you guys don't think it's better than the RC F now, ultimately it will. Toyota will not be leaving the Supra alone like it did with the FRS/GT86/86. They will be injecting so much R&D cash and intel into the Supra like never before.


This is just part of why I believe it is better (and if you guys don't think it is, it will be better than the RC F very soon). This is the dawn of a new legend. Just, please trust Toyota this time. They never skimped on the fundamentals of a sports car.

I would love to see your reasoning why it isn't! Do not take offence to anything! I am genuinely curious.

I would love to see your reasoning why it isn't! Do not take offence to anything! I am genuinely curious.

F1 Silver Arrows

I would love to see your reasoning why it isn't! Do not take offence to anything! I am genuinely curious.

Based on what is known so far

- 140 more horsepower/Much faster acceleration
- More luxurious/premium even the track edition with more exotic materials
- V8 high-revving sound/response
- Don't have to sacrifice practicality (even the track edition has the same backseats)

F1 Silver Arrows

I would love to see your reasoning why it isn't! Do not take offence to anything! I am genuinely curious.

Based on what is known so far

- 140 more horsepower/Much faster acceleration
- More luxurious/premium even the track edition with more exotic materials
- V8 high-revving sound/response
- Don't have to sacrifice practicality (even the track edition has the same backseats)

my issue with the track edition is the lack of "focus". I get it they want to have a car that is good for both on and off the track. But isn't that what the RC-F should be? I'd go so far to say that the RC-F should have all the upgrades made to the track edition (minus that hideous rear wing and put in something mechanical like the LF-A) and call that a day. For me (as a pure enthusiast with no mechanical knowledge whatsoever) the track edition should be extra hardcore. That means getting rid of a torque converter automatic and having a single or dual or manual clutch transmission, getting rid of the back seats, getting rid of some sound deadening, getting rid of some luxuries such as motorised seats (if there are any)...it should cut out at least 150kg. Not 65.

Now im not saying the track edition is not a great car. But I just see it as a missed opportunity. I also get that journos will forever bash the weight of the donor car (despite it being pretty much just as quick as a bog standard M3 around a track) and then bash something else when the weight is gone but that is beside the point. I believe a track edition should be hardcore.

I also find it odd that, as a brand building exercise (along with the pornographic drop top LC...that car is just OMG...), but no IS/GS replacement in sight! Surely they are not THAT expensive to develop...right? And surely they're not loss making investments? right? I mean i'd love to be well off enough for a LS and i'm sure there are people in this forum who are. But I am not. It doesn't mean I don't aspire to an IS right? If you think about it...(for Australia anyway), the closest thing to an IS for the "aspiring" individual looking at the Toyota/lexus range is a camry...kinda sad aint it?

anyway...off topic there.

my issue with the track edition is the lack of "focus". I get it they want to have a car that is good for both on and off the track. But isn't that what the RC-F should be? I'd go so far to say that the RC-F should have all the upgrades made to the track edition (minus that hideous rear wing and put in something mechanical like the LF-A) and call that a day. For me (as a pure enthusiast with no mechanical knowledge whatsoever) the track edition should be extra hardcore. That means getting rid of a torque converter automatic and having a single or dual or manual clutch transmission, getting rid of the back seats, getting rid of some sound deadening, getting rid of some luxuries such as motorised seats (if there are any)...it should cut out at least 150kg. Not 65.

Now im not saying the track edition is not a great car. But I just see it as a missed opportunity. I also get that journos will forever bash the weight of the donor car (despite it being pretty much just as quick as a bog standard M3 around a track) and then bash something else when the weight is gone but that is beside the point. I believe a track edition should be hardcore.

I also find it odd that, as a brand building exercise (along with the pornographic drop top LC...that car is just OMG...), but no IS/GS replacement in sight! Surely they are not THAT expensive to develop...right? And surely they're not loss making investments? right? I mean i'd love to be well off enough for a LS and i'm sure there are people in this forum who are. But I am not. It doesn't mean I don't aspire to an IS right? If you think about it...(for Australia anyway), the closest thing to an IS for the "aspiring" individual looking at the Toyota/lexus range is a camry...kinda sad aint it?

anyway...off topic there.

Faisal Sheikh

Based on what is known so far

- 140 more horsepower/Much faster acceleration
- More luxurious/premium even the track edition with more exotic materials
- V8 high-revving sound/response
- Don't have to sacrifice practicality (even the track edition has the same backseats)

I can immediately debunk your first and your last points quick. I can sorta do the same with your second and third point. But your response is great!

I just thought of something smart recently. So everyone here in Lexus Enthusiast, think of it like this. This Supra that we all saw is like the BASE MkIV Supra (2JZ-GE which made 220 hp) has 340 (I honestly think this is underrated as hell or there is something odd going on) horsepower. Imagine if it had more power and torque like the Supra Turbo? That's what the GRMN/alpha/Motomachi car will be like. It will kick the RC F's ass. By the way, "much faster acceleration"? Come on bro they're exactly the same. Like exactly the same. The Supra is actually faster.

Now regarding it being more luxurious I cannot deny that whatsoever, but I don't even consider that because that's not what the Supra is trying to be. It is premium (because Supra) and it has plenty of exotic materials and high-level engineering (because race car).

I feel like I am one of the few in the world who LOVES six-cylinder engines. You have to be honest discussing sound isn't a really good metric in terms of performance and objectivity. The B58 and the future variations of the Supra are pretty damn responsive. I know subjective opinion is also big as well, but we're talking about competition here.

The Supra has a great boot. It is practical. Definitely not as practical as the RC F but what do you expect it is a much smaller car right?

- - - - - -

Do you see where I am coming from now? While your 2nd, 3rd and 4th arguments are very valid, in the grand scheme of sports cars, I personally don't feel that they're strong enough to say it is better than the Supra as a whole. However I must commend you, that was a good rebuttal.

I like friendly discussions so you may go on if you please. :)

Faisal Sheikh

Based on what is known so far

- 140 more horsepower/Much faster acceleration
- More luxurious/premium even the track edition with more exotic materials
- V8 high-revving sound/response
- Don't have to sacrifice practicality (even the track edition has the same backseats)

I can immediately debunk your first and your last points quick. I can sorta do the same with your second and third point. But your response is great!

I just thought of something smart recently. So everyone here in Lexus Enthusiast, think of it like this. This Supra that we all saw is like the BASE MkIV Supra (2JZ-GE which made 220 hp) has 340 (I honestly think this is underrated as hell or there is something odd going on) horsepower. Imagine if it had more power and torque like the Supra Turbo? That's what the GRMN/alpha/Motomachi car will be like. It will kick the RC F's ass. By the way, "much faster acceleration"? Come on bro they're exactly the same. Like exactly the same. The Supra is actually faster.

Now regarding it being more luxurious I cannot deny that whatsoever, but I don't even consider that because that's not what the Supra is trying to be. It is premium (because Supra) and it has plenty of exotic materials and high-level engineering (because race car).

I feel like I am one of the few in the world who LOVES six-cylinder engines. You have to be honest discussing sound isn't a really good metric in terms of performance and objectivity. The B58 and the future variations of the Supra are pretty damn responsive. I know subjective opinion is also big as well, but we're talking about competition here.

The Supra has a great boot. It is practical. Definitely not as practical as the RC F but what do you expect it is a much smaller car right?

- - - - - -

Do you see where I am coming from now? While your 2nd, 3rd and 4th arguments are very valid, in the grand scheme of sports cars, I personally don't feel that they're strong enough to say it is better than the Supra as a whole. However I must commend you, that was a good rebuttal.

I like friendly discussions so you may go on if you please. :)

GoHuskers

Damn. I love both versions but man the Track interior is awesome.

@krew, your original article from this morning said it has 72 hp.

LOL, fixed.

thtupid

my issue with the track edition is the lack of "focus". I get it they want to have a car that is good for both on and off the track. But isn't that what the RC-F should be? I'd go so far to say that the RC-F should have all the upgrades made to the track edition (minus that hideous rear wing and put in something mechanical like the LF-A) and call that a day. For me (as a pure enthusiast with no mechanical knowledge whatsoever) the track edition should be extra hardcore. That means getting rid of a torque converter automatic and having a single or dual or manual clutch transmission, getting rid of the back seats, getting rid of some sound deadening, getting rid of some luxuries such as motorised seats (if there are any)...it should cut out at least 150kg. Not 65.

My thoughts echo this, in that I wonder if the Track Edition should have instead been a series of options to the standard RC F. Honestly, though, the market is likely higher for the full package rather than piecemeal upgrades.

I asked the RC F chief engineer if they had considered removing the back seats, and he explained that there was a specific weight reduction they were targeting as the optimal balance between performance and comfort -- that ended up being the 176lbs, no more no less.

GoHuskers

Damn. I love both versions but man the Track interior is awesome.

@krew, your original article from this morning said it has 72 hp.

LOL, fixed.

thtupid

my issue with the track edition is the lack of "focus". I get it they want to have a car that is good for both on and off the track. But isn't that what the RC-F should be? I'd go so far to say that the RC-F should have all the upgrades made to the track edition (minus that hideous rear wing and put in something mechanical like the LF-A) and call that a day. For me (as a pure enthusiast with no mechanical knowledge whatsoever) the track edition should be extra hardcore. That means getting rid of a torque converter automatic and having a single or dual or manual clutch transmission, getting rid of the back seats, getting rid of some sound deadening, getting rid of some luxuries such as motorised seats (if there are any)...it should cut out at least 150kg. Not 65.

My thoughts echo this, in that I wonder if the Track Edition should have instead been a series of options to the standard RC F. Honestly, though, the market is likely higher for the full package rather than piecemeal upgrades.

I asked the RC F chief engineer if they had considered removing the back seats, and he explained that there was a specific weight reduction they were targeting as the optimal balance between performance and comfort -- that ended up being the 176lbs, no more no less.

krew

Video: The Lexus RC F Track Edition

Ready to race.

View the original article post

krew

Video: The Lexus RC F Track Edition

Ready to race.

View the original article post

F1 Silver Arrows

By the way, "much faster acceleration"? Come on bro they're exactly the same. Like exactly the same. The Supra is actually faster.

Your post is ridiculous. I own an RCF and know how quick it is relative to other cars. Your claim on the other hand, is based on what? What is the 0-150 mph.?Is it quicker than 24 seconds? 0 - 200 km/h better than 14.5 seconds? 1/4 mile time of a Supra? Is it better than 12.5 seconds? Does it trap 114 - 115 mph? You are basically saying, a car with E46 M3 power-to-weight ratio is quicker than a car with 8.5 lbs/HP. At higher speeds, it is all about raw horsepower, gearing and aero.

This video is an example of a fast, big and technical track where the RCF with Christian Menzel in both around the track hits 235 km/h VMAX while the M2 with 365 HP/3400 lbs hits 225 km/h VMAX

F1 Silver Arrows

By the way, "much faster acceleration"? Come on bro they're exactly the same. Like exactly the same. The Supra is actually faster.

Your post is ridiculous. I own an RCF and know how quick it is relative to other cars. Your claim on the other hand, is based on what? What is the 0-150 mph.?Is it quicker than 24 seconds? 0 - 200 km/h better than 14.5 seconds? 1/4 mile time of a Supra? Is it better than 12.5 seconds? Does it trap 114 - 115 mph? You are basically saying, a car with E46 M3 power-to-weight ratio is quicker than a car with 8.5 lbs/HP. At higher speeds, it is all about raw horsepower, gearing and aero.

This video is an example of a fast, big and technical track where the RCF with Christian Menzel in both around the track hits 235 km/h VMAX while the M2 with 365 HP/3400 lbs hits 225 km/h VMAX

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

They actually are. I have a baby seat in the back. Groceries and even adults of average size can fit in the back without much issues.

Ian Schmidt

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

Ian Schmidt

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

They actually are. I have a baby seat in the back. Groceries and even adults of average size can fit in the back without much issues.

Ian Schmidt

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

Ian Schmidt

I'm not sure the RC's back seats are practical in any form :cool:

In the Supra's favor, the driving dynamics of the BMW version have been universally praised, and you inherit all the BMW tweakability that they're known for (and that Toyota/Lexus isn't).

Both cars will have bystanders literally dropping whatever they're doing to take pictures!

Faisal Sheikh

Your post is ridiculous. I own an RCF and know how quick it is relative to other cars. Your claim on the other hand, is based on what? What is the 0-150 mph.?Is it quicker than 24 seconds? 0 - 200 km/h better than 14.5 seconds? 1/4 mile time of a Supra? Is it better than 12.5 seconds? Does it trap 114 - 115 mph? You are basically saying, a car with E46 M3 power-to-weight ratio is quicker than a car with 8.5 lbs/HP. At higher speeds, it is all about raw horsepower, gearing and aero.

This video is an example of a fast, big and technical track where the RCF with Christian Menzel in both around the track hits 235 km/h VMAX while the M2 with 365 HP/3400 lbs hits 225 km/h VMAX

I don't see why you have to get so worked up over this? I clearly asked you not to because I am trying to engage a friendly discussion based on facts. What you're mentioning above about speed times is something that the Supra hasn't been able to show us yet. It will hold it's own. I knew your bias would play a factor (and I cannot blame you whatsoever). The only argument that I can give you right now (not in a few years) is that it makes a lot of raw power helping its power to weight ratio. However we all know that aerodynamics is much more cohesive on the Supra (the engineers kept mentioning this) and the ZF auto has way faster gearing ratio (note I didn't say shift speeds) in other cars than the RC F's automatic. The biggest issue with the 8-speed (and even the 10-speed) is that the gearing ratios were always incorrect from the get-go, something that has been remedied with the Track Edition.

Everything that I am telling you right now is based on facts, on what has been said officially and performance measurements as well. I am not trying to induce an argument. We're a community and this isn't how we are conducting things. If you saw me being harsh before that is because it was at someone who is saying things just to get attention or they were throwing a personal jab.

I think it's better to say that we should wait. However I stand by my opinion that the Supra (and the GRMN/alpha car) will be a way more cohesive sports car. Because that's its purpose. To be a sports car. The RC F is an amazing GT like the M4/C63. The fact that a GT car will do a better job than a sports car is questionable in my humble opinion.

While the RC F in my opinion has a few demerits as an F car, there is no way I would take away the credit it deserves as a great luxury grand touring sports car. They're in completely different classes.

@mikeavelli and others said something very beautiful recently. Is that in such a crazy SUV market. In what is arguable one of the biggest shows in the world, all of Toyota/Lexus' reveals were all coupes. That's absolutely mind blowing.

That just goes for show how good they are as a company.

Faisal Sheikh

Your post is ridiculous. I own an RCF and know how quick it is relative to other cars. Your claim on the other hand, is based on what? What is the 0-150 mph.?Is it quicker than 24 seconds? 0 - 200 km/h better than 14.5 seconds? 1/4 mile time of a Supra? Is it better than 12.5 seconds? Does it trap 114 - 115 mph? You are basically saying, a car with E46 M3 power-to-weight ratio is quicker than a car with 8.5 lbs/HP. At higher speeds, it is all about raw horsepower, gearing and aero.

This video is an example of a fast, big and technical track where the RCF with Christian Menzel in both around the track hits 235 km/h VMAX while the M2 with 365 HP/3400 lbs hits 225 km/h VMAX

I don't see why you have to get so worked up over this? I clearly asked you not to because I am trying to engage a friendly discussion based on facts. What you're mentioning above about speed times is something that the Supra hasn't been able to show us yet. It will hold it's own. I knew your bias would play a factor (and I cannot blame you whatsoever). The only argument that I can give you right now (not in a few years) is that it makes a lot of raw power helping its power to weight ratio. However we all know that aerodynamics is much more cohesive on the Supra (the engineers kept mentioning this) and the ZF auto has way faster gearing ratio (note I didn't say shift speeds) in other cars than the RC F's automatic. The biggest issue with the 8-speed (and even the 10-speed) is that the gearing ratios were always incorrect from the get-go, something that has been remedied with the Track Edition.

Everything that I am telling you right now is based on facts, on what has been said officially and performance measurements as well. I am not trying to induce an argument. We're a community and this isn't how we are conducting things. If you saw me being harsh before that is because it was at someone who is saying things just to get attention or they were throwing a personal jab.

I think it's better to say that we should wait. However I stand by my opinion that the Supra (and the GRMN/alpha car) will be a way more cohesive sports car. Because that's its purpose. To be a sports car. The RC F is an amazing GT like the M4/C63. The fact that a GT car will do a better job than a sports car is questionable in my humble opinion.

While the RC F in my opinion has a few demerits as an F car, there is no way I would take away the credit it deserves as a great luxury grand touring sports car. They're in completely different classes.

@mikeavelli and others said something very beautiful recently. Is that in such a crazy SUV market. In what is arguable one of the biggest shows in the world, all of Toyota/Lexus' reveals were all coupes. That's absolutely mind blowing.

That just goes for show how good they are as a company.

^^^

It is because you are so smitten by Supra that you are not willing to look at objective facts that don't favor your argument. I stated the factual advantages to which you made it a point to counter the 140 HP advantage.

Again, I am not going to waste my time because you clearly don't understand fast cars. I don't think you will find a car with that power-to-weight doing 0-150 mph in 24 seconds or quicker, which is why I used the example of M2. The fact that you somehow think gearing magically will overcome a huge power-to-weight ratio deficit, is ridiculous. That is not how gearing works. The M2 example illustrates a car with similar size and better power to weight ratio, being slower by 10 km/h on a fast technical track.

Supra stock out of the box will not be close to the RCF as I stated especially at high speeds. You can take it to the bank. I will be sure to check back with you. 0-60 mph? sure 1/4 mile? probably a few tenths off. over 100 mph? no way. This is coming from someone who owns a fast car.

^^^

It is because you are so smitten by Supra that you are not willing to look at objective facts that don't favor your argument. I stated the factual advantages to which you made it a point to counter the 140 HP advantage.

Again, I am not going to waste my time because you clearly don't understand fast cars. I don't think you will find a car with that power-to-weight doing 0-150 mph in 24 seconds or quicker, which is why I used the example of M2. The fact that you somehow think gearing magically will overcome a huge power-to-weight ratio deficit, is ridiculous. That is not how gearing works. The M2 example illustrates a car with similar size and better power to weight ratio, being slower by 10 km/h on a fast technical track.

Supra stock out of the box will not be close to the RCF as I stated especially at high speeds. You can take it to the bank. I will be sure to check back with you. 0-60 mph? sure 1/4 mile? probably a few tenths off. over 100 mph? no way. This is coming from someone who owns a fast car.