1st Generation Lexus RC 300, 350, F and Track Edition Megathread

Messages
2,344
Reactions
3,797
RCF is faster on majority of the race tracks and has better raw handling, objectively. I don't want to start listing all of them out. Like I said, there are many tracks with the same driver, same conditions and same track. RCF is supposed to compete with the M4 so it should be. The raw handling numbers are completely apart and disagree. Peak raw handling numbers of 0.98g for the RCF vs 0.93g for LC500.

You can see from these comparisons. There are many more. RCF is the better handling car and I actually found LC500 to feel very big, very heavy and rather on the softer side like a luxury GT car. The 10 speed, luxury, exhaust note. exterior, interior design etc, are all superior on the LC500. Again, those are my personal experiences.





I posted this above, RCF did a 1:39.5 with the older inferior Super Sport tires (in a comparison to M4's 1:37.8) to 1:37.9 for the RCF track edition. The LC500 on the same track ran a 1:41.06

View attachment 4679


View attachment 4680



View attachment 4681

View attachment 4682

There are a couple of elements that discredits your claim of the RC F being that much more advanced than the LC500 in terms of performance numbers. A glaring example is that there are many examples where the LC 500 has hit 60 mph quicker than 4.7 seconds. Not that it matters anyways.

Given that the LC is a solid 400 lbs heavier than the RC F, even with those numbers which gives the LC some room to perform even better, the LC isn't doing that bad.

For what it is, the RC F isn't really spanking the LC. It has be doing at least 1/2 a second faster to 60, and also carry more momentum faster as it is lighter than the LC. The laptimes proves little in favor of the RC F Track Edition/Fuji Speedway edition given how Sachsenring is a pretty long racetrack that values horsepower with the long straights.

There's also an element as to what's making the LC insanely competitive is it's brilliant chassis tuning that's hands down more balanced than the RC F and the 10-Speed automatic transmission that shifts as fast as a dual-clutch when pushed hard, and when not pushed hard, it just slides into the next gear elegantly. The RC F's 8-Speed is quite good when you see its application in the RC F Track Edition/Fuji Speedway Edition, but the older RC F, despite the fact that the 8-Speed was relatively sharp and COULD fool you into thinking it's a early design ZF 8-Speed automatic, the difference between the 8-Speed and 10-Speed are night and day.

For example, compare the BMW M340i to the BMW 840i Coupé. The latter weighs many more hundreds of pounds more than the former, so obviously there will be a disparity in performance, and in this case, there is. The M340i dashes to 60 an entire second faster than the 840i. And that isn't even the full-blown M3. I compared the M340i and the 840i Coupé because they share the same engine, just like the LC and the RC F do. If anything, the RC F should be faring a lot better compared to the German competition if you're talking numbers because that Frankenstein architecture just creates a really non-cohesive experience.

But y'all are being fixated on something that doesn't matter. Of course specs like 0-60, figure-8's, lap times, brake tests, and everything performance related matters because it's a performance car, and they're a valid data point to then judge a car with relation to the car's competitive set. The LC punches way above its weight (when comparing to a 850i, S560). The RC F doesn't (when comparing to a M4, C63S, CT4-V Blackwing).

Again. Performance numbers are insignificant when you compare it to the experience, as @Gecko and @mikeavelli continue to stress.

The RC F is a decent car when you push it, but you get a jarring ride that gives you the impression that the car drives like its nervous. However on a beautiful road, where the RC F can truly show its duality of being a performance/luxury car when you're not pushing it 9/10ths or 10/10ths, and that's where it shines. The TVD gives it then necessary jazz it needs and the V8 sings to 7100 RPM on the straights. It's a solid handling car with great seats, and a relaxed ride when you're not worried about trying to chase the M4 that's ahead of you. It's surprisingly a confident driving car and can coax you to driving really fast.

The LC however IMO, does all of the above and does it better, while not being an F product. Most of that is only because of the chassis design. A luxury car first and foremost, but is insanely capable and can set some amazing times on a racetrack. But that's not what its meant to do. The LC500 was meant to give you so many smiles per mile while still being really good in terms of performance when you compare it to its competitive set. It doesn't care about being the fastest, most aggressive car out there. It takes the high road by having the best chassis, transmission and engine, all in a gorgeous exterior and sumptuous interior. It's refreshingly slow.

Had Lexus built the RC F to be a true coupé based on the New N platform (without having to fuse 3 architectures in one) then I genuinely wouldn't think this argument would've been happening today. However, we know that the RC F needed to be built in the way it is currently built for the sake of rigidity, but it just has a couple of compromises. Is it a really big deal? No! Just enjoy the god damn car! It's a great package altogether. The LC with the TNGA platform is simply a masterpiece. You even get reviewers giving the LS critical acclaim for being an amazing handler thanks to the TNGA platform.

It's not all about the numbers guys, it's the experience and vibes that the car gives you. If it ain't your cup of tea for whatever reason, power to you, and I get why the RC F isn't a lot of people's cup of tea. I get why the GR Supra may not be some people's cup of tea. I get why a McLaren may not be someone's cup of tea either.

It. Just. Doesn't. Matter.
 
Last edited:

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
You literally proved my point. They are fairly equal on the track. Thanks for posting the lap times.

2 - 3% lap time difference "are not the same". That is a few car lengths at the finish line. Although, we can agree the difference is not as big and smaller than what the weight difference would suggest.
 
Last edited:

mikeavelli

Moderator
Messages
7,045
Reactions
15,636
Another thing is rarity. When I brought the RC F out to meets and shows it was cool but rarely did people rush the car. I took it to a Lexus meet on Sunday and their jaws dropped. But the meet last night was special, I talked to so many young people who rushed to the car and had a ton of questions. One guy even left me message saying I made his night (you can see it on my Instagram story).

That is another awesome part of the Track/Fuji editions... rarity...
 

Attachments

  • 9EEE4788-35FB-42D5-8181-9585121CB221.jpeg
    9EEE4788-35FB-42D5-8181-9585121CB221.jpeg
    594.7 KB · Views: 17
Messages
32
Reactions
19
Another thing is rarity. When I brought the RC F out to meets and shows it was cool but rarely did people rush the car. I took it to a Lexus meet on Sunday and their jaws dropped. But the meet last night was special, I talked to so many young people who rushed to the car and had a ton of questions. One guy even left me message saying I made his night (you can see it on my Instagram story).

That is another awesome part of the Track/Fuji editions... rarity...
the updated RC-F just looks very good overall, nevermind the track/fuji edition which is on a whole new level, the old RC-F design looks weird imo and would never buy used, altho I see lots on autotrader for 45k CAD for a 2015.
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
the updated RC-F just looks very good overall, nevermind the track/fuji edition which is on a whole new level, the old RC-F design looks weird imo and would never buy used, altho I see lots on autotrader for 45k CAD for a 2015.

Looks are subjective. Everyone perceives beauty different way. I personally like some of the updates better on the new one. However, attention is not any different for the pre-2020 one. Without any exaggeration, I get crazy amount of attention everywhere. People come and tell me how gorgeous and it is a dream car. Even passers by giving thumbs up. The color also has a lot to do with it, but it is a matter of perspective. Everyone is going to look at it differently.

RCF Outdoor 2.jpg
 
Last edited:

mediumhot

Follower
Messages
496
Reactions
644
Looks are subjective. Everyone perceives beauty different way. I personally like some of the updates better on the new one. However, attention is not any different for the pre-2020 one. Without any exaggeration, I get crazy amount of attention everywhere. People come and tell me how gorgeous and it is a dream car. Even passers by giving thumbs up. The color also has a lot to do with it, but it is a matter of perspective. Everyone is going to look at it differently.

I believe headlights were miles better sculpted and aggressive looking on pre-MCF. Yes you would need to scoop the snow in the morning but it's worth it :) New headlights are a bit off when it comes to angle they drop down, it doesn't follow the sheet metal right.
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
Best motoring RCF TE vs GT63 AMG

RCF does a respectable 27.3 seconds on the Gunsai Touge (for reference, stock M4 did in 27.8 and modified MCR RCF did in 26.4). However, the GT63 AMG defies physics considering it is a lot bigger and many hundreds pounds heavier.

Power difference is not a big factor due to the tight turns. The electronics on the GT63 are incredible that make it do things, it should not be able to.

p.s. turn captions on for translation.


2015 comparison of ASSIST M4 vs MCR RCF

 
Last edited:

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
I personally think the GS F handles better than the RC F.

Objectively, RCF should be faster on the track compared to the GSF. Yaguchi san said, RCF was set up better for the track with bit stiffer chassis/suspension while GSF was better for comfort/space. GSF does get TVD standard, which is incredible in making it feel more responsive/nimble for its size. I have never driven an LSD RCF so I don't know how different it is vs my TVD RCF.

The biggest dynamic difference between the two is aspect ratio. Same width, but RCF is 1 foot shorter. Subjectively, the long wheelbase on the GSF gives more sense of security/predictability and easier control at the limits while the shorter wheelbase on the RCF will tend to be more instantaneous/twitchy and less stable (easier to understeer/oversteer), but will have higher/tighter cornering limits. I have had a few scary moments when my RCF almost twitched left into the median while cross-controlling it to switch lanes. Luckily, I simply lifted off the throttle to get hard engine braking without touching the brakes and the car snapped back in the direction of the steering.

FWIW, numbers on sustained cornering grip on the skidpad for GSF is 0.93g and 0.98g for the RCF.



 
Last edited:

mikeavelli

Moderator
Messages
7,045
Reactions
15,636
I personally think the GS F handles better than the RC F.

I agree with this too. Easier to drive at the limits and standard TVD. The bespoke platform is all the difference. But I do think the track edition > GS F. That thing is magical lol.
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
I agree with this too. Easier to drive at the limits and standard TVD. The bespoke platform is all the difference. But I do think the track edition > GS F. That thing is magical lol.

GSF is the same legacy platform as the GS450h/GS350/GS200t. Personally, I favored sedan over coupe due to two kids and was looking into buying a GSF initially. While TVD is magical, at 194 inches the GSF still felt just too big and on the softer side for my taste. I wanted a smaller/compact size and more sportier feeling high performing car.

In the end, the smaller size, seating position of the RCF, 100 lbs and the firmer chassis/suspension setup made me compromise on the 2 extra doors. Then, I bought an RX450h to split the role. I believe in the saying "can't have your cake and eat it too". There is a compromise always.
 
Last edited:

Demetrius

Founding Member
Messages
145
Reactions
216
I personally think the GS F handles better than the RC F.
Same.

I drove both back to back before making my purchase and it's amazing how at roughly the same weight for a TVD equipped RC F and a GS F, the GS F just drives much smaller than it is, as to where the RC F weight is felt a bit more. Both still great machines. I would up purchasing a GS F and glad I got it before it got the axe
 

mikeavelli

Moderator
Messages
7,045
Reactions
15,636
GSF is the same legacy platform as the GS450h/GS350/GS200t. Personally, I favored sedan over coupe due to two kids and was looking into buying a GSF initially. While TVD is magical, at 194 inches the GSF still felt just too big and on the softer side for my taste. I wanted a smaller/compact size and more sportier feeling high performing car.

In the end, the smaller size, seating position of the RCF, 100 lbs and the firmer chassis/suspension setup made me compromise on the 2 extra doors. Then, I bought an RX450h to split the role. I believe in the saying "can't have your cake and eat it too". There is a compromise always.

the 4th gen is a new platform. Nothing shared with the 3rd gen. I’ve owned both and the 4th gen makes the 3rd gen feel like a brick.
 

Gecko

Administrator
Messages
4,911
Reactions
11,848
If I recall correctly, 3rd gen GS and 2nd gen IS were on the "N" platform, and the 4th gen GS and 3rd gen IS are on the "New N" platform.

How Toyota labels a platform is still a bit murky, but they do seem different.
 

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
If I recall correctly, 3rd gen GS and 2nd gen IS were on the "N" platform, and the 4th gen GS and 3rd gen IS are on the "New N" platform.

How Toyota labels a platform is still a bit murky, but they do seem different.

I know. All I am saying is, the 4th gen platform was developed more than a decade ago.
 
Last edited:

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
760
Reactions
1,375
Same.

I drove both back to back before making my purchase and it's amazing how at roughly the same weight for a TVD equipped RC F and a GS F, the GS F just drives much smaller than it is, as to where the RC F weight is felt a bit more. Both still great machines. I would up purchasing a GS F and glad I got it before it got the axe

RCF is about 100 lbs lighter. I agree the GSF drives very well for its size. It is absolutely an amazing car considering the space and luxury. Great choice. No arguments there.

1616617381370.png


1616617461511.png


My carbon/TVD RCF on the weight station scale (3950 lbs with 25% fuel and no driver)


thumbnail_DSC_0190.jpg
 
Last edited: