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

Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
Unfortunately, people like to bash Lexus for making "slow, heavy cars", but reality away from the magazines/papers/press cars is very different. I realized it personally from driving as well.

This is an RCF vs M4 duel on the Fuji Speedway race track in the hands of two skilled drivers. They both have some basic mods. RCF has the Novel exhaust, in case you are wondering. As apparent in the video, the RCF does toe-to-toe with the M4. This is something that would never show up on paper in the magazines

 
Last edited:
Gecko

Gecko

Administrator
Messages
4,932
Reactions
11,902
^I think so much of the media and internet discussion is on 0-60 or 1/4 mile times, and in those instances, BMW's turbocharged motors have the advantage with low speed/low RPM acceleration, whereas the RC F needs to rev to make power. But once you reach the middle and upper part of the rev range when the 2UR is in it's power band... different ball game. The RC F was walking away from the M4 at the end of that straightaway.
 
Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
Gecko said:
^I think so much of the media and internet discussion is on 0-60 or 1/4 mile times, and in those instances, BMW's turbocharged motors have the advantage with low speed/low RPM acceleration, whereas the RC F needs to rev to make power. But once you reach the middle and upper part of the rev range when the 2UR is in it's power band... different ball game. The RC F was walking away from the M4 at the end of that straightaway.
Click to expand...

You are exactly right. 2UR in general, is like a Honda S2000 engine with more than twice the displacement. You need to rev it hard and start in the right gear. You can see the driver is constantly downshifting approaching a turn to make sure he is in the powerband to power out of the turn. BMW i6 TT have a huge midrange torque swell so gearing and rpms are less important because they have just so much torque available in the midrange. But, it makes the car more fun to drive since you have to really work hard for that big power (and the accompanying sound).

Also, he was keeping up in the turns against the M4 as well despite being much heavier. It all goes down to Lexus tuning of the chassis and suspension to be more stable and predictable in the turns. The front end, for example is the cheaper, inferior, lighter MacPherson struts on the M4 while the Lexus cars have the heavier, more modern and superior double wishbone shock design.
 
Last edited:
Smychavo

Smychavo

Follower
Messages
181
Reactions
192
Faisal Sheikh said:
Unfortunately, people like to bash Lexus for making "slow, heavy cars", but reality away from the magazines/papers/press cars is very different. I realized it personally from driving as well.

This is an RCF vs M4 duel on the Fuji Speedway race track in the hands of two skilled drivers. They both have some basic mods. RCF has the Novel exhaust, in case you are wondering. As apparent in the video, the RCF does toe-to-toe with the M4. This is something that would never show up on paper in the magazines

Click to expand...
It impresses me beyond belief over what Lexus' F engineers can do even with a platform that is publicly perceived as 'compromised'. The footage speaks for itself there, heck, even its GT3 counterparts are still up there competing for victories against Porsche and Lamborghini, BoP notwithstanding. I personally don't think there's any question to the capability of the car itself, it's genuinely great. If anything I lament the fact that the next generation certainly won't carry over the 2UR, it's a wonderful beast of a motor.
 
Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
Smychavo said:
It impresses me beyond belief over what Lexus' F engineers can do even with a platform that is publicly perceived as 'compromised'. The footage speaks for itself there, heck, even its GT3 counterparts are still up there competing for victories against Porsche and Lamborghini, BoP notwithstanding. I personally don't think there's any question to the capability of the car itself, it's genuinely great. If anything I lament the fact that the next generation certainly won't carry over the 2UR, it's a wonderful beast of a motor.
Click to expand...

Yeah, a lot of those perceptions are not rooted in reality. Reality is, end result is a heavily overengineered platform (which is why it ended up being "heavy"). It actually makes the car more predictable and easier to make it push higher limits when it is setup for very high G-loads. The GT3 RCF basically uses the same engine placement, engine, chassis and suspension components as a starting point as the road going version. The regulation restricts how much you can change from the road-going platform (homologation rules).

Here is a good technical example of what you would never see in the media/internet. This is why RCF is heavy while BMW ended up saving weight at the cost of rigidity and extreme load durability. While they save weight on the chassis, they over-compensate for it by giving it a very stiff suspension and also bolting the rear subframe directly to the chassis without any bushings. The RCF is the other way around. Chassis is very rigid, which means it does not need an overly stiff damper/spring setup.

The RCF rear subframe has been strengthened twice as much as that of the M4/M3 (F80/F30). There is both doubly reinforcements on the subframe laterally and reinforcements to the upper cross member. This is a picture of ISF, RCF and BMW rear subframe pictures. The explains why the chassis is heavier. This allows for more aggressive coil over setups for very high G-load in the RCF without risks to the subframe, which you cannot do with the BMW M because aggressive coil over setups result for extreme loads (especially in GT3 racing where cars generate heavy G-load) in too much stress on the rear subframe. The BMWs with aggressive coil over setups have a tendency to develop cracks in the rear subframe.

1640131999604.png

BMW:
1640132011557.png
 
Last edited:
Smychavo

Smychavo

Follower
Messages
181
Reactions
192
Faisal Sheikh said:
Yeah, a lot of those are generalizations not based on reality. Reality is, it is heavily overengineered (which is why it ended up being "heavy"). It actually makes the car more predictable and easier to make it push higher limits when it is setup for very high G-loads. The GT3 RCF basically uses the same engine placement, engine, chassis and suspension components as a starting point as the road going version. The regulation restricts how much you can change from the road-going platform (homologation rules).

Here is a good technical example of what you would never see in the media/internet. This is why RCF is heavy while BMW ended up saving weight at the cost of rigidity and extreme load durability. While they save weight on the chassis, they over-compensate for it by giving it a very stiff suspension. The RCF is the other way around. Chassis is very rigid, which means it does not need an overly stiff damper/spring setup.

The RCF rear subframe has been strengthened twice as much as that of the M4/M3 (F80/F30). There is both doubly reinforcements on the subframe laterally and reinforcements to the upper cross member. This is a picture of ISF, RCF and BMW rear subframe pictures. The explains why the chassis is heavier. This allows for more aggressive coil over setups for very high G-load in the RCF without risks to the subframe, which you cannot do with the BMW M because aggressive coil over setups result for extreme loads (especially in GT3 racing where cars generate heavy G-load) in too much stress on the rear subframe. The BMWs with aggressive coil over setups have a tendency to develop cracks in the rear subframe.

View attachment 5370

BMW:
View attachment 5371
Click to expand...
Quite the difference here between all of these, even in the IS F it looks pretty busy compared to the BMW, and that's a much older car to the F82 by comparison. On that note, I can't help but wonder why I continue to hear such mixed impressions on the vehicle. Just like I hear such different impressions on the Supra, it's no different here. Either it's an incredible driving machine, or it's being 'held back' on account of its weight. It's easy to see that the suspension is top-notch, the engine, excellent, I can't quite wrap my head around why it hasn't gotten the praise it seemingly deserves. It's a real cool car.
Least in the meantime I'm happy to say that I've seen a handful around town. Some visually modified, and I gotta say, they're quite a sight. Just wish I got to hear them rev. Oh well.
 
Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
Opinions are subjective. They are based on emotions of the person. Not necessarily the facts. People in general could have biases in favor or against something. You can see it in the FSW video where it defies what the narrative is in the reviews. That is why I said, media is generally unfair to Lexus cars especially from performance angle. Even LFA in the first several years, was very polarizing with people saying it was 3 times the cost of a 458 Italia, the single clutch etc. There is no explanation for what subjective opinions might be driven from.

For me, I personally have owned it for 4+ years and my own experience it is a blast. That is why I recommend people explore what they want to on their own and make decisions based on their own impressions. It is a car that needs to be really learned and understood especially the jekyll/hyde personality with SPORT+/MANUAL mode and TVD in slalom. Clarkson used the wrong 'expert' mode to try to make it drift and then complained when the ECU would cut power to the rear (when it easily can be with the right mode). 'Expert mode' is only meant for hot laps where small slip angles through throttle inputs are needed for rotation through turn. As I said to Gecko above, 2UR is an engine that requires a lot of work to access the power and goes against the easily accessible midrange torque of turbo engines, but that is what makes it so rewarding. Also, there are things like "feeling the size/weight", which is basically the long/bulging hood of the car and the heavy steering calibration in SPORT+ mode. I really love the heavy steering calibration as on the track it really means rapid steering lock corrections in the fast turns without the steering lag or overboosted effect. However, to some heavy steering at slow speed and streets would make it feel like a chore to drive. I personally like the heavy steering at slow speeds as well since it makes the car feel like a tame beast.

Smychavo said:
Quite the difference here between all of these, even in the IS F it looks pretty busy compared to the BMW, and that's a much older car to the F82 by comparison. On that note, I can't help but wonder why I continue to hear such mixed impressions on the vehicle. Just like I hear such different impressions on the Supra, it's no different here. Either it's an incredible driving machine, or it's being 'held back' on account of its weight. It's easy to see that the suspension is top-notch, the engine, excellent, I can't quite wrap my head around why it hasn't gotten the praise it seemingly deserves. It's a real cool car.
Least in the meantime I'm happy to say that I've seen a handful around town. Some visually modified, and I gotta say, they're quite a sight. Just wish I got to hear them rev. Oh well.
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
S

ssun30

Expert
Messages
3,551
Reactions
7,796
RC-F was easily beating the C63 and RS5 of its time on tracks and nobody complained these two were heavy and slow for some reason.

The new GT3 car and the base RC couldn't come soon enough. The new M4 is ugly and boring. The new C63 has four cylinders. This is a good time to deliver a final generation of ICE F car before the day finally comes.

The 2UR could have been improved a few years ago based on the GT3 engine design. Increase displacement to 5.4L and give it ITBs and dry sump. ~540PS should solve complaints 'it's slow in the straights'.
 
Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
ssun30 said:
The 2UR could have been improved a few years ago based on the GT3 engine design. Increase displacement to 5.4L and give it ITBs and dry sump. ~540PS should solve complaints 'it's slow in the straights'.
Click to expand...

Funny thing is, it is still plenty fast in the straights even in today's day and age. It is just you really need to know how to wring its neck out like I said above with the "8 Cylinder S2000 engine" like characteristics. For example, I held neck and neck back a few years ago on the highway with a C6 base Corvette. All I had was a full exhaust (but, so did the Corvette probably because it had a very burly noise to my car's high pitch noise). That is something the magazines numbers would not normally reflect.
 
Last edited:
Faisal Sheikh

Faisal Sheikh

Admirer
Messages
765
Reactions
1,383
Kind of odd review, but posting anyways. How,many people still don't realize Torsen LSD is standard on the base RCF and TVD is part of an optional package

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.