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

[meth.ix]

I feel like they won't change much of the engine and more exterior dynamics for functional stuff like aero

 

[PeterF]

I feel like they won't change much of the engine and more exterior dynamics for functional stuff like aero

this would be unfortunate. They need to upgrade the suspension and driving dynamics if the car will get close to the handling of a 911. I like the NA V8, but it won't compete with the 911 GTS high reving 4 l flat 6 NA engine. It may not compete with the 991.1 3.8 L NA engine either unless the car is far lighter (I doubt if they will get the car lighter than 3600 lbs). Without a TT engine, it will not get near any of the 991.2 models

If all they do is some exterior cosmetic work (better aero and a little lighter) the car will not be impressive and won't be a car worth tracking. IMHO

 

[ssun30]

We don't know how much revving the 2UR could still get. I don't think they need to push really far to get over 500hp from the 5.0NA.

 

[PeterF]

We don't know how much revving the 2UR could still get. I don't think they need to push really far to get over 500hp from the 5.0NA.

Good point, my point is that if they are serious about making the RCF GT into a competitive track car, they need to attend to these issues. They cannot simply rely on the current tuning in the 5l NA engine. Porsche has done very well with their NA engines; I am sure Lexus engineers can do the same. They cannot simply make some cosmetic changes to exterior and expect the car to be competitive with corvettes, 911s and perhaps M cars as well

 

[meth.ix]

I would sort of view it as a competitor to the M4 GTS and C63 R. Not exactly Corvette ZR1s and 911 GT2s, but a slightly lower tier.

 

[PeterF]

I would sort of view it as a competitor to the M4 GTS and C63 R. Not exactly Corvette ZR1s and 911 GT2s, but a slightly lower tier.

I would not expect it to compete with the 911 GT2 or the ZR1, very few cars can compete with those. I would like to see it compete with the 911 GT3, but I have my doubts whether it can compete with a lower trim 911, such as a GTS or carrera S. It would be nice to see if compete with a M4 GTS, but I would have to see that to believe that. It's one thing to compete on a 0-60 straight or 1/4 mile, it's an entirely different thing to complete on the track, such as Leguna Seca or other tracks with significant turns. If all Lexus does is add the aero and make slight changes to the exterior without changing suspension, driving dynamics and aspects of the motor, I don't hold out much hope.

 

[F1 Silver Arrows]

RC F GT spotted testing in the Nürburgring Nordschleife a couple of days ago.


Skip to 9:40, 11:00, and 11:45. You can see the car hurtling itself down the straights. This car is so much more agile and is significantly more stable in high speed turns (which the standard RC F wasn't that bad at doing but wasn't amazing by any means). Most of all, it can carry much higher speed in the turns as well and the car looks like it is doing an amazing job at gripping the asphalt. Looks like there is still a little bit of understeer when taking the turn but it's not bad at all.

 

[PeterF]

RC F GT spotted testing in the Nürburgring Nordschleife a couple of days ago.


Skip to 9:40, 11:00, and 11:45. You can see the car hurtling itself down the straights. This car is so much more agile and is significantly more stable in high speed turns (which the standard RC F wasn't that bad at doing but wasn't amazing by any means). Most of all, it can carry much higher speed in the turns as well and the car looks like it is doing an amazing job at gripping the asphalt. Looks like there is still a little bit of understeer when taking the turn but it's not bad at all.

thanks for the post. It does look impressive in the corner and just prior to the corner. I'd love to read about some stats. Understeer is not a major issue. 911s have some understeer

 

[JJohn341]

That induction noise! one can hear that more than the exhaust.

 

[PeterF]

RC F GT spotted testing in the Nürburgring Nordschleife a couple of days ago.


Skip to 9:40, 11:00, and 11:45. You can see the car hurtling itself down the straights. This car is so much more agile and is significantly more stable in high speed turns (which the standard RC F wasn't that bad at doing but wasn't amazing by any means). Most of all, it can carry much higher speed in the turns as well and the car looks like it is doing an amazing job at gripping the asphalt. Looks like there is still a little bit of understeer when taking the turn but it's not bad at all.

That induction noise! one can hear that more than the exhaust.

WOW, watched it again. It really does look impressively stable through the corners. impressive!

 

[ssun30]

Understeer is the result of the driver pushing it really hard. The way he/she threw the RC-F GT into the corner so abruptly looks like they are testing the limit.

Also, the RC-F, LFA, along with the 992 are the only cars that you can tell coming before they pass by. Other cars are just, turbo vacuum cleaners, including the Supra.

 

[F1 Silver Arrows]

Understeer is the result of the driver pushing it really hard. The way he/she threw the RC-F GT into the corner so abruptly looks like they are testing the limit.

Also, the RC-F, LFA, along with the 992 are the only cars that you can tell coming before they pass by. Other cars are just, turbo vacuum cleaners, including the Supra.

Yes, that is true in one regard but understeer does not only occur from pushing the car really hard. You also need to take note that suspension, shocks, camber, amount of dialing and overall chassis setup really matter in regards to how car turns into a corner. The RC F's poor architecture since its inception is the issue. Take a look at the IS F and GS F, they were very neutral on the turns in racetracks or even on normal roads, and that is all because of an amazing, taut, stiff and well balanced chassis. While yes, the driver plays a crucial role in regards to the car going into an oversteer or understeer, depending how much they dial in the steering wheel or try to induce a drift into a corner, that is nothing in terms of significance to the role of the engineers and mechanics with the chassis tuning.

 

[ssun30]

Yes, that is true in one regard but understeer does not only occur from pushing the car really hard. You also need to take note that suspension, shocks, camber, amount of dialing and overall chassis setup really matter in regards to how car turns into a corner. The RC F's poor architecture since its inception is the issue. Take a look at the IS F and GS F, they were very neutral on the turns in racetracks or even on normal roads, and that is all because of an amazing, taut, stiff and well balanced chassis. While yes, the driver plays a crucial role in regards to the car going into an oversteer or understeer, depending how much they dial in the steering wheel or try to induce a drift into a corner, that is nothing in terms of significance to the role of the engineers and mechanics with the chassis tuning.

That was exactly my point. Understeer can be suspension setup or driver input. There really isn't any conclusion we can get from a video clip. The drivers know what they are doing. The way I interpreted these clips is that the driver was testing the car's steering behavior under rapid increase of steering angle (which is not something that one should do in any type of driving on tarmac, by the way). You can interpret it as a suboptimal setup. Either could be correct.

 

[krew]

krew

New Lexus RC F GT Prototype Spotted at Nürburgring

Testing continues.

View the original article post

 

[LexusSteve]

That recent LFA Prototype has camouflage in similar areas, this updated RC F GT prototype seems to have that same widebody treatment on it... Combined with that fixed wing...

Lexus RC F Nürburgring Edition?

Couldn't Be... Could it?

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

RCF is much longer than the LFA. That LFA mule was some sort of LFA variant. This RCF GT is different from that Nurburgring Edition LFA mule that was testing

That recent LFA Prototype has camouflage in similar areas, this updated RC F GT prototype seems to have that same widebody treatment on it... Combined with that fixed wing...

Lexus RC F Nürburgring Edition?

Couldn't Be... Could it?

 

[krew]

That recent LFA Prototype has camouflage in similar areas, this updated RC F GT prototype seems to have that same widebody treatment on it... Combined with that fixed wing...

Lexus RC F Nürburgring Edition?

I like this idea, naming the RC F GT the Nürburgring Edition. Would add some class.

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

The RC F's poor architecture since its inception is the issue. Take a look at the IS F and GS F, they were very neutral on the turns in racetracks or even on normal roads, and that is all because of an amazing, taut, stiff and well balanced chassis

I own an RCF and "poor architecture" has absolutely baseless. The front end especially with TVD is extremely sharp. Yes, the chassis was derived from three chassis sections and took a lot of flack for being "frankenstein", but it is still engineered as unibody chassis with laser screw welding for high rigidity. The end result when I am pushing the car, is still very high torsional rigidity and a phenomenal chassis and I am very pleased Lexus is taking it forward as the platform of choice for the first track oriented F car after the LFA. The middle section has reinforcements in the door panel. The only downside was, the added reinforcements added weight. Since RCF has very low center of gravity and roofline (18 inches with the carbon roof), all of that weight is concentrated near the bottom of the car.

The TVD in RCF makes it more bias towards being tail happy as it rotates the rear (which I have on my carbon RCF) as long as the driver feeds in the power. 'Slalom' mode makes the car feel like a small, short wheelbase car with very high maneuverability at slower/moderate speeds while 'track' mode is for high speed agility. It is optional on RCF, but standard on GSF.

Where the GS F felt firm and planted, the RC F felt like it wanted to be driven hard. Using the same 467-hp, 5.0-liter V-8 engine, the RC F powered aggressively through corners on the Chuckwalla Valley Raceway. With its smaller dimensions, the drive was more aggressive, enabling the driver to push the limits even further than the GS F. Because the GS F is larger and heavier, even if it's only by roughly 80 pounds, it didn't offer as sporty of a drive as the RC F. When it comes to driving on the track, hands down, the RC F is the way to go.

https://www.motortrend.com/news/gs-f-versus-rc-f-5-reasons-choose-sedan-coupe/

Above all, RCF has lap times quicker on majority of the tracks over the GSF or the ISF. This AMS Germany same driver, same track case (AMS Germany) is one example

On a big track, RCF is full 3 seconds/lap faster than the GSF

Lexus RCF: 1:56.4 VMAX: 235 km/h
Lexus GSF - 1:59.5 VMAX: 232 km/h



This early 2014 carbon RCF prototype was going through benchmark testing while being chased by an ISF test car. The gap is clear

 

[mikeavelli]

I've learned a bit more about this vehicle and I am REALLY excited for the updates. So much so I can see it in my garage. Expect some pleasant surprises!

I own an RCF and "poor architecture" has absolutely baseless. The front end especially with TVD is extremely sharp. Yes, the chassis was derived from three chassis sections and took a lot of flack for being "frankenstein", but it is still engineered as unibody chassis with laser screw welding for high rigidity. The end result when I am pushing the car, is still very high torsional rigidity and a phenomenal chassis and I am very pleased Lexus is taking it forward as the platform of choice for the first track oriented F car after the LFA. The middle section has reinforcements in the door panel. The only downside was, the added reinforcements added weight. Since RCF has very low center of gravity and roofline (18 inches with the carbon roof), all of that weight is concentrated near the bottom of the car.

Unfortunately the media just went ham on the RC F weight and that it has 3 platforms together and people just beat a dead horse over and over. 5 years later I hear the same arguments about weight. The RC F still drives pretty damn good.

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

RCF came out at a time when M4 was being touted as being very lightweight (compared to the E92/E90). BMW was officially quoting the dry weight of 1500 KG while RCF was being put at 1800 KG. The actual weight difference is much less at 182 KG (400 lbs). Still quite a lot, but not nearly as much as Sutcliffe, Chris Harris or Clarkson were quoting in early reviews. Even when RCF had a photo finish against the M4 running almost identical lap times with Randy Pobst, it still was said to be not as "playful" as the M4 beyond 10/10ths.

Funny I approached the drive of the RCF Carbon/TVD (which I ended up buying), with the same skepticism in mind thinking it will "feel" heavy, but was blown away once I pushed it hard through turns. I ended up deciding to buy it the next day.

GSF came well after the RCF and was praised a lot more than the RCF in the early reviews based on subjective driving impressions. Unfortunately, these type of fair reviews below started coming out many years after the RCF was launched. People still look at Harris and Clarkson reviews to draw impressions on a car. The damage was done.

I've learned a bit more about this vehicle and I am REALLY excited for the updates. So much so I can see it in my garage. Expect some pleasant surprises!



Unfortunately the media just went ham on the RC F weight and that it has 3 platforms together and people just beat a dead horse over and over. 5 years later I hear the same arguments about weight. The RC F still drives pretty damn good.