[mikeavelli]

Please Lexus DO IT!!!!

 

[maiaramdan]

!!!!!!!!
so many articles about so many different future plans
Guess when we will know the true one

 

[meth.ix]

Yes perfect output number for next-gen GS F, but then the LC F and LS F would need an even higher tuned variant of the engine, since they would be heavier. They would have worse performance than a "lesser" model. Then again, the E 63, is faster than the S 65 and S 63.

 

[RDS]

It's more likely to be in LS F rather than GS F, unless Lexus decided to make another GS.

 

[PeterF]

this certainly sounds good. I wonder how expensive a GSF (configured this way) would be. It will certainly up the price of the car substantially. Now the GS F is about $88k; I would think that it will be at least $30k more expensive (if not more) accounting for the new engine and platform (GAL). This would reduce the number of buyers who could shoulder such a cost. I just wonder how feasible it will be especially since it would be essentially similar to a Cadillac CTS-V, which goes for about $103k (with all the goodies).

 

[DDas]

So many different rumors for the GS...It makes it suspenseful almost for what the outcome will be. We all hope the GS stays - I personally think it should stay rather the ES take its place (but I understand why the ES would take its place - just dont like it).
Anyways, I have seen this rumor several times, so it makes me more confident for the sake of the GS! Come on, Lexus! Keep the GS!

 

[gecko]

These torque numbers seem low to me with a turbocharged engine. 600hp and 500lb-ft? If the car is going to deliver 600hp, I'd think the torque would be more like 550-650lb-ft.

 

[Dreski]

Alright.. alright... alright.. Alright!!! To see is to believe. GS [F] needs to be completely new and this power figure certainly makes ones Monday. Gotta up the game or be left behind. If you're planning on staying in this league. You need to be relevant @ Lexy.. (Im talking bout M5, E63 league).

 

[Ruksac]

I'm jaded at this point. To call GS sales flat would be an insult to all things that are flat. GS-F sales are in the toilet. With most people already believing that the demise of the GS is nigh, I hardly think this is a real option. Especially if the put a $120k price tag on it.

 

[Rob Grieveson]

It will be very expensive and possibly take Sales from the LS. Too many rumours need some new cars on the ground please Lexus.

 

[meth.ix]

These torque numbers seem low to me with a turbocharged engine. 600hp and 500lb-ft? If the car is going to deliver 600hp, I'd think the torque would be more like 550-650lb-ft.

Yes, I was thinking the same thing, but I saw someone say on a forum that the reason that the torque is so low for a turbo V8 is because this engine is essentially two 2.0t 4-cylinders joined together at 90 degrees. I'm not sure if this is true.

 

[james_m300]

doesn't do anything for me because torque is still low and the competitors will still be lighter and faster

 

[PeterF]

Yes, I was thinking the same thing, but I saw someone say on a forum that the reason that the torque is so low for a turbo V8 is because this engine is essentially two 2.0t 4-cylinders joined together at 90 degrees. I'm not sure if this is true.

Yes, I also read (somewhere) the same thing, ."this engine is essentially two 2.0t 4-cylinders joined together at 90 degrees."

I'm jaded at this point. To call GS sales flat would be an insult to all things that are flat. GS-F sales are in the toilet. With most people already believing that the demise of the GS is nigh, I hardly think this is a real option. Especially if the put a $120k price tag on it.

I agree completely. While I certainly want to see an upgraded GS and GSF with a TTV8, I have doubts about the feasibility for good sales figures


The whole GS mystery certainly has a bunch of us dwelling on the possibilities.

 

[CIF]

I'm with Gecko that those rumored numbers don't make sense for a twin turbo V8. That torque number is only a little bit higher than the V35A TT V6 in the new LS.

Yes, I was thinking the same thing, but I saw someone say on a forum that the reason that the torque is so low for a turbo V8 is because this engine is essentially two 2.0t 4-cylinders joined together at 90 degrees. I'm not sure if this is true.

God I truly hope not. If this rumored TT V8 ends up being two 8AR-FTS engines joined together, I'm just going to become a GM fan I swear.

 

[GoHuskers]

God I truly hope not. If this rumored TT V8 ends up being two 8AR-FTS engines joined together, I'm just going to become a GM fan I swear.

What is WRONG with two 2.0L joining together?

Let's see: the 2.0l I-4 is 235 hp and 258 ft lb. This rumor engine has 590 hp which is 2.5 times more than the 2.0. If we use the same math for the torque then we have more than 645 ft lbs. This is a monster, eh?

 

[gecko]

8AR-FTS is not a Dynamic Force engine, so there's simply no way that would happen.

 

[Levi]

I'm with Gecko that those rumored numbers don't make sense for a twin turbo V8. That torque number is only a little bit higher than the V35A TT V6 in the new LS.



God I truly hope not. If this rumored TT V8 ends up being two 8AR-FTS engines joined together, I'm just going to become a GM fan I swear.

8AR-FTS is not a Dynamic Force engine, so there's simply no way that would happen.

What is wrong with that?

The Toyota Land Cruiser's 4.5l V8 (1VD-FTV) is built from two 2.2l I4 (2AD-FTV). The latest Mercedes-AMG 4.0l V8 (M176/M177/178) that is now the performance engine of every AMG, be it sedan, SUV, or sportscar is built from two 2.0l I4 (M133), that started with the AMG A-Class and derivatives (CLA, GLA).

The whole BMW inline engines, from 3 to 6 cylinders, gasoline and diesel, Efficient Dynamcis or M Performance all have the same base. The new X3 M engine S58 is nothing more than modified I3 with double the cylinders count. What an engine based on has little to do with how the engine is engineered.

By the way, the 5.0l V8 (2UR) is at base not a pure performance engine either. It is the modifications (GSE) that count.

 

[gecko]

What is wrong with that?

The Toyota Land Cruiser's 4.5l V8 (1VD-FTV) is built from two 2.2l I4 (2AD-FTV). The latest Mercedes-AMG 4.0l V8 (M176/M177/178) that is now the performance engine of every AMG, be it sedan, SUV, or sportscar is built from two 2.0l I4 (M133), that started with the AMG A-Class and derivatives (CLA, GLA).

The whole BMW inline engines, from 3 to 6 cylinders, gasoline and diesel, Efficient Dynamcis or M Performance all have the same base. The new X3 M engine S58 is nothing more than modified I3 with double the cylinders count. What an engine based on has little to do with how the engine is engineered.

By the way, the 5.0l V8 (2UR) is at base not a pure performance engine either. It is the modifications (GSE) that count.

The AR 4 cyl dates back to 2008 and while it was revised for turbocharging duty in the 8AR-FTS, it's not a state of the art engine by any stretch. Lexus "doubling" a 10 year old economy-minded 4 cylinder engine to create a top-tier performance V8 doesn't really sound like a great idea to me.

I'm all for the modular engine designs that save money and engineering costs, but it is time for an all-new 4 cylinder. Thankfully, we have one in the A25A-FKS, and reviews of that engine on the Camry have been very positive. I am expecting all of these Dynamic Force engines to be state of the art with great performance - both in power and efficiency. AR has never been tops in either.

 

[mikeavelli]

Twin Turbos are usually not high revving and produce tons of torque. A tradeoff of the N/A 5.0 is a higher redline but lower torque. Also look at the 4.8 V-10 LFA....

 

[CIF]

8AR-FTS is not a Dynamic Force engine, so there's simply no way that would happen.

Excellent point, and I was going to post this myself but forgot until I saw your post on it. Due to this fact, I remain extremely skeptical of this particular rumor.