The Lexus LC F Megathread

[mikeavelli]

I've driven but the GT-R and LC on road and on track. First off you have to get a newer 2017+ GT-R with the updated interior and suspension. Now believe it or not new to new, its pretty apples to oranges. The LC loaded is 108k and the GT-R starts at 114k. To get an alacantara headliner like the LC you have to jump to the 125k anniversary edition. The GT-R is faster, louder, harsher, more of a driving event. Just an unbelievable car and even at its now higher price still an exotic killer. It also is something from 2008 or so. I still am in love with it.

The LC is a true grand tourer, much slower than the GT-R, not the track rat but the interior is jaw dropping, it still sounds good and it looks exotic. Handling wise, its damn good too.

Obviously I made my choice but if I could, a GT-R would be parked with the LC.

 

[PeterF]

Design wise, it has phenomenal chassis/suspension. Double wishbones and multi-link with all aluminum knuckles, arms etc. Sorry, but no way it will be 3500 lbs. Even LFA that was tiny at 176 inches and entirely carbon fiber, was not 3500 lbs with money no object. Most scales showed it was around 3580 lbs. You could start with LC500 at 4400 lbs and with all beefed up chassis/suspension components to handle all of that power with turbocharge plumbing weight etc., you could see where it will go. Rear seats being removed might shed about 100 lbs, but there will be lots of other weight adding items.

the 2017 corvette grand sport (and Z06) are 3500 lbs, and much much faster than the RC F and LC 500; granted they don't have any back seats, but lexus could make a much lighter one if they wanted. 991.1 and 991.3 Porsche 911s are less than 3400 (my 991.1 C2s was 3250 and it had a back seat; i own a 991.2 GT3 (no back seat) that weigh 3060. Anyway, I am sure the new LC F will be nice and exciting. I go to track evens a lot (about 40 track days per year) and I have seen an RCF once, and it could not compete, however, that is fine, it is not made for track events. Lexus makes and sells those to people who want comfortable luxury cars that go pretty fast, I used to be interested in the RCF and owned an LC500, but my preferences changed; but they are my preferences, not those of an average Lexus RCF or LC500 buyer. none is better, it just depends on what you want. I would not look at an LC F unless it was very fast and agile, and it won't be fast an agile if its heavy. but, that is just IMHO

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

The LC chassis is more than 1.5 foot bigger than a 991 GT3 and GT3 is RR layout (does not have a driveshaft etc,) You cannot compare that to an LC500 or the smaller RCF. You simply cannot change the architecture. That is my point. Not sure why you are comparing RCF to your GT3? That is a first. It does not even compete with a Carrera S, let alone GT3. RCF does well on the track relative to what it competes with.

The Corvette GS weighs 3500 lbs, but the test numbers I see are 12.2 - 12.4 secs vs 12.5 - 12.7 secs for the RCF. BTW, I weighed my RCF and it came out to be 3960 lbs with around 35% gas and all fluids

the 2017 corvette grand sport (and Z06) are 3500 lbs, and much much faster than the RC F and LC 500; granted they don't have any back seats, but lexus could make a much lighter one if they wanted. 991.1 and 991.3 Porsche 911s are less than 3400 (my 991.1 C2s was 3250 and it had a back seat; i own a 991.2 GT3 (no back seat) that weigh 3060. Anyway, I am sure the new LC F will be nice and exciting. I go to track evens a lot (about 40 track days per year) and I have seen an RCF once, and it could not compete, however, that is fine, it is not made for track events. Lexus makes and sells those to people who want comfortable luxury cars that go pretty fast, I used to be interested in the RCF and owned an LC500, but my preferences changed; but they are my preferences, not those of an average Lexus RCF or LC500 buyer. none is better, it just depends on what you want. I would not look at an LC F unless it was very fast and agile, and it won't be fast an agile if its heavy. but, that is just IMHO

 

[PeterF]

In what way better? How is RC F suspension bad?

its not that its bad, but its not as good in high speed corners as a 911, a C7 grand sport/ Z06, or M3/M4. Compared to these cars, the RCF (i am only aware of the 2018, not the 2019) rolls more in at high speeds in corners, it does not transfer weight as well when you have to brake at a high speed to turn into a corners, and the car does not get as easily planted when turning in corners. Of course a 911 is much more expensive, but the M3 and C7 grand sport are not. The best test of a suspension is at high speeds through corners. All that being said, the RCF is an excellent car. a friend of mine owns one as a daily driver and a Lotus as a track car. I am not dissing the car, I am saying that I am comparing it to other cars and that the LCF would have to have better suspension if I would consider buying it. that's all. A big problem with the RCF and the LC500 is weight. when the car weighs that much, the suspension has to be that much better to manage the weight through corners. The RCF is not built for regular track use (even the RCF track edition,which I think is a waste of money, is not built for track use). It is built to be a luxury sports coupe that looks great, sounds fantastic (i love that engine) and is pretty fast but no where near a 911 or C7 corvette GS or Z06. The 911, M3/4 and C7 corvette grand sport are built for the track. I own a C7 corvette grand sport and a 991.2 911 GT3. I like the looks of the new LC F (at least what I've seen). I would be tempted to buy one, but, like i said, it would have to be about 3500 and have much better suspension (and transmission, similar to the PDK or the new dual clutches in the C8 or the Mustang GT500)

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

RCF does fine relative to what it is supposed to do. With TVD and sticky Sport 4S, I can take long turns at 90+ mph without even feeling much. A lot of that is credit to the chassis and suspension tuning. The weight is because of the reinforcements to achieve much higher chassis rigidity. This telemetry data tells everything in the hands of a race car driver. While no one would say, it is a hardcore track car (nor is the track edition), 1.41G lateral acceleration turn on the mediocre OEM-version of the Super Sport tires is exceptional for what it is supposed to do (because the Pilot Sport 4S I have now are far superior).

It does a fine job for what it is supposed to do. Do everything well rather than being a focused track car.

 

[PeterF]

RCF does fine relative to what it is supposed to do. With TVD and sticky Sport 4S, I can take long turns at 90+ mph without even feeling much. A lot of that is credit to the chassis and suspension tuning. The weight is because of the reinforcements to achieve much higher chassis rigidity. This telemetry data tells everything in the hands of a race car driver. While no one would say, it is a hardcore track car (nor is the track edition), 1.41G lateral acceleration turn on the mediocre OEM-version of the Super Sport tires is exceptional for what it is supposed to do (because the Pilot Sport 4S I have now are far superior).

It does a fine job for what it is supposed to do. Do everything well rather than being a focused track car.

View attachment 4111

Hi Faisal, I really like your post, thanks!
I agree the the RCF is an excellent car and that it does what it is designed to do, plus it is extremely luxurious inside. I only mentioned the RCF in regards to the new LCF to say that the LCF should be lighter and have better suspension than the RCF (if i would be interested in it, that is). I was not comparing the GT3 to the RCF, i was comparing it to the LCF, the LCF will compete with the GT3, at least in price I believe. In regards to the RCF, and the corvette GS, the numbers you posted are straight-line 1/4 mile times which really don't capture the race - track differences between the cars. the best comparison is in the VIR Lightning Lap times, where the RCF track edition recently posted a 3:02, the LFA posted a 2:55.1 awhile ago, and the 2017 Corvette grand sport posted a 2:47.1; (M4 GTS did a 2:53) in that event there are clear differences between cars. BTW: the fact that the Lexus RCF GT Concept car posted a 2:43, which attests to the fact that Lexus could build a very fast car if they wanted. Of course speed isn't the whole story (the RCF GT was pretty stripped down) these speed difference are only realizable on a track, where very very few actually take their cars. Also, its important to note that differences between cars are more evident on some tracks than others (and some drivers than others: Probst is one of the best), depending on how many corners, types of corners, and lengths of the straights. thanks again for your posts. I know that it looks like I don't like the RCF; this is not true. I like the RCF a lot, and have been tempted to buy one for a daily, but I am a little crazy, i like cars too much, i have too many, and my wife would not be very happy. So, I am waiting.

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

VIR time are terribly inonsistent because they use different drivers for every car and every year they have a different pool of drivers. All of them are not professional race car drivers. Nothing like Randy Pobst. The owner of the LFA was super p*ssed when they ran a slow lap with the LFA and their excuse was, they did not want to push it because it customer's car. Roy said, he would have much rather brought in Scott Pruett. Randy Pobst did 1:36 with LFA and C7 GS at 1:35 with the same pro race car driver. Difference is, the LFA was on S001 Potenza street tires while the GS C7 was on Cup 2 slick racing tires.

The biggest difference in the lap times you are comparing are type of tires, which accounts for 3% variance of the lap times when you compare a car with Cup 2 or Trofeo R vs summer street tires. The gap looks a lot bigger because of that reasons since none of the Lexus F cars wear racing slick tires. As I stated above, my own experience with the OEM Super Sport on RCF was quite unfavorable. The tires designed for the RCF were soft I got extra load rated Pilot Sport 4S and they are infinitely superior to the OEM PSS. They are far more sharper, responsive with almost no perceptible roll because of the much higher reinforcements in the sidewalls. They almost feel like racing slick tires because I cannot break traction with these even turning at very high speeds.

Anyway, wanted to make a note that Lexus does not put such aggressive tires because all of their F cars are all-around cars. Even the track edition has rear seats and all of the luxury as well as street tires. I don't expect LCF to follow a different formula.

 

[PeterF]

VIR time are terribly inonsistent because they use different drivers for every car and every year they have a different pool of drivers. All of them are not professional race car drivers. Nothing like Randy Pobst. The owner of the LFA was super p*ssed when they ran a slow lap with the LFA and their excuse was, they did not want to push it because it customer's car. Roy said, he would have much rather brought in Scott Pruett. Randy Pobst did 1:36 with LFA and C7 GS at 1:35 with the same pro race car driver. Difference is, the LFA was on S001 Potenza street tires while the GS C7 was on Cup 2 slick racing tires.

The biggest difference in the lap times you are comparing are type of tires, which accounts for 3% variance of the lap times when you compare a car with Cup 2 or Trofeo R vs summer street tires. The gap looks a lot bigger because of that reasons since none of the Lexus F cars wear racing slick tires. As I stated above, my own experience with the OEM Super Sport on RCF was quite unfavorable. The tires designed for the RCF were soft I got extra load rated Pilot Sport 4S and they are infinitely superior to the OEM PSS. They are far more sharper, responsive with almost no perceptible roll because of the much higher reinforcements in the sidewalls. They almost feel like racing slick tires because I cannot break traction with these even turning at very high speeds.

Anyway, wanted to make a note that Lexus does not put such aggressive tires because all of their F cars are all-around cars. Even the track edition has rear seats and all of the luxury as well as street tires. I don't expect LCF to follow a different formula.

thanks for your responses. clearly you are a passionate RCF owner. like I said before, great car

 

[Faisal Sheikh]

thanks for your responses. clearly you are a passionate RCF owner. like I said before, great car

That is true. That is why I bought it. However, by the same token, I like to stick to objective facts as much as possible so that it could be as unbiased a point of view as possible.

 

[CRSKTN]

I wanted a car that could be fast and felt different. The M4 felt like a very fast 4 series. The AMGs are nice, but you can tell they structure and price them to be leased, and that's not my thing. Plus all the RGB and plastic surfaces turned me off. Look at Audi, but some of their user interaction stuff is just bonkers to me. Can't think of any examples, but I just kept thinking "this is so unintuitive". Maybe that just makes me the crazy one if they're known for intuitive details like how the indicators work, how you turn the wipers on/off, certain things it does automatically, etc.

It just felt like a different choice. Plus i grew up wanting an E92 M3 coupe, and the idea of a Lexus NA V8 RWD coupe that looked crazy, plus good value for money (imo), and it was sort of an on the spot decision.

A few years on, and absolutely no regrets. This thing has literally been no more headache than my IS350 was. I can drive it like a normal car. I've had people who hate loud fast cars ride in it, get anxious, and then once we set off they're like "oh... it's like a normal car" in traffic.

It also makes it a little more of a surprise when you kick them in the back of the head downshifting to 4k rpm and tapping the gas.

Plus, you can unchoke the engine and with a few easy modifications make it a very, very different handling car. I've got a set of lower control arms I am thinking of swapping again for OEM, but they just completely change the feel. It made it much closer to the sort of overzealous turn-in you'd get from the competition.

Mine has QOL stuff like sunroof, etc. No track stuff.

For the record, I have driven this in weather most drivers wouldn't want to take an SUV in, and it has somehow done the job. Good tires are the differentiator for all conditions.

I like the new one, but honestly after seeing the IS, they have set the bar really high for a dedicated, stylish coupe. The new IS is already pretty coupe like.

 

[CRSKTN]

RCF does fine relative to what it is supposed to do. With TVD and sticky Sport 4S, I can take long turns at 90+ mph without even feeling much. A lot of that is credit to the chassis and suspension tuning. The weight is because of the reinforcements to achieve much higher chassis rigidity. This telemetry data tells everything in the hands of a race car driver. While no one would say, it is a hardcore track car (nor is the track edition), 1.41G lateral acceleration turn on the mediocre OEM-version of the Super Sport tires is exceptional for what it is supposed to do (because the Pilot Sport 4S I have now are far superior).

It does a fine job for what it is supposed to do. Do everything well rather than being a focused track car.

View attachment 4111

People literally do not understand how small this performance difference effectively is, and IMO you get so so much in exchange.

That said, a lot of that equation is subjective, so i'd never hold it against someone for having done it differently.

 

[Levi]

In real world comparisons, of which car is faster, the most significant variable is the driver. But either you are a real pro driver (so do not need to prove anything), or you end on the sidewalk/bush like a number of Ms, AMGs, and Mustangs, which is wiser to avoid not to look stupid.

 

[mikeavelli]

People literally do not understand how small this performance difference effectively is, and IMO you get so so much in exchange.

That said, a lot of that equation is subjective, so i'd never hold it against someone for having done it differently.

Indeed. Michelin had those tires in 21" for the LC and not 22" so I went with Pirelli P Zero Nero. Well Michelin finally added some 22" sizes so I'm going to change to them. The front is 10mm wider (265/35/22 vs curren 255/30/22) so might need to change offset on the next set of wheels. But those tires are the standard and its worth it.

 

[Will1991]

Accordingly to CarSensor (and if Google Translate isn't fooling me), LC-F might have been canceled due to the Covid-19 crisis??

Toyota has stopped developing the LC-F. The company has officially started the project on the premise that it will be the highest peak of the Lexus and "F" brands as a high performance coupe since LFA.

However, this time it seems that the store has been decided.

There are several reasons for discontinuation. One is the selection of cost and manpower. It is inevitable that profits will deteriorate due to the prolonged new coronavirus.

Source: https://www.carsensor.net/contents/editor/category_849/_64943.html

It was chosen an EV model:

Unfortunately, the high-performance sports of the highest peak of Lexus have become a phantom one, but we are looking forward to the emergence of a project that survived after selection, an electric EV model and a GR supersport that draws blood of WEC participants Try.

But the V8 TT will live:

The LC-F was planned to be equipped with a 4L V8 turbo. There was also information that it would be a transaxle to optimize front-rear weight distribution. In other words, although it was an LC base, it was supposed to be designed almost exclusively.

In addition, this V8 has not only high performance version but also popular version. It will continue to be developed and will be installed in large pickups and SUVs exclusively for North America, and will be adopted in the LC500 with plans to be used in a minor change version.

NOTE: PickUps and SUV's for NA, Thundra and Sequoia V8TT???

At least they gave some hope towards the end:

*This is a forecast article regarding the announcement of new models as of June 19, 2020. We do not guarantee the announcement

 

[F1 Silver Arrows]

Accordingly to CarSensor (and if Google Translate isn't fooling me), LC-F might have been canceled due to the Covid-19 crisis??




Source: https://www.carsensor.net/contents/editor/category_849/_64943.html

It was chosen an EV model:



But the V8 TT will live:


NOTE: PickUps and SUV's for NA, Thundra and Sequoia V8TT???

At least they gave some hope towards the end:

I don't know what to say to all of this.

 

[super51fan]

I have a hard time believing this would cause it to be discontinued since they carried on with the LFA during a recession and it has been in the works for years now.

 

[Sebass]

I don't know what to say to all of this.

I do. If Lexus does not make the LC F, then the F brand is dead, and in my eyes so is Lexus. Hell, if they don't make an LC F, then I doubt the LC will live to see a second generation. The result will most likely mean no LS F either. LF-1 F though? Hells yeah brother! Honestly, if there really isn't going to be an LC F, then I have lost any and all enthusiasm in this brand, and I really don't have anything to look forward to. I know non of this is confirmed yet, but these rumors are never a good sign. I can't believe Lexus made a 100 million dollar plus racetrack, all to build a half-assed IS and performance SUVs. I am happy that there is a rumor that Pickups will get the TTV8, but honestly, I would rather have LC F than TTV8 Tundra. I can't believe Koji Sato would let this slide, the chief engineer of the LC, how could he let his baby die?
Once again, I know this is just a rumor and that fingers crossed, could possibly be fake, it is never a good thing to have rumors like this floating around. Please God, Please let this be fake, let those who started this rumor be drunks who lost all their brain cells smoking marijuana, who are forced to drive modern Mitsubishi's by their wives and want the happiness of others ruined because of it. Damn those guys... damn them.

 

[Levi]

I have hard time believing the new Landcruiser will get TTV8. On the other hand many LC are B7 armored, will the TTV6 be enough?

 

[Sebass]

Thinking about it more, I am starting to realize that this makes less and less sense. Koji Sato is the chief engineer of the LC, and now the President of Lexus. I just don't understand how he could let it die. After the LC's release, He in an interview with Top Gear stated that the LC's story was not over. He may have been talking about the Convertible, but I think not. In my eyes, the ultimate form of the LC was always supposed to be in F form. This is the only car in the lineup Sato can truly call his own, and I think he wants his project to be seen to completion. So many car journalists and automotive news organizations have spoken about the LC F, that I think Lexus is just going to let people down way too much with not making a high-performance variant of one of the only cars in its lineup that is widely liked by motoring journalists. But then again, the F brand has had only 4 models in its 13-year history, the GS is dead, and the new IS is only 25% new. I am 50/50 on whether or not the LC F is canceled.

 

[ssun30]

Back to the drawing board like LFA 1.0? If it was indeed cancelled it may be because they realized it won't be competitive anyway.

It's time to think big.