Is the Lexus LFA ready for the supercar world?

[Zpectre]

Originally Posted by GTR

Fix'ed.

So basically they used shorter gears to keep the RPM up. Makes sense.

You have a point.

Originally Posted by GTR

Not all of their models are unreliable...but my point was that things change. Chevy, with the exception of their low end "budget" cars, has actually been making fairly decent cars. In fact Buick has scored very well in JD power's list and its near the top of the list with Lexus, Toyota and Lincoln. And look here, Hyundai makes the top list, while the consumer reports guy calls VW and MB unreliable, despite their good reputation of reliable cars.

Fairly decent like the Camaro which was a disaster when first launched...

About Dubs and Mercs being unreliable... Americans are strange people. Maybe import owners are more demanding? Maybe a tour around VWVortex will say the contrary...

Originally Posted by GTR

So does mine, and so do I. But the way I see it, the gap is closing up real quick. Corvette isn't all that bad man, I mean I know it's not exactly luxurious but its what it was supposed to be. A sports car, decent comfort, and good performance.

I prefer fancier cars. See? It's all about preference.

Originally Posted by GTR

What's wrong with that?

But then again their Z06 also dominated when it came out, and that was "only" 505hp.

Dominated what? The 997 Turbo ties with it at the Ring while being much heavier and less powerful... And it's a much better car overall. No matter what people speak, I can't find anything too impressive about the Corvette other than performance for the cost. It's a good sportscar but it doesn't rock my world.

[Indigo]

Are you kidding? The Z06 is mostly crap. It has a shoddily-built interior, isn't very visually exciting, etc.

The only remotely interesting feature is the heads-up display, but that's on the C6 in general.

Don't get me wrong–it's a great value. But it's not much compared against a Porsche or a Ferrari in terms of long-term enjoyment.

[TenPoundBurrito]

@Indigo - I agree with you on one thing: the Corvette's interior and build quality leave something to be desired. Bear in mind, however, that before the 1990s, the same was said about Ferrari and Lamborghini build quality, but the debut of the incredibly reliable (for a supercar) Acura NSX had them scrambling to fix that, which they've done admirably.

Also, you're right about the Corvette being a great value in terms of price versus performance, but I'm not so sure on it being worse than Ferrari on long-term enjoyment. It's very common to see Corvettes, as well as Porsches of all kinds, with over 100,000 miles of "enjoyment" on them. However, a Ferrari or Lamborghini with that many miles is a rarity. Even ones with more than 50,000 are hard to find in driveable condition. The reason is simple - the Corvettes are built better and designed to last longer, thus bringing more enjoyment to the driver. Also, when it does break, I'm yet to see Carquest or NAPA offering Ferrari engine rebuild kits. Corvette drivers are often hands-on people, especially those into restoring them.

Interesting note on the LFA - a recent Car & Driver test found that their tester LFA had clutch and transmission issues in automatic mode, with the clutch slipping and the transmission searching for gears. Sounds abnormal for a Lexus, don't it? They did say it could be attributed to the fact that it was a preproduction model, but that still makes me wonder.

[Ricochet]

Originally Posted by TenPoundBurrito

Interesting note on the LFA - a recent Car & Driver test found that their tester LFA had clutch and transmission issues in automatic mode, with the clutch slipping and the transmission searching for gears. Sounds abnormal for a Lexus, don't it? They did say it could be attributed to the fact that it was a preproduction model, but that still makes me wonder.

After hearing so much about Lexus, I'm not surprised

[GTR]

Originally Posted by Zpectre

I prefer fancier cars. See? It's all about preference.

I see.

And I'm fine with anything long as it doesn't break my ass.

Dominated what? The 997 Turbo ties with it at the Ring while being much heavier and less powerful... And it's a much better car overall. No matter what people speak, I can't find anything too impressive about the Corvette other than performance for the cost. It's a good sportscar but it doesn't rock my world.

Yeah I guess not...but still, the world was pretty impressed by how far an OHV can go in a production car.

I personally like larger V8s because:

1. The sound. Especially in mid range rpm. Just makes you feel you're 4 years old all over again. By the time its at 7,000rpm you're, quite literally, the perfect demonstration of what is called RAGE.
2. Low end torque. Imagine enjoying a train-like constant acceleration without making too much noise. Simply push the pedal down more than half and inch, let it shift up, and even at very low rpms you're accelerating pretty good. It's very much like Mercedes (my favorite European car manufacturer).
3. Image. Confidence comes standard with all muscle cars, girls are optional.

I don't care for SUVs very much though. Even if they do come with V8s.

[Zpectre]

Originally Posted by GTR

Yeah I guess not...but still, the world was pretty impressed by how far an OHV can go in a production car.

Ha! It still needed a 7 litre engine to produce only 500 bhp, despite being able to rev up to 7000 rpm (I believe the Corvette engine was the first street OHV to rev that high).

[GTR]

Originally Posted by Zpectre

Ha! It still needed a 7 litre engine to produce only 500 bhp, despite being able to rev up to 7000 rpm (I believe the Corvette engine was the first street OHV to rev that high).

lol...So I guess the OHV engine in the SSC Ultimate is 14 liters? And the 8000HP OHV engines in the top fuel dragsters prolly have 112 liters to make that kinda power, huh?

Why it shouldn't have 7 liters? 201kg, 24mpg, small enough to fit. Am I missing something?

You mean the Corvette from the late 80s right? cause my LT1 can rev to 7000rpm. Easily.

[Zpectre]

Originally Posted by GTR

lol...So I guess the OHV engine in the SSC Ultimate is 14 liters? And the 8000HP OHV engines in the top fuel dragsters prolly have 112 liters to make that kinda power, huh?

Why it shouldn't have 7 liters? 201kg, 24mpg, small enough to fit. Am I missing something?

You mean the Corvette from the late 80s right? cause my LT1 can rev to 7000rpm. Easily.

Those are absurdly tuned engines. The OHC engines in F1 cars could reach 21000 rpm in 2006.

LS7 is all-aluminum, right? And naturally-aspirated. If it wasn't light...

Is your LT1 stock? From what I remember the Z28 in NFS (which was an LS1) couldn't reach 6500 rpm.

[GTR]

Originally Posted by Zpectre

Those are absurdly tuned engines. The OHC engines in F1 cars could reach 21000 rpm in 2006.

See, I don't understand all these rules. What's the big deal about size, rpm, hp/liter? Shouldn't results be the priority? I mean tuned or not, any engine can make more power if you feed more fuel and air to it, be it OHV, OHC, diesel, natural gas, ethanol,...it's all just a matter of what you want from it. In this case GM went with OHV instead of OHC even though they have a lot of OHC engines and they've seen good results from OHC as well (the C4 ZR-1). Pretty sure they had a good reason to choose the OHV over OHC.

LS7 is all-aluminum, right? And naturally-aspirated. If it wasn't light...

Another rule huh. What, using aluminum for an engine is cheating now? Seriously dude.

Is your LT1 stock? From what I remember the Z28 in NFS (which was an LS1) couldn't reach 6500 rpm.

I dunno dude, maybe the previous owner chipped it. Then again it's not easy reading the RPM when you're foot's all the way down

But yeah on Camaro forums they say you can set an LT1s rev limiter at 7200rpm with no problem, but then again, it's not like anyone would wanna go there. I mean it's not like it has VVT or turbo that'd require it to keep the RPM up.

[t3ku]

I declare this thread derailed.

[Ecstasic Seraphim]

I declare Zpectre as the winner.

Now all of you, get back to the LF-A!

[Zpectre]

More pics!










Doesn't justify spending $375,000, but it looks damn good. And it can be said it has a well-distinguished character in comparison with other sportscars. I'd surely own one even though it's a Lexus.

[Indigo]

Having seen it more in-depth I can safely say that I like its ass and that's it.

[Ricochet]

I like the whole design, and the interior is ok too. I wouldn't mind having one as well if it were cheaper.

[TwinTurboGTR]

New-age Supra in disguise. Or drag. Whichever you prefer.
Looks like it would sell for $200,000 MAX, honestly.

[GTR]

I've been staring at those pictures for a few minutes...I think it's a great overall design, ruined by a shitload of mistakes. There's no panel you can choose than you can say was done with no mistakes. It's just a mass of weird shapes. But it you just sit back, watch it as a whole...it does look nice in a very odd sporty way.

The wheels I'd say are the best parts.

The interior is good enough. The red seats resemble the SLR.

I declare Ecstasic as a fag. Does that make him so? Based on his logic, it does.

[Ecstasic Seraphim]

Originally Posted by GTR

I declare Ecstasic as a fag. Does that make him so? Based on his logic, it does.

Also, based on my logic, GTR stands for Great Tranny Retard, you.

[Ricochet]

GTR, let Ecstatic Seraphim have the last laugh for now , just for the sake of keeping this thread as it is.

The only problem everyone seems to be having with the LF-A is the price tag, so what do you guys think it should go on sale for? I'd say $100k-150k

[Primus]

Originally Posted by Ecstasic Seraphim

I declare Zpectre as the winner.

Originally Posted by Ecstasic Seraphim

Also, based on my logic, GTR stands for Great Tranny Retard, you.

Don't you feel stupid posting garbage like this after witnessing the informative debate between GTR and Zpectre? Especially since irony has it that you're the loser in this thread for having contributed nothing but pathetic insults taken from a 6-year old girl.

IMO, they're both winners and you're the only normal kid on this site that would lose in the Special Olympics.

[Ecstasic Seraphim]

Originally Posted by Primus

Don't you feel stupid posting garbage like this after witnessing the informative debate between GTR and Zpectre? Especially since irony has it that you're the loser in this thread for having contributed nothing but pathetic insults taken from a 6-year old girl.

IMO, they're both winners and you're the only normal kid on this site that would lose in the Special Olympics.

*Applauds*

Here's your bouquet. Now get lost!

[GTR]

Originally Posted by Ecstasic Seraphim

Also, based on my logic, GTR stands for Great Tranny Retard, you.

Having seen the products of that logic before, I don't see why I should be offended.

Anyways.

I'm not very fond of LF-A because, while Zpectre somewhat convinced me it has potential, IMO, to be prepared for the supercar world, it needs a much more aggressive expression. Should look sexier, should sound gruntier and louder, should have a zillion hp...this is too nerdy of a car to be anything. Kind of like the GT-R. Except, it doesn't even have the bargain price the GT-R had. The low price of GT-R gave it a chance to really show its potential to everyone and make a name for itself. So the high price tag of the LF-A will do its image as a performance car a serious damage.

While I stand by that, I see the point Zprecre is making. It surely isn't too harsh on the eyes, and in theory at least, it seems that it may have some potential.

This is what internet is for. Discussing things, researching, learning, teaching. I myself learned a lot.

[Ecstasic Seraphim]

Originally Posted by GTR

I'm not very fond of LF-A because, while Zpectre somewhat convinced me it has potential, IMO, to be prepared for the supercar world, it needs a much more aggressive expression. Should look sexier, should sound gruntier and louder, should have a zillion hp...this is too nerdy of a car to be anything. Kind of like the GT-R. Except, it doesn't even have the bargain price the GT-R had. The low price of GT-R gave it a chance to really show its potential to everyone and make a name for itself. So the high price tag of the LF-A will do its image as a performance car a serious damage.

While I stand by that, I see the point Zprecre is making. It surely isn't too harsh on the eyes, and in theory at least, it seems that it may have some potential.

This is what internet is for. Discussing things, researching, learning, teaching. I myself learned a lot.

Maybe they just put that high price tag and put a limited number to create a new generation of Lexus, move themselves from that usual feeling when you see a car branded with an L at the front - 'Oh, a Lexus. Nothing special.'

They want to dive into the supercar world, and as a first attempt, I'd say It's not bad.

[Indigo]

But the price is more like a car with history.

I'm tellin' ya, they need to lop off the 3 or it's a sunk ship.

[Bajan Shifter]

Originally Posted by Indigo

But the price is more like a car with history.

I'm tellin' ya, they need to lop off the 3 or it's a sunk ship.

Only making 3 wouldn't be that special for a car of this caliber.I think that they decided to go off with 500 units or how many they are making to be a little more unique than the rest. If they were to be a bit more like Lamborghini with their Reventon Roadster and made like up to 40-50 LFAs, the car would attract more attention, problem is, if they only went with up to 50 LFAs going at a price of like $200,000, they'd be gone already.

Not to mention the fact that developing this car cost more than what it costs and I can see why they put the price for the LFA that high so that they can get back the money they spent developing, testing, building and engineering. Besides, making a supercar ain't cheap.