Lexus LF-CC / RC350 & RC-F

[Monogram]

Originally Posted by roybotnik

I was incredibly excited about the RC F until I heard about the weight. I love the styling and the Lexus brand, but there is no excuse for the weight.

I think the RC F's biggest problem is the GT-R. The GT-R weighs less, has superior performance, and is easily picked up with a few thousand miles on it for about the same price as an RC F. Yeah it would be used but you can't really argue with that performance bargain if you must have something Japanese. Considering the cramped rear seats of the RC F, it's hard to argue that it's any more versatile or more luxurious. The only real advantage would be the quality of Lexus's interior design.

In terms of RWD V8 cars, I would certainly go with the GT350. At the price there will be nothing else that compares to it, and the maintenance and parts will be very cheap compared to the M3, C63, RC F, etc. I will probably get one of them next year to replace the 2011 GT I had. The interior is great and I love the styling. And at 47k it makes the powered-up luxury base models on offer from BMW and M-B look like a bad decision.

It's comments like these that make me chuckle. Have you ever ridden in a GTR? Have you ever ridden in an RC F? The extra weight on the RC F is there for a number of reasons, not the least of which is crash safety. It holds the highest rating of any car in its class, and this class of car was built to mainly be driven on the street. I daily drive mine, and I can tell you it is ultra comfortable on even 3+ hour trips. You can't say that about a GTR. It also will be the most reliable car in its class, and I'd much rather have a vehicle that I can rely on day in and day out vs. a car that only exists for bragging rights. Lexus built this car to be competitive with the competiton, but unlike the competition they are unwilling to compromise quality and reliability. Spend some time in each of the cars under normal daily driving conditions, then take each to the track a few times, then come back with an educated opinion that is not based on internet hype.

[Monogram]

Originally Posted by roybotnik

I was incredibly excited about the RC F until I heard about the weight. I love the styling and the Lexus brand, but there is no excuse for the weight.

I think the RC F's biggest problem is the GT-R. The GT-R weighs less, has superior performance, and is easily picked up with a few thousand miles on it for about the same price as an RC F. Yeah it would be used but you can't really argue with that performance bargain if you must have something Japanese. Considering the cramped rear seats of the RC F, it's hard to argue that it's any more versatile or more luxurious. The only real advantage would be the quality of Lexus's interior design.

In terms of RWD V8 cars, I would certainly go with the GT350. At the price there will be nothing else that compares to it, and the maintenance and parts will be very cheap compared to the M3, C63, RC F, etc. I will probably get one of them next year to replace the 2011 GT I had. The interior is great and I love the styling. And at 47k it makes the powered-up luxury base models on offer from BMW and M-B look like a bad decision.

As for the GT350, it takes nothing more than a quick sit in each car to know why I bought the RC F.

[DAEMANO]

Originally Posted by roybotnik

I was incredibly excited about the RC F until I heard about the weight. I love the styling and the Lexus brand, but there is no excuse for the weight.

I think the RC F's biggest problem is the GT-R. The GT-R weighs less, has superior performance, and is easily picked up with a few thousand miles on it for about the same price as an RC F. Yeah it would be used but you can't really argue with that performance bargain if you must have something Japanese. Considering the cramped rear seats of the RC F, it's hard to argue that it's any more versatile or more luxurious. The only real advantage would be the quality of Lexus's interior design.

In terms of RWD V8 cars, I would certainly go with the GT350. At the price there will be nothing else that compares to it, and the maintenance and parts will be very cheap compared to the M3, C63, RC F, etc. I will probably get one of them next year to replace the 2011 GT I had. The interior is great and I love the styling. And at 47k it makes the powered-up luxury base models on offer from BMW and M-B look like a bad decision.

I agree, the weight is bad. The RC-F really did not need to be this heavy. The 86 is at the very top of its' class in crash worthiness and is feather light. After the torque characteristics in its' V-8 were reviewed by Chris Harris, that killed it for me. This is a GT that's being billed as being more of a sports car than it really is. On the road the RC-F does its' job admirably, but the RC-F doesn't belong anywhere near a track.

[ame="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RXJm4DcbuXg"]Chris Harris on Cars - Lexus RCF road and track test. - YouTube[/ame]

[jdmblood]

Was the isf any good on the track?

[funwheeldrive]

Originally Posted by Monogram

As for the GT350, it takes nothing more than a quick sit in each car to know why I bought the RC F.

The GT350 isn't even out yet...

Originally Posted by Monogram

It's comments like these that make me chuckle. Have you ever ridden in a GTR? Have you ever ridden in an RC F? The extra weight on the RC F is there for a number of reasons, not the least of which is crash safety. It holds the highest rating of any car in its class, and this class of car was built to mainly be driven on the street. I daily drive mine, and I can tell you it is ultra comfortable on even 3+ hour trips. You can't say that about a GTR. It also will be the most reliable car in its class, and I'd much rather have a vehicle that I can rely on day in and day out vs. a car that only exists for bragging rights. Lexus built this car to be competitive with the competition, but unlike the competition they are unwilling to compromise quality and reliability. Spend some time in each of the cars under normal daily driving conditions, then take each to the track a few times, then come back with an educated opinion that is not based on internet hype.

It's obvious that you really like your RCF, but not everyone prioritizes safety, comfort, and reliability when buying a dedicated sports car, especially if they have +60k to spend on a car. I'm sure the RCF is a fantastic car, but I think I would rather buy a M4 if I had that kind of money for a brand new car. It is 500lbs less and it has the option for an old-fashioned manual transmission. It is also much better looking in my opinion.

[jkonquer]

I think many of you are confusing with real dedicated sport car vs all around sport car.

Cars like FRS, GT350R, and Cayman are a dedicated sport car. they are made for one purpose only. Cars like M4, WRX STI, and RCF are made to do everything with budget in mind and be able to keep up with higher caliber cars.

Just as WRX STI's are made be faster WRX as M4's are faster 4 series. They are made to do what the base model does and more. but in the end if you really want a true sport car for "Track" purpose, you would get a Cayman.

At same price range, you can't beat Cayman. But most people will prefer RCF or M4 for their practicality. And that's is why safety, comfort, and luxuriousness matter.

[jdmblood]

Originally Posted by jkonquer

I think many of you are confusing with real dedicated sport car vs all around sport car.

Cars like FRS, GT350R, and Cayman are a dedicated sport car. they are made for one purpose only. Cars like M4, WRX STI, and RCF are made to do everything with budget in mind and be able to keep up with higher caliber cars.

Just as WRX STI's are made be faster WRX as M4's are faster 4 series. They are made to do what the base model does and more. but in the end if you really want a true sport car for "Track" purpose, you would get a Cayman.

At same price range, you can't beat Cayman. But most people will prefer RCF or M4 for their practicality. And that's is why safety, comfort, and luxuriousness matter.

yea but a cayman is so ugly.

unless its a gt4

[Rampage]

Originally Posted by jdmblood

yea but a cayman is so ugly.

unless its a gt4

So, you think a Cayman is ugly but an RC-F is good looking?

[jdmblood]

Originally Posted by Rampage

So, you think a Cayman is ugly but an RC-F is good looking?

yes especially the first gen cayman.

[Monogram]

Originally Posted by DAEMANO

I agree, the weight is bad. The RC-F really did not need to be this heavy. The 86 is at the very top of its' class in crash worthiness and is feather light. After the torque characteristics in its' V-8 were reviewed by Chris Harris, that killed it for me. This is a GT that's being billed as being more of a sports car than it really is. On the road the RC-F does its' job admirably, but the RC-F doesn't belong anywhere near a track.

Having run track days in both the FRS and RC F, I can say without any doubt that the RC F is a much better track car than the FRS. It is better in every way ... well, excluding fuel mileage. FRS- 11mpg. RC F- 5mpg.

The FRS slightly oversteers, where the RC F slightly understeers, but both are very neutral. The RC F will drive past the FRS anywhere on any track.

Stating the RC F does not belong near a track is nothing short of ignorant.

[Monogram]

Originally Posted by funwheeldrive

The GT350 isn't even out yet...



It's obvious that you really like your RCF, but not everyone prioritizes safety, comfort, and reliability when buying a dedicated sports car, especially if they have +60k to spend on a car. I'm sure the RCF is a fantastic car, but I think I would rather buy a M4 if I had that kind of money for a brand new car. It is 500lbs less and it has the option for an old-fashioned manual transmission. It is also much better looking in my opinion.

The GT350 is just another Mustang.

[Monogram]

Originally Posted by jkonquer

I think many of you are confusing with real dedicated sport car vs all around sport car.

Cars like FRS, GT350R, and Cayman are a dedicated sport car. they are made for one purpose only. Cars like M4, WRX STI, and RCF are made to do everything with budget in mind and be able to keep up with higher caliber cars.

Just as WRX STI's are made be faster WRX as M4's are faster 4 series. They are made to do what the base model does and more. but in the end if you really want a true sport car for "Track" purpose, you would get a Cayman.

At same price range, you can't beat Cayman. But most people will prefer RCF or M4 for their practicality. And that's is why safety, comfort, and luxuriousness matter.

Nice thing about the RC F and M4 vs the Cayman is that both with lay down lap times equal to or better than the Cayman. When I was looking at upgrading from the FRS, I seriously checked out a Caman GTS, but set up fully optioned in comparison to the RC F, it was $15,000 more. It also did not feel much different than the FRS. As a daily driver with intermittent track use, I am glad I went with the RC F. I have no regrets.

[OldSkoolToys]

How in the world did the RC-F / FR-S comparison even begin? The price of each reflects the car you're buying. Of course the RC-F is going to be better. It's damn near twice the $ in stock form. If it wasn't then Lexus obviously messed up massively. It's essentially the same as comparing an AE86 to a turbo MK3 supra back in '87. Why even bother?

[jdmblood]

I didn't start this thread as a comparison. I just love both cars