Lexus LFA breaks cover before Tokyo unveiling

[Matador]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

Ferrari pulled all of this off except for the CF and 2 extra cylinders part but with a dual clutch gearbox instead with a much lighter curb weight and price tag of 240k.

458 curbweight > LFA curbweight by a few pounds. Don't get confused by dry weight figures. Ferrari can do it cheaper because they've been at it for decades. The have the process down, they didn't need to acquire new tooling, processes and knowledge. R&D is Expensive. Everything except the nav unit on the LFA is bespoke, right down to the hex key bolts in the interior with 'Lexus' engraved on them.

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

You didn't present nothing to me but some car in the 60's with a 2.0l I6 that Yamaha pretty much built for Toyota. I wonder if Nissan had priced the GT-R at 300k would you feel the same way about it being overpriced? I pretty much know your answer and 90% of this boards answer. After all this is a TOYOTA forum right? And to the guy that says I'm a troll I pretty much have love for cars that Toyota have built with sport intentions and a good price to go with it(Supra TT,MR-2). Forgive me for not going crazy for the yaris,prius and corolla.The problem with forums nowadays is that people become so emotionally attach towards a brand you like that you can't take criticism or opinions but you love for others to take your opinions and run with it or else they are considered a troll.

Why is it again that I had to present anything to you? Furthermore, Toyota is a major shareholder in Yamaha. Criticizing that Yamaha assists Toyota in engine work is like getting upset that the Audi R8 uses a Lambo engine... or vice versa. Hard to tell the difference these days. The point is, they are making the best use of their resources, how can you fault them for that?

Don't get butt hurt that this is a Toyota forum. Look to the top of your browser. I'm sure you'd expect a similar response if someone went to a Honda forum and proclaimed "The NSX is a piece of overpriced crap". Right now, I'm home on a sabbatical, if you look outside, you will find 5 vehicles which are examples of the 3 biggest Japanese brands covering from 1984-2001 in guises from stock to slightly tuned to fully built. So really, don't tell me about bias.

I would contend that the GT-R is in fact under priced for it's performance (betting Nissan loses money on them too... Why else would the V-Spec cost a whopping $160,000 for a few bits of carbon tacked on to a GT-R?), but it's design and build process is exactly where it should be price wise... It's built on Nissan's ubiquitous, albeit a highly modified version, FM platform. It's akin to Lexus taking the IS/GS/SC platform, and producing a Supra. That's not worth $300k.

Nobody here is more upset than me that this car costs what it does and is so rare. I want one. However, it is what it is, and because of it I can look forward to some better sports cars from Toyota/Lexus in the near future. Not much to complain about then. Just that we've been through pages of the bitching about the price, I for one, am tired of hearing it, especially since it won't convince Toyota to give me a 60% discount on one

[Matador]

Originally Posted by SUB-FT86

7:24.22 Nissan GT-R (2011) Toshio Suzuki October 2010 Nissan conducted test.[11] Semi-wet conditions. 2


7:38 Lexus LFA Horst von Saurma September 2010 Sport Auto conducted test,[25] Bridgestone Potenza S001 tires used.


Illusions of Grandeur?

Where is this magical 7:19?

Hmmm. Same day, same driver. The only way to make a proper comparison if you will.

Lexus Europe tweeted;

Should add that these are AutoBild's times with same driver - level playing field if you like...
....our own figure is in the low 7'20"s, and will go lower with the Nurburgring package

Someone asks

"any idea about how the Nurburgring package road car compares with Gazoo Racing LFA that competes in VLN?"

They reply

Will be quicker - no power restrictor, carbon ceramic brakes vs. steel and approx. same weight.....

Just saying.............

[Dimman]

I've said this before. The 'Ring times are not the best comparison for 'Who's the best Supercar.'

It's kind of like the old 200 mph club, whoever was fastest was king. The Diablo vs the F40 was a good example. Diablo had higher top speed, but on a track the F40 demolished it by seconds per lap.

So track performance became important. And how the 'Ring came to be the de facto testing ground I'm not sure. Probably from the Germans' who always tested on it having reputations of being fast on the track and having good road manners. Or maybe the 'Ring is more like a timed circuit of 'real' highway?

But in the 'Ring's case, we are only getting one track comparison that is VERY influenced by the driver's familiarity with it.

Matador's example is the best of these (actually the only one I would consider acceptable), using the same driver, but I would like to see other track's times.

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Dimman

I've said this before. The 'Ring times are not the best comparison for 'Who's the best Supercar.'

It's kind of like the old 200 mph club, whoever was fastest was king. The Diablo vs the F40 was a good example. Diablo had higher top speed, but on a track the F40 demolished it by seconds per lap.

So track performance became important. And how the 'Ring came to be the de facto testing ground I'm not sure. Probably from the Germans' who always tested on it having reputations of being fast on the track and having good road manners. Or maybe the 'Ring is more like a timed circuit of 'real' highway?

But in the 'Ring's case, we are only getting one track comparison that is VERY influenced by the driver's familiarity with it.

Matador's example is the best of these (actually the only one I would consider acceptable), using the same driver, but I would like to see other track's times.

I agree. The big deal about the ring I guess is the variety of driving surfaces, length, and healthy mixes of corner types, straights and elevation changes. A comprehensive test if you will. Many companies have tested there for a long while, I think perhaps due to gran turismo etc why it is popular for bench racers now.

Anyway, I can say for certain that the LFA has beaten the GT-R by 3 seconds at Goodwood circuit, but not on the same day, not same driver. Doubt you'll see much testing of that sort, what with the LFA being as scarce as it is.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

I agree. The big deal about the ring I guess is the variety of driving surfaces, length, and healthy mixes of corner types, straights and elevation changes. A comprehensive test if you will. Many companies have tested there for a long while, I think perhaps due to gran turismo etc why it is popular for bench racers now.

Anyway, I can say for certain that the LFA has beaten the GT-R by 3 seconds at Goodwood circuit, but not on the same day, not same driver. Doubt you'll see much testing of that sort, what with the LFA being as scarce as it is.

Despite the different times and drivers, this represents a major ass-kicking delivered by the LFA, much more than the 'Ring example.

Around 3 seconds faster over 3.8 km at Goodwood.

Compared with around 5 seconds faster than the GT-R over 20.8 km at the 'Ring.

Actually when you look at the difference of only 5 seconds at the 'Ring makes the GT-R look pretty exceptional in my opinion. (Not even counting performance per dollar stuff.)

[cyde01]

my 2 cents concerning sub's posts.

some have said they aren't fanboys of certain brands, well i am. i've been toyota fan for a long time and have always had a strong appreciation for their approach to sports models (when they actually make them). i love toyota sports history and i love the LFA, and i feel so incredibly privileged to have been able to see and touch one in person. i think i've been posting around here long enough for people to know that i'm not a hater or a troll. that said

i can see why some enthusiasts say the LFA is overpriced. i don't agree with them, but i can understand why they say so. because some enthusiasts use performance numbers and brand prestige as the only values that matter in price. if that's all that matters, then yes the LFA is more expensive than one or two ferraris and lambos. but if the logo and numbers were all that mattered, then every sports car made would be a european mid-engined awd turbo.

OBVIOUSLY that's NOT all that matters because some people prefer front engine cars compared to rear mid-engine. and some people prefer FR to AWD, and some prefer n/a to boost. that's because there's MORE TO PERFORMANCE THAN NUMBERS. there are certain intangibles that can't be expressed in numbers. example: someone might buy a brand new miata for more $$ than a used S2000 because that's what they like. if you go by prestige and numbers only, the S2000 would be the obvious choice. but some people prefer the intangibles of a miata, like the fact that it's easy to control at the limit. i'm not knocking the s2k, i'm an s2k owner myself and love the car to death, but i can tell you from experience the s2k is NOT easy to control at the limit. even in my later model ap2 the snap oversteer is not easy to control. if all you cared about were power to weight ratio, skidpad and slalom specs or lap times you would never know such intangibles.

what i really appreciated as an enthusiast and fan in the article matador quoted was how special they thought the LFA was, more special than a 458, which has better numbers and is less expensive. when something is that special, that means that the intangibles of the car are at an unimaginably high level. the fact that it was so fast on the top gear track despite wet conditions and an FR layout also is a good indication of this, the "hands of buddha" or whatever that the designers talked about.

the GTR gives a whole lot of performance for the price. but is it special? does it have these intangibles? i hear it's an incredible car, but one of it's criticisms is that with the AWD system and auto gear box it's so easy to drive fast that it's almost boring. i don't think i'll ever hear a driver describe the LFA as boring. is the GTR an awesome car? yes. is it in the same league as an LFA? i think the answer is a resounding no.

the LFA is obviously not worth the cost to some and priceless to others. i think the travesty is that LFA critics tend to only look at the price tag and the performance numbers. but numbers will always only tell you half the story, there is a lot more that makes a car special. after all, isn't that why we're all interested in the FT-86?

[Abflug]

^^^ totaly agree 100%!

[Matador]

Originally Posted by cyde01

my 2 cents concerning sub's posts.

some have said they aren't fanboys of certain brands, well i am. i've been toyota fan for a long time and have always had a strong appreciation for their approach to sports models (when they actually make them). i love toyota sports history and i love the LFA, and i feel so incredibly privileged to have been able to see and touch one in person. i think i've been posting around here long enough for people to know that i'm not a hater or a troll. that said

i can see why some enthusiasts say the LFA is overpriced. i don't agree with them, but i can understand why they say so. because some enthusiasts use performance numbers and brand prestige as the only values that matter in price. if that's all that matters, then yes the LFA is more expensive than one or two ferraris and lambos. but if the logo and numbers were all that mattered, then every sports car made would be a european mid-engined awd turbo.

OBVIOUSLY that's NOT all that matters because some people prefer front engine cars compared to rear mid-engine. and some people prefer FR to AWD, and some prefer n/a to boost. that's because there's MORE TO PERFORMANCE THAN NUMBERS. there are certain intangibles that can't be expressed in numbers. example: someone might buy a brand new miata for more $$ than a used S2000 because that's what they like. if you go by prestige and numbers only, the S2000 would be the obvious choice. but some people prefer the intangibles of a miata, like the fact that it's easy to control at the limit. i'm not knocking the s2k, i'm an s2k owner myself and love the car to death, but i can tell you from experience the s2k is NOT easy to control at the limit. even in my later model ap2 the snap oversteer is not easy to control. if all you cared about were power to weight ratio, skidpad and slalom specs or lap times you would never know such intangibles.

what i really appreciated as an enthusiast and fan in the article matador quoted was how special they thought the LFA was, more special than a 458, which has better numbers and is less expensive. when something is that special, that means that the intangibles of the car are at an unimaginably high level. the fact that it was so fast on the top gear track despite wet conditions and an FR layout also is a good indication of this, the "hands of buddha" or whatever that the designers talked about.

the GTR gives a whole lot of performance for the price. but is it special? does it have these intangibles? i hear it's an incredible car, but one of it's criticisms is that with the AWD system and auto gear box it's so easy to drive fast that it's almost boring. i don't think i'll ever hear a driver describe the LFA as boring. is the GTR an awesome car? yes. is it in the same league as an LFA? i think the answer is a resounding no.

the LFA is obviously not worth the cost to some and priceless to others. i think the travesty is that LFA critics tend to only look at the price tag and the performance numbers. but numbers will always only tell you half the story, there is a lot more that makes a car special. after all, isn't that why we're all interested in the FT-86?

I'm speechless.

[Dimman]

But for most of us, all we get are the numbers. All we can offer is second and third hand opinion, never having driven these monsters.

[Snaps]

^ Which is why we have to look to reviews like these, to see what people that HAVE driven the car say about it.

[cyde01]

Originally Posted by Dimman

But for most of us, all we get are the numbers. All we can offer is second and third hand opinion, never having driven these monsters.

yes, and that's why i said i can understand why some people think the LFA is overpriced, even if i don't agree.

in the end, what this all means is none of us are really in a position to offer opinions or critiques of these cars because we haven't driven them.

[KTB]

this is just my 2 cents on this.

Anyone that is purchasing either of these cars is not doing so because they are the "best" honestly every sports car this expensive spends a lot more time under a cover in a garage than it does on the road, a shame, I know. Really both of these cars, SLS and LFA are more a work of art than they are transportation. if you'd like insanely fast transportation a 911 turbo or a GTR will fill that shoe for a lot less. both of those are expensive but nothing like the LFA or the SLS. the LFA, SLS, 458 italia, anything Pagni... Its all car artwork.

And I'll take a Panoz AIV Roadster.

to each their own right?

[Dimman]

^^^ If the SLS is 'art' it is more of a study of how function is more significant than form. (I think it's hideous...)

[Dark]

Originally Posted by Dimman

^^^ If the SLS is 'art' it is more of a study of how function is more significant than form. (I think it's hideous...)

LOL true, it's not beautiful(IMO), but I don't call it ugly. The designer was trying really hard to bring the retro style back. If it's pure ugly, MB couldn't never convince people to get this car. It's a piece of art, but everyone doesn't have the same definition of art.