Lexus LFA breaks cover before Tokyo unveiling

[Myka]

How much does the track version weigh?

[Dimman]

Many of you may recall a series of lengthy rants by myself regarding Toyota's (Lexus') LFA.

Well in the August 2010 issue of Automobile magazine, titled: "Supercar Street Fight!" they put it up against the new Mercedes Benz SLS AMG (which for the record is about HALF the price of the LFA).

The stats:
LFA:
$375000 (Value as they can only be leased for 2 years apparently.)
4.8L 40v DOHC V-10, 553 hp @ 8700 rpm, 354 lb-ft @ 6800 rpm!
6 Speed automated manual
265/35R20 Front tires, 305/30R20 Rear tires
3460 lbs

SLS AMG:
$183000 (But sold out until mid 2011 already.)
6.2L 32v DOHC V-8, 563 hp @ 6800 rpm, 479 lb-ft @ 4750 rpm
7 Speed dual clutch automatic
265/35R19 Front tires, 295/30R20 Rear tires
3573 lbs

The Test Numbers:
LFA:
0-60 mph: 3.9s
0-100 mph: 8.0s
0-120 mph: 11.2s
0-140 mph: 15.6s
1/4 mile: 11.8s @ 126 mph

Braking from 70 mph: 154ft

Average of Left and Right Lateral G: 1.05g

SLS AMG:
0-60 mph: 3.8s
0-100 mph: 7.7s
0-120 mph: 10.6s
0-140 mph: 14.5s
1/4 mile: 11.7s @ 127 mph

Braking from 70 mph: 152ft

Average of Left and Right Lateral G: 1.00g

Last paragraph of the article:

"But as should be the case when you compare two such evenly matched machines, the real deciding factor hides beneath the skin. The Lexus LFA is let down by its transmission, and it is, albeit to a lesser extent, handicapped by the need to rev its melodious engine to more attention-getting volumes than the more relaxed, bigger-bore V-8. In all other departments, it's a very close decision. I could quite easily live with the LFA's less compliant suspension, and if this was toy number six or seven, even the screaming engine wouldn't matter that much. But the clutch does, because it's at odds with what the halo car of the brand should deliver: ultimate quality in every respect. The Mercedes-Benz SLS AMG, on the other hand, establishes a credible link to its maker's F1 and DTM racing efforts. And it proves, fifty-six years after the original Gullwing and only weeks after the final production run of the SLR McLaren, that Mercedes still knows how to make a supercar."

Well the heavier Benz (slightly) out-drags the LFA. This I will take as support for what I said in earlier posts that the super-high torque peak and small rpm spread to peak power show that this motor is not super-driveable.

Additionally for those of you that assured me of the technology trickle-down effect, I have to disagree. It seems the LFA is being used for nothing more than selling their F-Sport brand (re-branded performance parts, just like TRD), as demonstrated in a fancy pull-out ad in Automobile's July issue. Laser guided circular carbon-fiber loom is now being used to make super-overpriced carbon engine covers for IS and GS series owners?

Sigh...

(Nomex on!)

[Matador]

The author can go suck a ****. The LFA will rape an SLS around a track. It is not a drag racer, and the feel of the car as described by most who have reviewed it, is razor sharp, exhillirating, as close as you will get to a race car on the road. No need to rev it, because it has an awesome miderange. It has a torque band like a table, not narrow at all.

The SLS is a bruiser and while a great car, certainly not in the same breed as the LFA.

For reference;

http://www.pistonheads.com/roadtests...p?c=47&i=22218

And I could go on.

[Matador]

p.s. I'd like to see an SLS pull 1.4 Gs

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

The author can go suck a ****. The LFA will rape an SLS around a track. It is not a drag racer, and the feel of the car as described by most who have reviewed it, is razor sharp, exhillirating, as close as you will get to a race car on the road. No need to rev it, because it has an awesome miderange. It has a torque band like a table, not narrow at all.

The SLS is a bruiser and while a great car, certainly not in the same breed as the LFA.

For reference;

http://www.pistonheads.com/roadtests...p?c=47&i=22218

And I could go on.

Apparently like a very LOW table.

What's that joke about VTEC? "VTEC: Because some people want a catchy word to tell the world that their engine doesn't make power until 5000 rpm."

The gist of the review is that through ALL performance categories the two cars are basically equal. But the Lexus has a horrible transmission, and to get any performance out of the engine you have to whip it really hard, all the time.

Some more quotes:

"In the SLS, the balance between steering and throttle is more natural and better weighted."

"Although the numbers may tell a different story, the commendably progressive SLS feels as though it pulls more lateral g's than the LFA, which is hindered by a slight front-to-rear grip imbalance and a more brittle suspension. On the racetrack, this is rarely an issue. But through patchwork corners, the Lexus feels busier, more nervous, and less stable."

Basically from a handling perspective the LFA is too much a racecar. Not the do-everything masterpiece that someone told me that all supercars apparently are made to be. The authors feel that the SLS is better. It pulls 1.00g laterally and is good under any condition.

Like I said earlier, the LFA is not the best supercar out there, but I believe it should have been. My faith in Toyota sadly does not change the facts that they made some poor decisions in their design choices.

[ichitaka05]

All in all, I do enjoying this debate. I leaning towards Matador's side (sorry Dimman).

Now, I'm not pro or con of LFA nor SLS AMG, cuz my Impreza can take both of em on... put the joke on the side

I can say is, it's kinda not fair for SLS to have 1.4 Liter more on the engine. That 1.4 Liter made the difference in the TQ. 0~60,100 or 1/4 mile is all about tq, not hp. 125 tq less LFA did pretty good job for 0.1 sec slower than SLS AMG.... now I wonder what kind of tq LFA gonna have w 6.2L V10... I can only dream.

For Matador's comment bout LFA rape an SLS around the track. LFA got 7:19 around the Nur track (driver: Haruhiko Tanahashi), while SLS AMG got 7:40 around the Nur track (driver: Horstvon Saurma). 21 sec slower than LFA. LFA is fast around the Nur track than Zonda F (24), GT-R (26), Carrera GT (28), CCX (33), ZR1 (38), Scuderia (39), LP640 (40), & etc.

Now, which one do you feel suck loosing? 0.1 sec lost in drag or 21 sec lost in the track? I'll let you guys choose.

For myself, if I had all the money in the world and I gotta choose between SLS or LFA, I'll choose LFA not because it's Toyota or cuz it's faster around the track or other stuff like that, but I read several LFA and SLS's review and most of them state that SLS is great car all around, easy response, control, & power. While LFA is razor sharp, hard to maintain (sometimes), too stiff for daily driving. Now, I want some car that I have hard time taming. I think, that's all bout isn't it? I control the car, not car control me (I think Tsuchiya-san even stated that).

[Siriusly.Andrew]

I'm with Matador / Ichi.

And it will come down to preference for most of it I'm sure.

I PREFER a high revving exciting motor vs a brute force monster.

I PREFER a car I drive, without any assistance from computers so I can refine my ability to control the car. ABS is almost to much assistance for me lol.

I think I'd also like "melt your face" performance with assisted driving as well, but maybe have a separate vehicle for that experience. In the grand view of things, if I were buying a LFA I would probably have a GT-R.
This example is just to show the contrast in what I mean.

[Dark]

I would take LFA over SLS AMG because:
body made of CF
500 limited
most incredible car that comes from Japan
Yamaha's tuned engine and engine's sound
beast at the track.
Pretending that I have wet dreams, LFA is one of them.

[Abflug]

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

LFA got 7:19 around the Nur track (driver: Haruhiko Tanahashi), while SLS AMG got 7:40 around the Nur track (driver: Horstvon Saurma). 21 sec slower than LFA. LFA is fast around the Nur track than Zonda F (24), GT-R (26), Carrera GT (28), CCX (33), ZR1 (38), Scuderia (39), LP640 (40), & etc.

any official confirmed sources for the laptimes?! (no wikipedia, please)

Originally Posted by ichitaka05

While LFA is razor sharp, hard to maintain (sometimes), too stiff for daily driving. Now, I want some car that I have hard time taming. I think, that's all bout isn't it? I control the car, not car control me

I think it´s just a question of settings and adjustments - put on all supporter and assistant gimmicks in the LFA and the car controls you, the same in the SLS - put all off and you control the car.

[ichitaka05]

Originally Posted by TomGT

any official confirmed sources for the laptimes?! (no wikipedia, please)



I think it´s just a question of settings and adjustments - put on all supporter and assistant gimmicks in the LFA and the car controls you, the same in the SLS - put all off and you control the car.

No wiki? K, here you go Official Nur lap time

SLS AMG time was claim by official Director Vehicle Dev AMG. ref?
can skip it til 2:23ish
[u2b]XfkDKznMH6c[/u2b]

LFA ref, carsguide.au

The racetrack connection is one reason why the LFA is revealed to the world's press at the Nurburgring in Germany, where Tanahashi admits reluctantly that it has lapped in "better than 7 minutes 20 seconds".

...but search up more & most of them/reviewer/tester stating that they're getting 7:24... still 0.1 sec vs 16 sec? IDK

[Matador]

Originally Posted by Dimman

Some more quotes:

"In the SLS, the balance between steering and throttle is more natural and better weighted."

"Although the numbers may tell a different story, the commendably progressive SLS feels as though it pulls more lateral g's than the LFA, which is hindered by a slight front-to-rear grip imbalance and a more brittle suspension. On the racetrack, this is rarely an issue. But through patchwork corners, the Lexus feels busier, more nervous, and less stable."

Basically from a handling perspective the LFA is too much a racecar. Not the do-everything masterpiece that someone told me that all supercars apparently are made to be. The authors feel that the SLS is better. It pulls 1.00g laterally and is good under any condition.

Like I said earlier, the LFA is not the best supercar out there, but I believe it should have been. My faith in Toyota sadly does not change the facts that they made some poor decisions in their design choices.

A MkIV supra has 315 ft/lbs max torque. The LFA makes that much torque from 3700rpm. 354 ft/lbs max.
The Gallardo, R8 V10 and Ferrari 458 can all barely muster 40 ft/lbs more than the LFA's engine. Low table my ass.

The Author is supposedly a respected reviewer, but I'd have to guess that his driving skills suck? The LFA is sharp, it was designed to be that way. Better weighted throttle? Jackasses will say anything to promote Euro car superiority.

You want quotes? check the links I posted.

"This is a supercar of the athletic, flyweight variety rather than a bung-a-big-engine-in-and-hope affair."

"It's all very sophisticated in the way it handles, too. In the immediacy of its responses the LFA feels a little bit like a Porsche GT3 RS, but it has none of that car's rawness; it might have hyperactive dynamic responses, but the LFA's edges are smoothed off, making it a surprisingly approachable car."

" In fact the only place the LFA feels anything other than rock steady is in the braking zone for the right turn before St Mary's. And that is an off-camber, over-a-crest job, which the car approaches at almost 140mph, so we can probably forgive its little wiggle from the rear."

"What Goodwood's fast, flowing corners and longish straights do show off beautifully, however, is the explosive mid-range pace of the LFA. The way it piles on speed between 75mph and 130mph is truly astonishing."

Supercars are not "do-everything for you" masterpieces. That's the Job of the Playstation 3/X-Box 360 esque GT-R and Evo. Back in the days, supercars would kill you. With modern traction control on, it will help you go faster. Turn all the toys off, they probably still will. They are meant to be respected, because the approach the limits of driving performance. That is what a supercar is about.

[Dimman]

Originally Posted by MatadorRacing_F1

A MkIV supra has 315 ft/lbs max torque. The LFA makes that much torque from 3700rpm. 354 ft/lbs max.
The Gallardo, R8 V10 and Ferrari 458 can all barely muster 40 ft/lbs more than the LFA's engine. Low table my ass.

The Author is supposedly a respected reviewer, but I'd have to guess that his driving skills suck? The LFA is sharp, it was designed to be that way. Better weighted throttle? Jackasses will say anything to promote Euro car superiority.

You want quotes? check the links I posted.

"This is a supercar of the athletic, flyweight variety rather than a bung-a-big-engine-in-and-hope affair."

"It's all very sophisticated in the way it handles, too. In the immediacy of its responses the LFA feels a little bit like a Porsche GT3 RS, but it has none of that car's rawness; it might have hyperactive dynamic responses, but the LFA's edges are smoothed off, making it a surprisingly approachable car."

" In fact the only place the LFA feels anything other than rock steady is in the braking zone for the right turn before St Mary's. And that is an off-camber, over-a-crest job, which the car approaches at almost 140mph, so we can probably forgive its little wiggle from the rear."

"What Goodwood's fast, flowing corners and longish straights do show off beautifully, however, is the explosive mid-range pace of the LFA. The way it piles on speed between 75mph and 130mph is truly astonishing."

Supercars are not "do-everything for you" masterpieces. That's the Job of the Playstation 3/X-Box 360 esque GT-R and Evo. Back in the days, supercars would kill you. With modern traction control on, it will help you go faster. Turn all the toys off, they probably still will. They are meant to be respected, because the approach the limits of driving performance. That is what a supercar is about.

40 ft-lbs is a lot of torque. Also all those cars peaks are WAY lower than the LFA's.

I checked the links. Guys gushing about track performance. And you guys crap on me for being obsessed with only one aspect of cars...

As for the 'Ring times that a getting thrown around all the time, this is the one track where a marginally more familiar driver can account for many seconds of performance improvement. I would prefer to see maybe an 8 lap average of Tsukuba instead. More reflective of the cars' performance as opposed to driver memory.

Well from the 5th gear vid they show that the LFA can bite you in the ass very easily. Its break-away characteristics are snappy, not progressive. This is bad for 99% of drivers. More and more this car is looking like a one-trick pony. Excels at the track. Mediocre everywhere else.

The Benz has a better engine. It has an even more rear-biased weight split. It has a better transmission. It out-brakes the LFA. It is just over 100 lbs heavier than the all-carbon LFA. It handles exceptionally well under every single driving condition, whereas the LFA is only exceptional at the track.

I don't think I fully explained before but this was a 3 day test in Germany. And the cars were tested on the track and the Autobahn/public roads. As 'real' cars. Almost all other super-positive reviews are just: "Here's the LFA. Have fun with it. Come back in 5 laps. Tell everyone what you think." The LFA's transmission is crap (5th Gear vid even mentions that it is slow) in real-world driving conditions. That was the primary complaint. And the SLS is REALLY GOOD.

They called them essentially equal, performance-wise, but the LFA's transmission killed it.

However what was glossed over in the review is that the SLS is now on my personal list of UGLIEST CARS EVER MADE!

The LFA's looks are growing on me. Mainly because from the side it looks like a Mk4 Supra, the details aren't great, but the shape is right on.

For the LFA lovers, probably the best vid of the car I've seen. Enjoy:

[Matador]

^^ Tiff drives with all aids OFF.

**sigh, where do I start**

It's useless arguing with you, because obviously you prefer the big engine in an "I don't care how much it weighs because I have one thousand torques" kind of car. Should have been obvious... you drive a MkIII.

The LFA's transmission has been described as "harsh" but it was designed to be that way. This is the only review where it has been described as letting the car down. Yes. The Sequential is "slow".... if you can call 0.2s slow. It is that way because that is the way they wanted it to be. You don't think Lexus had the money and resources to design a double clutch transmission if they felt that it was necessary for the car? The ASG was developed specially for the LFA.

The Benz has a better engine? You must be out of your ever living mind. It has more rear weight bias? What's your point? If Lexus felt that the LFA needed more weight in the back, they probably would have put the engine there in the first place. The car does exactly what it's designed to do, and does a damn good job at it.

I'm not saying the SLS isn't a great car, it is. But the LFA is better. Performance does not = 0-60 and 1/4 mile.... I guess the Euro car lovers only feel that those parameters = performance when they get slaughtered around the track, in driving response and overall sensation.

Where it the other way around, we'd be hearing fairly tail bullshit about "soul" and what's not.

Puh-lease.

[Matador]

Look at the fat geezer reviewing em, no wonder