LFA 1st Test, Z06 speed for 599 GTB money!
#106
05-25-2010, 07:14 PM
True - but the point of contention remains... There is more to the LF-A than just straight line acceleration. I mean - Toyota doesn't live in a bubble. They knew what the car was going to be compared to. They knew what it could do before they released and THEN priced it. They were comfortable about what it could acheive and what it represents - and then they released it. The results that everybody is just now discovering, were already known by Toyota at LEAST 2 years ago.
#107
05-25-2010, 08:10 PM
Well, they had a target sale price of $100k+ for the ZR1. Is it that much faster than a Z06 or 997.2 Turbo? Not really. Yet it's still deficient in many other areas too.
#108
05-25-2010, 09:46 PM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kirkland
Posts: 2,571
Rep Power: 177 
This isn't the first time an automaker was able to thru amazing marketing make up for a not very good entry into the respective markets they are entering. There is more to an LFA than straight line performance as with every other sports car. That still does not mean that cars in certain price brackets are not expected to perform a certain way, or to be at least competitive to their classes.
#109
05-26-2010, 01:31 AM
This isn't the first time an automaker was able to thru amazing marketing make up for a not very good entry into the respective markets they are entering. There is more to an LFA than straight line performance as with every other sports car. That still does not mean that cars in certain price brackets are not expected to perform a certain way, or to be at least competitive to their classes.
I find it pretty hilarous that you've made so many claims you can't even back up. Such as "all the magazines" think Lexus are crazy to ask this kind of price. Forgot about this one too, did you?
http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/...n/results.html
And this?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mosl...ve-Toyota.html
Next, you'll be trying to convince me that "all the magazines" are saying the LFA "isn't very good."
You bring up how Porsche doesn't offer a $375k GT3 RS, yet conveniently ignore the Sport Classic which is not dynamically superior to the RS, yet costs more.
I mean, are you trying to say that Lexus are greedy to ask for the revenue that the LFA stands to bring in (even still at a loss)?
4th time's a charm: Which Lexus forums are you a member of? Did you honestly want to find out what an LFA buyer thinks, or had you already made up your mind that they're nuts? Sounds to me like it's the latter.
#110
05-26-2010, 11:12 AM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kirkland
Posts: 2,571
Rep Power: 177
What I said is based on my opinion and the opinion of automotive writers, what basis do you have that exotic car buyers do not care about performance at all? Is that not basically what you are saying? Another thing I am having a hard time understanding how does an engine rated at 552 hp put out similar dyno numbers to cars rated at 485 and 505 hp? Maybe the early press cars were not in full tune? The LFA is not just slow in relation to its peers its slow in relation to itself!
I can understand with your lack of reading comprehension why you keep coming back to justify the LFA's value. This is not a discussion about the LFA's monetary worth as that has already been established. With anything you buy don't you want the best?
Do you want to have the most expensive, smallest house? Do you not mind paying Patek Phillipe money for a Tag Huer? Who do you know that gets excited to pay the most to get the least? You obviously don't get my point, and I am very curious as to if you even have a car? I am done, my thoughts on the LFA are still the same as are yours so there is no point.
Lets let other people chime in at this point.
I can understand with your lack of reading comprehension why you keep coming back to justify the LFA's value. This is not a discussion about the LFA's monetary worth as that has already been established. With anything you buy don't you want the best?
Do you want to have the most expensive, smallest house? Do you not mind paying Patek Phillipe money for a Tag Huer? Who do you know that gets excited to pay the most to get the least? You obviously don't get my point, and I am very curious as to if you even have a car? I am done, my thoughts on the LFA are still the same as are yours so there is no point.
Lets let other people chime in at this point.
#111
05-26-2010, 12:38 PM
http://jalopnik.com/5388538/2011-lexus-lfa-first-drive
"With only a 202 MPH top speed, a 3.7-second 0-60 MPH time and a 7:30 ‘Ring time, the LFA isn't going to be a bench racer's dream. But we actually admire Toyota for eschewing the conventional, numbers-based approach to supercar success."
I think this is the road to take... and move on.
"With only a 202 MPH top speed, a 3.7-second 0-60 MPH time and a 7:30 ‘Ring time, the LFA isn't going to be a bench racer's dream. But we actually admire Toyota for eschewing the conventional, numbers-based approach to supercar success."
I think this is the road to take... and move on.
#112
05-26-2010, 12:48 PM
BUT - ..... (pause)... this is a performance car. Numbers mean almost everything in this arena.
(yes, I know they don't mean EVERYTHING - but come'on... It's slower than a damn 911 w/PDK and stock GT-R in almost all areas)
(yes, I know they don't mean EVERYTHING - but come'on... It's slower than a damn 911 w/PDK and stock GT-R in almost all areas)
#113
05-26-2010, 01:06 PM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kirkland
Posts: 2,571
Rep Power: 177 In the past in exchange for forsaking brand history, provenance , heritage you got a car that performed and was just as good or better and at a discount. Now in the exotic arena where brand history, provenance and heritage in my opinion are even more important, and then the other reason for buying a hyper performance car is also negated then you're left with rarity and build quality as buying factors.
#114
05-26-2010, 03:03 PM
BS looks the part? It looks like an SL with a body kit. It's also trapped at 123.9 mph (Motor Trend). Even at 127 mph, that's slower than a ZR1. It is a known quantity in that it is slower than other cars costing only a fraction of the price. I thought "most car guys" would look beyond the badge; guess not?
And look what happens after the 1/4 mile mark.
130-150 mph
BS: 5.3
LFA: 5.4
That's not dominating. And the reason why is probably due to gearing: the BS has a shift at 130 mph, which is only 4 mph past its 1/4 mile speed. It's in the sweet spot of the powerband. At 124 mph, the LFA is 13 mph short of the next shift. Check their 900'-1320' times in R&T: the LFA is only 0.1s slower despite a shift where the BS doesn't have a shift.
As for handling prowess, it's not that hard to look up figures for the BS. They're worse than the LFA's, and aren't any better than M3 figures. In fact, Evo Magazine tested these two on the same day around their track and the BS was only fractionally faster. If you contend that the BS dominates the LFA on the straights, yet the LFA is faster on a wet TG track than the BS in the dry, then there shouldn't be any doubt as to which will be faster in the twisties.
Black Series: M3 handling, slower than a ZR1, yet costs nearly 3x's as much. LOL.
Yeah, a bone stock GTS Viper on massive 335mm rear tires. Said Viper has also trapped at 118 mph in C&D tests. And has taken 4-5 seconds longer to get to 150 mph. I seem to call Vipers were underrated in the hp department too. Not too hard to do when you have 8 liters to play with.
And look what happens after the 1/4 mile mark.
130-150 mph
BS: 5.3
LFA: 5.4
That's not dominating. And the reason why is probably due to gearing: the BS has a shift at 130 mph, which is only 4 mph past its 1/4 mile speed. It's in the sweet spot of the powerband. At 124 mph, the LFA is 13 mph short of the next shift. Check their 900'-1320' times in R&T: the LFA is only 0.1s slower despite a shift where the BS doesn't have a shift.
As for handling prowess, it's not that hard to look up figures for the BS. They're worse than the LFA's, and aren't any better than M3 figures. In fact, Evo Magazine tested these two on the same day around their track and the BS was only fractionally faster. If you contend that the BS dominates the LFA on the straights, yet the LFA is faster on a wet TG track than the BS in the dry, then there shouldn't be any doubt as to which will be faster in the twisties.
Black Series: M3 handling, slower than a ZR1, yet costs nearly 3x's as much. LOL.
Yeah, a bone stock GTS Viper on massive 335mm rear tires. Said Viper has also trapped at 118 mph in C&D tests. And has taken 4-5 seconds longer to get to 150 mph. I seem to call Vipers were underrated in the hp department too. Not too hard to do when you have 8 liters to play with.
Damn you Guibo I was finished with this
Dude you cant pass that math off as fact. Its merely your "opinion". Its swell that you can google articles and crunch numbers but there are too many variables in tests of two vehicles done on different days/venues etc to come to a factual conclusion. Surface, air temp, humidity etc etc etc.
If the LF-A does this on the same day against the BS or similar car then you got a point but till then Ill chose the 127mph trapping car to beat the 124mph car but of course this is my opinion. Gearing, aero etc could switch things up on the big end.
To be fair Id love to see the LF-A tested on a preped 1/4 mile to see what it is fully capable of. It still needs at least 100hp more though
#115
05-26-2010, 03:18 PM
I did not know the LF-A did a 7:30 on the Ring. Not bad but those numbers make me love the GTR even more now
I think the LF-A should be used by Nissan in commercials to sell the GTR.
"For the price of an LF-A you can have a Maxima, Cube, 370z coupe and vert, Pathfinder, Thundra, Sentra and GTR and beat the LF-A in performance around the Ring."
I think the LF-A should be used by Nissan in commercials to sell the GTR.
"For the price of an LF-A you can have a Maxima, Cube, 370z coupe and vert, Pathfinder, Thundra, Sentra and GTR and beat the LF-A in performance around the Ring."
#116
05-26-2010, 05:33 PM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kirkland
Posts: 2,571
Rep Power: 177 I just spit water on my laptop! Its a high level Dell laptop but you may not believe this but I paid Cray supercomputer money for it due to its exotic construction. Dell created a special factory and made the chassis out of carbon fiber on its own rotary loom.
That's why I agreed to stop this argument, he says the LFA " could " be faster above 100 mph and then when I tell him the trap speeds he uses conjecture, Jedi mind tricks, and Obama double talk to act as if those trap speeds are a conspiracy told to us during the cold war! I know what the Z06 dyno's which strangely enough is higher than the LFA despite being rated lower. It also has a strange squiggly line that starts out much sooner and is higher on the chart than the LFA....help me read I think its called torque.
Last edited by germeezy1; 05-26-2010 at 05:36 PM.
#117
05-26-2010, 06:11 PM
This is a very interesting topic. I still would like to know why anyone would want to spend this kind of money for a toy that you really can't play with!!! 
#118
05-26-2010, 09:00 PM
Dude you cant pass that math off as fact. Its merely your "opinion". Its swell that you can google articles and crunch numbers but there are too many variables in tests of two vehicles done on different days/venues etc to come to a factual conclusion. Surface, air temp, humidity etc etc etc.
LOL, so the "domination" actually comes down to differences in surface, air temp, humidity, etc.
#119
05-26-2010, 09:37 PM
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kirkland
Posts: 2,571
Rep Power: 177
No Guibo the facts are that the Z06 has trapped 128 mph and has ran 10.9x quarter mile times bone stock. The facts are the fastest LFA at this point has ran 11.8x @ 124 mph. Trap speeds tell power and the fact is the Z06 is lighter and although it has worse gearing its lighter and has more torque and a bit more horsepower to the wheels.
Those are facts, not your attempts with Jedi mind tricks to create a small doubt so therefore in your mind making you right. You speculated that the LFA is faster over 100 mph and as of this point that has not been validated.
So please go back to forcing how good the LFA is down our throats instead of arguing an argument that has no merit based on your speculation.
Those are facts, not your attempts with Jedi mind tricks to create a small doubt so therefore in your mind making you right. You speculated that the LFA is faster over 100 mph and as of this point that has not been validated.
So please go back to forcing how good the LFA is down our throats instead of arguing an argument that has no merit based on your speculation.
#120
05-26-2010, 09:53 PM
Without AWD and launch control and a DCT, it's pretty much a given that the LFA could be slower to 60 mph. The GT-R is faster than a lot of cars to 60, many supercars included. But notice the other figures for the LFA vs GT-R in these areas:
60-100: 4.1 vs 4.8
60-0: 94' vs 103'
Skidpad: 1.05g vs 0.98g
I would also think the LFA can take more sustained 10/10ths lapping than the GT-R...
Also, check the comments in the Motor Trend article:
"Subsequent testing proves the LFA to be dynamically superior to the GT-R in nearly every category. Any doubts that the Lexus is anything but a legitimate supercar are absolutely gutted on the test tarmac. Only supercars manage to brake from 60 in under 94 feet and pull 1.05 g on the skidpad. Sure, the GT-R retains bragging rights to 60 mph due to all wheel drive and shorter gearing, but to triple digits and beyond, it is all LFA. Then there is the way it handles our figure eight.
The LFA feels far lighter and more balanced than the GT-R in every phase of driving; and with that V-10 singing, it's a rush like no other."
And then there is their summary...
And then there is their summary...
The 7:30 was done with traffic. And Lexus's goal wasn't lap times, but responsive feel and durability. It appears they have acheived that.