You are here: Forums Sedans Performance Oriented Factory Tuner Automobiles

Performance Oriented Factory Tuner Automobiles

147 messages,  Last post on Dec 08, 2007 at 9:15 AM

You are in the Sedans Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Cadillac CTS-V, Mitsubishi Lancer Evolution, BMW M3, Acura TL, Audi S4, Audi S6, Mercedes-Benz C36 AMG, Lexus IS-F, Audi R8, Coupe, Convertible, Sedan

#134 of 147 Re: IS-F in AWD???? [twq83] by louiswei Jun 28, 2007 (6:49 am)
Replying to: twq83 (Jun 28, 2007 6:30 am) Uh...few corrections   1. 911 is rear engine mount 2. Boxster & Cayman are mid engine mount 3. Porsche does offer an AWD 911 version. Targa(?) Replies to this message: twq83 (Jun 28, 2007 7:00 am) louiswei (Jun 28, 2007 7:08 am)
#135 of 147 Re: IS-F in AWD???? [louiswei] by twq83 Jun 28, 2007 (7:00 am)
Replying to: louiswei (Jun 28, 2007 6:49 am) Again, My point exactly ... Mid-Engine Mount, REAR-Engine Mount both are significatly structured differently to allow for the AWD possibility! Yes or No? Replies to this message: louiswei (Jun 28, 2007 7:08 am)
#136 of 147 Re: IS-F in AWD???? [twq83] by louiswei Jun 28, 2007 (7:08 am)
Replying to: twq83 (Jun 28, 2007 7:00 am) I don't see how more difficult that a front-engine-mount car to allow AWD than a rear-engine-mount one. But anyway, the point should be that the IS-F DOES NOT need to be AWD, period. Why? I'll give you several whys...   1. M3 isn't AWD 2. C63 AMG won't be AWD 3. The only reason why the RS4 is AWD is because Audi is specialized in AWD and they don't have a dedicated RWD platform.
#137 of 147 Re: IS-F in AWD???? [twq83] by michael2003 Jun 29, 2007 (2:03 am)
Replying to: twq83 (Jun 28, 2007 6:30 am) My reason for saying that an AWD system would require reducing HP is a 'False Excuse' is that putting AWD would actually allow much greater HP since a 2WD system has limits on how much traction can actually get to the road, so the statement just doesn't seem to make any sense. Please note that I'm also only talking about street legal vehicles used for transportation.   Adding an AWD system that only puts a small percentage of the traction to the front wheels still allows that much of a percentage of additional HP to be available towards getting traction. Replies to this message: twq83 (Jun 29, 2007 9:08 am)
#138 of 147 Re: IS-F in AWD???? [michael2003] by twq83 Jun 29, 2007 (9:08 am)
Replying to: michael2003 (Jun 29, 2007 2:03 am) Michael,   Adding HP is just a matter of adding a larger more efficent Engine! What your talking about with traction addition is Torque ( the force that get's the vehicle moving)and this requires Structural and Pitch and roll supports to ensure that the vehicle doesn't tear itself apart over the years. The more weight you add the less Torque you can produce...... hence the less PERFORMANCE the vehicle is allowed to exert on you and your driving experience. AWD adds stability and some Torque at the expense of performance. SEE???
#140 of 147 IS-F stinks by homerjs Nov 01, 2007 (10:21 am)
The RS6 is front engined with 580 hp. Anyway the TSX and civic si makes more hp/liter than the IS-F which is supposedly a top performance car, never mind the M3 and RS4 which makes 100+ hp/L. IS-F is an embarrassment. 5L from the M5 makes 500hp, IS-F power is made by M3 with only 4 liters. Lexus should just keep on making nice fine luxury boats and leave the hi performance to others. I'd rather get a 335i which is only a tad slower but more comfy and cheaper to insure. Best yet i don't have to explain myself to my friends why a $20k civic engine has better output
#141 of 147 IS-F IS A WINNER by skarie Nov 03, 2007 (10:30 am)
IS-F is an embarrassment. 5L from the M5 makes 500hp, IS-F power is made by M3 with only 4 liters   How is this an embarrassment, the lexus produces 370lbs of torque, the M3 does'nt even have 300.. the lexus also has a faster 0-60 time 4.2vs the M3 4.6..
#143 of 147 Reply to Page 1, Post 15 of this thread by kywildcat Dec 04, 2007 (10:30 pm)
Replying to: robbieg (Dec 01, 2006 7:19 am) You got it exactly right, best-to-worst: "In order, Lexus, Acura, Infiniti, BMW and Lincoln."   The Lincoln was designed with a compass and a straightedge. Their over-the-hill designers can put their pencils away already. "No more graph paper for you." I would be insulted if Lincoln tried to sell me their interior as entry-level luxury. Just look at that get-up.   The BMW's redesign took the car from the 80's to the 90's. The orange backlighting looks cheap, and the over-simplistic dash has no character. BMW's are beautiful on the outside, but they make me frown when I get inside, like a VW bag lady wrapped in a fur coat.   The empty chrome space on the Infiniti dash, combined with the cutouts and small climate controls, are disproportionate, the same problem you'd have putting 14" wheels on one of these cars. They took some cues from the Infiniti M, but did not execute it as well. What's up with those vertical vents? Looking at the car on the showroom floor, the exterior of the Infiniti G is more power than luxury. If you want luxury, keep moving.   The Acura is nice (I actually preferred the TSX interior to the TL, since I liked the wood trim strip arcing across the mid-dash). I almost bought the TSX. It's nice that their cars come loaded, with NAV as the only option, which works for me. The blue/white backlighting is beautiful. The TSX is the best bang-for-the-buck.   The Lexus is the best of the lot. My IS250 AWD is on special order for the Mark Levinson audio option. The car will come with every bell and whistle except NAV, which isn't worth $3K, but I'll miss the touch-screen climate controls--pure eye candy. All other entry-level luxury cars (and many more expensive cars) seemed to be missing items I'd want in my car for the next 10 years: hands-free entry (no keys or fob button pushing), pushbutton start, multi-level heated and cooled seats, HID/adaptive lights, electrochromatic rear/side mirrors, real wood trim, AWD--you know, the little things that help boost my carbon score. Even the steering wheel automatically raises/lowers for easy access. Lexus does have the best leather seats, and I can't wait to get my hands around that leather-wrapped steering wheel -- pure happiness. I'm also getting a clear bra and tint, dealer-installed, everything for $35K plus 6% tax. My only quibble with their layout is that the speedometer should be on the right side where it belongs. The only car I'd replace it with in the next few years would be an IS convertible.   Lexus has more luxury prestige (for me) than any of the cars in this group. From day one, Lexus earned their luxury reputation at a value price over the Euro luxury brands. I would be concerned about owning a MB past the initial warranty, and the trips to the shop for days/weeks would be unacceptable anyway. The price of adding every separate option to get all the bells and whistles puts their cheaper cars into the $50K+ range. I prefer Japanese reliability and price-points. I want trouble-free luxury.   I never made it to Audi, Saab or Volvo--maybe next time, maybe not. Those guys have always been collected together (in my mind) as faceless, boring, fringe, "rumoured" automakers to anyone from the States. However, the A4 (or A6) I recently saw was sweet as it drove by. But I had already finished my search before seeing it. They probably need more dealerships and should have been making more-noticeable cars all along. Replies to this message: pat (Dec 05, 2007 1:40 am)

You are here: Forums Sedans Performance Oriented Factory Tuner Automobiles