Article Comments - First Look: 2008 Lexus IS-F

42 messages, Last post on Oct 31, 2007 at 4:53 PM

You are in the Lexus IS Forum. Your Hosts are pat & karens

What is this discussion about? Lexus IS, Sedan

First Look: 2008 Lexus IS-F - Though Lexus is still coy with us about the specifications of the IS-F's V8 as the date of the car's introduction approaches, the engine is almost certainly based on the LS 600h L's 5.0-liter V8. (more)

Outline

Messages Page 5 of 5: 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; Prev; Next; Last

#33 of 42 Re: rs4, is-f comparison [louiswei] by sjaieve Oct 30, 2007 (12:44 pm)
Replying to: louiswei (Oct 30, 2007 7:33 am) I think you are right, Lexus cant win with this car. I think the time has come for most of these editors to realize that the world does not stop spinning if they admit that the Japanese are now going toe to toe with the Germans. I remember when the IS350 came out, before the 335i was introduced, comparisons were made with the much slower 330i, most editors agreed that the 330i was still superior cos of "driving dynamics". Comparisons have also been made btwn the G35 & the 328i, and again the 328i won cos of driving dynamics & refinement. Such conclusions lead a lot to be desired IMO.
#34 of 42 Re: rs4, is-f comparison [gwinbear] by sjaieve Oct 30, 2007 (12:59 pm)
Replying to: gwinbear (Oct 29, 2007 10:53 pm) Certainly. It could be mechanical advantage (less power loss from engine to wheels,) different gearing ratio spread here you are assuming that the Lex engineering is inferior, lets assume its not
#35 of 42 Re: Article comments. [louiswei] by crimsono2 Oct 30, 2007 (10:33 pm)
Replying to: louiswei (Oct 30, 2007 7:30 am) Don't get me wrong, I love the IS. It's just one can't help but feel a little disappointed because they are very close to the competition when they executed this car. The devil is just in the details. Saying why there's no 2-door version of the IS-F just because the C63 and RS4 don't is a cop out. The car that IS-F is gunning for is not the C63 nor the RS4, it is the M3, which, last I checked, has always been a 2-door, until recently. Surely they could've at least acknowledged that the performance demographic they were gunning for had particular preferences in door configurations. Could the IS-F have lost of a few more lbs by making it a 2-door instead of a 4-door? As stated, it is factory tuned, but they redid the hood to allow the V8 to fit, also redid the seats, and the suspension, rear fascia, and you want to tell me that they couldn't bother to redo the body so that it had 2 doors instead of 4? The question arises then, did they make the IS-F to try and compete and steal M3 sales? Or did they make it for kicks and giggles? Logical business practice would venture to say they developed this car to do the former, and break out of the stereotype they have formed over these years (in that order). Then again, as the article states, the designers themselves had less than usual R&D resources to make this car happen so, I again reiterate, am happy this car exists. But that doesn't mean I will not comment on how I wish it could be better. Your arguments regarding the fake exhaust confuse me, if they were worried about overheating the bumper, why then does the exhaust terminate underneath the car? Hell, I can't even find where they really end from the pictures I've seen on the internet. Why would Lexus care how many things need to be replaced in the event of a rear-end accident? It's all $$ to them. They just care that you walk out alive, not making it cheaper for you. Replies to this message: louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 8:20 am) crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 8:48 am) louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 9:15 am) sjaieve (Oct 31, 2007 10:44 am) and 2 more...
#36 of 42 Re: Article comments. [crimsono2] by louiswei Oct 31, 2007 (8:20 am)
Replying to: crimsono2 (Oct 30, 2007 10:33 pm) The car that IS-F is gunning for is not the C63 nor the RS4, it is the M3 Lexus never made the statement that the IS-F is gunning for the M3. I asked the Lexus rep personally in the Taste-of-Lexus event and he said the car is not going to be a Lexus M3. I didn't say the IS-F not having 2-door is because RS4 and C63 don't have it as well. What I was saying is the IS-F is a factory tuned version of the regular IS just like RS4 is to A4, C63 is to C-class and M3 is to 3-series. since the 3-series ALWAYS has a coupe version in the lineup so naturally the M3 has offered a 2-door version. A4 and C-class on the other hand NEVER has a coupe version so it is only offered in sedan version just like the IS-F. The question arises then, did they make the IS-F to try and compete and steal M3 sales? Lexus never tries to become BMW, they'll let the Infiniti to be the copycat. With the ISX50 Lexus is building an entry level performance sedan using its own philosophy to compete in the same segment as the 3-series but never to be a Lexus 3-series. I believe the same would be applied to the IS-F. the designers themselves had less than usual R&D resources LM's Skunk Works had less than usual R&D resources as well with the SR-71 and U2 but I don't see these 2 planes were any worse than the rest. If you read the developing history of the IS-F it was indicated that in the early stage the car was designed and developed by a small number of people due to Lexus' objection. However, once the top dogs saw how capable the car is, the whole situation changed. I believe at that time, the IS-F team has Lexus and Toyota's full support. if they were worried about overheating the bumper, why then does the exhaust terminate underneath the car? You do see that the exhaust is attached to the bumper permanently right? There will be A LOT more heat transfer to the bumper if the muffler is attached to the exhaust. No other car in this class has this setup. Why would Lexus care how many things need to be replaced in the event of a rear-end accident? It's all $$ to them. They just care that you walk out alive, not making it cheaper for you. Because it might come back to bite them when that actually happens. I can see this is another one of those "lawyer decisions" just like the no off-button for the VDIM. Replies to this message: crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 8:48 am) louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 9:15 am) sjaieve (Oct 31, 2007 10:44 am) crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 11:56 am) and 1 more...
#37 of 42 Re: Article comments. [louiswei] by crimsono2 Oct 31, 2007 (8:48 am)
Replying to: louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 8:20 am) You make some valid points. But I never said Lexus was trying to become BMW either. I said they were gunning for, as in trying to compete/beat BMW. So, they looked at BMW's offerings as a benchmark and designed the cars against them. This is well known and demonstrated as, I too have been to the Taste of Lexus event and seen Lexus pit a 335i against the 350 on a short track (IS wins, no surprise there). However, you can't compete in a segment without having similar/comparable characteristic traits. They learned this from the first IS300 they released and adapted accordingly. I guess only time will tell regarding the exhaust. I have a feeling more people will complain about the possible problems with that than rear-collision damage. Hold the fort!! I now know what'll pull the IS-F ahead of the rest of the competition. Park Assist!!! http://www.lexus.com/isf/isf/specs.html Replies to this message: louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 9:15 am) sjaieve (Oct 31, 2007 10:44 am) crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 11:56 am) louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 12:43 pm)
#38 of 42 Re: Article comments. [crimsono2] by louiswei Oct 31, 2007 (9:15 am)
Replying to: crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 8:48 am) They learned this from the first IS300 they released and adapted accordingly. Actually, IS300 was a better handler than the ISX50 and in general consensus, it is a better 3-series competitor. However, the IS300 sold horribly so Lexus decided they can't beat BMW by being BMW thus comes the new IS.
#39 of 42 Re: Article comments. [crimsono2] by sjaieve Oct 31, 2007 (10:44 am)
Replying to: crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 8:48 am) I too have been to the Taste of Lexus event and seen Lexus pit a 335i against the 350 on a short track (IS wins, no surprise there). I know you are involved in a more intelligent discussion with someone else on this forum but your comment here was of interest to me. Are you saying in real life, the IS is faster than the 335i. I am not trying to start an argument, just interested in what you noticed at the Taste of Lex even Replies to this message: crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 11:56 am) louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 12:43 pm)
#40 of 42 Re: Article comments. [sjaieve] by crimsono2 Oct 31, 2007 (11:56 am)
Replying to: sjaieve (Oct 31, 2007 10:44 am) It was a Lexus sponsored event (at the very intro of the IS) where they pit themselves against a BMW 335i...do you honestly think there would be a chance that the BMW would win in a Lexus sponsored test drive event? I didn't...hence the written sarcasm on which won. I didn't mean to imply anything else other than the obvious publicity stunt. Replies to this message: louiswei (Oct 31, 2007 12:43 pm)
#41 of 42 Re: Article comments. [crimsono2] by louiswei Oct 31, 2007 (12:43 pm)
Replying to: crimsono2 (Oct 31, 2007 11:56 am) If it was at the very intro of the IS then that Bimmer should be 330i instead of 335i. The 335i came out at least 1 year later after the 2nd gen IS debut. To pit a 330i against an IS350 I have no reason to assume that Lexus has staged the IS350 to win given that the HP difference is just too big. If it's the 335i then that's a totally different story. Oh yeah and it wasn't a publicity stunt as well.
#42 of 42 last post on non-IS-F by crimsono2 Oct 31, 2007 (4:53 pm)
You're right, at that time it was the 330i. However, even if you think there was no chance in hell a 330i could match up...there are many edmunds BMW330i/IS350 owners that put it to the test and came up with mixed results (see the IS thread "2006 BMW 3-series vs. 2006 Lexus IS"). How's that saying go? Believe half of what you see, and none of what you hear. Either way, I've derailed this non-IS-F related thread long enough. Best of luck to the IS-F release. I have no doubt to its success, but it is not impervious to criticism.