Lexus IS-F Gets LSD

[ArmyBimmerDude]

Originally Posted by Cabinetman

Mine was Mercury Metallic (silver). I averaged between 18 and 19 mpg. On the highway with the cruise set around 75mph I would get 26 mpg. I was very impressed with the gas mileage considering the performance of the car. It also kept the F from getting hit with a gas guzzler tax.

I read somewhere the reason why it has an 8-speed AT was because of mpg and the ability to avoid the gas guzzler tax. My fiance wants an IS-F and if those numbers are correct, then she'll be a happy girl.

[Cabinetman]

Originally Posted by ArmyBimmerDude

I read somewhere the reason why it has an 8-speed AT was because of mpg and the ability to avoid the gas guzzler tax. My fiance wants an IS-F and if those numbers are correct, then she'll be a happy girl.

The 8 speed definitely helps. The F reaches its top speed in 6th so gears 7 and 8 are both overdrives. Also, the 5.0L engine uses both port and direct injection which might help gas mileage a bit.

My gas mileage is in line with what most owners are getting. There are a number of guys over on clublexus that are getting 20 mpg or better. My commute is mostly city driving which kept my average down a bit.

[330CIZHP]

Keep in mind the M3 Nurburgring Lap times of 8:05 are with the 6 speed manual.

Some people (Swamp etc.) claim the M-DCT should run faster than the 6 speed manual M3 under 8:00, which should be a better comparison with the auto transmission in the IS-F and its 8:18 time.

The IS-F suspension is rock hard as it is. Way more than the M3 is in its race track setting. I cannot see them "tuning it up" anymore. If anything, Lexus will end up softening it up since there are too many complaints of the car's head constantly bobbling all the time on the highway.

Originally Posted by footie

The IS-F time for the ring is actually 8:18 (sorry for correcting you) and to be honest I doubt that a slip would drop this by 13 seconds as there is much more important things which would need to be done as well as a LSD, if suspension tweaks are included as part of the overall changes then it's possible that it could be close. But as I said above, that is much more than pure performance figures in decided a new car, even when the cars in question are performance versions.

P.S.
On a similar note, I would love to know what's the difference between the S4 and the S5, the Audi S5 posted something like 8:25 in it's basic form and I would love to know how much of an improvement all that new technology (Sportsdiff, adaptive suspension, adaptive steering and DSG) plus the lighter torquier V6 will make. If it's 10 whole seconds better then every one of those options would be money well spent.

[Serious]

Did they fix the ride quality yet? Or is it still bed of nails rough?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by footie

Though to put it frankly I don't understand some of the defence comments on this forum, what is exactly wrong with another competitor's car being as good as an M3, there is a lot more an just performance to the decision process, well it is for me anyway.

There is nothing wrong with it. But you are simply taking markerting at its word. Let the independent tests happen. I guarantee you will be wrong. Simply putting a LSD in the IS-F will not make it lap as fast as the M3, sorry it won't happen. You also seem to think the only thing holding the IS-F from being as good as the M3 is "just" a LSD, do you get what you are typing. Do you see a 2 second gap between a C63 and a C63 with an LSD (perf. package)?

[!Xoible]

Originally Posted by M3_WC

There is nothing wrong with it. But you are simply taking markerting at its word. Let the independent tests happen. I guarantee you will be wrong. Simply putting a LSD in the IS-F will not make it lap as fast as the M3, sorry it won't happen. You also seem to think the only thing holding the IS-F from being as good as the M3 is "just" a LSD, do you get what you are typing. Do you see a 2 second gap between a C63 and a C63 with an LSD (perf. package)?

is someone so insecure?

[M3_WC]

Originally Posted by !Xoible

is someone so insecure?

I am being logical.

Do you see a 2 second gap between a C63 and a C63 with a LSD (perf pack)?

Please tell me how you believe a LSD will all of sudden transfer the IS-F into a M3. Please do.

If I was insecure about lap times, I wouldn't have bought a heavy convertible.

[Robin_NL]

Dunno if it's 2 seconds but a proper lsd can do a 'lot' to a powerful rwd performancecar....

Let's wait for the independent tests.

[footie]

Originally Posted by 330CIZHP

Keep in mind the M3 Nurburgring Lap times of 8:05 are with the 6 speed manual.

Some people (Swamp etc.) claim the M-DCT should run faster than the 6 speed manual M3 under 8:00, which should be a better comparison with the auto transmission in the IS-F and its 8:18 time.

The IS-F suspension is rock hard as it is. Way more than the M3 is in its race track setting. I cannot see them "tuning it up" anymore. If anything, Lexus will end up softening it up since there are too many complaints of the car's head constantly bobbling all the time on the highway.

If Lexus have softened the suspension it will probably improve it ring time, after all that is how Horst got his best time out of the M3.

Another thing, whether it's true that an M-DCT M3 would be that much quicker is up for debate. But as this is only hearsay best we not discuss it's merits just yet.

The only thing that is known is that on a 2 minute long lap the M3 is roughly 2 secs quicker than the older IS-F. Until some data appears for the new one we can only take Lexus at their word which if true means the IS-F is finally on terms with the mighty M. Not a bad result for the new kid of the bunch.

[adc]

Originally Posted by footie

The only thing that is known is that on a 2 minute long lap the M3 is roughly 2 secs quicker than the older IS-F on one particular racetrack.

There, fixed. Lexus didn't offer test results from other tracks.

Speculate at your own peril.

[Cabinetman]

Originally Posted by seriousm3

Did they fix the ride quality yet? Or is it still bed of nails rough?

From what I have heard the suspension is unchanged. When I had my F I thought the suspension was tight, but it never seemed excessive to me. Even my wife said it wasn't too bad. Granted, my daily driver is a 3/4 ton Chevy 4x4 pickup so my perception of rough might be a bit skewed.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by 330CIZHP

Keep in mind the M3 Nurburgring Lap times of 8:05 are with the 6 speed manual.

Some people (Swamp etc.) claim the M-DCT should run faster than the 6 speed manual M3 under 8:00, which should be a better comparison with the auto transmission in the IS-F and its 8:18 time.

A couple of details here...

On paper, I'd say the M3 should be faster with the auto, so it seems a bit strange that Horst (or whomever) either hasn't gotten out there to play, or in fact he did and was encouraged to sit on the results. I'd assume the former, possibly on the basis of BMW having an idea of the results and making test cars scarce.

Or not. Still seems strange, though. Are the M3 autos now bug free on track? I haven't been reading up lately.

The other thing is that the 8:05 bimmer time was done on PSC+ tires, meaning the same type as those on the GT3, Viper ACR, etc. As a rule of thumb, those tires are likely good for around a second a minute compared to the PS2s.

Don't get me wrong. BMW didn't cheat or anything, as those tires are (or were) an option on Euro versions. Not in the states, though, so apples aren't exactly apples against the Toyota.

I'd love it if the Toyota guys threw a scare into the M folks with these changes, though. Maybe they'd hurl a bit more spice into the E9X cars as a result. Competition is good.

Originally Posted by 330CIZHP

The IS-F suspension is rock hard as it is. Way more than the M3 is in its race track setting. I cannot see them "tuning it up" anymore. If anything, Lexus will end up softening it up since there are too many complaints of the car's head constantly bobbling all the time on the highway.

We'll see when it comes out, but the only suspension changes I saw were new anti-sway bars to complement the new wheels. I have no idea whether that means going firmer of softer, though. As footie says, softer would probably be better at the 'Ring.

By the way, I can't believe the suspension is way firmer than the M3 track setting. Both times I tried that setting, I got some wheelhop on bumpy roads. That's pretty much blasphemous for road-going BMWs.

Bruce

[swamp2]

Originally Posted by bruce.augenstein@comcast.

Are the M3 autos now bug free on track? I haven't been reading up lately.

In my recent track weekend, because I had both forgot the line to such a great extent and had rear tires nearly gone, I spent the majority of my time in automatic mode. It was a bit of a bummer but I still had fun. However, from numerous accounts herein the M-DCT at full tilt on the track is marvelous. It had two early bugs; occasional inability to downshift under very hard braking and some isolated cases or gear skipping. Only the former was reported with any real frequency and again both issues have been completely fixed some time ago.

Totally agree about it being odd that we don't have HvS M-DCT N'Ring time and also that it is a bit unfortunate/apples to oranges that the time we do have was on PSC+.

[ToothDoc]

Well, I'm glad that Bruce and Swamp at least recognize that the 8:05 was on PSC+ tires. I find it odd that most guys never or conveniently forget that. I suspect the DCT tranny with PS2 tires actually gives worse results than 8:05.

Also, the ride isn't so bad on the IS-F. Sure, that's what people complain about and the constant gear changing. But there's not much more to complain about. The only complaint I personally have is the weight and not enough HP/power mods. Nobody has cracked the ECU yet and a couple of twin turbo and nitrous out there, but not something I want.

The 255 rear and 225 fronts were also probably/possibly a fuel saving measure. You could easily stick 265s or 275s on the 9 inch rear rims IMO if you really wanted to go tracking. But for the 99% of driving I do (not on track), the 225/255 is really enough. Heck my drag tires are only 245s and I can't get them to spin. I'm thinking of upping to 245/275 for track use.

[a burrito]

Originally Posted by JetBlack5OC

Mercedes does offer a LSD in stock form.

You're right, the benz does offer the Rare Performance Package for the C63 but it does not include it in the C63 as stock equipment whereas the M3 and the ISF does. Sorry for the confusion.

[footie]

I know I harp on about this but not every setup will fully benefit from having the grippier rubber and don't always assume that even then the improvement will not always be that great, even on a track as long as the ring.

I would make a stab and say that the rubber on it's own in the M3 is accounting for 3~5 seconds on the ring, so that would still leave a PS2 equipped M3 posting somewhere between 8:08~8:10. I'm actually not that sure that the M-DCT will improve things that much on this track, I reckon it's biggest gain will come on much smoother circuits. So I concur that probably it will be no better than 8:05.

[GTM]

M3 wins in terms of performance/driving experience no matter what(even if IS-F comes with LSD or what)


But I really liked IS-F because this car also offers great reliablity.
If I was going to own the car more than 4-5 years, I would definitly got IS-F.
You can NOT beat Lexus reliablity/service quaility.

[bruce.augenstein@comcast.]

Originally Posted by footie

I know I harp on about this but not every setup will fully benefit from having the grippier rubber and don't always assume that even then the improvement will not always be that great, even on a track as long as the ring.

I would make a stab and say that the rubber on it's own in the M3 is accounting for 3~5 seconds on the ring, so that would still leave a PS2 equipped M3 posting somewhere between 8:08~8:10. I'm actually not that sure that the M-DCT will improve things that much on this track, I reckon it's biggest gain will come on much smoother circuits. So I concur that probably it will be no better than 8:05.

Sometime in the murky past (meaning before last week), we went over this a fair bit, and while I certainly concur that a stock street car will not be able to extract full benefit from track sneakers, my experience with several different cars on several different tracks indicates a "fat" second per minute from DOT-legal donuts. Others in a couple of run clubs have also indicated this to be a general rule of thumb. Finally, I believe I quoted some test results somewhere that backed up my position, although I don't remember the source at the moment.

With the extra tread groove on the PSC+, I back that off to about a second per minute.

In any event, we're more or less disagreeing on the actual size of a dimple on a pimple on a flea's left nut, so whether the M3 would've done an 8:08 or an 8:13 seems less important than the fact that it would not do an 8:05, which some of the faithful conveniently forget.

Bruce

[330CIZHP]

Originally Posted by footie

If Lexus have softened the suspension it will probably improve it ring time, after all that is how Horst got his best time out of the M3.

Another thing, whether it's true that an M-DCT M3 would be that much quicker is up for debate. But as this is only hearsay best we not discuss it's merits just yet.

The only thing that is known is that on a 2 minute long lap the M3 is roughly 2 secs quicker than the older IS-F. Until some data appears for the new one we can only take Lexus at their word which if true means the IS-F is finally on terms with the mighty M. Not a bad result for the new kid of the bunch.

It is only fair to compare apples to apples, which is track runs on the same day and back to back by the same driver.

In that case, M3 and IS-F were tested around Top Gear race track both being driven by The Stig back to back.

M3 lap time: 1.25.3
IS-F lap time: 1:26.9

Now it is close to 2 seconds difference, but it is all relative to the size of the track. Smaller tracks will amplify the impact of a second on the laptime. It is only fair to compare M3 vs cars that were 2 second faster around TG track. If you saw the Best Motoring track race, the IS-F was well over 10 - 12 car lengths behind the M3 to the Tsukuba circuit finish line and their time difference was less than 2 seconds.

If you look at cars that were 1.23.xx and two second faster than the M3 on the Top Gear lap times, you would be amazed since they all are supercars costing three times as much and not even in M3 league such as, Lamborghini Murcielago, Pagani, Zonda, Koeniggsegg etc. Just goes to show how much of a superior track car the M3 is compared to IS-F.

[footie]

I'm quite confident (90% sure) that the M3 used on that day was equipped with the 19" alloys and wearing Cup+.

I also recall the RS4, itself equipped was semi-race rubber but not quite as grippy posted a very similar time to the M3.

[330CIZHP]

Originally Posted by footie

I'm quite confident (90% sure) that the M3 used on that day was equipped with the 19" alloys and wearing Cup+.

I also recall the RS4, itself equipped was semi-race rubber but not quite as grippy posted a very similar time to the M3.

Which one are you talking about? Nurburgring? Top Gear? No both cars were bone stock with their standard PS2 tires. There was no mentioning of any optional or aftermarket tires on the M3 sedan.

Regarding Best Motoring, I don't remember. I will have to find the video again and see if it was a different tire than the stock PS2. Remember there were two races. One with a white coupe and one with a silver sedan with IS-F and C63. The results were almost the same in both. Tire wise, I think it was PS2, but I have to check again.

[SCCAForums.com]

I'd agree... with M3_WC

This is apples to apples: http://image.motortrend.com/f/816778...race_chart.jpg



The M3 beat them both by 4 seconds... so 2 seconds isn't going to be enough time.

Also... if the track in Japan is all 'Right Handers'... I believe 2 seconds... as that will induce the most wheelspin... if the track is left handers... the cars tendency to 'one wheel spin' is far less likely.

Here are the video's as well:
[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/hp9lkr4mBtM&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/hp9lkr4mBtM&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_vj5KL0urvQ&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_vj5KL0urvQ&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[u2b]<object width="425" height="344"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/8bzVvsD-8eU&hl=en&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/8bzVvsD-8eU&hl=en&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="425" height="344"></embed></object>[/u2b]

Peace,
Dave