RE: Lexus RC F vs BMW M4

[Baryonyx]

belleair302 said:

I fail to understand why track performance gets people so excited. I could build a track 'slag' for £12,000 that would blow these two away on both the road and track....but what really matters is how these cars deal with the M25 on a wet Sunday....a blast across France for the weekend and driving to and fro with wife, children....to see clients etc.

It's the halo model effect. If having a really good day to day car was your concern, you'd probably buy a decent Lexus LS-h. These provide more fun and 'sportiness' whilst not being as compromised as your hypothetical £12,000 track slag would be.

[unsprung]

Truly amazing times: we are presented with such capable machines. And there are more in or near this segment. I'm not suggesting that they're easily affordable. But just look at what buyers get for the money.

In the past, I'd have chosen the BMW. But now I'd go for the Lexus.

Others here have already mentioned positive things about the RC F (and of Lexus in general). I'd like to add one more: the dealership experience.

[danielj58]

wst said:

Bloody hell, those brake disks! That's something I never expected to see from a road car, even on a track.

Look at how much it's pitched down too, that suggests some pretty ferocious stopping power!

Selmer Mk6 said:

Hmm the M4 is no longer the class leader. A Lexus that is too heavy and only fractions behind the pace is an achievement.

Think it may possibly be more a reflection of driving talent than the cars raw performance itself (not meant as an insult!) The RC F would seem more accessible though.

kambites said:

Hmm, sounds like they're both rather flawed as road cars? It'll be interesting to see what Audi and Mercedes can do with their next generation cars in this sector.

The m4 doesn't sound flawed on the road to me? One of the biggest "criticisms":

article said:

But mess with the settings too much, soften that suspension, embrace the eco mode too often and the big M car just becomes a well-appointed 335i.

It's supposed to be used everyday, that you can dial it back to the comfort of an 'ordinary' 3 series is surely a good thing?

I think where my loyalty lies is pretty clear, but trying to be objective: the m4 styling is FAR too fussy, i actually prefer the msport kit over the m4 kit, and it sounds naff. Other than that I struggle to find flaws with it.

[big_rob_sydney]

Lexus fan here.

No surprise that the M car was quicker, but then it costs a lot more, and the lions share of it was in a big brake upgrade costing over 6k. It SHOULD be quicker around a circuit.

And if thats the extent of it, then AFAIC, the Lexus has done ore than enough.

What I dont understand, is why didnt they test the cars in comparable spec, ie same price, and standard brakes vs standard brakes?

Or did they deliberately want the M car to have a braking advantage from the start. Its a bit like cheating if you ask me.

[EricE]

I test drove the M4 a second time recently (admittedly at a damp day) and I really think the M-line needs to offer an AWD version. The engine, although extremely powerful, just didn't feel spectacular enough to make the car an event.

Sadly it has come to the point where'd enjoy the M4 more as a quick AWD point-to-point daily driver with easily deployable power (Nissan GTR, Golf R come to mind) than the relatively awkward (and to me disappointing) package it is right now.

My hope is that the M2 will be to the M4 what the Cayman GTS is to the 911S.

[Patrick Bateman]

Much has already been said about the M4's sister car on these pages. Unconvincing aurally, and a disappointingly bland at sane speeds. These are fair complaints, but worth re-iterating in this test of the M4 too. The stark contrast between that twitchy ten-tenths monster that just bested the RC F on track and the slightly vague M4 driven home is amazing. And yes, it's definitely the same car. Nobody swapped it.

Given it's something I'd more than likely only be using on the road (in a potential 10 years time), that is a fairly big mark against it.

[Dan Trent]

big_rob_sydney said:

What I dont understand, is why didnt they test the cars in comparable spec, ie same price, and standard brakes vs standard brakes?

Hi there,

Unfortunately we can't be that specific and we have to take the cars as they're specced by the manufacturer - obviously it's there in black and white (or, rather, glowing red hot!) in the piece if a key element of the car is a cost extra and, as you identify, it may have an impact on the performance in the test.

For what it's worth I've not seen ANY press M3/M4s on the standard brakes - all the UK press cars are on ceramics, as were all the cars on the launch so I don't think anyone will have been able to test one yet. Personally I think that's a shame and manufacturers should provide test vehicles with and without the options for test but such is the way of it.

And, while I'm here, the Lexus's brakes were pretty damned strong on the track too. OK, they didn't glow red hot but nor did they fade or go soft, even with all that extra weight to haul up. 'Old tech' or not they're up to the job!

Cheers,

Dan

Edited by Dan Trent on Monday 23 February 08:14

[kambites]

danielj58 said:

kambites said:

Hmm, sounds like they're both rather flawed as road cars? It'll be interesting to see what Audi and Mercedes can do with their next generation cars in this sector.

The m4 doesn't sound flawed on the road to me? One of the biggest "criticisms":

article said:

But mess with the settings too much, soften that suspension, embrace the eco mode too often and the big M car just becomes a well-appointed 335i.

It's supposed to be used everyday, that you can dial it back to the comfort of an 'ordinary' 3 series is surely a good thing?

I meant flawed as a car to enjoy driving fast on the road. I'm sure it's capable enough at playing the 420d when it needs to but bland and vague at sane speeds and hard-edged and twitchy at the limit is exactly what I don't want in order to have fun on the road.

Edited by kambites on Monday 23 February 08:19

[MyCC]

I think what this test illustrates is just how important a special engine / exhaust note still is for a sports saloon/coupe. The new M Cars are technically amazing and yet the engine note just leaves you cold which tends to undermine their emotional connection.

It will be the E90 that will be more prized in time thanks to that fantastic sonorous V8 engine. Fair play to Lexus for continuing the theme, but the mantle is prime for the taking, here's looking at you Mercedes/Jaguar.

Regards,

MyCC.

[moffat]

The RCF is a hideous looking thing from the outside and terrible inside too. Big thumbs up for the V8 which would have made this car shine had it not been for the excessive lardy nature.

The C63 and C63S have got a great opportunity to shine now as the C63 has an epic interior and epic engine if the AMG GT is anything to go by. Hopefully my money will be going into a C63S Estate in 2 years time.

[TobesH]

Dan Trent said:

big_rob_sydney said:

What I dont understand, is why didnt they test the cars in comparable spec, ie same price, and standard brakes vs standard brakes?

Hi there,

Unfortunately we can't be that specific and we have to take the cars as they're specced by the manufacturer - obviously it's there in black and white (or, rather, glowing red hot!) in the piece if a key element of the car is a cost extra and, as you identify, it may have an impact on the performance in the test.

For what it's worth I've not seen ANY press M3/M4s on the standard brakes - all the UK press cars are on ceramics, as were all the cars on the launch so I don't think anyone will have been able to test one yet. Personally I think that's a shame and manufacturers should provide test vehicles with and without the options for test but such is the way of it.

And, while I'm here, the Lexus's brakes were pretty damned strong on the track too. OK, they didn't glow red hot but nor did they fade or go soft, even with all that extra weight to haul up. 'Old tech' or not they're up to the job!

Cheers,

Dan

Edited by Dan Trent on Monday 23 February 08:14

The current EVO Magazine has a very informative article comparing steel to ceramic brakes. The performance is pretty much the same initially but the ceramics simply don't fade.

[Oz83]

The M4 isn't a handsome car, but that Lexus has a face only a mother could love.

Why can't manufacturers produce good looking cars any more? Sporty design seems to mean fussy and over-aggressive these days.

I have high hopes for the C63, but then it will probably end up looking like the road going equivalent of a crystal chandelier.

[GTEYE]

Interesting.

Autocar seemed to prefer the M4 over the Lexus in almost every way, perhaps soundtrack excepted.

To me the BMW isn't a great looker, but the Lexus is vile, especially the front.

[kambites]

Oz83 said:

Why can't manufacturers produce good looking cars any more? Sporty design seems to mean fussy and over-aggressive these days.

The minimum hard-point clearance requirements have pushed up bonnet lines meaning that fussy details are needed at the front and on the sides to avoid having huge slabs of unadorned paint (I think BMW particularly suffer from this because they insist on using inline-sixes which are very long and very tall). This also means that in order to have detail lines which rise as they go back along the car's sides (which make a car look more raked and hence sportier), manufacturers have to have these weird broken lines which don't meet up with each other.

Another issue is that with today's average two litre diesel rep-mobile looking "sportier" than yesterday's mental super-saloon, the top models have to be OTT to make them stand out at all.

Edited by kambites on Monday 23 February 09:18

[PunterCam]

I still find it hilarious that journalists praise cars for having softer plastic in the cabin, as if plastic is somehow a luxury material, and softer plastic is a sign of real class.

I wouldn't be interested in either, but I'd probably lean towards the lexus if pushed. An engine I'd enjoy, a cabin that certainly looks a lot more inviting, and the fact that it was just a posh toyota would sway me. It's still quite a classless brand, lexus.. It's not aspirational, like bmw..

[Soupie69uk]

I am surprised there are so many people choosing the Lexus over the BMW. Nice to see its getting some positive attention.

I am not as big a fan of the look of the M4 as the M3. I like how the rear half looks with the extra door, same with the C63s as well.

I would struggle to choose between the M4 and Lexus and I am sure I would be very happy with either. I hope the Audi and Merc give these pair a good run for their money.

[moffat]

PunterCam said:

It's still quite a classless brand, lexus.. It's not aspirational, like bmw..

Really, their price points are certainly aspirational?

I think that Lexus are desperately trying to make it a 'class' brand but are falling short. The new NX is certainly priced to compete directly with the RR Evoque as are the rest of the models.

[danielj58]

kambites said:

danielj58 said:

kambites said:

Hmm, sounds like they're both rather flawed as road cars? It'll be interesting to see what Audi and Mercedes can do with their next generation cars in this sector.

The m4 doesn't sound flawed on the road to me? One of the biggest "criticisms":

article said:

But mess with the settings too much, soften that suspension, embrace the eco mode too often and the big M car just becomes a well-appointed 335i.

It's supposed to be used everyday, that you can dial it back to the comfort of an 'ordinary' 3 series is surely a good thing?

I meant flawed as a car to enjoy driving fast on the road. I'm sure it's capable enough at playing the 420d when it needs to but bland and vague at sane speeds and hard-edged and twitchy at the limit is exactly what I don't want in order to have fun on the road.

Edited by kambites on Monday 23 February 08:19

Fair enough, this has been a trend for the last decade though, filtering down from the supercar elite. In the next few years we'll be saying the same of hot hatches I imagine.

Car makers have got very good at making ludicrous speed accessible, and as a result (in my opinion) Britain doesn't have aren't any roads where you can push these cars to the point of being fun (or what we'd define as fun); in years gone by you could do it with serious risk of ban and to life and limb, but it's simply not do-able now. Someone mentioned something similar above this, the BMW is torn between being an epic point-to-point car and a drivers car, and as a result in all but the perfect conditions it feels awkward.

What I hope for, next gen the M4 gets a twin turbo v8, the M2 inherits the twin turbo i6 and the M5 goes twin turbo v10. That would be stunning me thinks, the M2 would take the role of M3's gone by, the M4 would graduate to the tourer BMW wants it to be, and the M5 could go back to basics.

But I also think that in 7 years time come the new model, people will be more fond of this generation, as is the way with recent M cars.

[kambites]

danielj58 said:

Fair enough, this has been a trend for the last decade though, filtering down from the supercar elite. In the next few years we'll be saying the same of hot hatches I imagine.

I think we already are.

It'd be nice to think the M2 will be a bit more... exploitable, but I'm pretty sure BMW will continue down the path of chasing numbers at the expense of fun.

BMW really need to make a small sports car again so the M division can have something interesting to play with. I'd love to see a Z2 - something alone the lines of the original Z3 but less... crap than the Z3 cabriolet. I think the Z3 coupe was the last BMW I genuinely desired.

Edited by kambites on Monday 23 February 10:12

[Oz83]

kambites said:

Oz83 said:

Why can't manufacturers produce good looking cars any more? Sporty design seems to mean fussy and over-aggressive these days.

The minimum hard-point clearance requirements have pushed up bonnet lines meaning that fussy details are needed at the front and on the sides to avoid having huge slabs of unadorned paint (I think BMW particularly suffer from this because they insist on using inline-sixes which are very long and very tall). This also means that in order to have detail lines which rise as they go back along the car's sides (which make a car look more raked and hence sportier), manufacturers have to have these weird broken lines which don't meet up with each other.

Another issue is that with today's average two litre diesel rep-mobile looking "sportier" than yesterday's mental super-saloon, the top models have to be OTT to make them stand out at all.

Edited by kambites on Monday 23 February 09:18

I know the safety regs are making it more difficult, but the first Jag XF looked good, as does the current RS4/6. It's the scoops within scoops surrounded by a scoop that I don't like. I used to be a massive fan of BMW styling (E46 and Z3 coupe in particular) but i find the new stuff to be quite vulgar. Having said that, it's still easier to swallow than the Lexus. Quirky Japanese styling taken to the extreme.