RE: Lexus RC F: Review
Discussion
Wills2 said:
Dale Lomas said:
Wills2 said:
Sounds fantastic, since when was 391ft/lbs no torque? That's bloody loads!
Trust me, it's not enough to pull the skin off a rice pudding, WHEN COMPARED TO the hell that breaks loose around 6000rpm.
At 2000rpm the throttle pedal is simply a volume control
Being a conventional auto would it not just 'kickdown' from 8th to 3rd, or the most appropriate gear, if you floor it from a cruise? If you are just cruising about you would probably be in auto, if you are in manual changing mode you would be more likely be in a lower gear to start with?
Won't be too long before one of the appropriate tuners has done a manual conversion, although would have to choose ratios quite carefully for the power curve. Some variation of the Getrag 6-speed they put in Supras?
Edit:
Edit:
wikipedia said:
V160
Ratios:
First gear: 3.827:1
Second gear: 2.360:1
Third gear: 1.685:1
Fourth gear: 1.312:1
Fifth gear: 1:1
Sixth gear: 0.793:1
Applications:
May 1993 - August 1998 Toyota Supra Twin Turbo JZA80
V161
Ratios:
First gear: 3.724:1
Second gear: 2.246:1
Third gear: 1.541:1
Fourth gear: 1.205:1
Fifth gear: 1:1
Sixth gear: 0.818:1
Applications:
May 1996 - July 2002 Toyota Supra Non-Turbo JZA80 Japan-Spec Model (SZ-R Grade Only)
September 1997 - July 2002 Toyota Supra Twin Turbo JZA80 Japan-Spec Model
I know these boxes have been mated up to the older V8s, but they have a more linear output, AFAIK.Ratios:
First gear: 3.827:1
Second gear: 2.360:1
Third gear: 1.685:1
Fourth gear: 1.312:1
Fifth gear: 1:1
Sixth gear: 0.793:1
Applications:
May 1993 - August 1998 Toyota Supra Twin Turbo JZA80
V161
Ratios:
First gear: 3.724:1
Second gear: 2.246:1
Third gear: 1.541:1
Fourth gear: 1.205:1
Fifth gear: 1:1
Sixth gear: 0.818:1
Applications:
May 1996 - July 2002 Toyota Supra Non-Turbo JZA80 Japan-Spec Model (SZ-R Grade Only)
September 1997 - July 2002 Toyota Supra Twin Turbo JZA80 Japan-Spec Model
Edited by mr2j on Thursday 11th December 18:18
Edited by mr2j on Thursday 11th December 18:19
ITP said:
Being a conventional auto would it not just 'kickdown' from 8th to 3rd, or the most appropriate gear, if you floor it from a cruise? If you are just cruising about you would probably be in auto, if you are in manual changing mode you would be more likely be in a lower gear to start with?
Exactly that. I have an ISF, and when in manual mode, dropping it down from 8th is a royal PITA. But as you say, when cruising I'm in auto and it kicks down to exactly where you need it. When in manual, you're generally hovering around 4th/5th/6th anyway, waiting for an opportunity to floor it. I wouldn't go as far as saying it lacks torque... It obviously doesn't have the monumental shove that the new breed of turbo V8's have but if I'm honest, they don't do it for me; I like to work an engine...
Anyway, thanks for the write up Dale
Cable said:
ITP said:
Being a conventional auto would it not just 'kickdown' from 8th to 3rd, or the most appropriate gear, if you floor it from a cruise? If you are just cruising about you would probably be in auto, if you are in manual changing mode you would be more likely be in a lower gear to start with?
Exactly that. I have an ISF, and when in manual mode, dropping it down from 8th is a royal PITA. But as you say, when cruising I'm in auto and it kicks down to exactly where you need it. When in manual, you're generally hovering around 4th/5th/6th anyway, waiting for an opportunity to floor it. If you're in 8th in manual mode Dale you're driving it wrong.
I really wish people, especially car journalists who should really know better would stop saying things like 400lbs isn't enough. That kind of torque would have been unheard of in an engine like this 10 years ago and yet now it's not good enough.
It's talk like this as much as any silly EU regs which will guarantee that screaming NA engines like this become extinct. BMW made two of the most brilliant NA engines in there V8 and V10 that I've ever had the pleasure to drive but instead of people praising them for their ability to scream to 8000rpm, all we got was a load of people complaining about their "apparent" lack of torque. Now we have ended up with two very anodyne turbocharged units that need fake noise piped into the cabin because they sound rubbish.
A PERFORMANCE saloon should be exciting to drive and sound like gods mating at the redline. If I wanted to drive a car with lots of low down torque and no fizz, there are already plenty of diesels available for that.
Well done to Lexus for sticking to their guns.
It's talk like this as much as any silly EU regs which will guarantee that screaming NA engines like this become extinct. BMW made two of the most brilliant NA engines in there V8 and V10 that I've ever had the pleasure to drive but instead of people praising them for their ability to scream to 8000rpm, all we got was a load of people complaining about their "apparent" lack of torque. Now we have ended up with two very anodyne turbocharged units that need fake noise piped into the cabin because they sound rubbish.
A PERFORMANCE saloon should be exciting to drive and sound like gods mating at the redline. If I wanted to drive a car with lots of low down torque and no fizz, there are already plenty of diesels available for that.
Well done to Lexus for sticking to their guns.
Don't like the way it looks, just a matter of taste I guess but Lexus never made pretty cars so they're not going backwards like the rest, I mean mercs were much nicer 10 years ago for example have you seen the new cls? Saw one of the xf (r 's ?) earlier , blue jag with silly spoiler , horrific.
sealtt said:
Seems cool, though a touch heavy.
That's because the "front section is from the wide-body GS, the middle section hails from the previous generation IS C (a convertible), and the rear third is stolen from the current-gen IS"http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1409_20...
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff