Compared- Rc-F Vs Bmw "motor Trend"

[pj8708]

Here is Motor Trends results of the RC-F & the BMW M4.

I know I'm going to get flack over this, but I still think these race course/ road test are interesting but is almost without relevance to the mass customer base that buys a Lexus. Now I know and appreciate the excellent engineering that goes into these beautiful machines, but driving 90 mph on a two lane mountain road is something I rarely do.

I think much of these comparisons are swayed one way or another based on which manufacturer is stroking the ego of the writer. Okay, that probably isn't fair but when I'm up to my elbows in snow I'd rather know how well the all wheel drive on my RX works so my wife can get to work at the hospital.

So, I've given my two cents worth. Put your 3 cents in. Tell us what you think.

Paul

http://www.motortrend.com/roadtests/coupes/1502_2015_bmw_m4_vs_2015_lexus_rc_f_comparison/viewall.html

[midwesterner]

As a guy who has a journalism background and spent a good part of his corporate career dealing with the global press -- trade and general media -- I'd say the automotive journalists may not always suppress their biases, but I doubt they're selling their egos. I think most regard themselves as fiercely independent. Don't forget the highly favorable press ratings of the new IS vs Euro competitors, and the Road & Track test that put the IS350 f-sport ahead of the 3-series BMW.

More relevant, I think, is your assessment of Lexus customers. As I noted in another post, I think Lexus management clearly sees the difference between the Lexus buyer and the dedicated maximum performance buyer who wants the last degree of performance engineering and measures the car by the extent to which it owns track performance rights or the ultimate road-test comparo.

Having said that, if you produce a car that claims to compete with the ultimate performance leaders, you've got to be willing to take the results when the rubber his the road. It is not lost on me that the RC350 has pretty much the same technical specs and performance characteristics as my GS350, even the weight is not far off. Surely Lexus brought it to market knowing that. So sexy looks aside, how much of a performance car have we got? Will the RC-F make the average buyer select the RC350? We'll see, but I don't think it will steal many Porsche Cayman sales.

Bottom line: I think Lexus has clearly targeted its market, and is operating on the assumption that it's strategy will gain more over time than it loses. Meanwhile, each generation improves.

[LEX-SV]

Caymen/Boxster 2 seater sports cars in a league of their own IMHO, after owning 2.

RC/4 series/new and not released yet C sports coupes, now we have a legit battle in hi perf lux coupes IMO.

Yes, I have same concern that the 3.5L is essentially unchanged since model year 2006, and it's used today in heavier and more expensive vehicles, this engine needs to be revised for at least another 10% increase in output. It's plenty quick in older 3600 pound rwd models, but not so much in cars pushing 4000 pounds.

Agreed, the number are what they are in that comparison in Motor Trend. and its useful data.

But I put little weight on the subjective "rankings" in the end, I reach my own conclusions.

[midwesterner]

About the only way the subjective rankings work is if you know enough about the writers' preferences and biases to be able to equate your own. There were some pretty consistent people over the years at R&T and Automobile, and I could use their opinions as a measure. I have seen writers contradict themselves in the space of a single story. Nevertheless, I've found many of the automotive writers to offer reliable evaluations.

I recently re-read the R&T GS 350 vs Audi A7 comparison from May 2012. Besides thinking that the A6 would have been a more appropriate comparison, I thought the assessment was among the weakest I've ever seen. In the measurements, the two cars pretty much split their advantages down the middle, and in some cases were simply about equal. I though the road testers floundered in looking for points of departure, and wound up with a fairly shallow piece of work. The Audi won by a few points, but that was almost a direct contradiction to some of the real-world driving ratings that favored the Lexus.

However, the guys I grew up with a R&T are gone, and I don't relate to the new editorial staff, same with Automobile, and I have dropped my subscriptions to both.

Actually, I've come to have a level of confidence in the CR and Edmunds ratings, as I've found those testers tend to bring my values to their assessments. Both, incidentally, have been more willing to grant gains to Lexus than many of their enthusiast-book peers.

So, the tests and ratings can give some insight,and maybe guide the reader on points to check when testing. But as you say, the only way to really know is to drive the cars, look at your own criteria and preferences, and make your own decision. That's how I chose the Saab a few years back, and pretty much how I chose the GS.

[LEX-SV]

I subscribe to R&T and C&D still. Also subscribe to CR, which I use mainly (automotive-wise that is) for reliability data tracking.

The rest I treat like rags mainly for lining a bird cage, no that's an exaggeration, I don't have a bird or bird cage. I will read them if bored.

Yes, driving with criteria and preferences in mind leads to the final determination for me too.