[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Kampfer

How do you have a "one-piece CF?" I didn't realize there was CFRP out there that was multi-directional! How exciting.

The McLaren contains a CFRP tub that sits within an Al frame. The LF-A has an all-CFRP cabin which of course should be much more expensive to make.

And the reason why the other supercars are brought up is because it shows how fast this car can be. You say those other supercars are old but the Lexus has been in development in almost just as much time. Especially since a car they originally designed to have an aluminum spaceframe was ditched in favor of an all-new CFRP frame

Noted. Which is why i refrained from calling it all CF. I just meant one piece production.

McLaren reports that it has developed a new carbon fibre production process that allows the hollow MonoCell to be produced to exacting quality standards, in a single piece, in only four hours.

Rest of it does not matter. Just means that it is a generation late (and overpriced/slow for the times which is the point ive been trying to make).

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Rest of it does not matter. Just means that it is a generation late (and overpriced/slow for the times which is the point ive been trying to make).

So again, by this logic every supercar (excluding the Zonda F) built between 2002 and now were overpriced sub-par performers because they couldn't beat the Enzo's time.

Btw, the CCX could only put down 7:33 and the Murcielago LP 670-4 SuperVeloce was tested last year and could only muster 7:42.

[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

So again, by this logic every supercar (excluding the Zonda F) built between 2002 and now were overpriced sub-par performers because they couldn't beat the Enzo's time.

Huge problem. All of them (except a few boutique models like the Reventon) cost less than the Enzo.

I know where this is going, the Veyron. BUT, the Veyron absolutely excels at the straightaway while paying the price around the corners. Please dont start saying this Lexus is some sort of unbeatable Lotus Exige built for carving up the track machine now.

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Huge problem. All of them (except a few boutique models like the Reventon) cost less than the Enzo.

I know where this is going, the Veyron. BUT, the Veyron absolutely excels at the straightaway while paying the price around the corners. Please dont start saying this Lexus is some sort of unbeatable Lotus Exige built for carving up the track machine now.

They may cost less than the Enzo...but most of them are still significantly more than the LF A.

LF A $375 000 7:24
Zonda F Clubsport $741 000 7:24
Enzo $1M 7:25

Carrera GT $440 000 7:28
Koenigsegg CCX $650 000 7:33
F430 Scuderia $300 000 7:39
SLR $500 000 7:40
Murcielago 670-4 SuperVeloce $450 000 7:42

The Veyron has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. There will always be something faster. But, to this point, the LF A has put down the best track time out of any of these supercars. Guess everyone should just buy a Viper ACR as it's faster than everything here at a fraction of the price anyways.

[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

They may cost less than the Enzo...but most of them are still significantly more than the LF A.

LF A $375 000 7:24
Zonda F Clubsport $741 000 7:24
Enzo $1M 7:25

Carrera GT $440 000 7:28
Koenigsegg CCX $650 000 7:33
F430 Scuderia $300 000 7:39
SLR $500 000 7:40
Murcielago 670-4 SuperVeloce $450 000 7:42

Dear Cdnrockies,

Didnt we agree that all of them (Note: CCX replaced by Agera) are out of production. If they were the targets, Lexus would have been better off shelving the LF-A because they do not exist anymore.

And all of this is before i bring in Brand Values. You see, it is still a Lexus and you intend to compare it to Mclaren's, Lamborghini's, Ferrari's etc on equal footing? Plus, doesn't the car go on for sale only 18 months later?

We will have the new Murcielago and Zonda and concrete resting numbers for the Italia and Mclaren. You are free to compare (or make excuses by bringing up out of date cars) then.

You just completely ignore the 1/2 price Italia and Mclaren (which should be quicker) and 1/5 price GT-R (which only loses by a very tiny margin on only a track) and bring up BS comparisons with old cars to justify it.

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

The Veyron has absolutely nothing to do with this conversation. There will always be something faster. But, to this point, the LF A has put down the best track time out of any of these supercars. Guess everyone should just buy a Viper ACR as it's faster than everything here at a fraction of the price anyways.

Since it is a 1/3 of the price (probably less with the discounts that follow every Viper), this just means great value because you put up with a crap badge unlike this Lexus.

[Cdnrockies]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Dear Cdnrockies,

Didnt we agree that all of them (Note: CCX replaced by Agera) are out of production. If they were the targets, Lexus would have been better off shelving the LF-A because they do not exist anymore.

And all of this is before i bring in Brand Values. You see, it is still a Lexus and you intend to compare it to Mclaren's, Lamborghini's, Ferrari's etc on equal footing? Plus, doesn't the car go on for sale only 18 months later?

We will have the new Murcielago and Zonda and concrete resting numbers for the Italia and Mclaren. You are free to compare (or make excuses by bringing up out of date cars) then.

You just completely ignore the 1/2 price Italia and Mclaren (which should be quicker) and 1/5 price GT-R (which only loses by a very tiny margin on only a track) and bring up BS comparisons with old cars to justify it.

The older vehicles are the only numbers that actually exist to compare it to.

You are completely speculating on where the numbers of the new vehicles that haven't been to Nurburgring are going to end up. You have no idea, how fast the Italia and the Mclaren are going to be.

And even if they are faster...so what? So there are two supercars in the world faster than it? Big deal. It will be pretty cool to see what the Italia and Mclaren can do, that I agree with.

Again, what does the GT-R have to do with anything. It's widely agreed that it's the performance bargain of the century. It puts up better numbers than pretty much everything out there. What's your point?

I really don't understand what point you're trying to make at all....other than hating on the LF A for no apparent reason?

First, you stated that it was for "rich doofus'" which it isn't due to the selection process.

Then you tried to suggest that it wasn't technologically advanced which is downright laughable.

Then you tried to say it's performance numbers weren't up to your standards even though it beats all current track performers at the 'Ring.

You also stated it's overpriced, yet almost every supercar that has put up similar performance numbers has been even more expensive.

Now you're bringing up branding? As discussed earlier in this thread BMW doesn't have anything in this class and never has. (The M1 was designed and contracted to Lamborghini until their poor financial situation forced BMW to take over the project again so we're clear).

Lexus is entering a territory that is very difficult to get into. Is the LF A the greatest car ever built? No. Is it a technological marvel that is an amazing achievement for Lexus and puts down some great track times. Absolutely.

[Guibo]

For those of you still harping on the performance/price aspect, I'll copy and paste what I've written elsewhere:

"Let's forget the price for a minute because you could argue that, at certain levels of the marketplace, people don't even look at the price. They just want something that's rare and special. This car is rare and it's rare and very, very special. I don't want to get bogged down in 'Ooh, it's 6 times more than a GT-R.' That's simplistic. Yes, it's not 6 times the car that the GT-R is. Of course it isn't. Nothing is 6 times the car that the GT-R is. A Veyron certainly isn't 12 times the car that the GT-R is. It's not possible to be that.
We've deliberately avoided any talk of the 2011 Lexus LFA's list price of $375,000 until now, because having spent the day (well, four hours) in this car, the price doesn't strike us as especially relevant. That'll sound absurd to many of you, but this car isn't a normal retail proposition, not even in the abnormal reality of Planet Supercar. Just 500 will be made, some 150 of which will go to the United States and only 70 of which are destined for Europe (18 of them to the U.K.). Perhaps the biggest compliment we can pay this Lexus is to say that it doesn't feel like a bad value.
Chances are, most people will never see one, and you shouldn't underestimate the power of this."
--Chris Harris, Evo Magazine

Shane O'Donoghue, contributor to Yahoo autos, Car Enthusiast, and Performance Car Mag:
"Comparisons to similar performing machines are pointless, as we believe that potential buyers have the means to buy whichever they prefer, regardless of logic or value for money.
...if you can spend £300,000 or so on a supercar it's likely that you may have one of each rather than seeing them as competitors."

5th Gear:
"While those [performance] figures are on a par with many supercars, such as the forthcoming Ferrari 458 Italia and McLaren MP4-12C, the Lexus costs a sizable chunk more and, in effect, competes with the likes of the Pagani Zonda and Ferrari 599 GTB - although in that stratosphere we're not so sure buyers look at things that logically."

Is anything patently false or ludicrous about any of that?

Regarding the McLaren, 5 main points:
1) They achieve that car's power by forced induction, which makes it easier to hit the power figure
2) They don't weave the CF in-house, as Lexus have done; they still buy their CF in bulk sheets from external sources
3) They have decades of CF manufacturing experience at their disposal; by comparison, Lexus have basically tooled up from scratch
4) McLaren have made it very clear that cost containment was a major priority from the beginning (while Lexus have made it clear that the LFA is about the driving experience, moreso than the numbers)
5) McLaren are targeting 1000+ units per year (not including other models which will fill out their line); volume means you can amortize the cost over many more units, so the per-unit price should obviously be much lower.

As for the Ferrari 458, that is being built off of experience and tooling already existing from the 430 which likewise benefitted from 360 development; LFA is from the ground up. Aluminum vs CF. Likely production of ~10k units as previous V8 models. Not to mention it can be argued that V8 Ferraris (and their hypercars) are priced below true market value anyway.

Playing the performance/price card is a fool's game in any world where the ZR1 or ACR exist.

[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Cdnrockies

The older vehicles are the only numbers that actually exist to compare it to.

You are completely speculating on where the numbers of the new vehicles that haven't been to Nurburgring are going to end up. You have no idea, how fast the Italia and the Mclaren are going to be.

And even if they are faster...so what? So there are two supercars in the world faster than it? Big deal. It will be pretty cool to see what the Italia and Mclaren can do, that I agree with.

Again, what does the GT-R have to do with anything. It's widely agreed that it's the performance bargain of the century. It puts up better numbers than pretty much everything out there. What's your point?

I really don't understand what point you're trying to make at all....other than hating on the LF A for no apparent reason?

First, you stated that it was for "rich doofus'" which it isn't due to the selection process.

Then you tried to suggest that it wasn't technologically advanced which is downright laughable.

Then you tried to say it's performance numbers weren't up to your standards even though it beats all current track performers at the 'Ring.

You also stated it's overpriced, yet almost every supercar that has put up similar performance numbers has been even more expensive.

Now you're bringing up branding? As discussed earlier in this thread BMW doesn't have anything in this class and never has. (The M1 was designed and contracted to Lamborghini until their poor financial situation forced BMW to take over the project again so we're clear).

Lexus is entering a territory that is very difficult to get into. Is the LF A the greatest car ever built? No. Is it a technological marvel that is an amazing achievement for Lexus and puts down some great track times. Absolutely.

I know that the Italia will be much quicker. It is lighter, has more HP and torque and gives up nothing to the Lexus in technology (Its already much quicker on the straights as tested anyway). Same goes for the Mclaren.

Is it downright laughable? From the guy that admits that it's gearbox is "sometimes" criticized for being jerky and inconsistent?

It beats all the current track performers? For a car that will only reach customers 18 months later, it will be stupid to compare it to something that is going out of production instead of the new Mclaren and Ferrari. (Look, it is quicker than the Ford Model T!!!!)

Why are you intent on comparing it to BMW? They dont need a halo car and they admit it. No one brings them up except you, as if it is some consolation. If Lexus needs to fix it's image, wouldn't it be prudent that it goes through its recalls quickly and returns the LX to sale?

About the "rich doofus" (silly name) part, i did not call them that. I said Lexus is more intent in giving it to socialites as they would rather it be seen in the right places.

Seriously, stop comparing it to the Stanley steamer and just admit that the Mclaren and the Italia will be quicker, 50% cheaper and have infinitely better Brand Values . Really should wrap this up.

[DBFIU]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

I know that the Italia will be much quicker. It is lighter, has more HP and torque and gives up nothing to the Lexus in technology (Its already much quicker on the straights as tested anyway). Same goes for the Mclaren.

Is it downright laughable? From the guy that admits that it's gearbox is "sometimes" criticized for being jerky and inconsistent?

It beats all the current track performers? For a car that will only reach customers 18 months later, it will be stupid to compare it to something that is going out of production instead of the new Mclaren and Ferrari. (Look, it is quicker than the Ford Model T!!!!)

Why are you intent on comparing it to BMW? They dont need a halo car and they admit it. No one brings them up except you, as if it is some consolation. If Lexus needs to fix it's image, wouldn't it be prudent that it goes through its recalls quickly and returns the LX to sale?

About the "rich doofus" (silly name) part, i did not call them that. I said Lexus is more intent in giving it to socialites as they would rather it be seen in the right places.

Seriously, stop comparing it to the Stanley steamer and just admit that the Mclaren and the Italia will be quicker, 50% cheaper and have infinitely better Brand Values . Really should wrap this up.

Actually that was me

[blue2fire]

Bumping this thread for the GT2 RS's all conquering ring time. So much for putting down awesome track numbers

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Bumping this thread for the GT2 RS's all conquering ring time. So much for putting down awesome track numbers

1. Radical SR8LM 6:48 182 ´ 455 / 650 Michael Vergers
2. Radical SR8 6:55 179 ´05 363 / 650 Michael Vergers
3. Gumpert Apollo Speed 7:11.57 172 ´09 700 / 1200 Florian Gruber
4. Donkervoort D8 RS 7:14.89 (IFC) 171 ´05 350 / 600 Michael Duechting
5. Porsche GT2 RS 7:18 169 ´10 620 / 1370 Porsche

All-conquering?

BTW, that GT2 RS time almost certainly came on Cup tires. The tires on the LFA are most certainly not Cup tires. The LFA chief engineer is considering them for the the Nurburgring edition, however.

$245k GT2 RS vs $100k ACR vs $100k ZR1. Porsche is a huge waste of money, no?

[blue2fire]

Originally Posted by Guibo

1. Radical SR8LM 6:48 182 ´ 455 / 650 Michael Vergers
2. Radical SR8 6:55 179 ´05 363 / 650 Michael Vergers
3. Gumpert Apollo Speed 7:11.57 172 ´09 700 / 1200 Florian Gruber
4. Donkervoort D8 RS 7:14.89 (IFC) 171 ´05 350 / 600 Michael Duechting
5. Porsche GT2 RS 7:18 169 ´10 620 / 1370 Porsche

All-conquering?

BTW, that GT2 RS time almost certainly came on Cup tires. The tires on the LFA are most certainly not Cup tires. The LFA chief engineer is considering them for the the Nurburgring edition, however.

$245k GT2 RS vs $100k ACR vs $100k ZR1. Porsche is a huge waste of money, no?

Yes all conquering as the Porsche is the most user friendly of the bunch by far considering the steering wheel does not need to be collapsed every time you get in it. Radical doesn't even have a roof.

About the Cup tires, you just dont know and are guessing. Most certainly "not on cup tires":

You weren't there when they did it by any chance, were you? Both of them are mules and both of them are manufacturer times. Porsche clearly quicker and cheaper. GT2 RS wins.

P.S: Inconsequentially to this conversation, the ZR-1 is barely a match for the GT2 in the straights, i wonder what this will do to the equation. I trust you dont even want to bench race the Viper after this

[u2b]<object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vD9AW-EB3vo&hl=en_US&fs=1&"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vD9AW-EB3vo&hl=en_US&fs=1&" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>[/u2b]

[Nikolas]

Originally Posted by Guibo

1. Radical SR8LM 6:48 182 ´ 455 / 650 Michael Vergers
2. Radical SR8 6:55 179 ´05 363 / 650 Michael Vergers
3. Gumpert Apollo Speed 7:11.57 172 ´09 700 / 1200 Florian Gruber
4. Donkervoort D8 RS 7:14.89 (IFC) 171 ´05 350 / 600 Michael Duechting
5. Porsche GT2 RS 7:18 169 ´10 620 / 1370 Porsche

All-conquering?

BTW, that GT2 RS time almost certainly came on Cup tires. The tires on the LFA are most certainly not Cup tires. The LFA chief engineer is considering them for the the Nurburgring edition, however.

$245k GT2 RS vs $100k ACR vs $100k ZR1. Porsche is a huge waste of money, no?

Are you honestly comparing the 4 cars ahead of it? All 4 are far from production cars.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Yes all conquering as the Porsche is the most user friendly of the bunch by far considering the steering wheel does not need to be collapsed every time you get in it. Radical doesn't even have a roof.
About the Cup tires, you just dont know and are guessing. Most certainly "not on cup tires":
You weren't there when they did it by any chance, were you? Both of them are mules and both of them are manufacturer times. Porsche clearly quicker and cheaper. GT2 RS wins.

Nope, not all-conquering. You didn't include all of those qualifiers before you made your statement. Gumpert has a roof.

I don't have to be present on the 'Ring to know that GT2 RS comes with Cup tires. Take a look:

http://www.blogcdn.com/www.autoblog....gt2-face-7.jpg
http://www.autoblog.com/2010/04/20/s...-ring-running/
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1427/...6a7297ce_b.jpg

As for the LFA, this interview with the LFA's chief engineer is printed in Evo (Mar '10):

"Q: Were you tempted to use a 'cup' tyre for a faster Ring lap?
A: We are considering this."

You are sounding a lot like the ant-GTR fanboys who claimed they did their laps on racing slicks (even though the most scrutinized and photographed car in recent times since the Veyron has never been photographed with slicks on the 'Ring).

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Porsche clearly quicker and cheaper. GT2 RS wins.

Of course the Porsche should be faster. A turbocharged car with less weight, 70 more horses, and Cup tires should be faster, shouldn't it?
And cheaper too. It's based on a steel body shell shared with other cars, its engine isn't brand new, and it relies on forced induction for its power. And at the next Cars & Coffee, it'll be only a bit more exciting to look at than all of the other 997's.

Originally Posted by blue2fire

Inconsequentially to this conversation, the ZR-1 is barely a match for the GT2 in the straights, i wonder what this will do to the equation. I trust you dont even want to bench race the Viper after this

$110k ZR1 vs $194k GT2...and the ZR1 pulls away once the GT2 has lost its off-the-line advantage. Does that look like a car that is $80k faster to you?

Check this: Same-day test with a Porsche racer at the wheel of both cars. ZR1 a bit faster on track.
http://www.excellence-mag.com/issues...s/the-big-guns
And the ZR1 is even on runflats (they're good runflats, but they're nevertheless heavier than they would otherwise be)....
Face it, guy. ZR1 offers way more performance for the money. Porsche is a big waste.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by Nikolas

Are you honestly comparing the 4 cars ahead of it? All 4 are far from production cars.

I'm not. He is, when he says "conquers all."

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by shift@red

First, the Porsche is as far from a waste as there is. I wouldnt pay 125K for a zr1 that uses a steering wheel from a chevy malibu. The porsche uses the best materials and it worth the extra money.
Ferraris are a waste of money, if anything is.

Please look at this link and look at the lap times.

http://www.fastestlaps.com/compariso...c1746c636.html

The GT2, despite being 108 hp less, and only ~300 lbs less, it is FASTER on all but two of the tracks listed. The zr1 has a power to weight of 5.49 while the gt2 is at 6.0 but can easily take the zr1 at the track. Two equal drivers, the GT2 wins.

The zr1 while being a performance bargain cannot touch the excitement, nor the feel and razor sharp precision of the GT2.
The GT2 is a better drivers car and is worth much more than 75K more than a zr1.

Porsche uses the best materials? Like the plastic that they paint to look like aluminum and for which they will gladly charge thousands of dollars? BMW and Audi put the real deal even in cars as low as the 1-Series and TT.
The Z06 had the steering wheel before the Malibu. Is the $194K GT2's steering wheel that much nicer than the one in the sub-$50k Boxster?
Please, you put $20k into the ZR1's interior and you'll have something that looks every bit as good as the GT2's interior. Do you honestly think there GT2's interior looks $66k better than this?


Ferraris are a waste of money? LOL. Tell that to the guys who flipped their F430's and Enzos for far, far more than they paid.

Erm...I just showed you a same-day, same-condition test with a driver who specializes in racing rear-engined Porsches. And you need to bring up different-day test results, for what exactly? And let's put some runflats on the GT2 and run those tests again.

Are you familiar with the concept of playing devil's advocate?

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by shift@red

Yes, im very aware...
I do think ferraris are a waste of money.

Err...how is a Ferrari a waste of money? Get a F430 or Enzo, use it for a couple of months, then flip it for 20-40% more than you paid. Most cars will lose 20% the minute you drive them off the lot.

Originally Posted by shift@red

You keep talking about performance for the $. The zr1 will hand nearly any ferrari its ass and for a whole lot less than 300K+.

So? Just about everyone who's harping on the LFA are also talking about peformance for the $. Although they are strangely hesitant to address the second part of your statement; hmm, I wonder why...could it be snobbery? The reality is that if you apply the performance/$ equally and without bias, you are forced to accept some things about Porsches/Ferraris that you would otherwise not want to admit.

Originally Posted by shift@red

Porsche does use nearly all top notch materials-the carbon fiber and aluminum and wood they use is the best of the best. You just need to pay for it.

Wait, on a $100+k car you have to pay extra for what BMW and Audi offer starting at $30? Last time I checked, Porsche are still painting plastics painted in Alumalook rather than using the real thing. Even Ford are using real aluminum trim in the Mustang, LOL.

[Guibo]

Originally Posted by shift@red

Have you looked at Ferrari prices lately? I dont think anyone has made 20-40% on a ferrari in a while. My friend recently sold a 430 Scud for 260K (was 350K new) with only a couple thousand miles...so no money being made there either.
My father has been shopping for a 360 spyder or 430 spyder and values have dropped A LOT. you can buy 550 maranellos for 75K, and saw a 2001 360 spyder with 22k miles for 75k the other week...so value are way down on them too.
Performance for $ doesnt matter because they are always different levels.
Porsche charges for the high end stuff because they KNOW they can get people to pay, bmw and audi cant ay the same. But without a doubt what you pay for, you get, because they CF, etc are immaculate.

Yes, finally 6 years after the F430 debuted and with the release of its successor, the V8 car prices are starting to tank. I never said they wouldn't.
Agreed, and that's what I've been trying to explain to certain stubborn elements on this forum.
Having sat in the Porsche Turbo and in a F430, do you honestly think the leather of the quality is the same on both cars? I can honestly say, no, the Porsche's leather does not match that of the Ferrari, even if the Porsche's stitches may be straighter (no doubt due to more extensive automation). There was some clue to me even standing 6 feet away from an F430 convertible with its top down.