MR_F1

+1. I was willing to swallow that review until the part about the Ms Brakes being superior. Pure BS.

Why then did BMW sign a contract after the F came out for brembo to supply its brakes IIRC?

DustinV

Calm down.

The IS-F performed quite well in this test. The reason it placed at 12th place was because you have cars like the Gallardo, R8, 911 4S, Lotus Elise and 135i in this comparison which are more nimble and more hardcore than the IS-F (well, the R8, Gallardo, Elise and 911 4S for sure). Had this been an RS4 vs M3 vs C63 vs IS-F comparison then the results would have been better (4th place maybe? ).

The IS-F performed very well in this test, but as usual, it doesn't quite reach the balance of the M3, something that many magazines, both European and American, have commented on. The M3 is still the king, still the most balanced premium sports sedan in the market today.


Look on the bright side! The IS-F was placed above a BMW. An X6.

Ok, bad joke!

LexFather

lol at the joke

Dustin, I don't disagree about the IS-F finishing behind the M3. I stated in past threads I can understand why they would continue to pick the M3 as the winner, though the reviews have been close, with Top Gear declaring all the cars a "tie" in this class.

What irks me are the REASONS they gave the decision which contradict what everyone else has said . I guess they got an IS-F not up to par (I have driven one that needed new pads and it made a difference in braking)

RXGS

iTrader: (2)

you guys should just be happy it's on the list, let alone not in dead last

spwolf

Its German car papers.

Toyota small cars will win all comparos all day long - Auris was first car to beat Golf in Autobild after 25 years (and several times), Yaris won multiple comparisons, so did Rav4 in first 2 years of its introduction (before VW Tiguan, before Tiguan Rav4 stopped in less than 37m, after tiguan Rav4 stops over 40m :P ). As long as it gets to expensive Toyota/Lexus, it will lose miserably, every time.

For instance, IS-F transmission hunts for gears on track? Why exactly would you use AT mode on track, instead of direct shift sports mode? Which is basically manual transmission. .

It is just the way it works. In UK is totally opposite - they dont like cheap Toyotas and they like IS-F, a lot.

knihc2008

iTrader: (1)

Thank god the IS-F did better than an SUV and a Smart car, lol

thetopdog

I wish my girlfriend was here to translate all that German for me. I have no idea what the article says, but I still can't imagine any way a 4000+lb front-engined pig like the SL outhandles an Elise. I guess the definition of 'handling' is pretty vague itself and means different things to different people. All I know is that wrestling a front-engined car that weighs that much is not what I would be looking for as far as handling goes. I'm sure it grips extremely well though, and the traction control is probably great in the wet

TwiBlueG35

This is one wierd comparison. And it gives wierd results.

DustinV

Like I said, I suspect it was the company of cars the IS-F was in in this comparison. When you have cars like the R8 or Gallardo going against the M3 or IS-F, there is no chance for the M3 or IS-F to "impress". The driving experience and pleasure an R8 or Gallardo gives you honestly will most likely blow away the intense and exciting experience an M3 or IS-F gives you - and that's saying a lot. If we're honest, the R8, Gallardo and 911 4S, Elise etc. will run circles around the M3 or IS-F on the track (well the Elise can be had on the straights and perhaps a 911 4S, too).

I don't view the placement of the IS-F in 12th place as a negative thing. I look at the cars it competed against and then I look at the grades the IS-F received and it then occurs to me that the IS-F did quite well. Like I said before, the IS-F should be compared to the M3, RS4 and C63 AMG (and CTS-V in the US) and then the results and grading will most likely be closer. Get what I am saying?

By the way, they didn't bash the IS-F. They really enjoyed it and praised it. The brakes apparently were an issue in terms of stopping power. Might have been the test car or maybe a jealous reviewer, I don't know.

And the surprise of this test was really the Mercedes SL63 AMG. I wasn't really interested in the car but I read the review about it because I wanted to know how it placed so high up and apparently the boys at AMG really did do their homework. After all, the C63 AMG has been receiving good marks for handling - something its ancestors were not really know for (great handling, but the competition handled better).

DustinV

The handling of the SL63 AMG is very impressive apparently - the surprise of this review. The article goes on to explain that you can fully deactivate the electronic nannies and thus do extreme drifts with the SL - something that wasn't really possible in the old model as the ESP system would switch itself automatically on form the moment the sensors detected danger.

Compare the handling results of the SL63 AMG to that of the Elise. Handling on a dry track saw the SL get a "B-" and the Elise an "A-". On paper this might look "huge", but when you're driving these cars I suspect the difference is not so easily distinguishable. Handling on a wet track saw both cars get a solid "B". How else does the SL place ahead of the Elise? Better acceleration (important on the track) and a more direct steering feel (although the experts say non-power steering, which the Elise has, is useful on the track). The SL had the nicer engine sound (subjective, I guess) and the better engine characteristics. These overall points were added up and the SL appears ahead of the Elise. Both cars were driven by the same professional (some sort of German Stig who wasn't named) who awarded the cars the marks they received.

bad co

Probably the black series, and if you havent heard of black serie well just watch this
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xWvZfpz8n30