Car Chat General discussion about Lexus, other auto manufacturers and automotive news.

Battle of the SuperCars, IS-F vs. M3

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 09-20-10, 09:10 PM
  #61  
CDNROCKIES
Lexus Champion
 
CDNROCKIES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by lobuxracer
My F's all time average is 22.3 mpg. This includes three track weekends averaging 5.3 mpg for about 10 tanks of fuel and a number of road trips averaging 27 - 28 mpg for the entire tank as well.
Mine has averaged 24 mpg without any track time over 32K miles.

Originally Posted by STIG
I avg 15mpg on my 6MT. anything more than that, you aren't driving it properly.
That seems to be the justification for M drivers.

Originally Posted by rominl
haha i don't know, from what i heard 12-14 is a good day on the m5 or e63. quite a few people i talk to they see 9-10
The mileage should improve dramatically on the new turbo F10 M5.
CDNROCKIES is offline  
Old 09-20-10, 09:37 PM
  #62  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,100
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by CDNROCKIES
Mine has averaged 24 mpg without any track time over 32K miles.
I don't mean to be rude or arrogant, but what you do to average 24 MPG in a car like that? Coast downhill most of the time in neutral or with the engine off, and then feather-foot the engine at 1500 RPM in high gear?
mmarshall is offline  
Old 09-20-10, 09:51 PM
  #63  
syzygy
Lexus Champion
 
syzygy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,727
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

10 to 12 MPG for the E60 M5 is very typical for a 60/40 mix of highway/city driving. Quite a few of our neighbors own E60 M5s and that's the type of mileage they get.

Bear in mind these are 50+ year old people. 50 isn't really old; the point, however, is that these aren't your usual "boy racer" types in their daddy's M5 trying to race everybody and their grandma on the road. They will certainly have some fun once in a while (WOT) but generally speaking they drive pretty conservatively on the streets.

I shudder to think what their mileage would be if they drove with a lead foot all the time.
syzygy is offline  
Old 09-20-10, 10:40 PM
  #64  
rominl
exclusive matchup

iTrader: (4)
 
rominl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lovely OC
Posts: 81,671
Received 190 Likes on 148 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by Galaxy 40
Lol I saw that vid by Best Motoring and another one "Togue" which the M3 won. But the drivers where all Japanese and from the same show,competing for what? Time?
The outcome would be different if they had drivers from BMW corporate (German driver) and another from Lexus corporate(Japanese driver).Just like an Olympic sport,They would want their car to win for the Country and Brand
Sure the M3 might still win but I don't think it would be like in the Shows or magazines....its going to be a lot closer. If the M wins by a long margin at least people won't be too skeptical (not in sport mode or M mode, sand bagging,show or driver bias, etc).

About "they all drive the same" is really hard to prove because every individual feels different.
Its funny I have been test driving a M coupe and Sedan (my brother can't decide) but we noticed the coupe still had better feel to it. if I had to choose I would take the coupe to the track...I am sure most would.
Also if it was both sedan it would eliminate the thought that it was unfair because they had a coupe against a sedan.Just like you don't see the convertible against the sedan.
no doubt, using sedan would eliminate some questions, but then all the questions are from lexus people j/k. fwiw i also think it makes sense to use the e90, but oh well, at least we know real world, e90 is pretty much the same car. just look at all the numbers out there between sedan and coupe, it's not one sided at all

that's the reality isn't it, no matter how the test is, who test it, and where it is, it will never be done "right". you got a wishful thinking that pretty much will never materialize, so maybe we can all try to settle for the next best thing (if at all). to me if it's bunch of people in the same performance league driving the cars seriously on a track, that's results i give a tad more credits to.

Originally Posted by CDNROCKIES
Mine has averaged 24 mpg without any track time over 32K miles.

That seems to be the justification for M drivers.

The mileage should improve dramatically on the new turbo F10 M5.
i surely hope the f10 is better. but looking at the 335, the gas mileage is in general better than m3 but not drastically imho. i sort of expect more

Originally Posted by mmarshall
I don't mean to be rude or arrogant, but what you do to average 24 MPG in a car like that? Coast downhill most of the time in neutral or with the engine off, and then feather-foot the engine at 1500 RPM in high gear?
umm... on the isf actually i think it's doable. if someone is not driving the car like a mad man all the time, very capable.

Originally Posted by carLx
10 to 12 MPG for the E60 M5 is very typical for a 60/40 mix of highway/city driving. Quite a few of our neighbors own E60 M5s and that's the type of mileage they get.

Bear in mind these are 50+ year old people. 50 isn't really old; the point, however, is that these aren't your usual "boy racer" types in their daddy's M5 trying to race everybody and their grandma on the road. They will certainly have some fun once in a while (WOT) but generally speaking they drive pretty conservatively on the streets.

I shudder to think what their mileage would be if they drove with a lead foot all the time.
lol no kidding. but then again, those who can really own these cars, 10mpg, they can surely afford it my friend (young, early 30s) with the e60 m5, i will just say his avg mileage is single digit
rominl is offline  
Old 09-20-10, 10:48 PM
  #65  
syzygy
Lexus Champion
 
syzygy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,727
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
Default

True, I'm quite certain money is no object for these people. Nevertheless, it's got to be quite a hassle having to fill up so (relatively) often.

Though, maybe the M5 has some enormous fuel tank capacity. Actually I just looked it up, the e60 m5's tank capacity is 15.8 gallons. I'd imagine that would (safely) get you 120-140 miles per full tank, possibly 160-180+ if it's mostly highway miles.

Then again, I'm sure all of this trivial nonsense about gas mileage and fuel capacities goes out the window once you step on that accelerator and unleash the wrath of 500 horses.
syzygy is offline  
Old 09-20-10, 11:27 PM
  #66  
rominl
exclusive matchup

iTrader: (4)
 
rominl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lovely OC
Posts: 81,671
Received 190 Likes on 148 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by carLx
True, I'm quite certain money is no object for these people. Nevertheless, it's got to be quite a hassle having to fill up so (relatively) often.

Though, maybe the M5 has some enormous fuel tank capacity. Actually I just looked it up, the e60 m5's tank capacity is 15.8 gallons. I'd imagine that would (safely) get you 120-140 miles per full tank, possibly 160-180+ if it's mostly highway miles.

Then again, I'm sure all of this trivial nonsense about gas mileage and fuel capacities goes out the window once you step on that accelerator and unleash the wrath of 500 horses.
correction, it's 18.5 gallon tank, not 15.8 usually the IS/3 are about 16g, GS/5 are around 19g, and LS/7 are around 22g. mb equivalent are a bit more
rominl is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 06:42 AM
  #67  
Lets Drive
Racer
iTrader: (3)
 
Lets Drive's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: MD
Posts: 1,345
Received 8 Likes on 7 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by pvmike1
Guys, I'm curious what IS-F and M3 owners are averaging for mpg. Is there a measurable difference between the DCT and MT in the M3?
I get 20.5 city/28+ highway, and coast often. Prior to owning one, I was surprised by some members claims in the F, but sure enough, mine matches or exceeds my previous 350.
Lets Drive is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 10:53 AM
  #68  
STIG
Lexus Test Driver
 
STIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF
Posts: 6,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by CDNROCKIES
Mine has averaged 24 mpg without any track time over 32K miles.



That seems to be the justification for M drivers.
Yeah, the V8 is happier above 7000RPM range. Something that IS-F owners would understand.


I KeeeeD!
STIG is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 07:59 PM
  #69  
CDNROCKIES
Lexus Champion
 
CDNROCKIES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by STIG
Yeah, the V8 is happier above 7000RPM range. Something that IS-F owners would understand.


I KeeeeD!
I think you meant "wouldn't" understand.

'Course that's 'cause we're all ready getting sucked into our seats with all the torque and can't hear anything except the brutally loud exhaust noise.

'Course that's something M3 owners wouldn't understand.

j/k
CDNROCKIES is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 08:07 PM
  #70  
CDNROCKIES
Lexus Champion
 
CDNROCKIES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by lobuxracer
My F's all time average is 22.3 mpg. This includes three track weekends averaging 5.3 mpg for about 10 tanks of fuel and a number of road trips averaging 27 - 28 mpg for the entire tank as well.
Originally Posted by mmarshall
I don't mean to be rude or arrogant, but what you do to average 24 MPG in a car like that? Coast downhill most of the time in neutral or with the engine off, and then feather-foot the engine at 1500 RPM in high gear?
So Lance claims 22.3 mpg with track time and my 24 seems unreasonable with mostly highway miles and no track time?

I don't stop light race....but have run multiple(GTR, C5 Vette, SRT8 Challenger/Charger, Camaro SS, etc) fast cars on the highway....and have seen north of 163 mph once...150 mph a few times....and 125 mph regularly.
CDNROCKIES is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 08:43 PM
  #71  
STIG
Lexus Test Driver
 
STIG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: SF
Posts: 6,467
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by CDNROCKIES

j/k
Sure you are. hahah

It's all good. I would most def. have gotten the IS-F if I didn't have the IS350 at that times. Love the F.
STIG is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 09:10 PM
  #72  
mmarshall
Lexus Fanatic
 
mmarshall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Virginia/D.C. suburbs
Posts: 91,100
Received 87 Likes on 86 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by CDNROCKIES
So Lance claims 22.3 mpg with track time and my 24 seems unreasonable with mostly highway miles and no track time?
With a car like that, both 22 and 24 seem like a stretch to me. But I guess you guys obviously know what you measured at the pump. One issue, though.....did you re-fill the tank on a level surface? That's important for getting an accurate fill-up with the tank-level.

Case in point..........I had an IS300, with barely half of the HP (215) that the IS-F runs (416). Even with steady, moderate driving (though I had it on few long trips), I was hard-pressed to do any better than about 19-20, averaging 17-18 most of the time, with less than that in winter stop-and-go driving.

Last edited by mmarshall; 09-21-10 at 09:14 PM.
mmarshall is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 09:34 PM
  #73  
CDNROCKIES
Lexus Champion
 
CDNROCKIES's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Alberta
Posts: 3,054
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
With a car like that, both 22 and 24 seem like a stretch to me. But I guess you guys obviously know what you measured at the pump. One issue, though.....did you re-fill the tank on a level surface? That's important for getting an accurate fill-up with the tank-level.

Case in point..........I had an IS300, with barely half of the HP (215) that the IS-F runs (416). Even with steady, moderate driving (though I had it on few long trips), I was hard-pressed to do any better than about 19-20, averaging 17-18 most of the time, with less than that in winter stop-and-go driving.
No disrespect Mike, but this is just one reason why you should be reconsidering your opinion on the increased number of gears in the modern day trannys.

There is a reason that the F gets such great mileage, especially when compared to a C63 or M3 and it has everything to do with the 8 speed slushbox.

Gears 7 and 8 never get used when performance matters. But, when the car is being driven gently as a dd, gears 7 and 8 kick in as low as 40 mph.

I also notice the same thing on our ML vs X5. One extra gear in the ML and it gets significantly superior gas mileage (ie. approx. 2 mpg....granted the X5 does have more power).
CDNROCKIES is offline  
Old 09-21-10, 11:39 PM
  #74  
rominl
exclusive matchup

iTrader: (4)
 
rominl's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Lovely OC
Posts: 81,671
Received 190 Likes on 148 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by mmarshall
With a car like that, both 22 and 24 seem like a stretch to me. But I guess you guys obviously know what you measured at the pump. One issue, though.....did you re-fill the tank on a level surface? That's important for getting an accurate fill-up with the tank-level.

Case in point..........I had an IS300, with barely half of the HP (215) that the IS-F runs (416). Even with steady, moderate driving (though I had it on few long trips), I was hard-pressed to do any better than about 19-20, averaging 17-18 most of the time, with less than that in winter stop-and-go driving.
err... is300? you used a terrible car for reference man.... that drivetrain setup was never ever been "good" on gas mileage, it's avg at best at its time among other cars, let alone all the new technologies nowadays. the car was rated what, 18/24? even the v8 (4L) setup was rated 18/23. i had the is300 as well, and honestly, its gas mileage was never impressive, it's the same as my gs400 and sc430.

my ls460l and gs350 both blew away the is300 on gas mileage, and both cars have a lot more power.

like CDNROCKIES said, the 7th and 8th gears help the isf a lot on normal driving. 2000rpm at 80mph is something (on your is300 it would have been about 3000rpm. yes, i am pretty sure).

edit: i just noticed this has turned into a gas mileage thread? sorry about that. please everyone get back on track to what this thread is about
rominl is offline  
Old 09-22-10, 05:05 AM
  #75  
rdgdawg
Pole Position
 
rdgdawg's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Lake Country, WI
Posts: 2,794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Default

Originally Posted by rominl
edit: i just noticed this has turned into a gas mileage thread? sorry about that. please everyone get back on track to what this thread is about
Okay, BOT... I've driven the IS-F, M3, Shelby GT500, Cayman S, Boxster Spyder, and 911 all in the last week as kind of a refresh for some, intial drive on others.

For the $ and what it can do... the M3 is the most complete package in terms of on-street, everyday driving with refinement, space, looks, and durability. At Road America, as previously mentioned, mechanics time and time again mention to me without my prompted how if they could have any car they would live with day-to-day with an occasional track day (or not), M3 gets brought up again and again. IS-F doesn't get much response because there's not the history of performance (yet).

You cannot go wrong with any of the cars in this thread, including C63 AMG or S5 thrown in the mix.

But M3 vs IS-F... M3 for me, after back-to-back drives, I'm a true believer
rdgdawg is offline  


Quick Reply: Battle of the SuperCars, IS-F vs. M3



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:28 PM.