MYIS500

Congratulations guys and gals,

We own the third fastest car made by Lexus. The only models that are faster are the RCF Fuji Edition and the LFA. Giddy up! Story is in this link or click on the Club Lexus box in the top left corner.

https://www.clublexus.com/how-tos/sl...0-60mph-949223

arentz07

Honestly, that's a bit surprising! I expected the IS F and GS F to fare a little better here, due to weight and tires respectively.

macmaster

ClubLexus articles are a bit of a joke IMO but that probably won't stop the RC F and IS F owners from whining. GS F owners are usually cool for some reason.

MYIS500

I was shocked myself. I am pleased just the same. But I agree with both your comments Mac and Arentz's. I guess it is another notch to the uniqueness of our cars, which I am very happy about. Did I ever tell ya' lI love my car!

Bechtold

Well we're almost #3 on the Car and Driver Lightning Lap which is a more meaningful thing than some click-baity 0-60 times that are almost identical.
I truly feel if we had Michelin's like the LC we would be just ahead of it at Lightning Lap.
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...storical-data/

Lexus LFA (2012) 2:55.1
Lexus RC F Track Edition (2020) 3:02.6
Lexus LC500 (2018) 3:04.8
Lexus IS500 F Sport (2022) 3:04.9
Lexus IS F (2011) 3:05.4
Lexus RC F (2015) 3:05.8
Lexus GS F (2016) 3:05.9
Lexus IS350 F Sport (2014) 3:13.4
Lexus IS F (2008) 3:14.0

IS F what a Difference a Torsen diff and suspension changes make. 8.6 seconds!!!
Original RC F to Track edition is 3.2 seconds better for TE.

Kappa500

The IS 500 should be faster than the RC F Fuji. The IS500 used in the test was being held back by a separating front number which had a negative impact on aerodynamics.

jct23

I like the tire theory: If Lexus gave us the Michelin's their top of the line LC may fall and that could be embarrassing to them that the lower priced vehicle is faster.

95bat

Tires and brakes that are track worthy.

604GSE21

C&D complained about the crappy tires, soft pedals and with factory transmission cooler still overheated the tranny at VIR, but I am happy that it still out did the TLX type-S lol..

2022 IS500 Lightning lap:
https://www.caranddriver.com/feature...lightning-lap/

vpar23

Reading that car and driver article, where are those prototype front pads lol? Was that just marketing bs to say hey we have a solution but not really

KennyFSU

I thought the IS5 didn't come with the trans or oil coolers.

arentz07

It doesn't; the press vehicles had transmission coolers though.

95bat

Sure seems that way!

Hopefully the aftermarket will gain some steam for rotors and pads.

05RollaXRS

Their testing methodology is highly inconsistent due to a pool of different drivers and different drivers over the years. The track has gone through numerous repavement over the years. None of those are pro drivers. The fact that a basicn $60K 460 HP C7 Corvette Stingray has a 2:53 as opposed to a $400K Lexus LFA's 2:55, should tell enough about the consistency of the numbers. Mustang forums highly disputed the Mach 1 running faster than GT350R for the same reason.

It is not nearly as accurate as a head to head with the same driver. They are also not pro race car drivers. Not like having one driver like Randy Pobst drive every time. RCF should never be 3 seconds slower than an RCF TE given the same conditions as on every other track the difference is around 1 seconds. They have the same suspension, chassis etc. The RCF Carbon actually out-grips the RCF TE on the skidpad. They have the same C&D 0-60 mph tested around 4.0 seconds. I currently own both a 3IS F-Sport and an RCF. The difference in chassis stiffness and suspension, is night and day. RCF is faster than the B8 RS5 (3:04) on every track except one, which is this one. Again, if you look at all of the other track lap times, non-TE RCF has faster lap times than the LC500 and the ISF (or the GSF), but somehow it is not reflected here.

Tsukuba:

RCF (LSD): 1:06
ISF: 1:07

Circuit De Nevers:

RCF: 1:25
ISF: 1:28

Saschensring Germany:

RCF TE: 1:37.9
RCF: 1:39.5
LC500: 1:41
GSF: 1:41
ISF: 1:42 (2011)

AMS Mendig AFB Circuit (Germany):

RCF (Carbon): 1:56
RCF TE: 1:56
GSF: 1:59
LC500: 2:00

C&D Skidpad:

RCF (Carbon): 0.98g
RCF TE: 0.94g
GSF: 0.93g
IS500: 0.92g
ISF: 0.92g

MT Figure-8:

RCF: 24.6 seconds
LC500: 24.7 seconds
GSF: 24.5 seconds
ISF: 25.1 seconds
IS500: 25.2 seconds

Hockenheimring Short:

RCF: 1:14.0 seconds
GSF: 1:15.2 seconds
ISF: 1:15.8 seconds
LC500: 1:14.2 seconds

In 2018, there was this direct comparison done of LC500 vs RCF (Carbon). It truly shows the difference between the two cars when put head to head



An owner of LC500, RCF and GSF. He explains the difference between the three and RCF is the clear choice for track days


ISF was run on the pre 01/2014 layout while RCF was run right after the 01/2014 layout was created. Cars like C7 Corvette was actually 2 seconds slower in the post-01/2014 layout. For argument sake, if RCF was indeed no faster than the ISF then that would mean hundreds of millions of dollars of wasted R&D with brand new track tuned hardware, bigger brakes, much stiffer chassis plus more than 1 year of track testing was all a waste since it would be more of an E92 M3 competitor and not an F82 M4. Clearly that is not the case from head-to-head telemetry data with a pro driver.





All of the other tracks don't show that big of a difference. It might be faster, but not by that big of a margin. They both were very close around Tsukuba circuit with pro race car drivers. 8 seconds is a huge difference and there is no other data to support such a big difference. The remember reading they could not lap the 2008 properly because the car was too skittish on the track.

arentz07

Thanks for the information.

So what, should I edit the name of the thread to "3rd fastest car according to a very flawed and obviously inconsistent lap around a track with prototype equipment and amateur drivers"?