Edmunds: IS-F vs. RS4
10-29-07, 05:15 AM
#1
Racer
Thread Starter
Edmunds: IS-F vs. RS4
Edmunds Comparo: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...topanel..1.*#2
"The 3,780-pound IS-F gets to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and does the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds at 109 mph, trailing the RS4 to 60 mph by about a half-second and to the quarter-mile by almost as much. This is with the stability and traction control systems off (yes, Lexus actually allows such a thing, a policy initiated for its performance cars for 2007) and the transmission in Drive. Later we made our runs and manually shifted the IS-F's transmission, which feels fast but predictably isn't, especially since the launch is better in Drive.
Not that it matters. For all its displacement, technology and furious bark, the Lexus 5.0-liter doesn't make the IS-F much quicker than a BMW 335i, which makes 116 hp less.
Front spring and damper rates are up a whopping 90 percent compared to the standard IS, and the rear rates are 50 percent firmer. This is a stiff car — so stiff over freeway undulations that it forces small, involuntary exhalations from its passengers. One of us even knocked his noggin into the headliner, badly mussing his hair."
Is the 8-speed auto gearing conservative on the IS-F?? And if you guys read in the comments, then it does appear that IS-F needs a REAL limited-slip differential to better launch the car. It needs to have one, esp. for a car in this class. BMW M3 has one. MB C63 AMG has one optional.
"The 3,780-pound IS-F gets to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and does the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds at 109 mph, trailing the RS4 to 60 mph by about a half-second and to the quarter-mile by almost as much. This is with the stability and traction control systems off (yes, Lexus actually allows such a thing, a policy initiated for its performance cars for 2007) and the transmission in Drive. Later we made our runs and manually shifted the IS-F's transmission, which feels fast but predictably isn't, especially since the launch is better in Drive.
Not that it matters. For all its displacement, technology and furious bark, the Lexus 5.0-liter doesn't make the IS-F much quicker than a BMW 335i, which makes 116 hp less.
Front spring and damper rates are up a whopping 90 percent compared to the standard IS, and the rear rates are 50 percent firmer. This is a stiff car — so stiff over freeway undulations that it forces small, involuntary exhalations from its passengers. One of us even knocked his noggin into the headliner, badly mussing his hair."
Is the 8-speed auto gearing conservative on the IS-F?? And if you guys read in the comments, then it does appear that IS-F needs a REAL limited-slip differential to better launch the car. It needs to have one, esp. for a car in this class. BMW M3 has one. MB C63 AMG has one optional.
10-29-07, 05:43 AM
#2
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Edmunds Comparo: http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do...topanel..1.*#2
"The 3,780-pound IS-F gets to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and does the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds at 109 mph, trailing the RS4 to 60 mph by about a half-second and to the quarter-mile by almost as much. This is with the stability and traction control systems off (yes, Lexus actually allows such a thing, a policy initiated for its performance cars for 2007) and the transmission in Drive. Later we made our runs and manually shifted the IS-F's transmission, which feels fast but predictably isn't, especially since the launch is better in Drive.
Not that it matters. For all its displacement, technology and furious bark, the Lexus 5.0-liter doesn't make the IS-F much quicker than a BMW 335i, which makes 116 hp less.
Front spring and damper rates are up a whopping 90 percent compared to the standard IS, and the rear rates are 50 percent firmer. This is a stiff car — so stiff over freeway undulations that it forces small, involuntary exhalations from its passengers. One of us even knocked his noggin into the headliner, badly mussing his hair."
Is the 8-speed auto gearing conservative on the IS-F?? And if you guys read in the comments, then it does appear that IS-F needs a REAL limited-slip differential to better launch the car. It needs to have one, esp. for a car in this class. BMW M3 has one. MB C63 AMG has one optional.
"The 3,780-pound IS-F gets to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and does the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds at 109 mph, trailing the RS4 to 60 mph by about a half-second and to the quarter-mile by almost as much. This is with the stability and traction control systems off (yes, Lexus actually allows such a thing, a policy initiated for its performance cars for 2007) and the transmission in Drive. Later we made our runs and manually shifted the IS-F's transmission, which feels fast but predictably isn't, especially since the launch is better in Drive.
Not that it matters. For all its displacement, technology and furious bark, the Lexus 5.0-liter doesn't make the IS-F much quicker than a BMW 335i, which makes 116 hp less.
Front spring and damper rates are up a whopping 90 percent compared to the standard IS, and the rear rates are 50 percent firmer. This is a stiff car — so stiff over freeway undulations that it forces small, involuntary exhalations from its passengers. One of us even knocked his noggin into the headliner, badly mussing his hair."
Is the 8-speed auto gearing conservative on the IS-F?? And if you guys read in the comments, then it does appear that IS-F needs a REAL limited-slip differential to better launch the car. It needs to have one, esp. for a car in this class. BMW M3 has one. MB C63 AMG has one optional.
10-29-07, 05:51 AM
#3
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
hmmm,.......
edmunds: "downshifts tend to be slow (manual mode) and not very well timed"
completely different from what EVERY other magazine has been saying. if they are wrong then I think these guys are COMPLETLY biased. i suggest nobody ever visit their site for performance reviews.
edmunds: "downshifts tend to be slow (manual mode) and not very well timed"
completely different from what EVERY other magazine has been saying. if they are wrong then I think these guys are COMPLETLY biased. i suggest nobody ever visit their site for performance reviews.
10-29-07, 06:14 AM
#5
Lexus Test Driver
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: CA
Posts: 1,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well, they managed to get the fastest RS4 numbers, and like I mentioned the fact that they completely trashed the IS-F's transmission tells me that they were completely biased. you can even tell by the tone of the speaker's voice in the video.
10-29-07, 07:27 AM
#7
Lead Lap
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: KY
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not only that but, they said the style is "subjective" and only "Toyota Fanboys" would like it, which is not professional when you're writing a review that was supposed to be unbiased! Surely, the stylish can be a subjective matter, but that doesn't mean that if you DO like it, you're a "Fanboy"... Overall, the way they were talking made the review seem unprofessional. 
Moreover, you can clearly see that they stomped on the gas pedal when they accelerated the RS4, but they didn't when they launched the IS-F. The IS-F was a casual launch, imo!
They must be complete morons and "German Fanboys" if they think that the gear shifting is slow!
I wonder who are the TRUE fanboys....
You know, sometimes I wonder how many people actually believe all this Magazine BS and make a decision solely based on their reviews and all the hype they create! I recommend go and drive ALL of them and ignore the hype, BS opinionated reviews, and others' opinions! Make your own judgments.
Moreover, you can clearly see that they stomped on the gas pedal when they accelerated the RS4, but they didn't when they launched the IS-F. The IS-F was a casual launch, imo!
They must be complete morons and "German Fanboys" if they think that the gear shifting is slow!
I wonder who are the TRUE fanboys....
You know, sometimes I wonder how many people actually believe all this Magazine BS and make a decision solely based on their reviews and all the hype they create! I recommend go and drive ALL of them and ignore the hype, BS opinionated reviews, and others' opinions! Make your own judgments.
Last edited by Cornellian; 10-29-07 at 07:38 AM.
Trending Topics
edmunds!
10-29-07, 08:08 AM
#9
Pole Position
hmmm,.......
edmunds: "downshifts tend to be slow (manual mode) and not very well timed"
completely different from what EVERY other magazine has been saying. if they are wrong then I think these guys are COMPLETLY biased. i suggest nobody ever visit their site for performance reviews.
edmunds: "downshifts tend to be slow (manual mode) and not very well timed"
completely different from what EVERY other magazine has been saying. if they are wrong then I think these guys are COMPLETLY biased. i suggest nobody ever visit their site for performance reviews.
I enjoy stand alone Edmund reviews and I think they are quite good but their comparos suck big time. Not just this one but any other.
10-29-07, 08:32 AM
#10
Lead Lap
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: KY
Posts: 748
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
An Editor won't help! Because the "Fanboys" don't know how to properly compare cars, be it intentionally or not and are writing BS reviews to gain publicity! An editor will only brush up their English skills, which IMO needs work too...
10-29-07, 09:49 AM
#11
Guest
Posts: n/a
Originally Posted by 1SICKLEX
Holy craptastic comments batman.
Well, my 2 cents. Let us not FORGET, it took Audi quite sometime to get the RS4 right. It was not an overnight success. The current model learned tons of lessons from previous models, nothing more than the new 60/40 RWD split.
The RS4 is fantastic and was the standard a couple of years.
Amazingly, Lexus does now have a CREDIBLE competitor in the IS-F. WHo would have thought Edmunds says its too hardcore, too much of a track car and it looks to outrageous? This is Lexus first effort let us not forget.
This is a company that people think is bland and uninvolving.
Kudos to both. And I'll be waving from my IS-F eventually!!!
Well, my 2 cents. Let us not FORGET, it took Audi quite sometime to get the RS4 right. It was not an overnight success. The current model learned tons of lessons from previous models, nothing more than the new 60/40 RWD split.
The RS4 is fantastic and was the standard a couple of years.
Amazingly, Lexus does now have a CREDIBLE competitor in the IS-F. WHo would have thought Edmunds says its too hardcore, too much of a track car and it looks to outrageous? This is Lexus first effort let us not forget.
This is a company that people think is bland and uninvolving.
Kudos to both. And I'll be waving from my IS-F eventually!!!
FYI, I never read Edmunds or use them much as a source.
10-29-07, 10:15 AM
#12
Lead Lap
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: California
Posts: 654
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Daniel Pund and Chris Walton have different opinions about aspects of the car and it is not the editor's job to make a consistent view for Edmund's. This second writer, Pund, clearly thinks the stylistic flourishes of the IS-F are akin to a bad joke and that is his opinion and he entitled to it.
Edmund's has been trying to spice up their content for quite a while with "in" language (or what middle-aged men perceive to be "hip") and unfortunately words like fanboy, fugly and the currently "in" Beluga whale reference are the sad result.
I doubt any magazine will prefer the IS-F to the RS4 in comparison.
Edit: Just a quick look at the final scoring: RS4 85.7% IS-F 84.3% The IS-F didn't have too bad a showing for a slowish baby Beluga whale with the wrong sort of tranny.
Last edited by CRB; 10-29-07 at 10:43 AM.
10-29-07, 10:29 AM
#13
Pole Position
The implication is that an editor's job is to hew the content of different automotive writers until it presents a consistent position for the website. Clearly the same performance data was used again for this comparison review, so the only thing this writer has to do is offer opinions.
Daniel Pund and Chris Walton have different opinions about aspects of the car and it is not the editor's job to make a consistent view for Edmund's. This second writer, Pund, clearly thinks the stylistic flourishes of the IS-F are akin to a bad joke and that is his opinion and he entitled to it.
Edmund's has been trying to spice up their content for quite a while with "in" language (or what middle-aged men perceive to be "hip") and unfortunately words like fanboy, fugly and the currently "in" Beluga whale reference are the sad result.
I doubt any magazine will prefer the IS-F to the RS4 in comparison.
Daniel Pund and Chris Walton have different opinions about aspects of the car and it is not the editor's job to make a consistent view for Edmund's. This second writer, Pund, clearly thinks the stylistic flourishes of the IS-F are akin to a bad joke and that is his opinion and he entitled to it.
Edmund's has been trying to spice up their content for quite a while with "in" language (or what middle-aged men perceive to be "hip") and unfortunately words like fanboy, fugly and the currently "in" Beluga whale reference are the sad result.
I doubt any magazine will prefer the IS-F to the RS4 in comparison.
10-29-07, 10:40 AM
#14
Lexus Fanatic
Quote from Edmunds: "The 3,780-pound IS-F gets to 60 mph in 4.8 seconds and does the quarter-mile in 13.2 seconds at 109 mph, trailing the RS4 to 60 mph by about a half-second and to the quarter-mile by almost as much. This is with the stability and traction control systems off (yes, Lexus actually allows such a thing, a policy initiated for its performance cars for 2007) and the transmission in Drive. Later we made our runs and manually shifted the IS-F's transmission, which feels fast but predictably isn't, especially since the launch is better in Drive."
Proof that the Edmunds guys have no idea how to launch a car that isn't idiot-proof AWD. Car and Driver on the other hand, did it in Sport mode (less wheel spin there) and with manual shifting (they're willing to experiment to find the best shift points, not to mention the shifting is faster in manual mode).
Proof that the Edmunds guys have no idea how to launch a car that isn't idiot-proof AWD. Car and Driver on the other hand, did it in Sport mode (less wheel spin there) and with manual shifting (they're willing to experiment to find the best shift points, not to mention the shifting is faster in manual mode).
10-29-07, 11:02 AM
#15
Driver School Candidate
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: MD
Posts: 39
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That`s what I thought so why did they laucn the car with the traction setting to off mode and why did they have the transmission in regular Automatic? I thought Lexus said that if the driver puts the transmission in M mode and has the sport button activated that it would give the best launch times????? Why is edmunds saying 4.8 and that they thought the transmission gave a better launch in regular automatic mode?
They sound so biased on that review...It`s like we love only German cars even though the competitors are close we won`t give them the credit for it. I guess that`s all thery know so what else do we expect.
They sound so biased on that review...It`s like we love only German cars even though the competitors are close we won`t give them the credit for it. I guess that`s all thery know so what else do we expect.
Last edited by cbryce; 10-29-07 at 11:06 AM.