TF109B

If it had a prancing horse on the hood with those famous yellow shields it'd be loved everywhere, it'd be performance car of the year, you'd see them trying to get any test in it they could. But since it has an L for lexus- they view it casually, don't even take the time to dig deep into what the car is about, nothing...

I remember autocar did the stupid thing and put it against the GTR the SLS and 911 Turbo, in a straight line- without even mentioning launch control or the fact it was a pre-production car. Oh well. At least weve got an owner of one here that appreciates the finer things the car offers. I do still have questions about the performance of the Nurb' edition though. Hope they brag about it lol.

05RollaXRS

Really?? Evo X has 300 ft-lbs of torque and weighs more than the LFA so I doubt that.

In the video VBOX data, LFA is nearly touching 9600 - 9700 rpm before the rev limiter kicks in so I think the rev limit is a lot higher than the redline.

A higher redline compounded with a flat torque curve affording the possibility of shortening the gear ratios implies more torque multiplication to the wheels through gears.

That is exactly how 2.5 Liter V10 F1 racing cars able to rev up to 18,000 rpm with only 200 ft-lbs torque and 800 HP used to rip 0-60 mph in 2.x seconds

Please do make some videos.

07grIS350

I believe the flat torque curve characteristic and the amount of power given to the 1LR-GUE are by design.
The official story on the LFA is that it started life on the design sheet unlike most cars; due to economic constrains, most new car designs started life around an existing engine. It means that the packaging (body, and major components) would get fitted around some engine. For the LFA, since the number one objective for LFA was ultimate handling, they started by creating the packaging first, so they had effectively treated the engine as just another major component that they can design to fit the most balanced packaging they can dream up, knowing that they had the approval to build the engine from scratch, right down to the smallest bolts.
One huge aspect of the packaging design for ultimate handling was to not give up on the LFA driver when the car's limits are exceeded. That was why they chose front mid engine layout, and I suspect they gave the same considerations when arriving at the amount of available power.
Therefore when you combined the car's #1 objective, and the flexibility they had when building the 1LR-GUE, I would conclude that they did it on purpose.

jpvarghese

iTrader: (1)

Good info GR! The LFA surely takes a sophisticated mind to understand and fully appreciate it.

gengar

Weight-wise, the GSR is probably about the same ballpark as the LFA actually (the MR is probably heavier than the LFA because of the dual clutch), and remember, I was talking about torque to weight at low rpm. The Evo X may have less peak torque but gets near its peak torque much earlier. In fact I bet LFA torque peak rpm is at least near if not over redline of the Evo X.


This is more due to the light weight of the F1 car than anything else though. In a basic formula car we are looking at 550-650kg weight, nearly 1/3 of the weight of an LFA or other street-legal performance cars. Not much hp or torque is needed for ridiculous acceleration. For example, high-performance motorcycles too are in the same range 0-60 for even less literage and hp, and with a fraction of tire contact surface area.


It's definitely by design, I certainly wasn't making any statements to the contrary. Flat torque curve was clearly one of the main goals of the 1LR-GUE - Tanahashi told me that himself, after all, and it's in the development book - and Lexus succeeded brilliantly at it. I certainly have personal preference for the responsiveness and accuracy of such an engine to the brutality of high-displacement or turbocharged alternatives. My point is simply that you can't have both.

05RollaXRS

Well, I posted the dyno a while back. You can see 90% of the peak torque is available from 2800 - 9500 rpm in the 1LR. I think that is still atleast about 320 - 330 ft-lbs of torque at any given rpm. I think the Evo X weight is in the 3600 lbs region.

Most of its torque is available all across the rev band, which is the ultimate ideal goal of a high revving engine. Peak torque is a function of engine displacement and from 4.8 Liters of displacement, N/A 355 ft-lbs is a lot of peak torque considering 2UZ 4.7 Liter high-torque Toyota engine meant for towing puts out 315 ft-lbs.

Ofcourse, flat torque curve is what ultimately has been one of the most difficult thing to achieve, but the ultimate goal of daily-drivable high-revving engines. The whole concept of high-revving engines is based on two things 1) torque curve across the entire rev range 2) maximum torque multiplication through short gearing (which cannot be afforded in low revving engines because of speed-range per gear dependency).


Most engines are one way or the other since the engine internals (cams, piston speeds, bore, stroke) are either built for monster low end torque or high rpm pull. Most engines run out of breath past 5500 rpm and pull get very weak since their cam timing, bore and stroke are most optimum for low engine speed torque.

The biggest astonishing feat is 1LR retaining over 90% of its peak torque over 8000 rpm since even most high-revving engines lose steam past 8000 rpm.

Getting an engine to produce lots of low end torque especially from a short stroked engine like 1GR, which fills up those tiny 10 cylinders (only 480 CC per cylinder) so quickly and retain that torque all the way to 9500 rpm or so is practically astonishing. I am sure dual VVT-i does a lot to help, but the engine internal design and engineering is the biggest factor in accomplishing it.

TF109B

Imagine what it would put out if they were like other exotic car companies and didn't really care so much for longevity. I've heard it ran over 12k rpm on an engine dyno for more than 24hours straight. I guess they cut it back so it could be a Lexus still? It's amazing though, they cut the revs BACK, and it still redlines around 9500rpm!

SUNLINE

I am leaning towards the Carrera GT. Three reasons;

1) I can go with the top down with the GT, which the LFA can't offer .... this is the main reason
2) GT gas been holding it's value for the past few years. LFA is an unknown .... may drop 100 or 200K or may not. Too much of a gamble for me to take.
3) I decided to keep my M-5 as a DD

No feel free to get back to your arguments

TF109B

Your decision. CGT is a nice car. I'd take one too, not over an LFA though. But my preference isn't about streetablity. It seems yours is. I'd go for the Nurburgring edition. A car like this needs to be light as possible and why not go for the lightest and most powerful edition? CGT when it came out was around 450K, same with the Nurb edition. Thing is there's only 50 of the Nurb edition. If you're seriously in the position to buy one of these cars, I don't think our comments should hold as much weight as what you want.

SUNLINE

Was reading through this old thread. Can't believe it has been 5 1/2 years since I posted this question. Very glad I went with the LFA. It is a true marvel of a car which I am in awe of every time I drive it and for that matter just admiring its beautiful lines. Well done Lexus!!

05RollaXRS

I remember this thread since I vehemently advocated the LFA. EVO magazine did an in-depth comparo article between an LFA and CGT., which probably answered a lot of the questions. Those were the early days when people did not know much about the LFA so Carrera GT being a Porsche brand would have the advantage out of the gate. Did not realize it was you who created this thread and had been thinking about the LFA for over 5 years. Haha!

Glad you ended up with the LFA and are really happy with your decision.

Contender

I think the one area where the CGT has beaten the LFA is in resale value. While the LFA has held its value, the CGT has appreciated very significantly.

In my opinion the LFA will have its day in the sun in terms of resale and will probably one day eclipse the CGT as there were less LFAs made and overall its a better car.

But for now the CGT wins for value.

CrazyMPG

iTrader: (4)

I think the CGT appreciated in value more because of the Paul Walker death...It was for a while sitting pretty low and below the MSRP of the car until the past 3 years. Overall, Porsche has a much bigger performance following and history so that takes into an account for the appreciation in price. Also, it probably had to do that most Porsche 911 cars went up in value. I was looking at the Porsche 911 GT3 RS 4.0 before I bought the LFA and the price was sitting at MSRP or a little below but now it's more than double...

SUNLINE

The CGT is also 8 years older than the LFA. Where will LFA prices be 8 years from now, who knows, however it has maintained it value better than the CGT did during its first 4 years after its discontinuance of manufacture.

autoz4me

Resale value sorry to be negative but if I had this car the last thing I'd do is sell it.That is the LFA.

I have know doubts in the future because of the rarity of this car that it will appreciate significantly and if you have a Nur even more so.

Think for me with Porsche they'll always make something more exotic with the Lexus I'm not so sure.So in my eyes having an LFA is like having the Wonka golden ticket you'll have a very rare car and as mentioned It's very doubtful Lexus will make anything as exotic or I find they do it won't be for a very long time.

Ultra rare TMC the 2000 gt and the LFA.Long time between drinks for these 2 cars.Ill be surprised if I get to see TMC design anything as exotic in the time I'm still on this earth.