Like the post says, Matt's opinion is "decidedly mixed." But it's sure interesting to watch him flog it.

 

I like Matt and have watched his videos for years. I can't believe he and other judges picked the Hyundai Veloster as the PCOTY. For me it was like picking a "row boat" for Yacht of the year. But, I think those big shoot outs are total junk reporting. The PCOTY should literally be the best overall performing car, not the "best deal" with mediocre performance.

 

Matt Farah nailed how this F perform in the track. This is also what i feel when i drove the rcf in the lexus performance driving event. The only thing you can remedy this is upgrading to OS giken to avoid hitting cones.

 

Those were his subjective opinions based entirely on him trying to drift it. Matt did not know anything about the LFA carbon ceramic brakes, which was the most expensive upgrade on the car. Objectively, the RCF did well around Thunderhill PCOTY putting a lap time as quick as the much smaller M2 competition and 1.5s quicker than the Supra. Considering it has 4 seats, usable trunk and touring/luxury, it did great on the objective metric.

Regarding subjective question of entry understeer, the chassis has been setup for a stiff front end and a lot of downforce in the back with the big wing, which leads to less corner load on the front tires while going fast into a turn without braking like he was. RCF chassis was originally designed around the TVD. It is all about entry rotation both under braking and acceleration at both entry and exit.

Every front engine with staggered setup and rear wheel drive car will inherently understeer especially with mild camber. The RCF track edition is the closest to 50/50 balance this side of the LFA. Some break their tail first while the others have more grip on the rear, will break their front tires first. It is all about how the driver manages it. Matt does not like managing the understeer/oversteer balance through throttle while trying to slide, but many of the drivers like to. Putting the title 'waste of money' for something he does not care much for, is more of a gimmick to get clicks than anything else.

 

You have very good points, but pulling away from the technicalities of his review, he's only mentioning the GSF and claiming that the RCF TE is not performing as expected because of the price. The mods added to the TE did not justify the nearly $30k increase for the car, when you can just get the RCF and mod to your track liking. If someone provided you with an extra 30k to use on your car, i'm sure you could get it to perform much better on the track, which he claims is unfortunate because you'd hope a production track car would have offered more (especially at the price).

I know you didn't point the GSF comparison in your post; it just seems like his nagging on the RCF TE is not a direct shot at the RCF.

 

You make all valid points and totally agree with everything. I am modding incrementally my CF/TVD RCF as that person you mentioned. By the same token I can see someone (like a few members here) spending additional cash to ge an RCF track edition for the exclusivity, lighter weight, more CF, carbon brakes etc. making the car incrementally better dynamically out of the box. Plus, I think it is great for the brand image of Lexus. I do wish they made more of these so that the MSRP could have been reduced, but that is a business decision they made.

 

Yeah, the PCOTY pick was right out of left field. I've driven that car, and it's a blast, but I don't think it should have won that competition.

 

SavageGeese is the most objective reviewer. He purchased an N Velstor and did a full review. He keeps everything honest and tells it like it is.

 

He'd have had a better review if he'd been left foot braking. No Lexus comes from the factory (including the LFA) without understeer engineered into the chassis. Left foot braking helps with this quite a bit by transferring weight to the front and getting it more settled. But street drivers don't know this.