Just curious what you're talking about. All of the top 20 can be also confirmed on FastestLaps.

 

rofl, saw on there earlier that somebody did the ring in 1:38 on a very wet surface...

lol lol lol

Legendary


roflmfao

 

Integra type R didn't actually go 7:58? Oh snap

+1 on source, I can't find one anywhere to confirm it.

 

I agree that 8:03 sounds like a big jump. Unless it was a lightweight that we don't know about?

Well Top Gear the Mag said the IS-F was just as good as the M3/C63/RS4 and said it was a tie when they compared it. The writer closed the review saying he would take the IS F with his money

 

If the numbers are validated as true great job Lexus.

 

Maybe not the top 20, but look at some of the times (when I first looked, and like some of the posts below yours pointed out). I can go in and edit my IS250 to lap it in 30 seconds, but I risk losing my wiki privileges forever

Obviously I would want the ISF to lap it that quick, so I can go rub it in my BMW friends' faces, but we are not BMW fanboys, we don't jump to conclusions

 

i would wish someone can find the proof too. although i own an m3, i would love to see the isf with this great result, especially if it's from the 2010 with lsd (that would be the only explanation, not much else has been changed on performance). 15 seconds is like eternity on track time!

 

you mean we can't automatically accept wikipedia as true and accurate?

 

i wouldn't go as far as you "can't", but i wouldn't. wiki is nothing more than a lot of people doing you write and i write type of things. granted there are quite a bit of moderation and validation, but still, information up might not be accurate. i have seen more than a few times on wiki about false information

 

Ill write top gear and ask unless anyone else has already?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Top_Gear_test_track

http://www.bbc.co.uk/topgear/show/powerlaps.shtml

http://www.fastestlaps.com/track1.html

Here you have the Top Gear test track times.

BMW M3 (E90-saloon) - 1:25.3

IS-F (w/o LSD) - 1:26.8

Draw your own conclusions what effect the Torsen LSD will have on the IS-F lap times. It wouldn't be a stretch to say the above time will improve.

 

Sorry, but these Top Gear numbers are made for tv testing.

Does anyone here really think that our cars are faster than the GT3 around any track???

According to those numbers the F is 0.4 seconds faster than the GT3...which makes the 1.5 seconds slower than M3 seem like an eternity.

 

I think this is entirely feasible... the GT3 in the first wiki was in 1999, the gt3 RS further up in 04 i think? was quite a bit faster than the F, i think it was 7:47? then in the top gear i think the 996 gt3 that was a touch slower than the isf? thought i read it was wet in that test?

as far as the 1999 GT3, that car made 360hp? had a 0-60 of 4.8, isnt the F 4.6-4.7? not to mention the tire and traction technology in 1999 im sure was quite inferior to stuff available now-a-days?

thought i read somewhere that the 2010 ISF was 2-3 seconds faster around a track because of the LSD?

I dont know much about all of it, but a lot of it lines up...

 

Dude, cmon really???

Have a peek at the Top Gear test times?....really.

I enjoy my F as much as the next guy, but really, cmon....if you want to justify the Top Gear test track as meaningful you're kidding yourself.

We were discussing Top Gear, not Wiki, my point was that the Top Gear list only includes models, not model years. They've got a GT-R, LF-A, and R8 V10 on the list so why would we assume they haven't tested a more recent 997 GT3???

If you think that the F has a shot against a regular GT3 vs. a GT3 RS on a track you are clearly deluding yourself.

If the Top Gear times only include an 11 year old 996 GT3, as you suggest, they're incredibly out of date and even more lame.

 

I'm also very happy with my F, but I'd be smoking something really good if I ever thought I could lap any track as quickly as a GT3. I've been to enough track days to know - point him by quickly, he's closing very fast.