Quote :

"And how's that, exactly? LFA: 552bhp, 354 lb-ft, 3,263 lb curb weight Carrera GT: 605hp, 405 lb-ft, 3,000 lb curb weight"

Remember, with today's computer-controlled supercars, power and weight are not as good predictors of performance as they used to be. After all, the GT-R is 3,800+ lbs, just 478 hp, and it beats or equals the CARERRA GT, ENZO, MCLAREN F1, and ZONDA in 0-60 mph and Nurburgring lap time. The cars it beats are much lighter, and all are 600+ hp.

It is my intuition that the LFA will smash a lot of straight-line and various track lap time records, whether Japanese records or global records.

12/3/2009 5:19:41 PM

The part that is a world first is the offset gearset that connects the crank to the torque tube, allowing the lower engine mounting height. This way they didn't have to make a super tough small diameter clutch like Porsche did on the Carrera gt to get the crank as low as possible. So with a typical diameter clutch, the torque tube is coaxial with the height of the center of the clutch, which is connected to the driveshaft, but the offset gearset allows the driveshaft to be higher than the centerline of the crank, which, with its small diameter and in a dry sumped engine, can then be located little more than its own radius from the lowest point on the car.

12/3/2009 7:18:51 PM

^ the point of acceleration times isn't the time elapsed itself, since there isn't actually any substantive use, outside a racetrack, for achieving a speed a fraction of a second earlier, (as in, what are you going to do with that extra fraction of a second cruising?) but the implied acceleration rate experienced. That's why it's silly to refer to one car as faster than another according to absolute times once the measured time of accelerating to a certain speed drops below some reasonable point of diminishing returns.

I'd argue that 4 seconds is a good standard for 0-60 to use as a measure of: "your butt can't appreciate the difference." I mean, there's just no way anyone is going to convince me that a 3800 lb gtr with 478 up feels as gut-twistingly accelerative as a 2600 lb mclaren f1 with 627 hp. The Nissan manages it's figure by decimating time lost to wheelspin, shove lost to accelerative squat and rebound decompression of rwd contact patches, since it's awd, and being able to manage to spend less of its time between gears, thereby using a lower but more consistent rate of acceleration to Manage climbing to the same velocity in the same amount of time.

12/3/2009 7:37:53 PM

^thank you. I can't believe he used an AWD vehicle for reference, sigh.

12/3/2009 10:56:07 PM

In the US, Lexus will only lease the LFA

In Europe, it will sell it. They have set up only ONE dealership for the whole of Europe... and it is in London.

Pic of the dealership:



More @ http://www.autoblog.com/gallery/lexus-lfa-at-lexus-park-lane/full/

12/5/2009 6:54:44 PM

Mr. Themangt, that last post is your most concise, informative and written post to date IMO. Well done sir, and I fully agree.

12/5/2009 10:24:03 PM

^haha

12/5/2009 10:35:31 PM

one of the best posts i've read in here in a long time (from danman)

12/6/2009 10:18:34 PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xd9T53nUOiM&feature=related

1/26/2010 12:31:23 PM

Lexus LFA: a symphony of sound
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p6D7S2rcyIQ

Top Gear - Lexus LFA's Wet Power Lap by the Stig
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yv5yoAkDlGc
(fastest wet lap)

1/26/2010 1:53:44 PM

^^ just watched it now... WOW

that's a fucking sweet machine. and the video is great... loved the part about how mechanical needles would be too slow to keep up with the changes in RPM, hence the virtual reality display.

the price IS insane though...

US: $375,000
UK: GBP 340,000 = $550,000

and still they won't make money on even a single car... i guess that's what 9 years of development costs!

1/26/2010 2:43:39 PM

seriously danman, two thumbs up for that post. Keep that shit up!

1/26/2010 3:53:15 PM

Still wouldn't hesitate to take a Carrera GT over this Toyota.

1/26/2010 4:54:36 PM

^ Agreed.

But that might not be the case if the LFA were $100k instead.

1/26/2010 7:28:18 PM

Yeah, but it's not. It's 3x the cost for nowhere near that much of an improvement in performance. It really is a car that doesn't have a niche.

1/26/2010 8:45:25 PM

it's in collector car territory

pretty much priced themselves out of the market, IMO

1/26/2010 8:50:55 PM

"Hey LF-A, what's your niche?

"I am... ART.



[Edited on January 26, 2010 at 8:58 PM. Reason : .]

1/26/2010 8:57:54 PM

Hahaha, truth all up in those last 2 posts.

1/26/2010 9:02:43 PM

Quote :

"Still wouldn't hesitate to take a Carrera GT over this Toyota."

No fucking doubt.

1/26/2010 9:19:10 PM

yeah...$400,000, are you kidding?

I mean, that's what, 5x the cost of a GT-R, and double the price of a Gallardo LP560? I mean, I'd be hard pressed to turn down a 458 Italia if I happened to be in the market for an exotic supercar in the hundreds-of-thousands of dollars class, but even if you only consider things that are legitimately similar cars, I don't know how in the hell anyone could justify $400k on an LFA.

1/26/2010 9:26:54 PM

You guys don't have a clue about people with money.

These things will sell out for the same reason every other absurdly expensive car sells. Because there are plenty of people on earth who value exclusivity in material possessions.

It's the same reason people buy big retardo yachts, mega mansions, and huge diamonds. It ain't got shit to do with the performance statistics.

^And saying "if I were in the market for a 400k super car, I'd totally buy blah blah instead" is like telling your buddies about which actress or model you'd boink if you didn't already have a girlfriend. You only say that because you aren't actually in that position. If someone dropped a couple of billion dollars in your pocket, I guarantee the story would change.

1/26/2010 9:33:05 PM

NO doubt.

While the LFA still wouldn't be on my list if I had a billion dollars, I am certain it would show up on someone else's.

Wait, does Jay Leno have an LF-A? because I was just planning on buying his entire collection and then adding a few cars to it

[Edited on January 26, 2010 at 9:37 PM. Reason : .]

1/26/2010 9:36:53 PM

^^man you're not getting our point. We don't care about people with money, we're expressing that we're not in the least bit impressed with the car. Anyone can create a balls out exotic car for $400,000, even KIA. Not really anything impressive or groundbreaking about this car.

And could they at least make it look good.

1/26/2010 10:23:48 PM

Quote :

"These things will sell out for the same reason every other absurdly expensive car sells. Because there are plenty of people on earth who value exclusivity in material possessions. It's the same reason people buy big retardo yachts, mega mansions, and huge diamonds. It ain't got shit to do with the performance statistics. "

That's what I'm saying...I don't really know as much as most people in this threat about which uber-exotic is the baddest car on the planet this month.

I'm saying that I can't imagine what's appealing about the LF-A at the $400k price point. I'd rather have a Ferrari or Lamborghini, even if the LF-A was two tenths of a second quicker on the lap times.

I mean, it's a cool car and all, but $400k? Come on, dude. You could buy a Gallardo LP560-4, a GT-R, and a ZR-1 'Vette...

or a Ferrari 458 Italia, a GT-R, and an M5 (or ZR-1 'Vette).


or...well, you get the idea. Whatever your motivations are in buying exotic cars, I just don't see how this one makes any sense at that price.

1/26/2010 10:42:09 PM

V12 that revs to 9 grand........I'm in. You guys can have the ugly low budget GTR!

1/26/2010 11:02:01 PM

^leave the talking to the big boys Quinn














it's a V10

1/26/2010 11:09:39 PM

Quote :

"I mean, it's a cool car and all, but $400k? Come on, dude. You could buy a Gallardo LP560-4, a GT-R, and a ZR-1 'Vette... or a Ferrari 458 Italia, a GT-R, and an M5 (or ZR-1 'Vette)."

For the same reasons people buy Dinos, Zondas, or Veyrons. You are mistaking VALUE for DESIRE. Having a car that no one else has is more important to some people than what it can do. No one is going to race this car (at least in retail form), or be good enough with it on a track for it to matter.

1/26/2010 11:17:05 PM

the looks do not justify the price in this situation

should have been priced alongside the GT-R or between that and the ZR-1

no more

1/26/2010 11:18:02 PM

wow. Some of you guys are a broken record. Everyone is making valid points, except H8R who is just mad because it's not a Subaru or NSX... But no really, stop trying to force your points on each other. Post some new info and stop wasting bandwidth.

1/27/2010 12:42:15 AM

Quote :

"Not really anything impressive or groundbreaking about this car."

Actually, there are at least a couple of things which are groundbreaking and/or automotive firsts with this car. Not saying whether that justifies the price or not, but just pointing out.

Those of you comparing costs explain me this:

Quote :

"Still wouldn't hesitate to take a Carrera GT over this Toyota."

So why did the Carrera GT cost as much as it did? ($400,000?). The performance of today's 911 Turbo is not that far (maybe better?) from that of the Carrera GT, and it costs peanuts, relatively speaking.

You guys are saying the LFA has just a tiny bit better performance than the GT-R and the ZR-1 but costs 3 to 5 times as much. Fair enough.

What about the Carrera GT, 599 GTB, SLR, Enzo, etc? They also cost anywhere from 3 to 8 times as much as the GT-R and ZR-1, and the improvement in performance is miniscule, if any.

As I explained in a previous post, Toyota has aimed this car squarely at the big [European] guns, as far as price and exclusivity are concerned. (only 500 will be made)

Remember, Toyota is not making money on a single LFA. They are either breaking even, or losing money on them. So assuming it cost $400,000 - $500,000 to develop/make each car (due to the 9 years of development), you guys want them to sell each one for $100,000?

Quote :

"we're not in the least bit impressed with the car"

Did you watch Wyloch's youtube link? Are you saying you aren't impressed at all, or not impressed relative to its price?


[Edited on January 27, 2010 at 2:31 AM. Reason : ]

1/27/2010 2:26:47 AM

I believe it's all relative to price.

I believe there are some really cool things about this car. I appreciate it, however, wouldn't have it in my garage. The exclusiveness of there being only 500 made makes it most desireable among car collector's, as previously stated. That's it. That's all.

1/27/2010 2:58:35 AM

Quote :

"I believe it's all relative to price. "

In that case, it is the same with Carerra GT (same price, same performance).

1/27/2010 4:06:48 AM

The difference is its a crude looking ugly car. You really have to wonder why Toyota spend 9 years developing this car and didn't bother to make it attractive. Hell, maybe they should have spent 10 years on it so that they could have finished designing the front end. Instead it looks like it was thrown together with Elmer's Glue.

In this thread are mentioned the Carrera GT, 599 GTB, 458 Italia, Veyron, Dino, Pagani Zonda, Murcielago, etc. The thing is, however...that they're attractive cars.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but when 9/10 people say its ugly...well there ya go.

1/27/2010 8:36:59 AM

You know what. For the fucking record, the LF-A made it around the top gear test track in 1:22.8 seconds in "wet," which is a 4 second adjustment. Richard Hammond mentions that it was VERY WET outside, which would give it's lap time an additional 2 second adjustment, however, they still recorded it as just regular wet. Giving the car even some doubt that it was indeed just wet that would put the time down to 1:18.8. Let's take a look at how this compares for a second:


1:17.1 - Gumpert Apollo
1:17.3 - Ascari A10
1:17.6 - Koenigsegg CCX (with Top Gear Wing)
1:17.7 - Noble M600 (cold)
1:17.8 - Pagani Zonda Roadster F Clubsport
1:17.9 - Caterham Seven R500 (cold tyres)
1:18.3 - Bugatti Veyron
1:18.4 - Pagani Zonda F
1:18.8 - Lexus LF-A
1:18.9 - Maserati MC12
1:19.0 - Lamborghini Murciélago LP670-4 SuperVeloce
1:19.0 - Enzo Ferrari
1:19.5 - Lamborghini Gallardo LP560-4
1:19.5 - Porsche 997 GT2
1:19.5 - Ariel Atom 2 300
1:19.7 - Nissan GT-R
1:19.7 - Ferrari 430 Scuderia
1:19.8 - Lamborghini Murciélago LP640
1:19.8 - Porsche Carrera GT
1:20.4 - Chevrolet Corvette C6 ZR1 (damp)
1:20.4 - Koenigsegg CCX (without Top Gear Wing)
1:20.7 - Ascari KZ1 (damp)
1:20.9 - Mercedes-Benz SLR McLaren
1:21.2 - Ferrari 599 GTB Fiorano
1:21.6 - Audi R8 V10 (damp)
1:21.9 - Ford GT
1:22.3 - Ferrari 360 Challenge Stradale
1:22.3 - Porsche 911 GT3 RS (996 mk.II)
1:22.4 - Chevrolet Corvette C6 Z06
1:22.5 - Noble M15
1:22.8 - Lexus LFA (wet)

Oh look at that. In the WET, the LFA was only 3 seconds slower than the Carrera GT. I'm willing to bet then that it's indeed faster than the Carrera GT, given they race in the same conditinos. The top speed of a Carrera GT is 205mph, the LF-A is 202mph, so top speed wise they are both real close, a moot comparison at this level imo.

Oh, and if you want to compare lap times even further, here's this for thought:

The Lamborghini Murciélago LP670-4 SuperVeloce is about the same price, if not more expensive (depending on options) and is slower around the track.

The Maserati MC12 is 1/10 second slower than predicted for the LF-A in dry condition, yet is almost double the price!

Both the Pagani Zonda F and Bugatti Veyron are faster, yes, but are also both ~90% more expensive!!!

The Koenigsegg CCX and Ascari A10 are also much more expensive than the LF-A

So... in conclusion? I don't think it's that badly priced for the performance figures. And honestly, I find it more attractive than the Veyron. Sure there's the "I've got over 1000hp" bragging rights, but at twice the cost, it's more of a straight line rocket that consumes an ungodly amount of fuel (I know, there's the argument if you can afford a Bugatti to begin with, fuel costs are the least of your worries...). But the point remains. I find the LF-A easier on the eyes than the Veyron. The Veryon is just a damn egocentric cocky looking BEAST. The LF-A still has some class. It's an exotic that will catch your eye on the road, but is "professional" and "clean" in the sense that it can "fit in" with the rest of the crowd too. It doesn't just stick out like a damn rhino in a herd of gazelle.

After watching the Top Gear video, I must say that I'm actually quite impressed. We've also got to keep in mind that car's abilities are more than the numbers that are generated on paper. Sure that can give you some idea, but with all the technology available today, it definitely makes it harder to judge without actually taking them out on the track. I'm not saying that TG is some Bible or Absolute Truth, I'm just saying take it for what it's worth and look at the facts presented to you.

The LF-A does intrigue me and is growing on me...


[Edited on January 27, 2010 at 9:34 AM. Reason : .]

1/27/2010 9:28:33 AM

Quote :

"he difference is its a crude looking ugly car. You really have to wonder why Toyota spend 9 years developing this car and didn't bother to make it attractive."

You're being retarded now. It's a gorgeous car. There is so much attention to detail in the styling it's almost nauseating. Unlike all the American "super car" projects, this thing has some real thought put into the styling beyond just engineering aerodynamics (although the engineering aesthetics are freaking superb as well).

1/27/2010 12:12:47 PM

Attention to detail =/ good looking


And you can't honestly say that the front of the car doesn't look half finished.

1/27/2010 12:45:37 PM

i love the sound of that engine

and the car itself is not ugly to me

just not what i'd spend $400k on


it'd probably be more reliable than say an F car and cheaper to maintain than a Lambo

but if you're buying $400,000.00 cars, you probably aren't very frugal anyway

1/27/2010 1:31:44 PM

I do agree with TKE-Teg about the front end, specifically the headlights. They look like an after-thought. Many other people have said the same. Check out the headlights on the LFA Roadster concept on page 2 of this thread... freaking gorgeous... why did they change them so much???

Rest of the car is gorgeous to me... and every nook and crease and duct on that car is functional.

shmorri2, just FYI, the Veyron doesn't cost double of the LFA, but quadruple . (almost $1.6 million) Nice post, BTW .



[Edited on January 27, 2010 at 5:50 PM. Reason : 27,000 ]

1/27/2010 5:28:15 PM

^ LMAO, you are right... I did a quick "google" just to ballpark the price. I saw 700,000 at a quick glance, overlooking the almighty 1 in front of it. Kinda makes a huge difference. I thought $700k for a Veyron was cheap


HOLY EPIC 27000 POST OEP!!!!

[Edited on January 27, 2010 at 5:44 PM. Reason : .]

1/27/2010 5:41:19 PM

Quote :

"I do agree with TKE-Teg about the front end, specifically the headlights. They look like an after-thought. Many other people have said the same."

The consensus of a group doesn't make it correct. Many other people think the earth is 5000 years old. Many other people think using a cell phone while pumping gas will create an explosion. Many other people think they are going to inherit 20 million dollars from a Nigerian prince.

Just because you don't like something doesn't make it categorically ugly, or not thought through. The fact that none of you guys can ever articulate WHY you think these things, or what the solution should have been without referring to another vehicle just reinforces the point.

1/28/2010 9:36:01 PM

I think I've spelled out why I don't like all the front of the LF-A, but if I need to summarize it again no problem.

-too many air "intakes" that instead look like horrible panel gaps
-too many gaping intakes
-sharp creases that flow with...nothing.

1/28/2010 10:45:25 PM

Quote :

"The consensus of a group doesn't make it correct. Many other people think the earth is 5000 years old. Many other people think using a cell phone while pumping gas will create an explosion. Many other people think they are going to inherit 20 million dollars from a Nigerian prince."

So now you are confusing facts with opinions?

Quote :

"The fact that none of you guys can ever articulate WHY you think these things, or what the solution should have been without referring to another vehicle just reinforces the point."

You conveniently skipped the 2nd half of my paragraph, the part that answers your question and is a solution to the problem. Yes, I am referring to another vehicle, but it is the same damn vehicle, an earlier iteration of it. So, I will quote myself:

Quote :

"I do agree with TKE-Teg about the front end, specifically the headlights. They look like an after-thought. Many other people have said the same. Check out the headlights on the LFA Roadster concept on page 2 of this thread... freaking gorgeous... why did they change them so much???"

Also see the headlights on the last coupe concept... much much better than the production ones. And the whole front end seems to flow better with the rest of the car.




















I also prefer the boomerang tail lights of the Roadster concept. They give the rear more character, and balance the huge amount of area not covered by lights. (the lights on the production car are too small for the huge rear end)




[Edited on January 29, 2010 at 7:47 AM. Reason : ]

1/29/2010 7:44:23 AM

just preordered one in white.

-posted from my ipad

1/29/2010 9:12:33 AM

^

you mean you ordered this ice sculpture of it?

1/29/2010 11:12:52 AM

ITS STILL A FUCKING LEXUS!!!

1/29/2010 11:20:34 AM

I want an Ascari A-10. Thing is fucking beautiful.

1/29/2010 1:02:50 PM

Quote :

""I do agree with TKE-Teg about the front end, specifically the headlights. They look like an after-thought. Many other people have said the same. Check out the headlights on the LFA Roadster concept on page 2 of this thread... freaking gorgeous... why did they change them so much???" Also see the headlights on the last coupe concept... much much better than the production ones. And the whole front end seems to flow better with the rest of the car."

Welcome to the world of materials engineering and production limitations. You both said the lights looked like afterthoughts, AFTER you said how much you loved them in a previous concept. How can something be an afterthought when it's an iteration on designs that obviously took great care and effort?

It's a stupid comment.

And why didn't they make them like the concept? Most likely because they don't have tooling capable of producing it in a production manner. I had a buddy in grad school who worked on the hood for the Corvette ZR-1. It took DOZENS of engineers nearly a year to take the concept ZR-1 hood and create a production capable version. I was pretty shocked at how much effort it took, and that hood was relatively simple as it only has a couple of compound curves across the surface. The prototype LF-A has dozens of deep-channel compound surfaces that are damn near impossible to actually produce.

2/4/2010 12:37:58 AM

My little brother did a long design internship at Husqvarna (sp?) and still does some work on the side for them, he's said the same thing: it's always designers vs engineers.

The ZR1 hood is uglier than the chrome rims.

2/4/2010 8:46:21 AM

^Pretty much. Most auto's are design in Autodesk AliasStudio (Alias StudioTools formerly). But damn near everything is manufactured from SolidWorks or Pro/E.

Alias is a NURBS surface modeler, Solidworks is a parametric solids modeler. I've never seen a model that could go from one to the other without some tweaking (even basic forms). Everyone's always bitched why designers don't use Solidworks and or Pro/E, and they do actually. Just neither package has any real ability to DESIGN and is super painful to make changes, iterate or try alternatives.

2/4/2010 10:34:38 AM

^^I don't mind the hood. Also, the chrome rims are an option. I'd go without.

2/4/2010 11:27:22 AM