IS-F/R: Did Lexus Shuffle The Deck And Draw Another Ace In The Hole?

A few weeks ago I surprised a number of you by warning my fellow euro diehards not to under estimate the upcoming Lexus IS-F.  At that time I looked at the facts as we knew them, and realized that Lexus had an ace in the hole with the 8 speed transmission.  At that time I ran the figures through a program that theoretically gave me performance parameters.  Amazingly so, it only took a few days for my predictions to be put to the acid test, and lucky for me they rang pretty close to true.

As we all know Lexus’ first serious shot at the uber sedan market fell very close to the mark, but not quite at the top where the fan base expected it to be. Does this make it any less of a worthy competitor? Not in the least if you ask me.  You have to realize that whenever the IS-F trailed in acceleration or other parameters compared to its brethren, it was well within the margins of driver error.  It was that close. But you know, that doesn’t help much when it comes down to bragging rights, after you have to lead in most everything. 

Enter the rumored IS-F/R., Lexus second salvo, and an even more potent one at that.   On the surface the improvements may not seem like much.  A 12hp increase and a mere 6 ft/lbs of torque don’t seem like much.  But the real performance enhancing feature is to be the use of carbon fiber to reduce the curb weight by an estimated 220 lbs.  Now this, my friends is another ace in the hole.  Our buddies over at Lexus have done their homework again.

Don’t think it adds up? Well back to my trusty calculations again to give us a look into the future.  Let’s review my predictions on the original IS-F and the real world averages of the first tests.

Ok, this nothing really knew to many of you, because we posted it a while back.  But now we take the hp increase and weight reduction into account for the IS-F/R as we know it and this is what we get.

You may note that I took my known margin of error from the original computations compared to real world testing, and adjusted the performance in an effort to reflect known deviations.

 Now we see how it all adds up.  The horsepower increase only made a 1/10^th of a second improvement in the ¼ mile. But factor in the weight loss and you have another story all together. 

If the IS-F/R becomes a reality, and I believe it may, due to the relatively low cost to make it happen.  This will place the IS-F/R squarely at the top of the pack in this segment.  Actually depending on the driver it could eclipse the mighty Mercedes C63 AMG and leave both the M3 and the RS4 wondering what happened.

So how do you like those apples, could I be correct again?

JUGNU - 12/15/2007 11:21:41 AM

+3 Boost

Agent009

Seeing that u and your calculator were very close last time, I think Yes, u could be correct again.

JUGNU

Agent009 - 12/15/2007 11:49:12 AM

+5 Boost

That is why, I included the margin for error in the figures. The only thing that changed was weight and hp. So the margin should be very close. (I hope... lol
)

dlin - 12/16/2007 1:24:33 AM

+3 Boost

LEXUS is not HONDA, they don't -R everything.

I think IS-F/R, for now, is just a rumor. First, there's no gap to close between E90 M3 and IS-F. They are already at the same league and you can easily tell from the spec and latest tests. I've also seen report of IS-F lapping Nurburgring under 8 minutes.

Second, the market leader is BMW, therefore LEXUS won't know what to benchmark before E90 M3 CSL edition was revealed.

If there's anything LEXUS need to do to IS-F, it'll be to raise RPM redline to at least 7500 or add an AWD version to shut RS4 up :)

S4cabriofoxone - 12/16/2007 8:55:15 PM

-5 Boost

"First, there's no gap to close between E90 M3 and IS-F."

I disagree... there may be no power/acceleration gap, but in the way of a ride/handling balance, nobody can touch the M3, or the Germans as a whole for that matter.

RealitySmack - 12/17/2007 8:23:55 AM

+3 Boost

^^^Well, you can't under estimate competition these days. Yea, the Germans are known for delivering good performance but, to claim they can't be touched is stretching a bit. Just look at what happened to the Big 3.

dlin - 12/17/2007 10:01:35 PM

+1 Boost

I know someone will mention old tune of ride/handling balance. Here's my take: If the supreme handling still cannot get you the fastest lap time, then what went wrong?

Most race cars, being neutral to oversteer-oriented, are usually considered spooky for beginners. When you corners a stock bimmer at high speed, it understeers just like others. It's a matter of how (fast) you drive.

S4cabriofoxone - 12/18/2007 7:28:12 PM

+2 Boost

"Well, you can't under estimate competition these days. Yea, the Germans are known for delivering good performance but, to claim they can't be touched is stretching a bit. Just look at what happened to the Big 3. "

That comparison is invalid! The Germans are still producing amazing automobiles! The Big Three weren't, and that's why they went down!

BMW is known for incredible balance. Not their 50/50 weight balance, oh no. But their brilliant ride & handling balance! No matter how fast the IS-F is, it simply won't do what an M3 does. The M3 can be your cruiser... or your track tool. And both, it does with awe-inspiring ease, with a perfection that you won't find in any other car south of $100K.

dlin - 12/18/2007 9:23:55 PM

+1 Boost

Of course you can find one.

It's called EVO.

RealitySmack - 12/19/2007 12:12:01 PM

+1 Boost

Well I agree that they DO make good cars but, claiming they are unreachable is stretching a bit. Everybody knows how the previous M3 drives so, its easy to praise it, which it DOES deserve. But, nobody in public has driven the IS-F so, nothing firm can be said, yet.

Nobody and I mean NOBODY is unreachable!

farhank420 - 12/15/2007 11:26:35 AM

+5 Boost

..impressive

EL34 - 12/15/2007 11:28:14 AM

-7 Boost

I would rather have a Corvette.

EL34 - 12/15/2007 11:31:30 PM

-3 Boost

OK, wahtever you want..

o_O

GetemHigh125 - 12/15/2007 11:52:49 AM

-7 Boost

First the IS-F/R...now the IS-F/X. Who cares. Am I the only one not into this car?

RealitySmack - 12/15/2007 1:29:16 PM

+2 Boost

I think so!

enthusiastx11 - 12/15/2007 2:08:08 PM

-5 Boost

nope. it's still ugly and ill-proportioned.

tattedtwice - 12/17/2007 9:24:13 PM

+1 Boost

Absolutely not, I cant stand the is-fugly: Overdone, overratioed transmission, bloated engine with exhaust roar instead of real tuning, cheap looking wheels and body kit, and ugly as hell; basically, it's a japanese version of the c63.

S4cabriofoxone - 12/15/2007 11:58:26 AM

+3 Boost

Would this be the "IS-F/R" as you posted in the other article? Or a THIRD model, which wouldn't make sense?

One note... the normal IS-F has already achieved a 4.2 second time, as have the RS4 and M3, and the C63 AMG has gotten 3.9. I don't think the IS-F/X would be any quicker than the M3 CSL, C63 Black or RS4 Plus if all of them came into production, because the regular IS-F isn't any quicker than the regular versions of those three.

RealitySmack - 12/15/2007 1:35:45 PM

+1 Boost

I think it is the IS-F/R.

Agent009 - 12/15/2007 11:46:58 PM

+2 Boost

Yeah it is the IS-F/R my typo.

g2ok - 12/15/2007 12:27:37 PM

+1 Boost

I think it would not be hard for Daimler or BMW to reduce weight and increase hp also. I find the IS-F car style a bit cheap.

BMW4me4ever - 12/15/2007 12:42:11 PM

-7 Boost

they, BMW , dont need to. Ace in the hole in comparison to the BMW< Mercedes or Audi, not really. It is smaller in size then all three, has some 16 year old body kit with aftermark civic looking exhausts. Wait til the comparison comes out and the lexus is last. Just like the IS350 vs the 335i. Nice car yes, ace in the hole, NO.

Ingenieur - 12/15/2007 1:25:39 PM

+2 Boost

Agent009,

I do remember being amazed at how close you were the first time around so you might be onto something again.

Doesn't Road & Track have stats for the IS-F (0-60, 1/4 mile, etc)? Can you factor those in? If you have the time, that is.

STJ88 - 12/15/2007 1:51:04 PM

+7 Boost

@BMW4me4ever

I have never seen a civic with exhausts like the IS-F.

JRobUSC - 12/15/2007 1:57:57 PM

-1 Boost

saving 220lbs using carbon fiber body panels isn't a "relative low cost". That's extremely expensive. The carbon fiber roof on the BMW M6 costs several thousand dollars, and it only saves 11lbs -- you're talking about saving an extra 209lbs on top of that. That would likely add enough cost that you'd be in the range of the M3 CSL/C63 AMG Black, and to compete with those big dogs it's going to take more than an extra 12hp and 9lb-ft.

RealitySmack - 12/15/2007 2:02:23 PM

+4 Boost

The reason for couple thousand dollars is because it's "BMW M6". Not because that's how much it actually costs, which would be much lower.

enthusiastx11 - 12/15/2007 2:11:24 PM

-1 Boost

you're right. to make much of the car out of carbon fiber and save 220lbs could double the cost of the car. they have to be cutting equipment...like power seats, electronics, etc. that's how everyone does it.

enthusiastx11 - 12/15/2007 2:13:13 PM

-3 Boost

reality:

carbon fiber costs a FORTUNE no matter what car it's on. that's why even the M6 and M3 only have roofs made of the material...also, it's not just about weight reduction, it's about lower the car's center of gravity.

Agent009 - 12/15/2007 11:49:21 PM

+1 Boost

They probably are going to subcontract that part out of the equation to a vendor that already has done it. I probably isa just the hood and front fenders and maybe the trunk. Easy to do,

RealitySmack - 12/16/2007 7:38:36 AM

+3 Boost

Well yea, CF costs more than typical material. But, CF is not as expensive as what all these companies claim. I've recently started doing this so, I know how much mark-up companies put on. This is a similar argument to another thread where we concluded that costs go up due to the "Badge" they carry.

markymark - 12/16/2007 11:10:23 PM

+1 Boost

I don't know. If they sold it as a coup and not a four door sedan, they might be able to justify the new model and then people who bought the four dour wouldn't really be upset, just realize that they have a different car.

silver1 - 12/17/2007 10:21:09 AM

0 Boost

"TheSailor"

220lbs insane?

With 14,000,000,000 billion dollars in revenues, anything is possible...

Czelinski - 12/15/2007 2:35:38 PM

-4 Boost

S4 is spot on.

pacotacolol - 12/15/2007 2:45:28 PM

+1 Boost

ok.

S4cabriofoxone - 12/16/2007 12:55:58 AM

-1 Boost

"doesn't everything in this segment fall in this range?"

Nope, C63 AMG 3.9.

dbs600old - 12/16/2007 12:38:38 AM

+1 Boost

HAS ANYONE NOTICED THAT THE LX 570 PRICING LEAK POST HAS BEEN TAKEN DOWN??? WHERE DID IT GO???

RealitySmack - 12/16/2007 7:52:15 AM

+1 Boost

I am not sure how valid this news is going to be but, as I've mentioned in the 1st IS-F war thread that the 5L can be tuned to provide it's true power. IF they decide to make this than they'll definitely take advantage of that. And if they're in the market for low-end performance then they're gonna have to bump up the torque at the wheels by taking advantage of gears.

M53R - 12/16/2007 8:48:26 AM

-1 Boost

BMW M3 CSL, coming soon.

farabira1 - 12/16/2007 8:50:45 AM

+2 Boost

i think ISF R is a possiblity, designed to compete with The M3 CSL, and C63 Black AMG, but this time Lexus has to keep the price down a bit.

scorpio - 12/16/2007 2:17:45 PM

0 Boost

This means nothing to me. Performance numbers alone don't make a great or memorable car. And certainly not a great sports car.

Lexus - 12/16/2007 2:58:43 PM

+1 Boost

S4, where did you get the information that said the regular M3 and Audi RS4 did 0-60 in 4.2s?

From all the magazine review I have read, it said both of them manage goes from 0-60 in 4.8s or 4.4s best.

The Lexus IS-F did 0-60 in 4.2s and only to beaten by the MB C-class AMG which did it in 3.9s.

S4cabriofoxone - 12/16/2007 4:00:25 PM

-3 Boost

You're WRONG. There has been at least one test with a 4.2 sec time! Just accept it! The RS4 averages out at about 4.5!

"Audi factory numbers indicate that the B7 RS4 can accelerate from 0-100 km/h (62 mph) in 4.8 seconds and arrive at 200 km/h (125 mph) in 16.6 seconds. Many independent tests have shown that the stock B7 RS4 can readily achieve 0-60 mph times around 4.2 seconds. This is consistent with the pattern of conservatism that is usually found in Audi's official performance numbers." -Wikipedia

You can go look up the test where the M3 got the 4.2, because I couldn't find it, but yes, it's there.

r15mohd - 12/17/2007 9:42:47 AM

+2 Boost

relax S4, he's asking you for your sources...

he's not wrong as you state...he's looking for the facts. i heard the m3 did 4.2, i believe it but still don't know the source to its achievement.

and please refrain from using "wikipedia", the sources are not fully reliable.

tattedtwice - 12/17/2007 9:26:42 PM

+1 Boost

^^^Fixed it for you:
Who cares about lexus. They have to be the most boring cars ever invented, no styling what so ever. Heres how to some up every lexus ever made "4 doors, 4 wheels", thats all you get.

Lexus - 12/16/2007 6:01:57 PM

+2 Boost

I would NOT be surprise if Car And Driver Magazine will get below 4.0s for this Lexus IS-F/R from 0-60. It would be really interesting if it could do it in 3.8s-3.9s. from 0-60.

This their first true attempt in establishing a statement this segment. And the already causing a lot of commotion and have Great performance as well to back up it hype. I can't wait for the next gen Lexus IS-F sportcar to come out.

Great Job Lexus

r15mohd - 12/17/2007 9:22:07 AM

+3 Boost

to all of you predicting this IS-R coming in at 90k...let's be serious, the IS-F is going to be start at about $55k base and probably top out at about 63-65k. No way will the IS-R come in anywhere close to the 90k, as some of you ridiculously stated...it's not justifiable!

as for the weight reduction issues...carbon fiber replacement won't be the only type of reduction being made. an analogy used earlier was the Murcielago haveing replaced its body parts with c/f, that is because the interior of the Murci is already to probably its thinnest form.

the IS-R, IF MADE, will have a completely redone interior...kevlar/lightweight front seats...not so many trims, eliminating some features like the upgraded sound system (probably a 10-20lb factor alone). The 220lb mark isnt hard to obtain, once the "F" division starts to dig in and see whats replaceable...almost every car can scrape 200 lbs off with the resources available to these major companies.

just because MB and BMW can do it, doesnt mean no one else is capable.

the comparison between the CSK/Black and if produced IS-R should be interesting, as is the segment now.

Lexus took a shot and hit the middle...can't deny they did well, and don't expect less from this attempt if done.

RealitySmack - 12/17/2007 11:00:58 AM

+1 Boost

I have to agree with you here. IF they REALLY wanted to build this car than, the Lexus buyers will see some of their luxury being lessened. And the cost will in no way be anywhere close to $90k-$100k, just doesn't seem realistic.

One needs to remember that this is Lexus's 1st attempt and they managed to break into the *bubble*. So, it is realistic to assume that the next versions will be even better along with the others. The other 3's are good but, they're not unreachable!