Saw a Lexus IS-F parked up yesterday...... not horrible but not elegant either
08-04-2008, 10:03 AM
#1
AudiWorld Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: NYC
Posts: 245
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Saw a Lexus IS-F parked up yesterday...... not horrible but not elegant either
I checked out some reviews on youtube... webrides tv loves the IS-F over the RS4, Edmunds Inside Line loves RS4 over IS-F... would be interested in going toe-to-toe with one!!! 
08-04-2008, 10:32 AM
#2
AudiWorld Super User
Drove one. I prefer the C63's styling & engine...
One of the most glaring issues I had with it was that the suspension was way to rough for it's own good. Even the Evo X that I recently test drove felt like it had more compliant suspension. If Lexus made this car to handle much better than the M3 and RS4 then maybe that would be acceptable... but that's not even the case. BMW and Audi found a way to provide better handling dynamics than the IS-F without sacrificing ride.
It's a nice first try by Lexus but I'd still take any of the germans over it. RS4 for all-year and all-weather versatility, M3 for the best compromise leaning towards performance and handling, and the C63 for brute force and the most bad-*** sounding exhaust note.
I see the Lexus getting trumped by the others in almost every category, except maybe it has the nicest navigation system.
It's a nice first try by Lexus but I'd still take any of the germans over it. RS4 for all-year and all-weather versatility, M3 for the best compromise leaning towards performance and handling, and the C63 for brute force and the most bad-*** sounding exhaust note.
I see the Lexus getting trumped by the others in almost every category, except maybe it has the nicest navigation system.
08-04-2008, 11:21 AM
#5
AudiWorld Super User
IS-F feels quicker but mostly because of more torque down low and the slushbox shifts very fast...
faster than I can shift the RS4's 6MT at least.
But the RS4 definitely has more ***** in the top end of the revs all the way near the 7k+ rpm redline while the IS-F's 5-liter feels like it starts to run out of steam near 6k. RS4 feels more linear despite having less torque. Admittedly, I only did a couple of acceleration runs in the Lexus and didn't quite get it to triple digits but I did come to the conclusion that normally aspirated engines should be tuned to rev, unlike the relatively docile engine in the Lexus. My guess is that this is the Lexus way of adding a safe helping of reliability in this motor.
But the RS4 definitely has more ***** in the top end of the revs all the way near the 7k+ rpm redline while the IS-F's 5-liter feels like it starts to run out of steam near 6k. RS4 feels more linear despite having less torque. Admittedly, I only did a couple of acceleration runs in the Lexus and didn't quite get it to triple digits but I did come to the conclusion that normally aspirated engines should be tuned to rev, unlike the relatively docile engine in the Lexus. My guess is that this is the Lexus way of adding a safe helping of reliability in this motor.
08-04-2008, 12:37 PM
#6
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The IS-F has two more forward gears and yamaha-secondaries that flip open at 3600rpm giving it...
a nice deep whooshing intake sound that, to me, made it seem like it was accelerating faster than it actually was. When I was a teenager I had a Taurus SHO with the similar secondary intake runners and it had the same effect back then too. However that SHO engine was about 100x better looking than the one in the Lexus.
Edmunds tested the RS4 0-60 at 4.3 seconds, and I believe the IS-F was 4.8, which is around the same time as the 335i. I don't really care much about the 0-60 times since I won't ever clutch-dump my RS to get those results. The IS felt nervous and "over-tuned" - too taut and that makes it lose some of its composure on transitioning roads...a perfect example is trying to take a cloverleaf quickly - the typical changes in pavement on those loops easily unseated the Lexus where the Audi stayed planted. I spose the tires were to blame for some of that too.
Edmunds tested the RS4 0-60 at 4.3 seconds, and I believe the IS-F was 4.8, which is around the same time as the 335i. I don't really care much about the 0-60 times since I won't ever clutch-dump my RS to get those results. The IS felt nervous and "over-tuned" - too taut and that makes it lose some of its composure on transitioning roads...a perfect example is trying to take a cloverleaf quickly - the typical changes in pavement on those loops easily unseated the Lexus where the Audi stayed planted. I spose the tires were to blame for some of that too.
08-04-2008, 12:41 PM
#7
AudiWorld Member
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My favorite photo of the IS-F...showing the exhaust tips...completely disconnected from the exhaust.
<center><img src="http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com//media/roadtests/comparison/2008/lexus.is.f/08.lexus.is.f.det.7.500.jpg"></center><p>
Trending Topics
08-04-2008, 01:57 PM
#9
AudiWorld Super User
yes, but the key difference is that actual care and engineering precision was used in the R8...
...so that the faux tips would line up somewhat with the actual exhaust pipes. Properly aligned faux exhaust tips are also true of lambos and even the bugatti veyron. No such alignment with the IS-F.... it's completely out of whack.
08-04-2008, 03:18 PM
#10
AudiWorld Super User
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 7,817
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True.
But they still serve no actual purpose just like in the IS-F. People get on the IS-F for being rice because of the fact that the tips are not functional but there are so many other cars out there like that.