Discussion in 'Lexus' started by -=Hot|Ice=-, Apr 12, 2012.
Lexus LFA II Rumors: Twice the Car, Twice the Price | AutoGuide.com News
Should be good. A One 77 type of car?
I just wanted to post this. I really like that there is a possibility an LFA II. I guess Toyota feels it need one, with the coming of the new Porsche 918, Ferrari F70 and McLaren F1.
The Toyota GT86 is nice but Toyota might need at least one or two other cars, one powered by some V6 priced around 50K, and one other powered by some V8 price around 100K. I think the later one will be the LF-LC, I'd like a smaller one with a H6 based on the H4 of the GT86.
Toyota working on even more exotic followup to Lexus LFA?
Toyota working on even more exotic followup to Lexus LFA?
Many countries have produced supercars with price tags that dip into the six figures, but that rare breed of exotic that fetches upwards of a quarter million is all but completely exclusive to Europe: Ferrari, Lamborghini and Pagani out of Italy, Bugatti from France, McLaren and higher-end Aston Martin models of Britain, top-of-the-line Porsche offerings from Germany, Koenigsegg of Sweden and so on. That's what makes the Lexus LFA so exceptional. It extends beyond the Acura NSX and the Nissan GT-R that previously defined the top end of Japanese supercars and joins its European rivals at the very top of the market. But that, we're reading, is only the beginning.
According to a shadowy anonymous source cornered by AutoGuide, Toyota is already working on a successor to the LFA, and their mole says the car will be even more exotic, more powerful and more expensive. Just what that entails when the LFA is already limited to 500 examples, packs a 552-horsepower 4.8-liter V10 and costs $375,000 has us conjuring up images of an animé take on the Bugatti Veyron. AG suggests the car could nudge the million-dollar mark with production limited to just 100 examples.
Could it be a production version of the LF-LC concept? It's probably too early to tell. In fact, we're going to go ahead and take this entire rumor with a few shakers-worth of salt and advise you to consider doing the same.
Twice the car?
ROFL. I almost fell off my chair laughing.
If true, I believe LExus can make the LFA even better, for more, by adding power and reducing wieght and making it look if better. 800.000 € is ok for such a car built to only 100 units. If you look the SLR McLAren is not that exclusive, about 3.500 units, has worse performance, and costed about 430.000 €. The Carrera GT is quite close to the LFA in terms of performance and driving feeling, but there are 1.270 units and it costed about 450.000 €. The coming 918, F70 and F1 are going to be even more expensive, but hybrids so more heavy, for this much more powerful.
twince units and twice price is hard... 1,000 units and 750-800k $ !!
I'm just thinking about SLR too..
it's no easy to compare SLR and LF-A because in 2003 there's less supercar and hypercar than 2010, but I rembember how MB planned 3.500 units, but standard SLR was stopped around 1, 200, as like as Carrera GT (similar price, also planned @ 1,500).
the overall SLRs were about 2,000 units, thanks to a lots of special units (722 edition, roadster, 722 roadster, and 75 units of Stirling Moss...)
(p.s. SLR and CGT are faster on straight than LF-A)
I don't know about that especially Carrera GT. There is no conclusive drag race video to prove or disprove that. Although, talking about drag racing in these car (especially LFA and Carrera GT) case is a moot point.
There are videos where a Carrera GT barely managed to edged out a stock C6 Z06 to very high speeds. Nobody could have guessed that by e-racing.
LF-A almost fast than CGT and SLR?!?!? it make me smile...
please go back a read about highspeed test @ Nardò...
What is your proof?? Where is the head to head race?? Show it to me and I will be the first one to admit. Like I said before, a Carrera GT was not much quicker than a stock C6 Z06 to very high speeds in a head to head race. How many people could have guessed that??
Even LFA in SA test, it is hard to believe a seasoned pro like Horst Von Saurma hit only 275 km/h on Dottinger Hoe when a rookie amateur Ben Barry following a pace car hit 278 km/h on his first try coming out much slower from the corner.
..Z06? I'm talking about CGT and LF-A.
I do not have to prove anything, because in all tests is evident how the CGT is faster than LF-A (and Z06).
Then, if in the real world, a CGT has trouble against the Lf-A (and Z06).... oooooops, ask it to the experts about the "differences between official and stock cars"
have a nice weekend :t-cheers:
Well, where is the head to head race??
Yeah, those tests you are looking at would also tell you a ZR-1 is slower than a Carrera GT while the real world all comparisons head to head tell otherwise.
...Z06 or ZR1? eve so.... they are =/= than LF-A
Nardò high speed test
0-300 34.x s
what about LF-A? Sport auto did 0-200 12.5s and 0-300 50.6s
you'll find some test, about 0-200 LF-A, under 12s, but CGT did
AMuS: 10.7s (nardò)
AMuS: 10.9s (single test)
LF-a has less power, more weight and longer gear ratio (both high drag)
now, show me an head-to-head race where LF-A can match against CGT, if you can
(LF-A vs CGT... not Z06, Zr1... F22 raptor...)
The Z06 reference is there to point a flaw in your bench racing methodology. I am not drawing any conclusions until I see a proper comparison test. That is all I am saying.
No one could have guessed a 599 GTB HGTE would be slower in a direct test with an LFA by looking at isolated numbers or do well against a GT2 RS on cup tires.
I am sure, with those bench racing numbers, a ZR-1 is shown to be slower than a Carrera GT while in head to head drag racing videos, they ZR-1 is substantially quicker.
Again, get the point. Your flawed way of bench racing by picking two numbers in isolation one of them represent the worst of the worst and then compare to them to the best of the best of the other side. That is the worst form of bench racing there is.
How cleverly you removed the 0 - 100 km/h of the LFA. The numbers you mentioned from SA, they got a 0 - 100 km/h in 4.5 seconds with an LFA while a 4.2 seconds from a 440 HP M3 GTS. You expect me to believe that nonsense?? There goes the credibility out of the window when you get sloppy numbers like that from a 552 HP car, something is really out of place.
I'm talking about "CGT Vs LF-A"... which part of this phrase is unclear?
even so... the LF-A's best performances ever (0-200? 11.5s?) still far from CGT's average (10.7s)
CGT did 1 km 20.4s @ 266 Kph, LF-A cannot do it
CGT did 0-300 34.x, LF-A cannot do it
LF-A is slower, end of the story
Bench racing does not work. That is what my point is like I explained in my previous post.
No one could guess these videos just by looking at isolated numbers like you are because bench racing is the worst form of comparing two cars. Your bench racing numbers would never tell you this type of outcome
p.s. LFA has overall shorter gearing a 1000 rpm extra rpm band.
CGT is faster. 0-200 tells one story but look at the 0-300 times. World of difference.
Carrera GT is definitely the much faster car even though it is almost a decade older.
0-200: Best 9.8sec Worst 10.7sec
0-300: Best 34.2sec Worst 36.5
0-200: Best 10.7sec Worst 12.6sec
0-300: Only time I know of 50.6sec
Lexus LFA 0 - 260 km/h in 21.1 seconds (Motorsports magazine, France)
I don't care for the SA test. It will not take another 29 seconds for it to get from 260 km/h - 300 km/h unless it was very windy that day or some other conditional challenges.
Heck, Horst Von Saurma on full attack could only get 275 km/h on Dottinger Hoe with the same car while an amateur Ben Barry on his first test drive lap did a video VBOX 278 km/h on that exact same straight.
While I agree the LFA shouldn't be that slow to 300 kph, it should be noted that the GT2 RS in that test may have had launch problems. It was noted in that test, dated 4/12/2011:
"**Update: Our scan tool found a fault code in the GT2 -- not displayed with a warning light -- regarding wheel speed sensors which could explain the launch. We will re-test if possible. **"
Even with the launch problem, the GT2 was faster by 4 mph at the trap. When they retested it with the fault codes cleared later in the month, the GT2 RS ran an 11.2 @ 129, which is considerably faster than the LFA in both ET and trap. CGT should also be comfortably faster.
Which one is being twice the units and twice the price?
As for this "LFA II", I'd be a little pissed if I were an LFA customer and found Lexus were making more of the CF tub for other cars. Can't see this being another car built from the ground up like the LFA.