Notices
News & Rumors Archives Useful threads, previous Cars of the Week, and more.

2008 Lexus IS-F 500 spy shots

Thread Tools
 
Old Jan 14, 2007 | 04:25 PM
  #31  
umop-apisdn's Avatar
umop-apisdn
Allergic to vitamin D
 
Joined: Jun 2002
Posts: 6,032
Likes: 0
From: Earth
Default

Originally Posted by lexusis350
Does Acura Plan for a new Type S for the TSX? Would be nice along with the M3 and IS-F. I think Acura should make one, will make this area more competitive. Acura and Lexus will take some sales away from BMW.
Agreed. Beat Lex to a two door version. Who cares if it eats into the Accord sales, in the end Honda still gets the money.
Old Jan 15, 2007 | 07:15 AM
  #32  
lexusis350's Avatar
lexusis350
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Default

Honda always gains money and I think they should expand their lineup. Add a V8 to Ridgeline and compete with full-size trucks (F-150, Tundra)
Old Jan 15, 2007 | 08:08 PM
  #33  
bunny's Avatar
bunny
Junior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Troopa-R
::sigh:: eight speed automatic? For true, Toyota?

I'm not interested anymore.

I mean... I really like the new IS. I like the interior, I love the way they drive... they even offer the two options I want - a real manual tranny (F1/SMG/DSG may be faster but they're not the same) and AWD, but they're only offered on the lowest model and they're not even offered together. Back to lusting after European models for me, I guess.
The IS-F has a new torque converter design. The shifting time from the steering wheel based shifters are almost the same as in a DSG.
Old Jan 15, 2007 | 08:11 PM
  #34  
bunny's Avatar
bunny
Junior Member
 
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Default

Originally Posted by Ochdx
As much as I like this IS-F, I am not getting why the torque rating is so low, with a 5.0 V8. I mean the stock 4.6 in LS460 generated 360lb/ft, and this 5.0 is only at 350? With only 20 more HP over the 4.6? Sounds underrated.
Do you know what is "torque"?

The IS-F doesn't need as much torque as the LS460, since it's way lighter. Torque is only good for low-rev start up. As long as it's adequate, there is no advantage to overshoot it. From that point on, it's the horsepower that really counts.
Old Jan 15, 2007 | 08:51 PM
  #35  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

Originally Posted by bunny
Do you know what is "torque"?

The IS-F doesn't need as much torque as the LS460, since it's way lighter. Torque is only good for low-rev start up. As long as it's adequate, there is no advantage to overshoot it. From that point on, it's the horsepower that really counts.
no genius. torque is the measured output, horsepower is a calculated value.
a comparison:
an engine making 100ft-lbs up from 0-100rpm is just as useful as another engine making 200ft-lbs from 0-50rpm

the reason is GEARING. plus he is right, it makes no sense for an engine tuned for performance, using a similar design from the same company to have lesser torque than the smaller engine.

horsepower is basically just a idiots way of interpreting useful torque band. whats actually useful to know is the area under the torque curve marked off at each shiftpoint added together at the wheels.... but most people wouldn't understand what i just said, so don't feel too bad. horsepower in this day in age is about as useful as circular mils
Old Jan 15, 2007 | 11:12 PM
  #36  
Troopa-R's Avatar
Troopa-R
Senior Member
 
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 583
Likes: 0
From: San Francisco, CA
Default

Originally Posted by bunny
The IS-F has a new torque converter design. The shifting time from the steering wheel based shifters are almost the same as in a DSG.
Missing the point, dude. I don't care if DSG or SMG or whatever new manumatic the engineers can come up with shift faster/better/more efficiently, it just doesn't match the feel and control of shifter+clutch. Big reason I like cars is because I like to drive. I don't need the car driving me.
Old Jan 16, 2007 | 06:47 AM
  #37  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

Originally Posted by Troopa-R
Missing the point, dude. I don't care if DSG or SMG or whatever new manumatic the engineers can come up with shift faster/better/more efficiently, it just doesn't match the feel and control of shifter+clutch. Big reason I like cars is because I like to drive. I don't need the car driving me.

they did this because they wanted 8-speeds. the 8-speed is going to make it much faster and probably much more fuel effcient than it's competitors, regardless of engine power output.

with the new rregulations coming in with the new EPA ratings anything with more than say 3.0 liters is going to get hit hard in the MPG-- the only logical way to keep suggested MPG up and performance up at the same time would be to introduce more gears across a wider area

on another note i wouldn't be suprised if the top speed of this thing was 190+ it's CD is minimal and it's got serious downforce helping it out.
Old Jan 16, 2007 | 09:43 PM
  #38  
allmotorking's Avatar
allmotorking
HAN Approved Vendor
 
Joined: Jun 2006
Posts: 180
Likes: 0
Default

the "F"??? doesn't sound nearly as good as "Type R"
Old Jan 17, 2007 | 01:32 PM
  #39  
lexusis350's Avatar
lexusis350
Junior Member
 
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Default

F probably stands for Failure, I dunno.
Type-S sounds better, sounds sportier than F.
Old Jan 17, 2007 | 06:43 PM
  #40  
sherwood's Avatar
sherwood
I missed Sean
 
Joined: Aug 2004
Posts: 11,285
Likes: 1
From: Fairfield/Bridgeport CT
Default

type-r sounds downright retarded. F has a nice tone when used IS-F GS-F LS-F

it works, and it sounds more original than using some other knock-off naming pattern



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:36 AM.