Go Back  R/C Tech Forums > General Forums > Chat Lounge
Who does LEXUS think they are??? >

Who does LEXUS think they are???

Who does LEXUS think they are???

Old 07-09-2010, 09:21 AM
  #76  
Tech Adept
 
bobbyvegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 179
Default

Originally Posted by DOMIT View Post
No, Toyota has not won at LeMans. The only Japanese manufacturer who has done that is Mazda.
YEP! The 787B Mazda 4 rotary engine. It was so dominant Mazda was told not bring the car back to LeMans - A true outlaw..
Now back to thread:
First, I'm a simple guy. I don't like Lexus Period, waist of $$$. For the LFA price tag, I'd buy a Nissan GTR, Z06/ZR1 Vette, GNX, and find a '71 Cuda and resto-mod it with a Keith Black 540 cubed Hemi. All my rides will snap your fukkin neck
bobbyvegas is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 09:51 AM
  #77  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (35)
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 4,123
Trader Rating: 35 (100%+)
Default

Who you think I think I am?
marooko is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 10:05 AM
  #78  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (1)
 
Strong Bad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Strongbadia, OC
Posts: 208
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Dave H View Post
They have enough engineering prowess to build an engine that can go from idle to redline in under a second, take the entire engine from a few hundred RPM to several thousand RPM Iím assuming. Yet they canít make an analog tach needle move something like 180 degrees in that time frame? Really?
Its been reported a few times that its not so much that it cannot be engineered but that making it reliably function was an issue better solved with a digital unit. Additionally LCD displays are becoming cheaper to produce so this is yet again the beginning of trickle down engineering. Its becoming easier to program and develop hardware for an LCD than it is design, prototype and test mechanical units. Besides this most current "mechanical" units just use digital signals anyways. New model Jags and Rovers are all running full digital instrumentation already.
Strong Bad is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 10:37 AM
  #79  
Tech Lord
iTrader: (38)
 
Oasis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: * Sin Cal *
Posts: 10,738
Trader Rating: 38 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by marooko View Post
Who you think I think I am?
I'll take a wild guess..Marooko..Tech Fanatic..close..
Oasis is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 11:55 AM
  #80  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
DOMIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA, North America, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe
Posts: 4,034
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by bobbyvegas View Post
YEP! The 787B Mazda 4 rotary engine. It was so dominant Mazda was told not bring the car back to LeMans - A true outlaw..
Now back to thread:
First, I'm a simple guy. I don't like Lexus Period, waist of $$$. For the LFA price tag, I'd buy a Nissan GTR, Z06/ZR1 Vette, GNX, and find a '71 Cuda and resto-mod it with a Keith Black 540 cubed Hemi. All my rides will snap your fukkin neck
Hey doesn't the later Turbo TA use the GN engine? I'm thinking that has potential, since most of the F-bodys during that timeframe were turds.
DOMIT is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 03:30 PM
  #81  
Tech Adept
 
bobbyvegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 179
Default Turbo TA Pace car

Originally Posted by DOMIT View Post
Hey doesn't the later Turbo TA use the GN engine? I'm thinking that has potential, since most of the F-bodys during that timeframe were turds.
Yes, the 1989 Indy Pace car used the 3.8 Buick motor. Rated at only 250hp, it ran the 1/4 mile in 13.7.. This was the only Indy Pace car that needed NO performance upgrades unlike those before it.. I raced a Turbo TA back when I had my '91 Z28 5.7 TPI (nearly 300 HP) and got smmmmooooked!!!
bobbyvegas is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 06:06 PM
  #82  
Tech Lord
iTrader: (38)
 
Oasis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: * Sin Cal *
Posts: 10,738
Trader Rating: 38 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by bobbyvegas View Post
Yes, the 1989 Indy Pace car used the 3.8 Buick motor. Rated at only 250hp, it ran the 1/4 mile in 13.7.. This was the only Indy Pace car that needed NO performance upgrades unlike those before it.. I raced a Turbo TA back when I had my '91 Z28 5.7 TPI (nearly 300 HP) and got smmmmooooked!!!
On a motor dyno it had 301 hp, so about 225 hp at the wheels, it was an up graded GNX motor, they had even reworked the heads, pretty trick for 89..most "performance" cars in the 80's and early 90's ran high 15's so high 13's was fast, to bad they only made 1,555 of them..
Oasis is offline  
Old 07-09-2010, 09:24 PM
  #83  
Tech Adept
 
bobbyvegas's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Las Vegas
Posts: 179
Default

Originally Posted by Oasis View Post
On a motor dyno it had 301 hp, so about 225 hp at the wheels, it was an up graded GNX motor, they had even reworked the heads, pretty trick for 89..most "performance" cars in the 80's and early 90's ran high 15's so high 13's was fast, to bad they only made 1,555 of them..
Actually, Performance picked up for Muscle during the mid-late 80's. 5.0 Stangs and 5.7 Camaros/Firebirds were running 14.5's all day by 1990. Same goes for the Shelby 2.2 turbo Dodges like the GLHS (Goes Like Hell Somemore) Omni and Charger, Lancer and CSX which were limited production Shelby machines and all could run with the fastest V8s during this period.

Sorry to go off topic, now back to the thread.
bobbyvegas is offline  
Old 07-10-2010, 08:48 AM
  #84  
Tech Elite
Thread Starter
iTrader: (211)
 
Neu_Racer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Pacific NW
Posts: 4,012
Trader Rating: 211 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by bobbyvegas View Post

Sorry to go off topic, now back to the thread.

No worries, we've been off the thread for a long time.
Neu_Racer is offline  
Old 07-12-2010, 07:43 AM
  #85  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
DOMIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA, North America, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe
Posts: 4,034
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

I've owned a few musclecars...

1971 Ranchero (I know you're thinking "HUH?" but...) 351 CJ, (Yes, they referred to the solid lifter 351 4-barrel Cleveland as a "Cobra Jet") top-loader 4-speed. Funny as it sounds... this (car? truck?) was STUPID. Dropping to 2nd at 60 mph would put you sideways in a cloud of tire smoke.

1968 Mustang, 302 with a bit of modification.

1969 Cougar convertible, 390 GT (325 hp 390 big block.) Loads of grunt.

I've also owned 3 "sportscars..." A Nissan 300Z, a Mazda RX-7 convertible (converted to TII drivetrain) and a Porsche 944.

Whoever said there are only 3 sportscars (911, Mustang, and Corvette) that have turned a profit is smoking crack... and the Mustang isn't even a sportscar.
DOMIT is offline  
Old 07-12-2010, 10:56 PM
  #86  
Tech Adept
iTrader: (1)
 
Strong Bad's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Strongbadia, OC
Posts: 208
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by DOMIT View Post
Whoever said there are only 3 sportscars (911, Mustang, and Corvette) that have turned a profit is smoking crack... and the Mustang isn't even a sportscar.
You're arguing sematics about the Mustang being a sports car. Call it what you want but the arguement is still the same. In regards to sports cars car profitability there are numerous references. One of the editors of Car and Driver, I want to say Brock Yates spoke of subject of sports car profitablility when the Camaro was dropped in I think it was 2002. He himself quoted the three cars I mentioned. Bob Lutz practically told the buying public that bringing the Camaro back for an extended period was conditional on the car turning a profit. Automotive News reported the same concerns from a Nissan exec when considering the 350Z for production in 1999. As for the Z it doesn't really matter, 11 years later the 350Z is the face of Nissan's rebirth. The point is car development, tooling, marketing and sales is a insanely expensive process. To speak to this point, Lexus reportedly took 11 years to finally make a profit for Toyota, 4 years ahead of schedule. Sports cars are even worse in the profitablity sense given the number of bespoke components used and the every tightening regulation of the cars themselves. There has to be a reason for these cars to exist and advertising is one of them. One of the points originally made before this thread went all off topic is that the price point for this car whether we see it as outragous or not is largely irrelevant because the car is a technology demonstrator, piece of rolling advertising and every single one is already sold. Whether you like or I like the car or not its serving its supercar purpose perfectly. Its illiciting strong emotions. If you don't believe me, look at the media coverage for this car, drop onto any automotive forum and look up the threads involving it. A great example and a good reason we should just let this thread die before it falls into entropy and mass hate is the Supraforums LFA thread. Literally 233 pages, 5,800 posts and counting of mindless squabbling and personal attacks over the merits for and against this car. So in the interest of getting people people fired up I applaude Toyota/Lexus because before the LFA all you could argue about in regards to Toyota or Lexus was how boring their next car was going to be.

Last edited by Strong Bad; 07-12-2010 at 11:32 PM.
Strong Bad is offline  
Old 07-13-2010, 07:09 AM
  #87  
Tech Elite
iTrader: (1)
 
DOMIT's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Fort Worth, Texas, USA, North America, Earth, Solar System, Milky Way Galaxy, Universe
Posts: 4,034
Trader Rating: 1 (100%+)
Default

Originally Posted by Strong Bad View Post
You're arguing sematics about the Mustang being a sports car. Call it what you want but the arguement is still the same. In regards to sports cars car profitability there are numerous references. One of the editors of Car and Driver, I want to say Brock Yates spoke of subject of sports car profitablility when the Camaro was dropped in I think it was 2002. He himself quoted the three cars I mentioned. Bob Lutz practically told the buying public that bringing the Camaro back for an extended period was conditional on the car turning a profit. Automotive News reported the same concerns from a Nissan exec when considering the 350Z for production in 1999. As for the Z it doesn't really matter, 11 years later the 350Z is the face of Nissan's rebirth. The point is car development, tooling, marketing and sales is a insanely expensive process. To speak to this point, Lexus reportedly took 11 years to finally make a profit for Toyota, 4 years ahead of schedule. Sports cars are even worse in the profitablity sense given the number of bespoke components used and the every tightening regulation of the cars themselves. There has to be a reason for these cars to exist and advertising is one of them. One of the points originally made before this thread went all off topic is that the price point for this car whether we see it as outragous or not is largely irrelevant because the car is a technology demonstrator, piece of rolling advertising and every single one is already sold. Whether you like or I like the car or not its serving its supercar purpose perfectly. Its illiciting strong emotions. If you don't believe me, look at the media coverage for this car, drop onto any automotive forum and look up the threads involving it. A great example and a good reason we should just let this thread die before it falls into entropy and mass hate is the Supraforums LFA thread. Literally 233 pages, 5,800 posts and counting of mindless squabbling and personal attacks over the merits for and against this car. So in the interest of getting people people fired up I applaude Toyota/Lexus because before the LFA all you could argue about in regards to Toyota or Lexus was how boring their next car was going to be.
So it is your claim that the MX-5 (Miata) has never made a profit? (It is only the best selling sportscar of all time!) How about the Lotus Esprit? Any Ferrari? The Porsche 944? The Mazda RX-7?
DOMIT is offline  
Old 07-13-2010, 11:33 AM
  #88  
Tech Lord
iTrader: (148)
 
Frank L's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: NorCal
Posts: 12,520
Trader Rating: 148 (100%+)
Default

I have owned 6 Lexus cars in the last 10 yrs and I absoutly love them. I have had is300's gs350's (1 of these saved my life) an rx330 and now a gx460. Best cars I have ever owned. Domestic cars don't even come close.
Frank L is offline  

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.