'25 Lexus LC 500 Convertible

[HDMI]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

old fat men who haven't seen their dick in 30 years

It only matters if his partner can see it.

[JABCAT]

Originally Posted by Donut Lord

Yes, V8 everything.

I came from a Gen 5 Camaro, the amount of threads in that forum of V6 regret then they go sell their cars take a hit just to end up at a V8 anyway is quite large.

This isn't a comparable argument. GM V6s in every gen Camaro/Firebird suck & always have.

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by JABCAT

This isn't a comparable argument. GM V6s in every gen Camaro/Firebird suck & always have.

I mean define suck. A Gen 5 Camaro's V6 was like ~315 hp/~275 ft of torque.

Don't get me wrong, a 300HP V6 is meh compared to a 400+ HP V8, heck a 300HP V6 is meh to a 300 HP V8, but I wouldn't say say the V6 sucks in terms of V6s, it sucks because it is a V6 in a performance car when a V8 is available, so that is why people sell and go to a V8.

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by dreamingat30fps

If you think a turbocharged i6 is equal or better than a NA V8... then there's really nothing left to say.

This. There is a reason when BMW went racing with E46s, they ditched their turbo I6 for a V8

[freakystyly]

Originally Posted by Donut Lord

This. There is a reason when BMW went racing with E46s, they ditched their turbo I6 for a V8

Why did BMW ditch their I6 for an I4 with the M2 racing?
https://www.bmw-m.com/en/fastlane/mo...m2-racing.html

But as far as the body goes the LC does stand out IMO. The rest, behind the sheet metal not so much. Even from OPs post, the interior is just drenched with too much brown.

[Germanauto]

They still look nice, agree with others a bit over styled up front. I've driven it on the street and autocross, definitely better suited as a cruiser for older folks.

Way more special a car than the 8-series, which has generic BMW design inside and out. The interior, save for extended leather, is the same as a 3-series. How this competes with the new SL and AMG GT, I have no idea.

[25 V8 IS]

Originally Posted by afadeev

That's not really a cohesive argument, is it?
Any chance you are a vegan?




Doesn't one lead to the other?




Pretty, if slow-ish.
I had IS350 as a loaner and it was a fantastic ride with great ergonomics. Reminded me of E36 and E46 cabins and layouts. IS500 would be an improvement over that on all fronts, except weight and MPG.

Lexus's 5.0L V8 is one of the few remaining naturally aspirated motors available in sport cars these days. That V8 sounds great, but does come with the penalty in all-out performance and excessive thirst for dyno juice.

a

Yep. That's a fact. My IS500 is slower than every other car in its class, but I can't hear you over the sound of my V8.

And yeah...They are thirsty alright!

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by freakystyly

Why did BMW ditch their I6 for an I4 with the M2 racing?
https://www.bmw-m.com/en/fastlane/mo...m2-racing.html

But as far as the body goes the LC does stand out IMO. The rest, behind the sheet metal not so much. Even from OPs post, the interior is just drenched with too much brown.

likely racing regulations on BOP and engine sizing etc.

BMW knows, you want to do some racing you throw a V8 at it. Source: the BMW M Hybrid V8 prototype race car.

[JABCAT]

Originally Posted by Donut Lord

I mean define suck. A Gen 5 Camaro's V6 was like ~315 hp/~275 ft of torque.

Don't get me wrong, a 300HP V6 is meh compared to a 400+ HP V8, heck a 300HP V6 is meh to a 300 HP V8, but I wouldn't say say the V6 sucks in terms of V6s, it sucks because it is a V6 in a performance car when a V8 is available, so that is why people sell and go to a V8.

Compared to their V8 versions. I owned 3 Camaros of different generations (all V8s) & a WS6 TA. Those were decent poor man performance cars.

Originally Posted by Donut Lord

This. There is a reason when BMW went racing with E46s, they ditched their turbo I6 for a V8

I don't get all the fawning over "NA" V8s compared to other high-performance engines. . Personally, I've always thought cammed V8s sound stupid - I know blasphemy. Currently my twin-turbo i6 M2 is nearly as fun to drive as my supercharged LS7.

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by freakystyly

Why did BMW ditch their I6 for an I4 with the M2 racing?
https://www.bmw-m.com/en/fastlane/mo...m2-racing.html

But as far as the body goes the LC does stand out IMO. The rest, behind the sheet metal not so much. Even from OPs post, the interior is just drenched with too much brown.

Inline engines are unique in that an I6 doesn't get any cool points over I4s or I4 turbos, or something smaller like V8s do to V6s.

V8s are unique because they are like the gatekeeper in the V-class of engines

I think the first gen Audi R8 is a good choice for discussion as it came with a V8 and a V10 option. The V10 was obviously the better vehicle, basically a Lamborghini V10 R8, but no one was going to be like ewwww V8 R8. But I would bet money that if it was a V6 R8 and a V8 R8 people would reem on the V6 much like they do with Mustangs, Challengers, Chargers, Camaros, etc.

Car enthusiasts do this weird thing that if the V6 is the only option, yay its cool, but if there are 8-cylinders or above options? V6 is trash.

[jaffles]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

Really? They're all driven by old fat men who haven't seen their dick in 30 years here, lol. Cool cars, but they're always the same sort of person that drives any very luxury coupe. They want to pretend to be sporty, but they're well outside their prime, if they ever had a prime, and so REALLY want a soft comfortable car

Nothing wrong with any of that either. My buddy (30s) wants one insanely badly, but he's married with 2 toddlers and not in a position to have a secondary car like that, lol. Personally, I think the 8 series looks better, but looks are subjective.

hey hey hey, I'm old and fat, happily married with 2 kids about to leave the nest, and just bought a E93 330d M-Sport. It can do best part of 0-100 in 6 seconds and you can leave the braking to as long as you dare. However I bought it not to be 25 or rekindle some wishful dream of a wanna be stud. I bought it because life if a journey of experiences, decisions and outcomes. At 56 I have never had a convertible. Where I live is leafy green that runs through the country down to the sea. I could can't afford a 93 new, and I could not afford a Lexus second hand. I hope my 14K decision doesn't turn out the BMW is an unreliable money pit as I know the Lexus sure would not be. But regardless I would not buy a brand new car anyway.

As for the dick, I don't need to see it. I know where it is to jerk watching porn, and you don't have to be old and fat for that. All good mate.

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by jaffles

hey hey hey, I'm old and fat, happily married with 2 kids about to leave the nest, and just bought a E93 330d M-Sport. It can do best part of 0-100 in 6 seconds and you can leave the braking to as long as you dare. However I bought it not to be 25 or rekindle some wishful dream of a wanna be stud. I bought it because life if a journey of experiences, decisions and outcomes. At 56 I have never had a convertible. Where I live is leafy green that runs through the country down to the sea. I could can't afford a 93 new, and I could not afford a Lexus second hand. I hope my 14K decision doesn't turn out the BMW is an unreliable money pit as I know the Lexus sure would not be. But regardless I would not buy a brand new car anyway.

As for the dick, I don't need to see it. I know where it is to jerk watching porn, and you don't have to be old and fat for that. All good mate.

love this comment

[RM7]

Originally Posted by Donut Lord

Inline engines are unique in that an I6 doesn't get any cool points over I4s or I4 turbos, or something smaller like V8s do to V6s.

V8s are unique because they are like the gatekeeper in the V-class of engines

I think the first gen Audi R8 is a good choice for discussion as it came with a V8 and a V10 option. The V10 was obviously the better vehicle, basically a Lamborghini V10 R8, but no one was going to be like ewwww V8 R8. But I would bet money that if it was a V6 R8 and a V8 R8 people would reem on the V6 much like they do with Mustangs, Challengers, Chargers, Camaros, etc.

Car enthusiasts do this weird thing that if the V6 is the only option, yay its cool, but if there are 8-cylinders or above options? V6 is trash.

I think the high strung V6 had a pretty limited hey-day, because technology passed it up relatively quick. The V6s were ~150hp and then all of a sudden in the 2000s they got into a high compression HP war...220, 230, 250, 275, 300 and even pushing 330 or so. This happened over a relatively short period of time IMO. A common issue was that the torque was low compared to the HP output and to get to these HP numbers you had to be way high in the rev-range. In some light cars, it worked ok, but in many, it was just wasn't enough down low. Once turbos became mainstream, it just smashed these. A turbo 4 making full or nearly full torque at 1500-1700 would just walk away in most real-life situations.

I think there are some outliers, but that they are just that. These high strung V6s weren't horrible engines by any means...they just never had enough time to shine before something else came along that was better for most driving situations.

The V6s ended up in no-mans land...with a few makers taking them way past where they should have in certain cars.

[BlkGS]

I think a lot of people would argue that the V10 R8 is no better than the V8 one. The V8 sounded better, was easier to service, is substantially lighter, etc. it's also not that much less quick than the V10, 0-60 in 4.3 vs 4.1 (both would be slower than a base Corvette of their day). The biggest issue the R8 had its V8 simply isn't very good. It's not torquey, it doesn't make much power, and while it revs nicely and sounds good, you always get the feeling Audi couldn't do too much with it in the R8 lest they make the V10 and Gallardo look bad. Contemporary V8s were making significantly more power than the R8 V8, so it's not like they couldn't do better technically... They just couldn't due to corporate restrictions.

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by RM7

I think the high strung V6 had a pretty limited hey-day, because technology passed it up relatively quick. The V6s were ~150hp and then all of a sudden in the 2000s they got into a high compression HP war...220, 230, 250, 275, 300 and even pushing 330 or so. This happened over a relatively short period of time IMO. A common issue was that the torque was low compared to the HP output and to get to these HP numbers you had to be way high in the rev-range. In some light cars, it worked ok, but in many, it was just wasn't enough down low. Once turbos became mainstream, it just smashed these. A turbo 4 making full or nearly full torque at 1500-1700 would just walk away in most real-life situations.

I think there are some outliers, but that they are just that. These high strung V6s weren't horrible engines by any means...they just never had enough time to shine before something else came along that was better for most driving situations.

The V6s ended up in no-mans land...with a few makers taking them way past where they should have in certain cars.

V6s were always a product of packaging ease. Nobody WANTS a V6, it's just easier to fit in an engine bay than a V8 or I6. And while they sound pretty good, and modern v6s were able to solve the tradeoff between torque and HP, they never did what a V8 could do for both of those things. Then the cost cutting and compliance BS came in forcing automakers to shoving turbo 4s into everything because they needed to eek out little bits of fuel economy for CAFE requirements.

I don't think very many people out there (who care even a little bit) prefer a turbo 4 to a similar output v6. But CAFE rules pushed everyone into these tiny downsized motors.

[LH44]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I think a lot of people would argue that the V10 R8 is no better than the V8 one. The V8 sounded better, was easier to service, is substantially lighter, etc. it's also not that much less quick than the V10, 0-60 in 4.3 vs 4.1 (both would be slower than a base Corvette of their day). The biggest issue the R8 had its V8 simply isn't very good. It's not torquey, it doesn't make much power, and while it revs nicely and sounds good, you always get the feeling Audi couldn't do too much with it in the R8 lest they make the V10 and Gallardo look bad. Contemporary V8s were making significantly more power than the R8 V8, so it's not like they couldn't do better technically... They just couldn't due to corporate restrictions.

LOL

[maticCRO]

Originally Posted by BlkGS

I think a lot of people would argue that the V10 R8 is no better than the V8 one. The V8 sounded better, was easier to service, is substantially lighter, etc. it's also not that much less quick than the V10, 0-60 in 4.3 vs 4.1 (both would be slower than a base Corvette of their day). The biggest issue the R8 had its V8 simply isn't very good. It's not torquey, it doesn't make much power, and while it revs nicely and sounds good, you always get the feeling Audi couldn't do too much with it in the R8 lest they make the V10 and Gallardo look bad. Contemporary V8s were making significantly more power than the R8 V8, so it's not like they couldn't do better technically... They just couldn't due to corporate restrictions.

This is the most hilarious post ever... Every single thing is false LOL

[BlkGS]

Originally Posted by maticCRO

This is the most hilarious post ever... Every single thing is false LOL

Except it isn't.

Source for the weights and performance data: https://www.carthrottle.com/news/driving-audi-r8-v8-and-v10-back-back-taught-me-there-no-replacement-displacement

Contemporary V8s making more power: GM LS7 (505hp), Mercedes M156(450-518hp), Porsche Turbo 4.8 V8 (550hp), Dodge 6.1L (420hp), GM LS3 (430hp), Ford 5.4L Supercharged V8 (500hp)...

Hell, even Audi had a more powerful V8 themselves, the RS6+ made 480hp at the same time out of the twin turbo V8.

You can be mad about the truth, or debate that maybe car throttle was wrong about the specs, but everything I said was the truth. Be mad, or accept it, doesn't matter really. Audi needed to make sure the V10 was the faster car, and couldn't overshadow the Lambo. It's just business and corporate pecking order.

[mfarrzhp]

The Lexus is really classy and even the a used M850i is a better value proposition, the Lexus is not as common on the road where I live. I like being different, besides having an X5 in the household.

My only gripe with the LC500 is the wheels. Not the nicest stock wheel Lexus has selected. That’s a pretty easy fix and then you have a great sounding, unique, luxurious V8 that will be very reliable.

I don’t care nearly as much about HP as I used to. Short of some of the smallest 4 cylinders, almost everything is fast enough these days.

[Donut Lord]

Originally Posted by RM7

I think the high strung V6 had a pretty limited hey-day, because technology passed it up relatively quick. The V6s were ~150hp and then all of a sudden in the 2000s they got into a high compression HP war...220, 230, 250, 275, 300 and even pushing 330 or so. This happened over a relatively short period of time IMO. A common issue was that the torque was low compared to the HP output and to get to these HP numbers you had to be way high in the rev-range. In some light cars, it worked ok, but in many, it was just wasn't enough down low. Once turbos became mainstream, it just smashed these. A turbo 4 making full or nearly full torque at 1500-1700 would just walk away in most real-life situations.

I think there are some outliers, but that they are just that. These high strung V6s weren't horrible engines by any means...they just never had enough time to shine before something else came along that was better for most driving situations.

The V6s ended up in no-mans land...with a few makers taking them way past where they should have in certain cars.

I agree, like the recent years V6 "muscle" cars they all get like 300 horsepower minimum. Besides some supercar V6s they are the most powerful V6s you can buy.