So Ferrari's experience that went into the cheaper and better F458 doesn't count?

 

Why do you want two clutches when you can do the same with one?

 

I love how people justify their argument by naming cars that can beat the LFA in one category.

"The LFA is crap because it's not as cheap as a GTR, not as fast as a ZR1, not as comfortable as a S-Class, blah blah"

It's a stupid argument, with some very juvenile and not-very-thought-out comments. You know what they say, there's no point in arguing with stupid people because they just bring the argument down to their level, dumbing everyone down with them.

name ANY car and I can find you a car that can beat it for each of the categories, it's easy, so don't think you can call a car crap based just on that.

 

VERY solid point.

 

How did you come to that conclusion? He didn't say anything about Ferrari's (or any other company's) experience not counting.
One point you're still not understanding is why the F458 can be that cheap. It's built in much larger numbers. Considering the wait lists for the 360 Modena and the F430 and secondhand speculative trading, one could argue that Ferrari is pricing their V8-powered cars below true market value.

The LFA isn't just about Toyota trying hard. There is a culmination of technologies as a result of motorsport experience and production techniques (CF weaving), which could benefit cheaper, more mainstream vehicles. An ACR possibly outrunning it on the 'Ring is largely irrelevant. Do you see people lining up for years on end for a spot on an ACR waiting list? Why do you suppose that is. Is the Dodge or ZR1 resulting in sales slumps for Porsche, Ferrari, or Lamborghini? Haha. I doubt any Enzo owner thinks "Damn, I should have waited to buy the Dodge instead!"
Production numbers aside, Toyota have taken the LFA further than what Nissan or GM have done to their cars. Much more meticulous build, better materials and design inside, Nurburgring endurance testing, power achieved w/o forced induction, etc. The initial tests show it is also scoring subjective points that the GT-R and ZR1 have failed to take, in terms of driver involvement.


Also, consider.

Mercedes-Benz SLS
Structure: Aluminum spaceframe, bespoke
Doors: Gullwing
Transmission: 7-speed DCT
Price: 177k Euro

Mercedes Benz SL65 Black Series
Structure: Steel, modified from existing SL platform
Doors: Conventional
Transmission: 5-speed automatic
Price 327k Euro

 

Dual clutch transmissions do provide a performance benefit over single-clutch automated manuals. But his comparison of technology & price of the LFA vs M3 doesn't make much sense.

 

There's a reason why the Ferrari is cheaper; upgraded transferred technology. Who said Ferrari's experience shouldn't count? That's the biggest reason why a Ferrari is a Ferrari.

 

Right on. The dual-clutch transmission enables a seamless and smooth gearchange transition. Unless you care about peformance very much, this type of transmission, IMO, inhibits the mechanical feel that Lexus sought after. The delay and roughness of a e-gear/SMG/F1 type tranmission gives the car a bit more character. Ask any E60 M5 owner what they think of the dual-clutch offering in the M3 and they would hate to see an M5 with that option.

 

Ferrari have officially ditched the F1 gear system in their cars, as well as the manual gearbox. The new sh** it DSG 'box. I can understand why, but I would ALWAYS need a manual 'box car next to a double clutch car. Both have their own benefits.

The sad thing is, almost EVERYONE is releasing their new supercars with these high tech systems and I don't like the evolution.

 

I really am thinking that quite possibly the 458 Italia may be better looking, cheaper and possibly drive at least 80% as good as the purpose built for driving experience LFA. I don't know maybe I am wrong, I kind of feel that possible the Mclaren MP4-C12 also may drive at least 80% as good as the LFA as well for less money.

 

It's about preference. They are different cars. It's like a Scuderia vs. Enzo and GT3 vs. CGT. LFA happens to be Toyota's iteration of an Enzo or CGT.

 

So why don't Toyota build the LFA in larger numbers then? Because they can't, that's why. They selling at a loss as it is. I mention Ferrari's experience because I fail to appreciate the implicit suggestion that Toyota's experience out-ranks Ferrari's.

Yeah, it's largely a bit of ad-hoc development for cheaper models that LFA purchasers will be unwittingly funding.

Because the ACR has no air-con and has a ride quality that shares similarities with being anally raped by a silver-back.

The ACR and ZR1 are a different class of car to the above. The F458 and MP4-12C are the same class as the LFA.

Well gee, I'm glad but you're still comparing it to cars that are a million miles from the LFA's price range.


They're probably not worth it either but they've worked up a badge reputation. Can you see how this is different to an LFA with no badge reputation trying to position itself above less expensive Ferraris and McLarens that do have badge reputation and also have better performance characteristics?

 

They can't because of the build process. Name me another car that uses CF weaved in-house, or a car with a CF monocoque, that is built in 500 units.
Like Nissan isn't selling the GT-R at a loss also?

And what's the problem? Those who don't know and can afford this probably couldn't care either way.

Haha, so you're saying if the ACR had air-con and a good ride quality, people would line up for 2+ years to buy one? Get real. It doesn't take Enzo levels of $$ to put AC and suspension in an ACR.

Both will be limited to production of 500 units? Both will cost $400k? Both are front-engined GT's? The 458 is priced artificially low and has benefit of using existing production techniques (fine-tuned from the F430 and the 360 before that); its engine and transmission costs are being spread out on other models. By comparison, the LFA is a ground-up operation.

And there are very good reasons why they're a million miles from the LFA's price range: if they were priced like the LFA and advertised at their usual numbers, would anyone buy them?


They're probably not worth it...AMG should have seen with earlier Black Series cars that nobody was buying them. Yet AMG continues to expand the Black Series lineup. There will be an SLS Black Series.
Show me where it's proven they have better performance characteristics. I'll ask you again: Have you driven the LFA?
Like I said, badge reputation doesn't mean everything in this niche market. Ford can sell four thousand GT's at $140k a pop while premium brand Cadillac couldn't sell the XLR-V at $100k. Pagani, Koenigsegg, and others have come out of nowhere and established themselves as supercar players. In this niche market, people aren't buying a car based soley on performance, whether Car A laps the 'Ring in 7:20 vs Car B doing it in 7:40. Nor do they necessarily buy on the badge either. All it takes is a car to be different enough, exclusive enough, to separate someone from their $400k. These people are not likely making an either/or decision.

 

^ I thought CLK BS was a small success...? I'd hit it. Hell, I'd get it over this car and spend the rest on driving across Europe every summer for the rest of my life.

 

That was my point. (Sorry, should have put the first sentence in quotes.) People will pay what seems to us to be ridiculous amounts of money for a massaged Benz; ridiculous to us because we aren't realistically in any situation to make a value judgement on such a car. For these people, it's not a question of Black Series or Ferrari (which by most accounts is a better car to drive). People in this market tend to make purchases on what appeals to them, not whether Car A is faster or holds more cargo than Car B. Some people will go for the Ferrari. Others will want the less obvious choice.